Free-will and Atheism

Post Reply New Topic

Happy to oblige!

Seriously, though... If you presuppose the Christian world-view, all the "scumbag" bit means is that there is hope for everyone. There is no earthly point-of-no-return that disqualifies someone from God's grace. The only "unforgivable" sin is something you really have to work hard to commit, and that's one that if you're actually worried you may have committed it, it's a good sign that you haven't.

The temptation is that a sinner might be led to believe that he's been so bad that God could never accept him. Someone who truly regrets the evil he's committed and is open to the idea of repentance (turning away) from evil would likely be a strong believer if he knew he had that option.

For creating a world that operates the way this one does I'd have to argue he'd be a bit of a bag himself. Glad to see he has high enough self-esteem to self exempt at least.

Not a fact. You don't know THAT. Someone could have died and come back to tell about it.


True. But it is also a fact that not ALL people of influence abuse others for the sake of control


"Tons" more? Sure, the Catholics have had a few rough patches throughout their history. But Christian groups have also acknowledged at various times when/where the Catholics were in error and chose to separate themselves from their mother Church. Even the Catholic church itself has come a long way from the widespread violence it has perpetrated at times and I'd argue that it's not even really the same church it used to be. You can argue priestly pedophilia, of course... But personally I'm not Catholic, so I'd say those accusations against Catholics hardly applies to me and/or my church. The New Testament does not advocate violence towards people of any belief/non-belief, so Christian holy war is entirely unfounded. The same cannot be said for certain other religions. The same cannot be said for even other ideologies, either. Communism/socialism aren't religious at all and in practice have even been anti-religious, and they've resulted in atrocities incomparable to those of some religions. Other religions and ideologies have been far more destructive than Christianity.


Not ALL religion. This is a broad generalization, and thus not a fact.


There's nothing wrong with doubting or questioning. I may not agree with all of your facts, but I certainly agree with your opinion!

Oh, THAT? That's a matter of theodicy.

The way I look at it is if God is good, He can only make a world within His nature to make--a "good" world. But I also think God is good to equip man to choose what world he wants to live in--a good one or an evil one. God cannot contradict His own nature by creating an evil world. Therefore, it is my belief that THIS world is not one of God's creation. For God to self-exempt would mean something about His nature would have to change, and I don't believe that's the case in this sense.

??

He created the world in such a way that most of the rules are either arbitrary to or even directly discordant to his commands. Its a world where most of the ills come from inherent weaknesses as well as competitions set off by the genetic and environmental process working exactly the way its supposed to on its template. That's not the fallen nature of man, its the fallen nature of any plant or animal that can't split or self-replicate without genetic material from a partner.

Spur of the moment thinking . . . plus, i'm exhausted, so I may not have all the facts ><.

Ah, this is where we fall into another argument. If you're familiar with other cultures, you're familiar with different cultural beliefs. There are cultures around the world that practice oral sex on their young; it's a way into adulthood. They feel no guilt from it as it is merely a cultural practice that they believe is right. It's a general agreement. However, if you take this same act and use it in America, THIS IS WRONG! We would argue that these people are going to hell since they're hurting young and using them for sexual gratification out of marriage.

What's good for one culture, isn't good for another. What we believe is evil here in America, might not be evil in Africa. Do you get what I mean? People aren't going to be held accountable for their wrong-doings, while living, if no one around them perceives it to be wrong. In fact, the example I used above, is highly rewarded. If you would like me to quote it, I will. I just have to find it in one of my books about sex around the world.


Additionally, two of our closest relatives, chimps and bonobos, practice different sex acts. While bonobos avoid aggression by copulating, chimps are rather aggressive and don't generally (correct me if i'm wrong) use sex for other purposes besides reproduction. There again, there's a huge difference between what is right and wrong. What the bible says is right, won't be right for all. This is why it's too socially directed, and not objective enough. If this god creature was all-knowing, how come he didn't know about cultural differences and implement a law that would be applicable to all? He's the one that made us afterall....

Not buying it. If the "rules" are arbitrary or discordant to His commands, then that proves that if God exists He is not good. It would be contrary to the nature of a good God to create a world that is odds with His own nature, wouldn't you agree? The existence of such a world would be proof that a good God doesn't exist. If a good God DOES exist, then there has to be another explanation for the world as we know it.


That's the world AS WE KNOW IT TO BE, not the world as God created it from the beginning.


In other words, the nature of the world AS WE KNOW IT--the world we choose for ourselves, not the world God chooses for us.

I don't argue that anyone is going to hell because I dislike their cultural practices. I argue that EVERYONE is initially destined for hell because by nature they are born into sinful rebellion against God. If there is an exception, it is the point in life at which a person can reasonably be held accountable for their actions, their ability to make a conscious decision to do good or evil, to choose God or not choose God. It doesn't matter what your culture is, it's your relationship with God that matters.


But suppose it IS wrong. What if a person doesn't perceive it as wrong simply because no one told them it was? Tell someone something is wrong and demonstrate why it is wrong, that person MIGHT change his mind and correct his behavior. Cultural relativism or moral relativism is no excuse for bad behavior.


The Bible applies to human behavior, not behavior outside the species.

