Why doesn't God just not create the bad people to keep them from going to hell

[Amandil]

So, do you believe this explicitly or are you just interpreting this? And if you are interpreting, can you break your logic down please, so I understand better?

This sounds like fundamentalist terminology.

The words are what they are. Interpretation proper doesn’t entail what I believe, but requires the reader to separate interpretation from belief. The speaker or author is conveying something to you; your job is to receive what he is saying according to His mind and meaning, not yours.

Belief is an act of the will once you have interpreted his mind and meaning. You either believe what he says or you do not. That’s called being docile(teachable).

You read something so as to expand your mind into areas which you have not journeyed before, not to read your own beliefs into it so as to reinforce your own opinions and preferences, that eisegesis, not exegesis.

 

[oldcelt]

That’s a non-sequitur. Omniscience doesn’t “predetermine” human acts. You atheists or anti-theists keep falling into the same irrational conclusion based upon the same fallacious premise.

It may not determine human acts, but it does determine that God’s culpability.

 

[Leviticus20vs13]

Well, now we have eventually got agreement that it is all preordained, we can ask that question. Although getting thus far has been something of a trial. I think the thread may reach 1,000 posts before we even get close to an answer (and I think posts are automatically closed at that point).

And welcome to the forum. And I wonder how many people will have to look up your scriptural reference.

Thanks for the welcome. I would be interested to know how many supposed Catholics even read the Bible haha as my Hispanic devoutly Catholic family never touches the book.

I personally believe everything is predetermined…my logic goes as follows:

Internal forces, such as DNA and all that is biological and psychological that flows from it, REACT to external forces, such as our environment and all the people, forces of nature, pollution, etc… that are in it.

SIMPLE examples of this would be:

I was born a heterosexual male. So it is predetermined that I am attracted to the female sex. Thus, no free will.

I was born in Central America during the 1980s. So it is predetermined that I speak Spanish. Again, no free will on that one.

Some would say well, “you can choose to be gay or not.” Well in my experience, and I’ve had MANY chances to be homosexual with no one looking, I am just not attracted to men. That is, it is not my choice to like women (again, no free will).

Those same people will not say, “As a child, it was your choice to choose any language you want” without getting laughed out of the room haha

 

[Amandil]

Please explain to me as to why the statement does not follow from my previous argument? So I may understand better.

If my premise is mistaken, then I would greatly appreciate correction. TIA

You begin with:

God created everything and is all powerful (most Catholics would agree with this statement),

Then after a minor diatribe you follow with this:

Well, then that means that everything is predetermined by God (again his future seeing powers come into play).

Not only is that not what is meant by omniscience, you’re also presupposing determinism without proving it.

Omniscience means that there is no real barrier to God’s knowing. This does not preclude human free will but presupposes it.

Then this:

So then we DON’T have free choice.

Which is the non-sequitur, and this:

So why would consistent unrepenting murderers, pedophiles, theives, cheats, etc…be a bad people and condemned to hell if they were part of God’s divine plan???

Their choices were permitted into God’s plan; His plan did not determine their choices.

They possessed the free will to not be “unrepenting murderers, pedophiles, theives, cheats, etc.”, but they freely chose to abuse their freedom by being “unrepenting murderers, pedophiles, theives, cheats, etc.”.

Hence it is a non-sequitur.

 

[Amandil]

It may not determine human acts, but it does determine that God’s culpability.

Another non-seqitur.

(Playing “defensive” again? )

 

[Bradski]

That’s a non-sequitur. Omniscience doesn’t “predetermine” human acts. You atheists or anti-theists keep falling into the same irrational conclusion based upon the same fallacious premise.

But we have agreed that people are created ‘pre-determined’ for hell. So we can proceed…

God does not send people to hell on a whim. It isn’t arbitrary. I’m sure that you would agree that anyone who ends up in hell deserves to be there.

Now either they are there just because they have consciously rejected Jesus and/or they have done something bad enough (as far as God is concerned) to merit them being sent there. I’m assuming that it’s not good enough saying that you accept Jesus as your saviour and then carrying on raping and pillaging as if accepting Jesus was just like a get-out-of-jail card and then anything goes.

