am i right in saying this...?

Originally posted by bbarr
Right, and the God doesn't have a gun either! So what? Would it make you feel better if I had said "Freely love me or burn for eternity"? Your point is irrelevant to the analogy. What you're faced with in both cases is a forced choice, and in both cases the one issuing the ultimatum is engaging in coercion.

Bbarr: think of it this way. Today, you are one day closer to your death than you were yesterday.
That means you are getting closer and closer to judgment! G3+ 54v3d, d00d!

"This little game you play of saying it's people who send themselves to hell is not very convincing. We have to ask for salvation. If we don't, then we are sent to hell." ---ringwett





If I stop by your house and ask you to jump in my car and you reject my offer and choose to stay in your burning house , is it me that's done this to you or yourself? I don't send you there you just choose to not come with me.

You see the mere fact of rejecting God for who he really is (not in your case for you are rejecting a god of your own imaginings) would mean a hell like state of mind anyway. You would be rejecting the only purpose for which you were created. One can think of hell as a place where once having rejected God you are left to dwell for all eternity on what you have chosen to miss out on. God knows that even if he "invaded" hell to try one more last time to convince you to come with him it would be pointless because if you didn't feel compelled by his love , compassion and beauty the first time there is nothing left with which to persuade you.

Death may or may not be an option for us because we are created as eternal /spiritual beings (except we have forgoten this). Being converted through fear of hell is no conversion anyway. GOD seeks to captivate our hearts and invites us into a potential love affair with him , so fear is not part of it. To not go to heaven and to realise what heaven is and to know that it is you that chose this for yourself is a pretty good definiton of hell in my book. So you ask God to kill you or make you dead rather than be with him? But to ask him to do this to you is heartbreaking for God ,and you would have be in your own personal hell already to even think of asking him. But he has chosen to give you responsibilty , choice and free will and then you ask him to take it back. ?! What if in making the choice to give you free will , (even the freedom to spend eternity without him) it was a one time deal. His respect for your autonomy is so great that he will allow you to spend eternity without him if you so chose (but why would anyone chose this?). Hell is not a punishment , first and foremost it's a love story with an incredibly sad ending. The ultimate gift spurned. We have to want to be there , he won't force us, that would be perverse.

Originally posted by bbarr
Give me your wallet or I'll shoot you. If you choose to reject the rendering unto me of your wallet, you'll have only yourself to blame.

The offer of complete and unconditional love and acceptance in heaven , joy and happiness and contentment beyond your wildest dreams. A peace that surpasses understanding and a healing of all emotional , physical and psychological wounds that you have ever felt . All this and it goes on forever and ever.!!!

How on earth can you even begin to compare this most magnificent of gifts on offer to the nicking of one's wallet?????????????????

The analogy is COMPLETLY FLAWED. A much more accurate analogy would be a man that offers you a briefcase of 1000 billion quid no strings atttached.

God doesn't want your wallet he wants to GIVE you joy and peace. All it will cost you is your pride!

A better analogy of the fear of hell would be a father who talks to his son about the horror of what can happen if he gets run over by a car. He puts some fear in him deliberately but still knows he must allow him to cross the road by his own free will. He puts the fear in him because of his great love for his son. He wants him to wake up and realise what can happen if he doesn't take his advice on road safety. Does the son stubbornly refuses his advice because he thinks he knows best? Or does it prompt him to listen?

i think the mistake most christians make is viewing heaven as a place; it is not a place, it is a state of mind; the way i see it is the god we are looking for is infact the god within us, we are all gods. yet we all represent one god; this god represents peace, love, understanding, stillness etc... only when we have discovered this (god) for ourselves will we find ourselves in a state of bliss (heaven); yes - this is hell for most people now, thats only because they've yet to find who and what they really are. there is no sin or evil, it is merely terms used to take us further away from who we truely are; there is no punishment for being there though; we are eternal souls, our true state is stillness and peace, we are merely experiencing all emotions so that we can recognise this stillness and peace for what it truely is; the only way we can appreciate this is by experiencing everything it is not, pain, hurt, loss, sadness. slowly, we work our way back to what we yearn for, back where we belong, back home

My view is true heaven & hell is after you are dead and burried under the ground.

My view of a hell & heaven that so many people perceive here is one that is made by man, which never going to be perfect or without sin. Man could never achieve a heaven that is perfectly without sin. I really think people are pathetic who try to take what God says He will do, and then think they are so perfect they have an ability to create it. It goes the same for those who use the Bible for war. GOD created the heavens and the earth... not you! YOU ARE NOT GOD.

Originally posted by rwingett
He didn't. It's a myth. Free will is completely incompatible with an omniscient, omnipotent being.

Either that or god is a myth. Take your pick.

Absolute nonsense! Any old God can create creatures that he can control and predict entirely. It takes a lot more effort and creativity to create a real, living , breathing sentient being who is actually free to make real decisions for itself. It's a far more complicated and dynamic form of creating things than creating innanimate objects. It's far more risky too.

