A Question of Christianity, Hell and Free Will.

Remove all ads!

@ NOG, Gnarff and other pro free willers,
I unfortuantly do not believe in the concept of Free will or even fate, logically the very idea of either does not make much sense. to quote numerous authoritive sources, 'free will is an illusion'. Why? Because everything we do or say is a result of a unique combination of circumstances, factors, events, personalities and every choice to subjective to them. Furthermore, to say that if one could make that desicion again, they may have chosen another path is, also, an illusion. the exact circumstances repeated would produce the exact same result, if they did not then it would not be the same exact circumstances. To go even further than this you must also realise that choices are never repeated, fate can't exist because identical moments do not pass twice, there is only one avenue every one can go down each time we make a desicion. and if there is there is an odd choice made or some such nonesense, it is made because of perhaps unseen subtle factors, gut feeling etc. Free will and fate are simply words we place on our lives with the fantastical notion in our heads of some sort of alter dimensional plane. it isn't just arguable, the whole idea just doesn't make logical sense.
But that is just my opinion.
Based on that opinion i would say that with or without free will if God is all-knowing, which he must be or else he would not infinite, and therefore not god etc, he will, by defintion know every choice we will make.
Therefore to say that humans have free will is by very defintion denying that God is infinte. Because if he knows our desicion, then it is not unpredicatble and therefore not free.

That is my argument on that case,

As for the first question i asked the preacher. Well it appears i may have been talking with a bit of a dillusional hardliner. It is good to know that unknowing good people will get a chance. But:

Q: I am fully aware of the bible and jesus and the rest but choose not the believe. I, for the sake of discussion, have a lived a good life in every other way. If a murderer who sincerely repents may go to heaven, does a man who lives well but does not beleive get to go?

@Daie,
I was informed that in hell there would be worms, maggots, a lot of heat and a 'great gnashing of teeth'. this is, apparently according to the bible. Plus i don't think Dante counts as the word of God. Or does he?
Your position on free will and not allowing us slaves would prove that god was good, but it is not proof for his existence.


@ Gnarff: you mention a great deal about prophets spreading the word etc. all this added with the great flood and all this seems that God has made a few mistakes and wished to wipe the slate clean. infinite, all knowing beings can't make mistakes. It would be physically impossible.

@Abomination: Yes Gisborne was incredibly... interesting. Not quite as bad as Invercargill through, i think i could almost envision the 1st layer of hell being that place. Its nice to be back in Auckland where the rest of NZ hates you.


One more thing. If God made Adam in his own image. why did God have a willie?

 

He's trying. He has preachers and prophets equipped with His holy Bible, but people refuse to listen, some even preferring mockery...

That's exactly it. He gives us the Bible as a guide book with the laws contained, but we still must choose to obey them.

Bingo. We have a built in " detector" that helps us to know right from worng. Some of us use it less than others...

What NOG referred to as your conscience is God's way of telling you what is right. It will, if you prayerfully consider what is taught with real intent to learn what is right, tell you of the truth of what you read.

Is that supposed to come as a surprise? Even in the old testament, there are incidents where people who knew better still succumbed to temptation and committed grievous sins. King David anyone? Jonah? Balaam? Even Solomon fell. Receiving the law is one thing. Living it is another. The more you learn, the harder it is to live...

Is He really remaining silent or is He rather instructing His servants who are then commanded to teach others what they have been taught. Those in His service have the privelidge of His Spirit to guide them in these efforts. I have experienced this when trying to teach the young men in my charge at Church.

To make that which is sacred less so by making it public. It happenned with sex...

That's because people are friggin' morons sometimes. As you mentioned, He granted Moses the ability to part the Red Sea, but after years in the wilderness, the people forgot this and felt the need for the Graven images that they were raised with in Egypt.

For these miracles to be effective, they need to be more personal. I can read about people in far away places being healed through their faith, but I can't fully appreciate it until I'm in the story. I remember the pain my wisdom teeth caused me, and how the blessing I got from one in authority was the only thing that took the edge off the pain so that I could rest. I can read about how sinners change their life, but they are just stories until I'm the sinner who's life is changed. To me that's incontrovetable proof of God, but to you it is just a story that some guy on a message board told...