So they have done something bad (and possibly may have rejected Jesus as their saviour by doing so, implicitly if not explicilty).

Now God has always known that they were heading for hell. In fact, as we have agreed. He knew it before you were created (as we mere mortals understand time). So He also knew the reasons why you are bound for hell. It makes no sense to say that God knows you are going or hell but has no idea why.

So being created by God, He knew/knows/would have known (fiddle with the tense to satisfy yourself) what you were going to do to end up in hell. He created you knowing that you were going to be a murderer or a rapist.

Just as your ‘final destination’ is pre-determined (free will is of no use to you in trying to avoid that), then so are your crimes.

 

[Leviticus20vs13]

Welcome aboard and good luck in getting that answer. Mostly, people have been dropping out…I can only assume why.

Thanks for the welcome. I love the scientific method and model my life after it, i.e., it’s never too late to prove me false

That’s why definite things like the Bible make me come to the forums with questions, like, “why does God, in his perfect Bible, say that you should murder, homosexuals, disobedient children, and people who work on the Sabbath if he is a loving, forgiving God; and then send them to hell for, not 1, not 10, not 100, not 10,000,000 years, but for ETERNITY?”

Seems very puzzling to me, and why I’m on the fence now as a former Catholic. Just seeking clarification if possible, instead of the usual, “well this is the way because God has a plan”

 

[Leviticus20vs13]

You begin with:

Not only is that not what is meant by omniscience, you’re also presupposing determinism without proving it.

Omniscience means that there is no real barrier to God’s knowing. This does not preclude human free will but presupposes it.

Their choices were permitted into God’s plan; His plan did not determine their choices.

They possessed the free will to not be “unrepenting murderers, pedophiles, theives, cheats, etc.”, but they freely chose to abuse their freedom by being “unrepenting murderers, pedophiles, theives, cheats, etc.”.

Hence it is a non-sequitur.

Ok, so if there is no barrier to God’s knowing, then he CAN KNOW the future correct?

So if he can KNOW the future, then how can unrepentant sinners change the future.

Seems kind of impossible to me.

I mean, if I said to you, “I am God and all knowing and can see/do things you can’t even begin to comprehend, so give me all your money.” You’d probably not give me your money without proper explanation, tangible consistent evidence as to my business plan, etc…

So then, why would I believe your theory of God’s omniscience without proper explanation, consistent tangible evidence, and such?

I appreciate your clarification/help on my points.

 

[Amandil]

Another one with a false definition of “freedom”.

Freedom is necessarily ordered to the good. It is the responsibility to do what we ought, not the ability to do what we like.

Thanks for the welcome. I would be interested to know how many supposed Catholics even read the Bible haha as my Hispanic devoutly Catholic family never touches the book.

Your flippancy here speaks for itself.

I personally believe everything is predetermined…my logic goes as follows:

Internal forces, such as DNA and all that is biological and psychological that flows from it, REACT to external forces, such as our environment and all the people, forces of nature, pollution, etc… that are in it.

SIMPLE examples of this would be:

I was born a heterosexual male. So it is predetermined that I am attracted to the female sex. Thus, no free will.

You are not necessarily determined to act on that attraction, thus you are free.

I was born in Central America during the 1980s. So it is predetermined that I speak Spanish. Again, no free will on that one.

Yet you are choosing to type in English?

Some would say well, you can choose to be gay or not. Well in my experience, and I’ve had MANY chances to be homosexual with no one looking, I am just not attracted to men. That is, it is not my choice to like women (again, no free will).

Homosexual acts are contrary to human nature, they are not good, and thus they are not free, because they involve a disordered attachment of the will. A will enslaved to sin is by definition not free.

And certainly you’re not “attracted” all females, only particular ones whom you find sexually attractive. Again, this is an act of the will, thus it is free.

If heredity and /or environment determined your acts, and you have had “MANY chances to be homosexual”, then you would have no “choice” but to be homosexual.

You argued yourself right out of that one.

