Why does God create souls he know will wind up in hell?

[Mmarco]

Mmarco:

Wrong. Foreknowledge is only about what happens, and people in heaven always do what God has forseen, Which is sufficient to prove that your argument is wrong.
God has always known eternally our free choices.

So people in Heaven are not free anymore?

People in heaven have irreversely chosen to do always God’s will; they are free, but they always freely do God’s will.

 

[Gorgias]

The opinion of the unbelievers is not a valid argment.

Agreed. Yet, it’s a valid objection. So, the fact that they’re unbelievers doesn’t make it an invalid argument.

I believe exactly what St. Paul believed Ephesians 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

I do, too. You’re just positing that “before the creation of the world” implies that God knew He was creating people condemned to hell. I reject that thesis.

You are expressing a superficial view of goodness, typical of unbelievers

“All true Scotsmen”, eh?

The Church has never taught what you are saying about a god who is totally unable to choose to create only souls who will go to heaven.

Nor has she taught what you claim – that God wills souls to go to hell, for the benefit of others who do. Oh, wait… someone does teach that: John Calvin.

Great. Please show me where the Scriptures or the Church says that it was an apostle who was required to betray Christ. That was your claim, after all…

Scripture doesn’t claim that Jesus chose Judas for that purpose.

Nah. I get that concept. What you’re not grasping is the distinction of “creating while knowing they will be condemned”. It’s ok; it’s a subtle distinction to grasp.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

“God knows all real things in past, present, and future.” YES! YES! God knows all that He comprehends! But if God does not “comprehend” or create a soul in His mind, He does not know its fate! That’s what we’ve been saying! We don’t deny that God knows every real thing, just that God does not know the fate of a soul before it is designed in His mind.

And as for your second sentence, God giving all men grace enough to be saved isn’t good enough. If God knows their fate and still actualizes them, then God has done something contrary to His desire.

 

[stpurl]

Does freedom exist in the power to choose one thing over another?

Well then people in heaven and hell are certainly both free.

The people in heaven chose good over evil.

The people in hell chose evil over good.

They are not ‘in time’ so they had a free will choice which they are ‘still’ or continuing to exercise.

They aren’t forbidden to choose. They are, and will, always ‘be’ in the process of that free choice. They are always freely choosing.

 

[STT]

People in heaven have irreversely chosen to do always God’s will; they are free, but they always freely do God’s will.

That I am afraid is a contrary statement but regardless could people in Hell challenge God’s foreknowledge?

 

[stpurl]

People in hell are not ‘in time’. Even if they reject God, they still ‘know’ Him. They are always choosing hell. What then would you mean by ‘challenging God’s foreknowledge’ exactly?

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

He did. He just chose a man from among the Jews who He knew, because God knows all that is real in the future, would betray Him when given the chance. Judas was chosen but it didn’t need to be Judas. It could have been anyone who would have done what Judas did. Judas was not made to betray Jesus.

 

[STT]

People in hell are not ‘in time’. Even if they reject God, they still ‘know’ Him. They are always choosing hell. What then would you mean by ‘challenging God’s foreknowledge’ exactly?

By challenging I mean to ask for God’s foreknowledge as a matter of proof that God has such a knowledge and then do the opposite.

 

[Gorgias]

No – Scripture was fulfilled by the betrayal, and not by the identity of Judas.

Interesting that you think that Judas is personally and incontrovertibly identified by the Psalms. Are you sure about that?

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

It needed to be a traitor. Judas was the traitor but it could have been some other dude. Nothing in scripture says “And lo, the traitor is a man named Judas, son of Simon Iscariot, who will betray Jesus the Christ.”

Mentioned by name? I don’t remember that psalm…

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

Yes. Christ chose Judas because Judas would betray Him. Christ could have chosen many others besides Judas who would have done the same thing. Judas was not made to betray Christ.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

No. Judas was chosen to fulfill the prophecy. Judas was not the only one who could have.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

God did not create them to fulfill the prophecy. They were chosen because, by their own actions, they would.

And Judas didn’t need to be that close friend. There’s nothing inherent in Judas that made him the only one that could betray Jesus.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

But that was because Judas chose to do so, not because God made him in order for him to do so.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

That’s what we’re saying too.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

Because all of time was made real at the moment of creation, and all fates became actualized.

 

[Mmarco]

Mmarco:

The opinion of the unbelievers is not a valid argment.

Agreed. Yet, it’s a valid objection.

No, it isn’t. This objection is based on a superficial concept of love, typical of unbelivers. According to that line of reasoning, an omnibenevolent God should not punish souls in Hell for eternity. Your objections to my argument are based on that superficial concept of love.
The eternal punishment in Hell exists because the fear of Hell allows God to save more souls. And this is the reason why Christ tells us that many go to Hell.

 

[Gorgias]

Ahh, but that’s the whole point. The question is whether God makes people, knowing that they will do things that condemn them to hell!

 

[Gorgias]

According to that line of reasoning, an omnibenevolent God should not punish souls in Hell for eternity. Your objections to my argument are based on that superficial concept of love.

No. My objections aren’t based on whether a populated hell exists, as such. My objections are based on your assertions that God creates people whom He knows will be condemned – literally, whether God creates people in order that they go to hell.

The eternal punishment in Hell exists because the fear of Hell allows God to save more souls.

Umm… no. Hell doesn’t exist in order that fear of it might exist. It exists because of the possibility that some might choose it.

 

[quaestio45]

They do not exist and would never exist.

the point of the matter is that there is a lack of action which is detrimental to a being on the basis of some decision they have not even taken yet; and detrimental action driven by consequence towards a being may be seen as something like “punishment”

There is no more punishment in that than if a couple decided to not have sex and therefore did not have a child.

I think there might be a clear difference between the two scenarios, that being that firstly God is limiting the absolute possibility of a beings existence on the basis of actions not taken whilst a couple not having sex is only negating the possibility of birthing a child on the basis of something which quite clearly cannot be perfect knowledge of said child’s future actions. The difference is important because one is driven by knowledgeable consequences of the individuals future actions and the other isn’t. Now, if God has middle knowledge then God knows all these individuals wholly and totally prior to even their creation. As such, when he decides not to create a being because of an inevitable act, although he hasn’t actually come into existence, God still knows him as if he was existent and thus is limiting his creation on the basis of that which has not occurred. One might think of this as unjust.

To His viewpoint, it is “what occurs” and not “what will occur in the future”. As such, this isn’t a matter of “punishment before offense.”

Correct, of course. I guess meant to say ontologically prior, in the phase of the construction of his plan. If he discriminates by what one will do but hasn’t done (out of lack of existence), then it is unjust punishment, one might say. Further, even though for God everything just “occurs”, he still doesn’t give just punishment until after that which deserves punishment has occurred.