Very much disappointed

  • Thread starter Thread starter Trurl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Would it be fair to deny Soul B’s the opportunity to make the choice?
To prevent his child with a finite life in choosing an infinity in hell.

Yes it would be fair and most merciful.

Everyone is ignoring the crux of the issue.

God has always known who will love him and who will hate him.

Why then does he choose to create people whom he knows will hate him?

He already knows the outcome, but creates condemned souls anyway.

It’s rudimentary…

Only create souls who will love him. Love him of their own free will and free choice. Not robots…people who he knows will choose him and opt out of creating people he knows will reject him.

Not robots…but people he already knows will play his game correctly.
 
I understand the point you and Trurl are arguing; I simply disagree with it.

Your focus is completely on Soul A without any thought for the consequences of God not creating Soul B. You assume there are no negative consequences to God not creating a soul when people engage in the act of procreation according to how He created it to be and conception takes place. You assume that all people live in a causal vacuum, with no one’s choices being made based on the influence of others. You assign blame to God for actions freely chosen by Soul B without the direct influence of God. By doing so, you redefine free will while insisting that you’re not actually redefining free will. You also act as if God can go against His nature and still be God.
God could just choose a soul who he knows will choose to love him.

By bringing a soul into existence whom he knows will choose to hate him, he is creating a life whose sole purpose is to end up in hell.
 
God could just choose a soul who he knows will choose to love him.
How do you know God could do as you propose?
By bringing a soul into existence whom he knows will choose to hate him, he is creating a life whose sole purpose is to end up in hell.
Unfounded assertion. Each of us is created to love and serve God and to live with Him happily forever. An individual choice on how to respond to God’s love that intends eternal happiness cannot alter this purpose.
So you suppose no other purpose without knowing it to be so.
 
To sentence someone who has committed no crime is a great injustice, God is not constrained by time or space, we mortal beings are. Thus in the name of justice must a loving God watch heart broken by the sins of humanity as we make the decisions for which we must be judged.

He is the judge who has passed sentence, removed his robe stepped down from the bench and paid for the crime. Reach up and accept his mercy or not, the choice is yours.
 
How do you know God could do as you propose?

Unfounded assertion. Each of us is created to love and serve God and to live with Him happily forever. An individual choice on how to respond to God’s love that intends eternal happiness cannot alter this purpose.
So you suppose no other purpose without knowing it to be so.
  1. God is all knowing and all powerful. He can do what he wants.
  2. The individual choice is already known by God…before they are even willed into existence.
 
To sentence someone who has committed no crime is a great injustice, God is not constrained by time or space, we mortal beings are. Thus in the name of justice must a loving God watch heart broken by the sins of humanity as we make the decisions for which we must be judged.

He is the judge who has passed sentence, removed his robe stepped down from the bench and paid for the crime. Reach up and accept his mercy or not, the choice is yours.
God forced me into existence, knew I would reject him and then condemns me to hell because I don’t love him.

Yeah, that’s perfect justice.

:rolleyes:
 
God created you out of perfect love, Gave you the opportunity for eternal glory sent his SON to eliminate the barrier between you and him no, not justice mercy
 
God forced me into existence, knew I would reject him and then condemns me to hell because I don’t love him.

Yeah, that’s perfect justice.

:rolleyes:
Not. Illogic to the max.

God didn’t force you into anything.
While you are alive there is time to repent. Those in heaven rejoice when the lost sheep is returned to the fold.

Your own rejection condemns you. God only judges if the condemnation is complete or repentance is honest.
 
Yunat I continue to pray you find the peace and joy of Gods mercy.

To avoid any misconceptions (and to properly use double negatives)

God chose to not not create you because having not yet committed any sins it would be a great injustice to sentence you to the negative possibility of eternal glory, that is non-existence.

The foreknowledge of sin, is not the same as the knowledge of sin so to speak, while God is outside of the bounds of time we are not.

Knowing you would sin, he provided grace and mercy.

