A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
marketandchurch
Scholar
Posts: 358
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:51 am
Location: The People's Republic Of Portland

A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #1

Post by marketandchurch »

This was the post that got me banned on Christian Chat:
Then God doesn't care about the goodness and decency of an atheist, a buddhist, etc. And if that is the message you are telling me, then there is no point to being a good person. There is no point of fighting on behalf of the oppressed, as America did, in WWII. The only purpose of fighting the Japanese, and beating back the Nazi's should have been so that we could bring more people to christ...is that what your saying? Should America be sending food and aid to heathens in Haiti? Should America be helping out muslims in disaster relief fallowing a natural disaster, unless it is to bring them to Christ? Is a person's only value to you, there potential to become a convert? They have no humanity beyond that?

You have an old testament my_adonai, and you are to be as obsessed with its obsessions, as you are with the new testament's. And the Old Testament's preoccupation is fighting evil, championing the good, and making a more ethical existence, during this lifetime.

And unless you think Christians alone can make this lifetime a little better, a little less genocidal, with a little less starvation, a little less torture, etc, it is an unethical message to peddle, that a good God would demand goodness, unless one doesn't believe in his son. Then one's goodness is pointless. One might as well not care about not gossiping behind other people's back, destroying someone's dignity in public, sleeping with a coworker's wife, extorting an elderly couple that one was hired to help, raping a pre-pubcescent child, killing another human being because of their skin color, etc, etc, etc.

Apparently, I was challenging people's faith, and was just there to be anti-christian, in saying that a Good God would not send to hell decent people, simply because they do not believe in his Son. I got all sorts of less then appetizing replies, saying I'm screwed for eternity, if I don't accept Jesus. I feel that I am not alone, even within the Christian community, in thinking this as I've heard many catholic priests, and mainstream protestant pastors, while I was growing up, distancing themselves from such a belief. I don't know where people on this forum stand, but I'll put it up for debate:

  • Topic of Debate: A Good God would not send to hell a decent person, simply for not believing in his son.


If you agree with me, and are a Christian, please square your response with the rest of the New Testament. What I'm looking for is scriptural consistency to back up your position, and more importantly, how one will then re-read the entire message of the New Testament, if one wants to hold that position. I say this because I don't want you to drop scripture, simply because it doesn't conform to your own personal beliefs, but I am looking for how one can reinterpret the New testament, if one drops that central tenant, & for the rest of us, impediment, to everlasting life. Is there room for this? Or is the New Testament rigidly in the affirmative about Christ being the only way to heaven? Which is fine. That's their theology, but let's see where this goes.

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #611

Post by Nickman »

JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
You have my reply on the Black Jack counting thing.
You have my reply on the 'hinder free will' thing.
I did not know you defined your own new god here to work around this issue. Am debating the with reference to the bible god. Can toy identify your god, define him and his omniscience?
So, do you agree then that the bible god's omniscience contradicts human free-will?
I have already said that the biblical God is illogical. My imaginary God concept does not. You are stuck on the Biblical God concept. I am not. Omniscience with my God is not illogical. That sounds so weird coming from an atheist.
Nick, am I correct in saying you rather invent a new god than to agree with 'my' omniscience/free-will argument?
The debate is about omniscience which is extremely offtopic. I was debating omniscience without the constraints of Christianity.
You did not answer my question Nick. Why is that?
Nor did you answer my previous questions to define your god. And the card counting and 'hinderence'.

And yes, you are off topic here if you are not debating about the Christian god. Have you read the topic on the thread?

Omniscience is just that, and either your god has or our not. It does not change the argument.

No, can you please start debating. You have my questions, let's keep this honest. No more running away like Danmark.
My argument is that omniscience is not problematic in and of itself. Scott has even agreed that this is the case. Once you add the Biblical God concept to the equation, then it becomes problematic. Omniscience by itself does not deter free will.

