Good Friday's gone and passed...

Originally posted by bbarr
Come on. If salvation really is a gift, then we should be able to refuse it without being punished. That is, unless your God is some sort of cosmic mob-boss: "I will give them a gift they can't refuse....". I certainly will blame your God for all the natural evils in the world, if you persist in claiming that God is both all-powerful and morally good.

So a loving God must force himself on you then?

Originally posted by whodey
So a loving God must force himself on you then?

That isn't an implication of anything I said above, so I'm at a loss as to why you're asking.

Anyway, I don't know how to answer this question, since I have no idea what you theists mean when you use the term "love". You think claims like "God is loving" are compatible with all the evil in the world, and the eternal punishment of persons for rejecting a supposed gift. I can only infer that you mean something quite different by "love" than the rest of us (and quite different than how you yourself use the term "love" when applied to your other terrestrial relationships). Of course, this is a common problem with normative terms and theism. I have no idea what you theists mean by "moral" or "good" either.

Originally posted by whodey
So a loving God must force himself on you then?

Apparently that's what your God is doing. "Take this gift, or else... 😠" As bbarr pointed out, that's a rather strange (and certainly not very loving) way to offer a gift.

Originally posted by Nordlys
Apparently that's what your God is doing. "Take this gift, or else... 😠" As bbarr pointed out, that's a rather strange (and certainly not very loving) way to offer a gift.

So if you were throwing a life raft at someone who was drowning would you nicely offer them the device or shout at them to grab onto it or else? It is a question I struggle with as well.

Originally posted by whodey
So if you were throwing a life raft at someone who was drowning would you nicely offer them the device or shout at them to grab onto it or else? It is a question I struggle with as well.

That's a false analogy. There's a huge difference between "grab onto this raft, or you will drown" and "grab onto this raft, or I will drown you" (or "grab onto this raft, or you will drown, and I'll do everything I can to make your death as painful as possible" ).

Originally posted by shavixmir
Well...if Jesus was so all bloody omnipotent about such things, why did he allow himself to be cruCified?

I mean, would anyone dare suggest it had a point? Everybody's still as mad as hell...
Waste of a good chunk of wood, if you ask me.

Your misconceptions about God blinds you to the truth.
To answer your question; If someone you love was in eminent danger of dying and you knew you could save them but it would cost you your own life...?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Not for an omnipotent, omniscient creator.

A double-O creator (I'll get onto triple-O arguments later) would know, in advance, every action that would take place in a universe that he created. He'd know, for example, whether he'd have to send me to hell, right from the moment he created the universe.

So, if there is a god, malevolent is exactly the thing to call him. Another phrase would be "puppet master".

I find it absurd, and irrational, that you would give a definition of a God you don't believe exists. 😕

So, can you give me a brief and concise explination as to what is the cause of so much death and distruction we see in this world?

I got the feeling this is going to open a can of worms!

Originally posted by bbarr
Come on. If salvation really is a gift, then we should be able to refuse it without being punished. That is, unless your God is some sort of cosmic mob-boss: "I will give them a gift they can't refuse....". I certainly will blame your God for all the natural evils in the world, if you persist in claiming that God is both all-powerful and morally good.

Don't be offended, but your thinking is askew on this.
Why do you reach the conclusion that just because you can refuse the gift that you should be free of the consequences of sin?

And blaming God for anything is an act of denial. It is the same as refusing to except responsibility for your own conduct. We punish criminals for breaking the law; that's what justice requires.

And the most erroneous conclusion you espouse is that God, by virtue of his attributes, is some kind of monster. I remember as a child my father punishing me for disobedience, and how I thought he was wrong. I was wrong!

Originally posted by josephw
Your misconceptions about God blinds you to the truth.
To answer your question; If someone you love was in eminent danger of dying and you knew you could save them but it would cost you your own life...?

And this is exactly what I have been pressing on here for weeks now!

And if the beloved is unconscious; or doesn’t realize she is drowning; or is pathologically suicidal; or is angry at me about something, and is trying to hit me away; or is delusional and thinks I am a figment of her imagination; or is for some reason terrified of me; or even hates me—I save her anyway! Because she is the beloved; I need no other reason. And the God of the NT is not only lover but love itself.

In which of those cases, according to Christian soteriology, even within a theology of the cross, is God’s sacrificial death not efficacious? God either chooses not to save, or fails to save, or saves.

I am not stepping even one inch outside the bounds of Christian theism here. Early church theologians like St. Gregory of Nyssa understood this clearly.

Originally posted by josephw
Don't be offended, but your thinking is askew on this.
Why do you reach the conclusion that just because you can refuse the gift that you should be free of the consequences of sin?

And blaming God for anything is an act of denial. It is the same as refusing to except responsibility for your own conduct. We punish criminals for breaking the law; that's wh ...[text shortened]... a child my father punishing me for disobedience, and how I thought he was wrong. I was wrong!

Don't be offended, but you've lost the thread of the argument.