 

[Amandil]

But we have agreed that people are created ‘pre-determined’ for hell. So we can proceed…

No, we cannot, because you fail to use distinct or accurate terminology.

And correcting you constantly is now becoming tedious.

So which of the above terms do you suppose I’m referring to?

 

[Amandil]

Ok, so if there is no barrier to God’s knowing, then he CAN KNOW the future correct?

He doesn’t anticipate a future, only humans do.

So if he can KNOW the future, then how can unrepentant sinners change the future.

They can’t. But you’re not asking the right question either.

Seems kind of impossible to me.

I mean, if I said to you, “I am God and all knowing and can see/do things you can’t even begin to comprehend, so give me all your money.” You’d probably not give me your money without proper explanation, tangible consistent evidence as to my business plan, etc…

Really? “Give me all your money!” That’s suppose to be a rational question?

So then, why would I believe your theory of God’s omniscience without proper explanation, consistent tangible evidence, and such?

Omniscience is not “tangible”. We’re not discussing tangible evidence but abstract evidence. This is philosophy, not empiricism.

That is what the Church means when it uses the term “omniscience” in describing an aspect of God’s nature. It is clearly defined, and it follows from what we consider to be other aspects of God’s nature.

You can say, “well this is what I mean by omniscience” all you want, but then you’re not arguing against God ofrChristianity, only yourself.

 

[Bradski]

Yet you are choosing to type in English?

No esto seguro que le comprenderia si escrita en espanol.

(Levitius can correct my grammar if necessary).

 

[Amandil]

No esto seguro que le comprenderia si escrita en espanol.

(Levitius can correct my grammar if necessary).

Perhaps not, but regardless he is not predetermined to type anything at all. He exercised his will freely to do so.

 

[Leviticus20vs13]

Another one with a false definition of “freedom”.

Freedom is necessarily ordered to the good. It is the responsibility to do what we ought, not the ability to do what we like.

Your flippancy here speaks for itself.

You are not necessarily determined to act on that attraction, thus you are free.

Yet you are choosing to type in English?

Homosexual acts are contrary to human nature, they are not good, and thus they are not free, because they involve a disordered attachment of the will. A will enslaved to sin is by definition not free.

And certainly you’re not “attracted” all females, only particular ones whom you find sexually attractive. Again, this is an act of the will, thus it is free.

If heredity and /or environment determined your acts, and you have had “MANY chances to be homosexual”, then you would have no “choice” but to be homosexual.

You argued yourself right out of that one.

I do not get what is flippant about noting that many people who are supposedly devout Catholics do not read the Bible. Please explain?

So if I am not necessarily determined to act on the attraction, then why don’t I “choose” to procreate with turtles, pianos, computers, or anything other than what my DNA has predisposed me to liking, or being attracted to?

And no I did not choose to type in English. I was brought to America as a child and HAD to adapt to my environment, just as I had to adapt to my Central American environment in earlier years. PLUS, many people on this board would not understand my Spanish, and thus, by going on this English speaking forum, I was predetermined to type in English.

Homosexuals acts are not contrary to nature, they have been well documented in many many species, including our species.

Finally

"If heredity and /or environment determined your acts, and you have had “MANY chances to be homosexual”, then you would have no “choice” but to be homosexual.

You argued yourself right out of that one."

Please explain how I argued myself out of this one? As I was saying that my DNA predisposed me to like females with certain traits, and not males. Why would I have no choice to be homosexual, if sexual orientation is determined at conception by genes and reacts to external stimuli, e.g., copulation with women that meet certain criteria and not men, under any circumstance, except say gunpoint and like circumstances?

 

[Leviticus20vs13]

No esto seguro que le comprenderia si escrita en espanol.

(Levitius can correct my grammar if necessary).

Again, people on the board, such as this gentleman(woman) might not understand my Spanish if I “chose” to type in it.

Pretty good job on the grammar my friend, just need a little work on spelling and tenses, but I understood on the first go

Here’s how I would have typed it:

No estoy seguro que podría entender si escribe en Español.