Ask any computer IT whizzes who are trying to develop artificial intelligence which is harder. If a programmer said to me he had actually created a robot with free will and sentience I would infinitely impressed with him.

Your definition of omnipotence and omniscience is limited and legalistic and does not allow for an omnipotence that permits itself to be defied or rebelled against.

RINGWETT Your assertion that people could "receive Christ without even realising it" simply boggles the mind. I'm no theologian, but I doubt you'll find many orthodox christians who would agree with that statement

Given that some people will live and die and not be exposed to the Gospel then we have to ask what happens then? The Holy Spirit has to witness to them anyway and allow for them to be saved or redeemed . Such a person may never know who Jesus is but will still have the opportunity to allow God into their lives. They may call it "the life force of goodness" or something else altogether but it will be Christ nevertheless. I think you will find beliefs along this line of reasoning much more widespread than you think within Christendom. For example , I believe that the Holy Spirit has a role in your life already without you realising it , it's just you will probably call it something else or you will experience it as a feint inaudible whisper in your soul. It's not that mind boggling just logical really. The alternative is to believe that anyone who has never heard of Jesus has no chance.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Absolute nonsense! Any old God can create creatures that he can control and predict entirely. It takes a lot more effort and creativity to create a real, living , breathing sentient being who is actually free to make real decisions for itself. It's a far more complicated and dynamic form of creating things than creating innanimate objects. It's far mo ...[text shortened]... ic and does not allow for an omnipotence that permits itself to be defied or rebelled against.

Input equals output. If god desired a different output from mankind, he could have easily tweaked the starting input to reach any desired conclusion. When he made mankind, god knew they would rebel. We can only conclude that this is exactly what god wanted. If not he could have altered the outcome.

We can only conclude that god is a sadistic SOB who enjoys punishing his creations for behaving exactly in the manner he designed them. If we rebel, it is precisely because god designed us to be capable of rebellion.

The so called freewill theodicy only works if god is not omniscient, which is to say that he does not know what we will choose. Or if he is not omnipotent, which is to say that he knows what we will choose but is powerless to do anything about it. If you have a creator god who is both omniscient and omnipotent, then freewill is nothing but a charade.

Originally posted by rwingett
Input equals output. If god desired a different output from mankind, he could have easily tweaked the starting input to reach any desired conclusion. When he made mankind, god knew they would rebel. We can only conclude that this is exactly what god wanted. If not he could have altered the outcome.

We can only conclude that god is a sadistic SOB who enj ...[text shortened]... ave a creator god who is both omniscient and omnipotent, then freewill is nothing but a charade.

I do so love going head to head on free will because it brings up so many issues. It's quite plausible that God did know we would rebel against him. What you have cmpletely missed is the idea that this is not what God wanted but it was the only way to allow freedom of will. He could have guaranteed that man would not fall but that would take away free will. He can only change outcomes by messing about with our freedom which is something he's not going to do because if he does that he's back to square one - no free will. It is not what God wanted but then free will comes with a price. I don't want my son to fall off his bike and have the power to control him if I so choose but I choose not to . Do I want him to fall off his bike and hurt himself of course not! Do I anticipate that he will fall off - probably! So why do it? Because I respect his freedom , I know I have to let go of him to allow him to ride his own bike however painful that might be to watch. I consider the price worth paying. I love him even though it makes me winch when he thinks he knows best because I know he'll get hurt but I'm powerless , my love makes me powerless. He has to find his own way . If I take away his freedom I will hurt him much more deeply.

For God creating free will is a bit of a dilemma . If he creates it then how can he control what's going to happen? He can control us and stop bad stuff from happening but then he has sacrificed free will. Once you understand the intimate relationship between freedom and the potential for things to go off in ways that God doesn't want then you open up a whole new understanding that transcends your rather limited dogmatic way of seeing it. You need to get out of kindergarten theology and eat some grown up food.

We do not need to conclude that God is a SOB for doing this. He designed us with free will to be living sentient beings not robots. That means we are capable of rebellion. He does not ,as you say, punish us for rebelling , unless you didn't notice I think there may have been some mention of God taking the punishment for our rebellion on himself (I think his name was J...something or other....there was a cross or something..as well??) LOL.

All you have to do is consider what God is actually up to in all this. He's trying to create real living beings who can actually freely choose to love or hate if they so wish. Not a robotic dead love but a passionate dynamic love that is freely given , not because God "makes" us love him like slave robots. Now real choice like that is hard , tough and messy and yes may involve some rebellion. You may not like it but there you go. You may think it's not worth the risk and prefer that God took back the freedom he gave you and made you into a robot that can never go astray. Just like my son who complains and crys out when I let go of the handlebars and he feels scared. He then blames me when he falls off , and he's right , I have allowed this to happen, what he doesn't know is that there is no easy way in this and that one day he will thank me. But boy does he rebel!!