It's rare that I can actually crack a joke in the Alleys...

Justice and Mercy are two virtues, both equally good, but at cross purposes to each other. By giving His life for our sins, Jesus Christ takes upon us the role of mediator, enabling Justice to be satisfied and yet allow mercy to be extended to the sinners. This mediation requires faith in the mediator and our best efforts to obey His terms. Those who will not accept this mediation are then subject to Justice in full, having rejected all hope for mercy.

When you sin, you rack up a punishment list, payable at the last day. Were there no alternative for Mercy, then I'd have to agree. But Christianity also includes this alternative as I have described above. Think of it like racking up a debt with a mob boss. The day of reckoning arrives and he shows up with his goons to break your legs if you don't pay up. You don't have his money, and you plead for your life. Just as he's about to break your legs, a friend arrives with the money you owe the mobster. He agrees to turn it over on two conditions: First, the mobster agrees to take the money and leave you in peace, and secondly, you pay off the debt on his terms. The Mobster only wants his money. Do you agree to the terms of your friend or do you let the mobster break your legs?

So you deny human intellect or a soul? That is simply absurd and unimaginable to me.

First, I do not believe that Murderers can be truly forgiven. I believe that shedding innocent blood is outside the scope of the Atonement of Jesus Christ. AS long as you don't shed innocent blood and ultimately accept Christ (sometime before the final judgement, which will have at least a thousand years after the ressurection) you may be spared true damnation. You may not reach the Highest degree of Glory, but you won't be subject to Satan either.

The focus in this thread has been on God, but remember that the Bible also warns us of Satan, who tempts us and tries to lure us into misery. Satan held more influence than God in the places destroyed. This influence was so great that God destroyed the places believed completely overrun by Satan and his temptations.

Well, yes. He is our Father in Heaven after all...

 

So why doesn't God show himself today and prove to everybody that He is real? You answered the question before but I rebutted it and you agreed with my rebuttal...

So why doesn't he show himself? Why should we believe this 2000 year old book that's been re-written time and time again, is full of falsehoods, contradictions and is followed in a 'pick and choose' manner?

 

Well, mayeb, maybe not. God isn;t human, we need to remember that. He transends humanity. Perhaps he gave Adam a willie as a method of procreating, something whioch God does not need to do.

As much as any otehr theologian. Dante is a nice one to work with because he explains the situation effectively. Plus, where in the Bible is the 'Lucifer' story?

If I've proved that God is good, then I've proved his existance.
God is perfect.
God is good.
Something which exists is better than something which does not exist.
Therefore, to be good, God must exist.

*throws the ontological argument book away*

 

I will be a little off topic but one of the reasons that i don't believe in Islam is here (this is related to free will somehow):
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/2/index.htm

I am one of these disbelievers i think. But if i can't see Allah because it sealed my eyes, ears and heart than how can i be responsible for my disbelief? If i can't freely choose my path how can i be judged? AFAIK crazy people, babies, animals aren't responsible for their deeds because they don't have free will. It seems according to 2:7 disbelievers don't have free will as well. Though i will go to hell but babies, animals, crazies won't. That's not justice and it is a contradiction i think.

I think that was related to 2nd question.

And about first question, on the same page there is:

And that's about first question. Though there seems to be some contradictions :
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/contra/christians_hell.html

I think 3:85 isn't a contradiction but 5:72 is.

 

A million dollars in my bank account would be good. Therefore it must exist?

 

The argument is hugely flawed

 

Sleep:
You are right in that every situation is unique and unrepeatable, but that is the very defeat of your arguement. No one will argue that different circumstances will lead to different results, but how can you say the same circumstances will always lead to the same results if you can never repeat the same circumstances? How do you know that free will isn't a factor? And if free will doesn't exist, then I would argue that fate very much does. If there is only one option for every choice, depending on the circumstances which are themselves the results of other 'choices', then there is only one way the universe can play out. That sounds pretty much like fate to me. So make up your mind, either you can admit there is free will, or you can admit there is fate, albeit a rather hard one.