Having sinned there are now two choices, Grace and Mercy, or Justice
 
Here is a quote of someone’s question to the official apologists:

And here is the answer:

The apologist asserts that if no one would reject God, then the ones who would choose and embrace God would not do this freely? The apologist says that the “freedom” of choosing God is CONTINGENT upon someone else rejecting God? How can something be “free” if it is contingent upon someone else’s action?
Another way of answering is the following.

When God creates a man, he has the potential for heaven, that is, the possibility, because
God is good. The actuallity is in the pudding.

If God created man without the possiblity, then this would be predestination to hell, which
we do not accept. Besides this would go against God’s goodness.

And if he only created those whose possiblility resulted in always eating the pudding, then
this would be predestination to heaven, which again we do not accept.

So God must create the potential out of his goodness, but the actuallity is the mystery of
the interaction of grace from God and the freedom of man.

And if it is said that with foreknowledge selection, what is wrong with predestination to heaven for everyone? it is because God does not have foreknowledge, but just plain knowledge since he is one act. Foreknowledge is only our way of looking at God to try to understand him. And when we say God is one simple act, we can’t conceive of that visually since it is out of our experience as human beings. We are over our heads.

Just a thought.
 
Not. Illogic to the max.

God didn’t force you into anything.
While you are alive there is time to repent. Those in heaven rejoice when the lost sheep is returned to the fold.

Your own rejection condemns you. God only judges if the condemnation is complete or repentance is honest.
He forced me into existence and forces me to choose.

I take it i can’t choose to opt out?
 
God forced me into existence, knew I would reject him and then condemns me to hell because I don’t love him.

Yeah, that’s perfect justice.

:rolleyes:
On to the subject that really matters, why do you reject God?
 
Vistonas Wu brought out this argument before, it holds no water skeptics will rant and rave about how can God be loving if people will go to hell. The point is he Loves YOU enough to let you make that decision.
With love like that who needs hate?
Would it be fair for God not to create a person, and thereby deprive that person of the same opportunities and chances as other people, simply because God knew that person would choose hell?
Of course it would. Let’s use the “parent-child” analogy. You say that God is infinitely wiser than we are. Therefore he knows what is best for us. It is obvious that anything is better than to be tortured in hell eternally. Just like a loving human father will interfere and prevent the “free will” of the child, when that child is about to commit a self-destructing act, one would expect God to do the same, IF God would love us.

Since he does not, the word “love” is meaningless in this context. You cannot say that “human agape” (ruthlessly interfering with the freedom of the child) is fundamentally different from “divine agape” (allowing to perform self-destructive behavior). Well, you can try, but that removes your argument from rational consideration.

There is no escape from this dilemma.
I continue to pray for you my friend
Very kind of you, and thank you.
On to the subject that really matters, why do you reject God?
Please, let us not derail the thread. (But a short answer is due: "Atheists do NOT reject God. They reject the theist’s arguments ABOUT God.)
 
Your focus is completely on Soul A without any thought for the consequences of God not creating Soul B.
As long as there is no logical contradiction, God can actualize any state of affairs. That is also a fundamental tenet of classical theism. Obviously the state of affairs is different if “B” is not created. Why is that a problem? It would only be a problem if the world without “B” (or with a “C” instead of “B”) would be “worse”. If the world with “B” would be the “best possible world”.
You assume there are no negative consequences to God not creating a soul when people engage in the act of procreation according to how He created it to be and conception takes place.
First, the “MAYBE the state of affairs WOULD be even worse if B would not be created” is not an argument. If you wish to pursue that line, then you must prove that having “B” is the optimal state of affairs, that any other world would be even worse. That is not just an impossible task, but also an argument from ignorance.
You assign blame to God for actions freely chosen by Soul B without the direct influence of God.
Since God is ULTIMATELY responsible for everything, that “blame” is well placed.
 
He forced me into existence and forces me to choose.

I take it i can’t choose to opt out?
The age old desire to shun moral responsibility even to the point that you feel oppressed if given a choice between moral good and evil, as if being given the option to serve love in eternal heaven is a bad thing.

