Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Within your responses lies one of my central problems with your brand of Christian theology. "Come now, let us reason together..."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
What of it? The apostle Paul asked and answered this very question in Romans 9. It's God's prerogative -- he did the creating. Don't like it? I'm not sure it matters--since he's the one who created.
Quote:
We all deserve to go to hell, but God, in his mercy, saves some by granting them faith.
Quote:
He is omniscient, omnipotent, immutable, all-loving...
(Emphasis added)
In these statements you lay out the following picture of god...and stop me when you think I'm wrong...
1. He created me as a flawed and fallible human being.
2. He is utterly offended by my behavior because of my flawed, fallible nature.
Okay, already I'm seeing this as a pretty unfair set-up.
3. Because he is offended by the behaviors of flawed, fallible humans, he could very well send us all to eternal torment and feel justified.
What? So god is just in torturing me for acting in a manner consistent with the way he created me...which was offensive to him in the first place? Now this is sounding really unfair.
4. But he offers faith to some...but not all...to save them from this fate.
Call me crazy, but that doesn't sound any less unfair.
5. And even the great apostle Paul realizes that this may seem pretty unfair, prompting him to offer the following "explanation"...
Aha! An explanation...things are looking up!
6. You have no right to question god.
Woa! That is not an explanation! That's just an appeal to authority. Notwithstanding, it does lay out my situation pretty clearly. God made these rules and there is nothing I can do about it...
7. He saves some in his mercy.
Mercy? He made both myself and my neighbor as flawed, fallible human beings who will behave in a way he finds utterly offensive, and the fact that he's only going to torture one of us eternally for it makes him merciful?
8. And is "all-loving."
No. Clearly he is not "all loving." If creating me as a fallible and flawed human whose behavior he knew would be utterly offensive to him and then saving some people (but not necessarily me) from the eternal torment he has in store for us in his "mercy"...if that is your idea of "all-loving," then I assure you that I don't want the kind of love you are offering. That does not resemble love in any way that I've ever heard it described, including the one offered in 1 Corinthians 13.
mud...just mud.... An all loving being is not selective nor do they punish a person, especially a person who has done no wrong.
'We all deserve to go to hell....' WT..?!
BTW- you forgot to capitalize the H in him, Moderator cut: Orphaned
Within your responses lies one of my central problems with your brand of Christian theology. "Come now, let us reason together..."
Thank you for noting that it is only one perception (an insane one in my opinion, but that's another story) of Christian theology. Once again, for those new to the concept, this is called "Reformed Theology," often referred to as "Calvinism."
Within your responses lies one of my central problems with your brand of Christian theology. "Come now, let us reason together..."
Please realize....it's not my "brand". It's what the Bible teaches.
Quote:
(Emphasis added)
In these statements you lay out the following picture of god...and stop me when you think I'm wrong...
1. He created me as a flawed and fallible human being.
2. He is utterly offended by my behavior because of my flawed, fallible nature.
Yes and no. He created you yes. You were born into the human race, as a descendant of Adam. Adam was originally a sinless being--until he sinned. As a result, sin entered the world, and you inherited a sinful nature from him. That's why it was so important for Jesus to be born of a virgin -- and not have an earthly Father -- because he did not inherit a sinful nature from a man.
Quote:
Okay, already I'm seeing this as a pretty unfair set-up.
3. Because he is offended by the behaviors of flawed, fallible humans, he could very well send us all to eternal torment and feel justified.
What? So god is just in torturing me for acting in a manner consistent with the way he created me...which was offensive to him in the first place? Now this is sounding really unfair.
He is just for punishing you for the crimes committed against him. Again...did you read Romans 9? Is the clay justified in whining to the potter that it was formed into something it didn't appreciate?
Quote:
4. But he offers faith to some...but not all...to save them from this fate.
Call me crazy, but that doesn't sound any less unfair.
5. And even the great apostle Paul realizes that this may seem pretty unfair, prompting him to offer the following "explanation"...
Aha! An explanation...things are looking up!
6. You have no right to question god.
Woa! That is not an explanation! That's just an appeal to authority. Notwithstanding, it does lay out my situation pretty clearly. God made these rules and there is nothing I can do about it...
OK? And so? He not only made the rules -- he made YOU.
Quote:
7. He saves some in his mercy.
Mercy? He made both myself and my neighbor as flawed, fallible human beings who will behave in a way he finds utterly offensive, and the fact that he's only going to torture one of us eternally for it makes him merciful?
He is justified in sending everyone to hell. Your biggest whine is that he doesn't send all to hell.
Are you a socialist? Do you think it's unjust that someone might have a job and make more than the guy that sits at home on his couch, playing video games? Or are you happy for the guy that makes a good living? It's the same principle.
Quote:
8. And is "all-loving."
No. Clearly he is not "all loving."
Of course he is. Love doesn't mean we ignore wrong-doing. The problem, of course, is that your definition of God is too small. You fail to see God as being anything more than a good-natured old man that just wants to pass out candies to the kids.
The OT God is a cartoonish, genocidal, narcissistic, blowhard, who, if he actually existed, would be unworthy of anything but fear, loathing and contempt.
That some choose to worship such an evil being says much about their (lack of) character and intelligence.
Please realize....it's not my "brand". It's what the Bible teaches.
And yet there are many who would disagree, claiming that their brand of theology is what the bible teaches.
Quote:
Yes and no. He created you yes. You were born into the human race, as a descendant of Adam. Adam was originally a sinless being--until he sinned. As a result, sin entered the world, and you inherited a sinful nature from him...
That sounds a lot more "yes" than "no." Elaborating on the reason behind it does not change the veracity of the statement.
Quote:
He is just for punishing you for the crimes committed against him. Again...did you read Romans 9? Is the clay justified in whining to the potter that it was formed into something it didn't appreciate?
