This PPR forum could be enjoyable, but it's oten not.

Post Reply New Topic

If I'm going to make this decision, making it at the age of 25 seems as good a time as ever, since as you say, the nature of God is impossible to determine. I could die tomorrow. I could also change my mind tomorrow, but I'm not going to do it based on a slightly-altered version of Pascal's wager (based on God benevolence rather than His existence), as you suggest.

The issue is that I can't believe in God's benevolence. What use is a faked belief? I realised that a faked belief is as good as an outright blasphemy, if not worse. 'So then because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.' Revelation 3:16.

Also, I'm with P.B. Shelley on the nature of Satan (at least as he appears in his interpretation of Milton's Paradise Lost) - he is not as bad, morally, as God.

Last edited by puddingmouse on 23 Nov 2011, 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well, for my part, I believe the passages that speak of God's justness, and which claim that He is absolutely just. Therefore, the following idea is logical: "If God is wholly just, no one can reap a fate he or she is undeserving of." That is not where I stop in my reasoning about eternal rewards, but it is where I start. I accept the Bible's claim that God is wholly just. And, accepting that claim answers A LOT of questions, such as the eternal-fate one. As I said, those claims to justness are where I start. From there, we can get into certain verses which imply that the final judgment -- in each single person's case -- is God's to make -- and the Bible also says He is merciful. (Yes, an apparent contradiction, if by "fully just" you mean He'll toss you into Hell without thought if you so much as jaywalk.) But mercy can go hand-in-hand with justness, as it is not unjust for someone whom we've wronged to forgive us. The rule is, the ball is in HIS court -- as the one we've wronged -- to either forgive, or to enforce merciless-but-correct justice. "I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy", He said. Challenged on that (in a parable Jesus told), God responds, "What is it to you if I choose to have mercy on someone?" It is HIS right, as the creator of everything and everyone, to show mercy AND to enforce merciless-but-correct justice as He chooses. That may be disliked, but I think I have demonstrated that it is fair.

I didn't say study profits nothing; He gave us information both directly (things stated in the Bible) and indirectly (physical and undeniable personal evidence) to put together which, if done properly, is enough to convince us that He is real and that He is good. It is NOT, however, enough to teach us the infinity of the Being Himself. But Pascal is right in saying that the "risk", if you want to call it that, in this coming to believe is that we go to Heaven -- something I wouldn't exactly consider a bad outcome. But the risk in being wrong is too high a price to want to pay. It does, however, make a very bastardized version of Gospel message to attempt to reduce it to Pascal's wager. As many have pointed out, God wouldn't consider a mere gambling man a sincerely-repentant man, as He reads hearts directly.



Brave words, for sure, but can any merit be found in them?



Absolutely.



Do you believe that a creator necessarily owes the gift of continued and unaltered existence to his or her creation? The issue is in determining what is right versus wrong for God to do -- and in determining whether we tiny-minded creatures can even competently address such a question about the Infinite Person, who is said to Himself have authored Good.

You sound kind of like how I imagine Saul might have been before becoming Paul. It's good to look before you leap.

Oh, is it only admins that have access to that?