As for your question, I believe that even murderers can be forgiven if they repent, that any sin committed against God or man can be forgiven IF YOU REPENT. Now, if you are claiming that you're 'good life' is actually a perfect life, then you have no sins to forgive and get into Heaven, sure, but are you really going to say you have never, EVER displeased God in any way, you've never even told a 'little white lie'?

That is why you must repent.

Ab:

Let's clear this up right now. The Bible has been re- translated a number of times in some languages , but not all, due to changes usually in that language and not in the original text. On top of that, the text still survives in its original version (as far as we can tell, which is about 20-50 years after it was written for the NT and somewhere between 50 and 1000 or more for various parts of the OT) and original language. On top of that, I have yet to hear from ANY of the numerous people who make claims like this where there is a single falsehood in the Bible, or a single legitimate contradiction. If you want people to believe you, cite some examples. As for people who follow it in a 'pick and choose' manner, don't judge the text just because people don't always follow all of it.

 

Falsehood: Adam and Eve as the first humans. Moses splitting the red sea with a stick. The list goes on of things that the Bible claims happened but there has been no evidence to indicate that it did happen.

Contradictions: Leviticus, compare most to the whole of the New Testament. Leviticus says do one thing, New Testament says do another.

Pick and choose manner: following some of Leviticus and not the rest. The fact is there are things that the Bible commands but Christians don't follow it. Therefore they're 'picking and choosing' what they want to follow.

How so? The argument you presented is that if something is good then it must exist. This is total bollocks. A cure for AIDS would be good but it doesn't exist (yet at least). When you make an argument like that one just needs to provide an example of something that would be good if it did exist to prove it wrong... or simply give an example of something that is not good that exists. "Goodness" is not reason for existance.

 

Free will is necessary. God could have created automatons who loved him and obeyed him without question, but what would be the point? It would be like ai programmed to do one thing and one thing only, and thus can hardly be deserving of the credit of having done the 'right' thing.

We can choose to love God, or turn away from him. Free will is what makes the choices significant, because it is obediance given, rather then forced. Imagine a loved one, would you rather he/she obey you because a)he/she has no choice in the matter or b)because they love you?

Having said that, there is a scene in Brothers Karamazov where Ivan makes up a parable, accusing God of setting high standards that only the best among men could follow (Jesus resisting temptation in the wilderness etc). Its true to an extent as well, and I'll leave it to someone wiser then me to explain why God has such stringent standards

 

Free will is what allows us to make the only choice we can. The fact that there is no other choice we would make in that situation doesn't negate that it is our will to make that one choice. In the end, free will creates fate. I know, that sounds like doublethink even to me, but it's the best way I've been able to reconcile existence.

 

But if there is only one choice, is it really free will? Or are you thinking of free will as you do the circumstances, where factors within this 'free will' force it to make certian decisions? Again, I would question just how free this will of yours is.

 

Determinism abd Fatalism can indeed be very similar. There is a key difference though. With fatalism, events are going to happen no matter what, regardless of the cause.

Try this argument:
(1) If determinism is true (ie. all events including human actions and choices are, without exception, completely determined), then we do not have free will and therefore cnanot be morally responsible.
(2) If indeterminism is true (ie. the opposite of determinism) then human actions are random, hence not free, so we do not have free will and therefore cannot be morally responsible.
(3) Either determinism or indeterminism is true (as stated by the Law of Excluded Middle)
(4) We are never free nor responsible for what we do.

 

@Rotku:
This is not logical. You make the poor assumption that if something is not determined beforehand then it must be random, which is wrong. Essentially, you are assuming the claim you are trying to make. The very essence of free will suggests the ability to make a decision at the time and not before or after. If it is determined before, by something else, then you are right that we have no free will. If it is not determined before, but also not determined at the time, then you are right that it is random, and thus not free will. But if it is not determined before, by something else, and it is determined at that moment, by the person/persons involved, then there is free will. Essentially, you are presenting false alternatives, either one extreme must be true or the other, but that need not be the case here, and excluding the middle is very dangerous indeed.