So ringwett , kindergarten or real world , which is it? Do you stay with your twisted sadistic god who doesn't really exist anyway (except in your own mnd) OR do you start to wrestle with the real dilemma at the heart of this. Can you explain how God can create free will but at the same time control us (which logically then infringes on our freedom)? If you don't understand the purpose of free will and what it costs then how can you even begin to understand the argument? My guess is you don't have children.I would also guess that you are one of those who thinks that an omnipotent God should be able to create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it.

Originally posted by knightmeister
I do so love going head to head on free will because it brings up so many issues. It's quite plausible that God did know we would rebel against him. What you have cmpletely missed is the idea that this is not what God wanted but it was the only way to allow freedom of will. He could have guaranteed that man would not fall but that would take away free ...[text shortened]... mnipotent God should be able to create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it.

You make the mistake of assuming that the choices man makes are done so independant of the input that god has determined. They are not. Those choices are a direct result of god's design input. When god created mankind, he knew, in advance, exactly when each of them would sin. The fact that they sin, and the frequency with which they do so, are direct results of the whole casual chain of events initiated by god. A universe initiated by an omnipotent and omniscient god must necessarily be a strictly deterministic one. It is impossible that we could make any set of choices that was not foreknown to him. And it is impossible that an omnipotent and omniscient god could be displeased with anything. Everything that happens must happen exactly as he planned it to. There can never be one iota of difference between the way things turn out and the way he intended them to. If mankind sins, it is precisely because that is what god wanted him to do all along. And the magnitude to which mankind sins is precisely the magnitude that god has predetermined. Any thought of "freewill" with such a god is a complete illusion.

But if we look past all that and assume for the moment that we do have some freewill, it is certain that god does not respect that freedom. To use your bike example, it's not a simple case of god watching us screw up while he watches from the distance. No, not at all. If we fall off that bike we are to be visited with eternal torment. We're not "free" to fall at all. We are to be eternally punished for it. And not only our first born (to carry the analogy further), but every child which follows will be guilty of falling off that bike before he is even born.

If god merely lavished reward up those who acted as he wanted, and ignored the rest, then we might forgive him his behavior. But no, he eternally torments those who act exactly as he designed them to act. Whether they have freewill and merely exercised it's usage, or whether their fate was predetermine makes no difference. In either case, the christian god is the most heinous criminal ever conceived by the mind of man.

Originally posted by knightmeister
I do so love going head to head on free will because it brings up so many issues. It's quite plausible that God did know we would rebel against him. What you have cmpletely missed is the idea that this is not what God wanted but it was the only way to allow freedom of will. He could have guaranteed that man would not fall but that would take away free ...[text shortened]... mnipotent God should be able to create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it.

You need to get out of kindergarten theology

Is there any other kind of theology?

"A universe initiated by an omnipotent and omniscient god must necessarily be a strictly deterministic one. It is impossible that we could make any set of choices that was not foreknown to him. And it is impossible that an omnipotent and omniscient god could be displeased with anything. Everything that happens must happen exactly as he planned it to. There can never be one iota of difference between the way things turn out and the way he intended them to"POSTED BY RWINWETT

I haven't much time at the moment so this will be a quick intial post and I will return to this later. The first thing I want you to notice in the above sentences is how often you make these catagorical statements without backing them up with any argument at all. You say "never" and "impossible" and "must" with such ease but all they are is statements NOT arguments. I would like to hear more reasoning and less statements. I'm guessing you are a hard determinist , yes?

Originally posted by knightmeister
I haven't much time at the moment so this will be a quick intial post and I will return to this later. The first thing I want you to notice in the above sentences is how often you make these catagorical statements without backing them up with any argument at all. You say "never" and "impossible" and "must" with such ease but all they are is statements ...[text shortened]... hear more reasoning and less statements. I'm guessing you are a hard determinist , yes?

They do not need backing up with argument as they are directly implied in the definition of omnipotent and omniscient.

omnipotent:
Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful.

omniscient:
having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.

Originally posted by knightmeister
"A universe initiated by an omnipotent and omniscient god must necessarily be a strictly deterministic one. It is impossible that we could make any set of choices that was not foreknown to him. And it is impossible that an omnipotent and omniscient god could be displeased with anything. Everything that happens must happen exactly as he planned it to. T ...[text shortened]... ear more reasoning and less statements. I'm guessing you are a hard determinist , yes?

If there is an omniscient and omnipotent god, then the universe is necessarily a deterministic one. Free will, if it can exist at all, can only do so in a universe without such a god. Either there is no god, or god is completely other than what you imagine. If god is omnibenevolent, then he must lack either omniscience or omnipotence, or both. If god is both omniscient and omnipotent, then he cannot be omnibenevolent, i.e. he must be a sadistic SOB.