The fact is, you ought to choose the good, and you only have that freedom if you exist. God shared his existence with you. And no, ungrateful people can’t opt out, not if you accept that your existence has an inherent objective moral value.

The question of whether or not it is objectively good to create you is not dependent on your subjective say so, but rather it is dependent on the objective nature of God.
 
Your own rejection condemns you.
Let’s be precise here, please. No atheist can logically reject God, since they do not believe that God exists. Atheists do reject the “concept of God” by stipulating that the concept of God has no referent in reality, and they reject the the theists’ arguments about God. But neither of these actions mean that atheists “reject God”.

Now, let’s please get back to the topic at hand.
 
Wrong. God knew us before he created us and knew our future acts as well and our eternal destiny.
There may be different senses of “know” involved here. How is God’s knowledge of something changed when that thing comes into or goes out of existence? There has to be a difference.

Also, I am not clear that God exists in a temporally sequential “before.” Time appears to be a dimension of space and not of immaterial or eternal reality. Our actions as they impact the material world take place in time, but it is not necessarily the case that as spiritual beings we are “in time” in the same way.
We do not participate in God’s creative act of ourselves or of anything else. God creates and is the primary moving/changing, sustaining, directing, ordering, final cause of all things. Men and other created beings are seconday causes. We can produce things from prior existing matter, we can move prior existing matter to certain ends but we are not the primary causes of anything. 👍
I am not clear how this argues against what I wrote. God may allow or provide all the requirements to bring about what a human free agent chooses so that the actual “primary moving/changing, sustaining, directing, ordering, final cause of all things” remains God but the causal resources are allowed by God to be altered by the human agent by “acts of will” as part of what it means to have free will. The causal resources are placed under the disposition of the free agent to actualize free will. This could occur precisely to give the free agent full responsibility for their choices which are not predetermined by anything except the will of the agent, who “creates” their “self” by their choices over time.

To reiterate, it could very well be that a “person” is not the kind of thing that God does create “all at once.” The creative action of God may be in providing the free agent with the causal resources to freely “create” themselves. The nature of personhood could be an “open” kind of existence that depends upon its “finalization” on the action of the free agent “independent” of God. An “independence” that is made possible in actual fact by the cooperation of God, who lends the resources to the agent to allow autonomous self-determination. So God would not know with infallible certainty the fate of the created person until “after” this kind of creation (involving the (name removed by moderator)ut of the free agent ) was actualized, i.e., when the agent self-authenticates what kind of being they are.

Note: This “after” need not be a temporal sort of “after,” but, instead, a logical one. In other words, for God. this might occur from an eternal perspective even though for the free agent it happens “in time.” Either way, the nature of free agency would entail a logical dependency on the actual (name removed by moderator)ut of the agent in order to determine their “fate.” This would logically preclude God making a unilateral determination without (name removed by moderator)ut from the free agent as to the kind of person they “create” themselves to be, given that their choices are “underwritten” by God but not determined by him.
 
You act like God doesn’t interfere, doesn’t offer correction. I use the loving parent analogy because it is apt.

We have conscience, that screams at injustice because we were created with it, out of all the animals in the world.

We have natural law and the order of the universe. I have faith in God because I see the necessity for a creator in the world. Existence came from somewhere, to believe it came from nothing takes faith, perhaps greater faith than to believe in a Designer.

Life in its self points to a Creator, State evolution and I will continue to ask where did life begin until you can not answer any longer. I will then state the second law of thermodynamics that energy in a closed system seeks equilibrium the greater energy flowing to the lesser. or rather “The universal law of decay” Life beginning from nothing is scientifically impossible.

Examine the world open your eyes and quit banging your head off the floor screaming the proverbial “its not fair”. Seek truth, seek answers, and eventually it will lead to God. Creation sings of his glory.

Again I pray for you my friend, my heart breaks for you and I hope you may come to feel the love of God.
 
Wonderful.

So I choose not to go to heaven, not to go to hell and not to go to purgatory.

Actually, now that you’ve advised we have a choice whether or not we will play this game…it is actually fair.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top