How do you know God DIDN'T implement a law that would be applicable to all? What if cultural differences are really just spin-offs of a common tradition? Once the original traditions are obscured, distorted, or otherwise lost in favor of a rejection of what a primitive culture (1st culture, not inferior culture) already knew to be true? The OT outlines a history of divergent cultures, so this is no surprise to the Christian. If God is all-knowing, that means (according to your reasoning here) that divergent cultures knew God's law and purposefully rejected it in favor of one of their own creation and choosing. The law of grace, repentance, and atonement could very well represent a return to a law that is applicable to all in the face of the loss of the original universal law.

There is also evidence that a universally applicable law is in effect whether you know God or not. What we know as murder is almost universally known as an unacceptable crime. You don't even have to be a theist to get that. God's law in terms of OT law appears to already be written on the hearts of men even beyond the Judeo-Christian heritage no matter how hard we work to try to reject it.

You've left planet rational thinking or coherent language. Just an FYI. The above responses do not make any sense, you may simply need to explain further, because there is some massive gap in how you came to these conclusions that doesn't seem to follow.

Ps. I did not choose the world I was born to, it kinda happened before I was capable of forming descisions and making choices.

Correct, which leads me to no God. An evil God would create a world that would still make way more sense than this one, just in a different direction. To look at the world we have in front of us and reverse coherent motive of a designer from it as it stands is nigh impossible. I could see some people believing in creative forces in conflict who aren't all knowing or all powerful but even there, they'd just be riders on the system rather than originators and, IMHO, worshiping them wouldn't make a whole lot of sense.


He created everything, there is no such thing as a factor that he cannot know. For there to be factors that he doesn't know he wouldn't be omniscient, therefor for him to create a 'corrupter' is like JK Rowling drafting a villain in Harry Potter - she still wrote it.

There's not really a gap here. In a word, this is about theodicy.

1) God could make any possible world (omnipotence).
2) God's nature is perfect goodness, therefore God's creation can only be perfectly good. If God made a world that wasn't perfectly good, it would be a contradiction of God's nature. With me so far?
3) The world we live in is NOT perfectly good.
4) Therefore, God did not make THIS world.

Some would go so far as to say:
5) Therefore, God doesn't exist.

I reject 5) on the grounds that it isn't necessary for God to be absent in order for the world as we know it to exist. God very well could exist in such a way that is compatible with a fallen creation. As long as it is possible that God exists, 5) is a non-sequitor.

No, you didn't choose the world you were born into. You inherited it. Humankind as a whole determined the direction that God's creation would take, a choice God put in our hands and left up to us. It is up to each individual how he or she will shape the world around him or her, either attempting to return it to an Edenic state guided by God's power over his or her life or by choosing a path that leads away from the will of God. COLLECTIVELY humankind could possibly get very close to going back to Eden, but it would take 100% commitment from every person on the planet. It is hypothetically possible for that to happen, but extremely unlikely since all it would take is one person to individually assert his will against God's will to break the chain of perfection. So the best anyone can do is choose whether they will live purely within a secular realm or if they'll choose to live in the kingdom of God, which they choose by accepting God's plan over the material world. The only possible world that is left is one in which all persons populating it have already chosen God and in which there is no possible way in which anyone would choose to rebel against God. That would be the Edenic paradise that God created, not the fallen world in which we currently physically reside.

I think 1) needs a fix. As you said yourself, even an omnipotent God can't create 'any' possible world; he/she/it has his/her/its own nature to go by and that's it. To be omnipotent to start with means that you are the sum of all factors - no other influences exist. If other influences exist and you can't control them then you're not omnipotent, if you can't predict their outcome then you're not omniscient.

It really takes some serious intellectual pole vaulting/gymnastics to rationalize theism, as evident here. Seems much simpler not to care about the supernatural and just work at being a good person without the whole eternal punishment/omnipotence/pointless theology & rituals

Oddly enough, we agree on this last point. But it's only one step away from concluding there IS a God, a step I take that you do not.


Omniscience is only one factor of God's nature. God is also all-good, though, and to create something reflecting His image without giving that creation it's own creative power, God is not perfectly good. With that power is the ability to choose good over evil or vice versa. We could have chosen to leave creation alone, but we didn't--we sought to improve upon what was already perfect to begin with and arrogantly attempt to rise above God. To make a creation that He can't place faith in doesn't reflect a nature of perfect good. It's unfortunate that the creature made the wrong choice, but God would have been in violation of His own nature to intervene, not to mention it shows God never had any faith in His own creation to begin with. Even a perfect creation must depend completely on God to remain so (Why didn't Adam and Eve ask for God's help against the serpent? Or even ask God to remove the tree of death?). Rather than commit an injustice by compelling all who are born into rebellion to unconditional eternal separation, God offers the choice of continued rebellion or reconciliation. God may know everything, but God's knowledge doesn't excuse us from the decisions He allows us to make.

No "fix" necessary. God can make any possible world. But the actual choice to make any one world is going to be guided by all the things that God is by His nature. The ABILITY to do anything does not compel a person to do any ONE thing or even everything that is possible. God could have chosen to create a world that was inherently evil. Such a world would not reflect the nature of God as perfectly good. I think God DID make a perfectly world and choose not to make any changes since God got it right the first time. An evil world is not the product of a good God, merely the choices God allows it. Taking away the choice would be a contradiction of God's goodness and justice.