 

@ Dengo: You do realize that the Christians hold little value to the Qu’ran?

Adam and Eve have been dead for over 5000 years. Anyone who would remember them has likely been dead for over 4500 years. God’s word against yours. Also after Moses parted the Red Sea (over 3500 years ago anyway), the sea filled back in, obliterating any footprints or other evidence of the people of Israel passing through. Over 3500 years under the Red sea would also obliterate any traces of the Pharoah’s army. Ask any CSI detective how long it takes before evidence is lost? A lot less than 3500 years…

Jesus Christ specifically said that in Him the law of Moses was fulfilled. What was left over from the Book of Leviticus holds over under the original law as stated in Exodus 20. The Scribes and Pharisees went nuts with this. Just like Judges and politicians do today…

See above. The Laws were clarified by Jesus Christ. The Scribes and Pharisees hated Jesus Christ too. They wanted to stone him for healing the sick on the Sabbath. God commanded the observance of the Sabbath. The Scribes and Pharisees annotated and specified this. Jesus Christ, without violating God’s law violated the changes they made. Much of this was taking care of the stuff that the Scribes and Pharisees messed up…

Exactly, if we can’t screw up, then what point is there to existence? It’s like playing a video game where you can never die…

By being shunted through life it’s like waiting in line as opposed to interactive learning. Why are we here if not to learn?

Please explain. I don’t see those two as the only options. I see Self determinism as an option. We pick our own actions, allowing the consequences to fall where they may

 

Well if God would like to testify in court I'd be happy to oblige him

Parting the red sea? Not possible. And if he had there would be bronze and copper weapons at the bottom of the sea, the obvious remains of the Egyptian army.

There are contradictions. It's right there on paper. You said that Leviticus is something you shouldn't follow now, so why still condemn homosexuality? There are more occurances than just Leviticus but I don't happen to have the time nor effort to point them all out. Jesus preached that one should follow the law of the country yet he ran into a temple, turning over stalls and attacking people: vandalisim and assault.

You've said before that you pick and choose. The fact that there are some parts of the Bible that you follow and some that you don't is evidence enough. Mentioned before that women shouldn't ever talk in church yet they do, obviously somebody isn't following that part of the Bible. They're picking and choosing what to follow.

[ October 07, 2006, 07:55: Message edited by: Abomination ]

 

I agree completely, NOG. That argument is horrible. Never liked it at all

That's fair simple. Either statement X is true, or statement X is false, correct? Going by the same logic, either determinism is true, or it's false. If we don't have determinism, we have indeterminism (which is the lack of determinism).

Now, I'm no scientist, but I am quite sure that parting a sea would have very serious ecological effects. Think of all the currents that would be desterbed, as well as the life (both on shore and in the sea). Then you look at the effects on the land from the huge waves that would come crashing, and the terrain under the sea which would also probably have major changes. Surely some of these would be detectable.

Or what about the world been flooded with Noah?

[ October 07, 2006, 13:20: Message edited by: Rotku ]

 

Quote :So why doesn't God fix it? Oh, because he wants people to go to hell, obviously.

When God chooses to 'fix it', that is when God reveals his divine nature in its entirety. When that occurs, free will is taken out of the equation. Faced with the creator, one can only recognise his existance, and we will have no choice but to believe. Like I said before, God does not want converts because we fear his power, but to come to him of our own free will, based solely on the fact that he created us, loves us and sent his only son to bear the wages of our sins for us.

 

I still don't belive that argument for a second, Monger. As said before, God proved his existance again and again yet people still didn't believe in him, even those who bore direct witness.

I wouldn't go to God out of fear, I'd worship somebody who proved their existance to me and made it worth my while to worship them. Somebody who would actually have a conversation with me, explain things to me... not hide from me. I'd love to have a relationship with a divine being but I can't exactly open up the channel of commuication... does he have a PO Box, pager, e-mail even?

 

@Gnarfflinger : I know. I know the title is " A Question of Christianity, Hell and Free Will" not "Islam, Hell and Free Will". That's why I've started my post with "I will be a little off topic". I just tried to find the answers to these two questions for Islam and share my humble opinions.