OK? And so? He not only made the rules -- he made YOU.
He is justified in sending everyone to hell. Your biggest whine is that he doesn't send all to hell.
I believe I addressed Romans 9...it is a classic appeal to authority, not an explanation of your god's reasoning.
So you concure so far with my assertions...that he made me a flawed and fallible human being (why is of little relevance) whose behavior he will find utterly offensive and feels justified in torturing me forever for this offensive behavior?
Quote:
Are you a socialist?
Irrelevant.
Quote:
Do you think it's unjust that someone might have a job and make more than the guy that sits at home on his couch, playing video games? Or are you happy for the guy that makes a good living? It's the same principle.
No, it's nothing like that. If anything, it is more like racism...being punished for how you were created...absolutely beyond your control. Shall we discuss whether or not you are a racist?
Quote:
Of course he is. Love doesn't mean we ignore wrong-doing. The problem, of course, is that your definition of God is too small. You fail to see God as being anything more than a good-natured old man that just wants to pass out candies to the kids.
No, my problem is that your god sounds kind of psychotic to me. If anyone's god is too small it seems to me that it would be yours. Yours is the god who can't look past my flaws...a rather petty fellow if you ask me.
If you don't disagree with any of my bolded statements, and still see god as loving...well...I don't even know where to go from there.
I'd be happy to send you a copy if you promise to read it.
I can only tell you that I would read it if I have the time...I firmly believe in examining a situation from all perspectives...but with a wife, two kids, a book of my own to work on, and lots of work to be done in my lab - I couldn't possibly promise to read it.
Please realize....it's not my "brand". It's what the Bible teaches.
How does your idea of "what the Bible teaches" actually match with the contents of my earlier post concerning Revelations and the "second death". If you are basing your beliefs on what the Bible clearly says, then surely you must come to grips with what it actually says. It seems to me that you are importing the teachings of Augustine in place of the actual words of the Biblical text.
Believe me, you would have a much easier time of spreading the Word if you would disabuse others of the non-Biblical notion that God condemns people to suffer for all eternity.
But this isn't just for Vizio. Is ignoring what Revelations says concerning the "second death" a convenient way of holding on to an easy critique of God being unjust? Removing such a notion concerning the after-life would rob many critiques of their most powerful argument. I feel as if people are adopting traditional Fundamentalist thinking to attack Fundamentalist thinking, when it would be much better to appeal to what the text actually says. It's like shooting fish in a barrel to adopt easy, but fallacious, arguments concerning God's motivations.
Love doesn't mean we ignore wrong-doing. The problem, of course, is that your definition of God is too small. You fail to see God as being anything more than a good-natured old man that just wants to pass out candies to the kids.
This straw man is too ubiquitous among hellfire and damnation preachers to be mere coincidence. How often do UR's need to say "We will reap what we sow . . . but no more or no less than what we sow!!!" Wrong doing is not ignored . . . except perhaps in the minds of the "easy believers" . . . who think "brown-nosing" God with the right beliefs will get them out of reaping what they sow! God IS love, Vizio . . . that means His entire essence is LOVE . . . not just that He loves. Anything that is NOT agape love is incompatible with God, period. If you expect to be acceptable to Him . . . you best focus on developing your agape love for all life.
How does your idea of "what the Bible teaches" actually match with the contents of my earlier post concerning Revelations and the "second death". If you are basing your beliefs on what the Bible clearly says, then surely you must come to grips with what it actually says. It seems to me that you are importing the teachings of Augustine in place of the actual words of the Biblical text.
Believe me, you would have a much easier time of spreading the Word if you would disabuse others of the non-Biblical notion that God condemns people to suffer for all eternity.
But this isn't just for Vizio. Is ignoring what Revelations says concerning the "second death" a convenient way of holding on to an easy critique of God being unjust? Removing such a notion concerning the after-life would rob many critiques of their most powerful argument. I feel as if people are adopting traditional Fundamentalist thinking to attack Fundamentalist thinking, when it would be much better to appeal to what the text actually says. It's like shooting fish in a barrel to adopt easy, but fallacious, arguments concerning God's motivations.
I think you have a point there. I tend to focus on the fundamentalist point of view because that is where I came from ( Reformed Baptist among other things, go figure). However, even an annihilationist approach still has some issues, it just doesn't seem quite as eternally horrific.
The second objection is that however un-Biblical eternal Hell may be, that is the doctrine of many. It is kind of useless to discuss the religious belief of a fundamentalist, if you keep talking about what you think they should believe, instead of what they do believe. I try to discuss the theology put forth by the person I am talking to. You are right, arguing with Eusebius, for example, about Hell makes no sense... But There are two ways to attack fallacious logic, show that that axioms it is using are not valid, or show that regardless of the axioms it is internally inconsistent. I think there is room for both approaches in a discussion of theology.
Lastly, I think the problem goes to a phrase you mentioned "what the Bible clearly says". I think individual passages may clearly say something, maybe even entire books, but I think that the only way to get a clear, unambiguous "what the Bible clearly says" is to invent it. It is not a single work, it isn't coming from a single viewpoint, or even a singular culture. They are viewing the bible as a singular work with a singular message, so it is impossible to contradict that singular message with actual words from the book itself. It just means you are reading it "out of context", where context is not the document itself or the time it was authored, but the lens of belief that they are using to view it.
Indeed I am discussing here what Vizio thinks god is, and disagreeing with his vision of god does not negate any other concept - whether you are talking about a different Christian theology or an entirely different god-belief (e.g. Hinduism). Each if those would need to be addressed on their own merits.
Thanks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). However, even an annihilationist approach still has some issues, it just doesn't seem quite as eternally horrific. 