The claim, again, is that according to your own theism God is responsible for setting up the universe such that "sin" leads to eternal damnation. So it is not as though the refusal of the supposed gift of salvation merely has consequences that are independent of God. To claim otherwise is, at best, indicative of your ignorance as to the implications of your view. At worst, you are intentionally obfuscating the issue. If salvation were really a gift, then we could refuse it without being directly punished for the refusal. And please, don't make the absurd claim that it is not the refusal of the gift but the sin that leads to damnation. On your view, it is sufficient to sin that one refuse the gift. On your view, failing to worship God is itself a sin. So, your monster God has set up a a forced choice scenario: Love and worship him (what an egomaniac!) or go to Hell (what a tyrant!).

I don't blame God for anything, because I'm an atheist. But even if I wasn't an atheist, I wouldn't believe that God, by mere fiat, could determine what is right and wrong. You just assume that whatever punishment God visits upon us will be in accord with justice. But it is analytic that justice requires some sort of commensurability between the punishment and the crime. Your monster god thinks that eternal damnation is a just punishment for merely failing to love him. But this punishment is incommensurate with the supposed crime of failing to love him. Hence, your monster god is unjust. Of course, you could just redefine "justice" such that whatever God does is just. But then you will be engaged in some other form of normative discourse; one I simply have no interest in and which is completely irrelevant to my life.

Your father punished you to teach you. It was your development that was your father's aim. How does being damned for all eternity make one better?

Originally posted by bbarr
Come on. If salvation really is a gift, then we should be able to refuse it without being punished. That is, unless your God is some sort of cosmic mob-boss: "I will give them a gift they can't refuse....". I certainly will blame your God for all the natural evils in the world, if you persist in claiming that God is both all-powerful and morally good.

Well the gift is salvation because we are all dying......so if you refuse the gift you will die without the gift of salvation. How can you refuse a gift but expect to recieve the rewards of the gift you refused at the same time? There is an element of free will in faith towards God.

I think the idea is that there is goodness apart from God, there is life apart from God, there is existence apart from God. However, if God is at the heart of it all and is the source of life and you reject him what are yoiu rejecting? If he is at the heart of it all then all goodness comes from him. As far as evil goes, this is the result of choosing anything apart from the source of life and goodness. In and of itself it does not exist.

I realize that the thought of us "needing" him rubs many the wrong way, however, if he really is God then don't you think we do need him?

Originally posted by vistesd
And this is exactly what I have been pressing on here for weeks now!

And if the beloved is unconscious; or doesn’t realize she is drowning; or is pathologically suicidal; or is angry at me about something, and is trying to hit me away; or is delusional and thinks I am a figment of her imagination; or is for some reason terrified of me; or even hates me—I ...[text shortened]... istian theism here. Early church theologians like St. Gregory of Nyssa understood this clearly.

So if the Bible says that it is God's will that NONE should perish then does this not negate the idea that he wills certain people to hell?

From my perspective of the Bible, faith is what God desires, no? The Bible says that via faith we are counted as righteous. For me, this is because God is a God of love and subsequently of free will and requires us to choose him as a result. Faith is nothing more than agreeing with what God is telling you to do just like Abraham was counted as righteous because he placed his faith in God and followed what he told him to do. So if Abraham did not choose to do what God told him to do, is God then sending him to hell or is Abraham refusing what God has to offer which is life. And if God forces Abraham to do what he ought where is free will? Would one rather be a prisoner and alive or dead and free, so to speak?

Originally posted by whodey
Well the gift is salvation because we are all dying......so if you refuse the gift you will die without the gift of salvation. How can you refuse a gift but expect to recieve the rewards of the gift you refused at the same time? There is an element of free will in faith towards God.

I think the idea is that there is goodness apart from God, there is life ...[text shortened]... im rubs many the wrong way, however, if he really is God then don't you think we do need him?

Fine, then let me die without the gift of salvation, but don't punish me after I'm dead for refusing the gift. I don't expect to receive any rewards from your god, because I don't believe in him. And even if I thought your god existed, I certainly wouldn't worship him.

Yes, yes, I know that you and your ilk think that God is the heart of goodness and life. What I don't know is what that means. I don't know what it means because when I question theists about the relationship between God and ethics, they say the most ridiculous things (e.g., that God can simply will some acts to be right or wrong, that God is just and loving but will damn you eternally for failing to love him back, that God is both jealous and morally perfect, etc.).

Originally posted by bbarr
Come on. If salvation really is a gift, then we should be able to refuse it without being punished. That is, unless your God is some sort of cosmic mob-boss: "I will give them a gift they can't refuse....". I certainly will blame your God for all the natural evils in the world, if you persist in claiming that God is both all-powerful and morally good.

God is not responsible for all the natural disasters in the world, Satan is! And I know the next accusation! "Why did God kill all those innocents in the flood, or the Amelikites, etc." That would be like blaming the doctor for killing innocent cancer cells. They have rights too, right?

Originally posted by whodey
So it is impossible for an all powerful God to give us free will

No. But it's a logical impossibility for an all-knowing, all powerful God to do it.