JohnA
Banned
Banned
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:11 am

Post #612

Post by JohnA »

Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
You have my reply on the Black Jack counting thing.
You have my reply on the 'hinder free will' thing.
I did not know you defined your own new god here to work around this issue. Am debating the with reference to the bible god. Can toy identify your god, define him and his omniscience?
So, do you agree then that the bible god's omniscience contradicts human free-will?
I have already said that the biblical God is illogical. My imaginary God concept does not. You are stuck on the Biblical God concept. I am not. Omniscience with my God is not illogical. That sounds so weird coming from an atheist.
Nick, am I correct in saying you rather invent a new god than to agree with 'my' omniscience/free-will argument?
The debate is about omniscience which is extremely offtopic. I was debating omniscience without the constraints of Christianity.
You did not answer my question Nick. Why is that?
Nor did you answer my previous questions to define your god. And the card counting and 'hinderence'.

And yes, you are off topic here if you are not debating about the Christian god. Have you read the topic on the thread?

Omniscience is just that, and either your god has or our not. It does not change the argument.

No, can you please start debating. You have my questions, let's keep this honest. No more running away like Danmark.
My argument is that omniscience is not problematic in and of itself. Scott has even agreed that this is the case. Once you add the Biblical God concept to the equation, then it becomes problematic. Omniscience by itself does not deter free will.
That is your assertion/claim. Now, can you back it up?

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #613

Post by Nickman »

JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
You have my reply on the Black Jack counting thing.
You have my reply on the 'hinder free will' thing.
I did not know you defined your own new god here to work around this issue. Am debating the with reference to the bible god. Can toy identify your god, define him and his omniscience?
So, do you agree then that the bible god's omniscience contradicts human free-will?
I have already said that the biblical God is illogical. My imaginary God concept does not. You are stuck on the Biblical God concept. I am not. Omniscience with my God is not illogical. That sounds so weird coming from an atheist.
Nick, am I correct in saying you rather invent a new god than to agree with 'my' omniscience/free-will argument?
The debate is about omniscience which is extremely offtopic. I was debating omniscience without the constraints of Christianity.
You did not answer my question Nick. Why is that?
Nor did you answer my previous questions to define your god. And the card counting and 'hinderence'.

And yes, you are off topic here if you are not debating about the Christian god. Have you read the topic on the thread?

Omniscience is just that, and either your god has or our not. It does not change the argument.

No, can you please start debating. You have my questions, let's keep this honest. No more running away like Danmark.
My argument is that omniscience is not problematic in and of itself. Scott has even agreed that this is the case. Once you add the Biblical God concept to the equation, then it becomes problematic. Omniscience by itself does not deter free will.
That is your assertion/claim. Now, can you back it up?
I already have since we first started debating the topic. I also have had two other people agree with me in this very thread.

JohnA
Banned
Banned
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:11 am

Post #614

Post by JohnA »

Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Nickman wrote:
JohnA wrote:
You have my reply on the Black Jack counting thing.
You have my reply on the 'hinder free will' thing.
I did not know you defined your own new god here to work around this issue. Am debating the with reference to the bible god. Can toy identify your god, define him and his omniscience?
So, do you agree then that the bible god's omniscience contradicts human free-will?
I have already said that the biblical God is illogical. My imaginary God concept does not. You are stuck on the Biblical God concept. I am not. Omniscience with my God is not illogical. That sounds so weird coming from an atheist.
Nick, am I correct in saying you rather invent a new god than to agree with 'my' omniscience/free-will argument?
The debate is about omniscience which is extremely offtopic. I was debating omniscience without the constraints of Christianity.
You did not answer my question Nick. Why is that?
Nor did you answer my previous questions to define your god. And the card counting and 'hinderence'.

And yes, you are off topic here if you are not debating about the Christian god. Have you read the topic on the thread?

Omniscience is just that, and either your god has or our not. It does not change the argument.

No, can you please start debating. You have my questions, let's keep this honest. No more running away like Danmark.
My argument is that omniscience is not problematic in and of itself. Scott has even agreed that this is the case. Once you add the Biblical God concept to the equation, then it becomes problematic. Omniscience by itself does not deter free will.
That is your assertion/claim. Now, can you back it up?
I already have since we first started debating the topic. I also have had two other people agree with me in this very thread.
I already have since we first started debating the topic.
And I have shown where you went wrong, and you refuse to address my rebuttal.
I showed your card counting example as insufficient - unless of course you want to address that.
You 'hindered' has been shown false by a theist in this thread.
I also have had two other people agree with me in this very thread.
Argument from authority and population. You have to convince your critic (me), to my standards - that is normal debate.

I can offer what Danmark said (ignoring his contractions that the god and free-will do not exist for now): it has not been solved yet. Not that I would, but I submit that I agree it has not been solved. You say it has, but you refuse to show me how. Why?

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #615

Post by Nickman »

JohnA wrote:
And I have shown where you went wrong, and you refuse to address my rebuttal.
I showed your card counting example as insufficient - unless of course you want to address that.
You 'hindered' has been shown false by a theist in this thread.
If you would reread the thread you would see that they agree that omniscience by itself is not a problem, once you throw the Biblical constraints into the picture, omniscience becomes problematic. On its own, omniscience poses no threat to free will. Having knowledge of future events doesn't deter a person from making a decision. The entity who is omniscient didn't coerce the person in question. The entity only knew what decision that person would make. There is no hinderence of free will.

On counting cards, I don't even need that argument to prove my point. I brought it up because people can count cards and know which card will be played next. Their accuracy may not always be spot on, but more times than not, they are correct. Also, their ability to count the cards does not in anyway compromise the deck that is being used. They are able to see certain outcomes based on what has already been played. They are so good at it, that documentaries, movies and books have been written over and over on the subject.
Argument from authority and population. You have to convince your critic (me), to my standards - that is normal debate.

I can offer what Danmark said (ignoring his contractions that the god and free-will do not exist for now): it has not been solved yet. Not that I would, but I submit that I agree it has not been solved. You say it has, but you refuse to show me how. Why?
Call it what you will, but I am not claiming I am right based on how many people have agreed with me. My point is that you are the only participant in this thread that cannot see the logic in my argument because you are hell bent on your own ideas that omniscience somehow hinders free will. I have shown you time and time again that knowing something will happen before it happens in no way hinders free
ill.

User avatar
help3434
Guru
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:19 pm
Location: United States
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 29 times

Post #616

Post by help3434 »

[Replying to post 611 by Nickman]

So you are talking about some entity that is omniscient rather than the creator of the universe?

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #617

Post by Nickman »

help3434 wrote: [Replying to post 611 by Nickman]

So you are talking about some entity that is omniscient rather than the creator of the universe?
Regardless, omniscience is not problematic even if we say that the creator of universe is omniscient.

Just because a creator God knows what you will decide in your life before you do it, doesn't hinder your ability to choose. Can you choose differently? No, because you already made your choice in God's mind. He just saw which choice you made ahead of time. Think of it as looking back into the past.

Now omniscience is only a concept to begin with and I am not advocating that it is true, but if there were a being who could know all things this would in no way hinder your ability to choose. This deity would see things as if they already happened, i.e. looking into the past.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20566
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 337 times
Contact:

Post #618

Post by otseng »

JohnA wrote: Danmark gets stroppy when he lacks attention and his points are shown invalid.
:warning: Moderator Warning


Please do not make any personal comments about others.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

User avatar
help3434
Guru
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:19 pm
Location: United States
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 29 times

Post #619

Post by help3434 »

[Replying to post 613 by Nickman]

But the creator of the universe made everything in such a way that everything that everyone did was inevitable. And this omniscient creator knew it ahead of time better than a programmer knows what his program will do.

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #620

Post by Nickman »

help3434 wrote: [Replying to post 613 by Nickman]

But the creator of the universe made everything in such a way that everything that everyone did was inevitable. And this omniscient creator knew it ahead of time better than a programmer knows what his program will do.
You can look at it as a program also, but there are several ways to look at it. If you want to focus on creation as a software program, then omniscience is problematic. If you look at it as a deity who created people with free will, whom he lives outside of time because he created time, then this deity can let his creation do as they will, but he can already see the outcome. As if he is looking into the past.

Post Reply