 

[Leviticus20vs13]

He doesn’t anticipate a future, only humans do.

Really? “Give me all your money!” That’s suppose to be a rational question?

So then God has twiddled his thumbs for millions of years in Heaven saying, “I guess I’m not going to see my future seeing powers today.” Not even when he created grotesque things like Hell and Lucifer, per his all creating powers?

No, my example was to show you how ridiculous I would sound if I asked you to do so, WITHOUT providing great convincing evidence as to why giving me all your money is a good idea.

Similarly, it is ridiculous for any religious or non-religious person, be they Mormon, Catholic, Scientologist, Atheist etc… to give any amount of money, even 10 cents, to any THEORY/IDEA of how the world is ordered (what religion does), without great convincing evidence.

*edit: I should replace the phrase “great convincing evidence” with “empirical evidence”, so as people do not use great sounding anecdotal evidence as a boon for their argument

 

[Bradski]

Bradski says:

But we have agreed that people are created ‘pre-determined’ for hell. So we can proceed…

Bur Amandil says:

No, we cannot, because you fail to use distinct or accurate terminology.

Notwithstanding what Amandil describes as incorrect terminology (which is a red herring) he earlier said:

God’s goodness and mercy cannot exempt people who refuse to accept it and/or chose to act contrary to it.

To which Bradski replied:

They may well refuse, but the point is, which you all seem to be dancing around and looking the other way when it is pointed out to you, when God created those people He Did So Knowing That They Would Refuse.

To which Amandil replied:

So?

So you have accepted that God creates people knowing that they will refuse God’s goodness and mercy. And guess what happens to them…

Here’s a clue (from Pope John Paul II) ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2heavn.htm:

But man, called to respond to him freely, can unfortunately choose to reject his love and forgiveness once and for all, thus separating himself for ever from joyful communion with him. It is precisely this tragic situation that Christian doctrine explains when it speaks of eternal damnation or hell.

So maybe we can continue…and apologies for reposting this:

God does not send people to hell on a whim. It isn’t arbitrary. I’m sure that you would agree that anyone who ends up in hell deserves to be there.

Now either they are there just because they have consciously rejected Jesus and/or they have done something bad enough (as far as God is concerned) to merit them being sent there. I’m assuming that it’s not good enough saying that you accept Jesus as your saviour and then carrying on raping and pillaging as if accepting Jesus was just like a get-out-of-jail card and then anything goes.

So they have done something bad (and possibly may have rejected Jesus as their saviour by doing so, implicitly if not explicilty).

Now God has always known that they were heading for hell. In fact, as we have agreed. He knew it before you were created (as we mere mortals understand time). So He also knew the reasons why you are bound for hell. It makes no sense to say that God knows you are going or hell but has no idea why.

So being created by God, He knew/knows/would have known (fiddle with the tense to satisfy yourself) what you were going to do to end up in hell. He created you knowing that you were going to be a murderer or a rapist.

Just as your ‘final destination’ is pre-determined (free will is of no use to you in trying to avoid that), then so are your crimes.

 

[Amandil]

I do not get how noting that many people who are supposedly devout Catholics, do not read the Bible is flippant. Please explain?

For over a thousand years Catholic Christians didn’t read the Bible for themselves, they heard it proclaimed at Mass, they saw it painted in images on the walls of catacombs and churches.

One does not need to know every chapter and verse of the Bible to know Scripture or to know Christ. They have a simple faith, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

To make fun of them because they have a simple faith is flippant.

So if I am not necessarily determined to act on the attraction, then why don’t I “choose” to procreate with turtles, pianos, computers, or anything other than what my DNA has predisposed me to liking, or being attracted to?

You’re still presupposing determinism, i.e. you’re arguing in a circle.

Human acts are not determined by heredity + environment alone.

And no I did not choose to type in English. I was brought to America as a child and HAD to adapt to my environment, just as I had to adapt to my Central American environment in earlier years. PLUS, many people on this board would not understand my Spanish, and thus, by going on this English speaking forum, I was predetermined to type in English.

Speaking a language is not a necessary object of the will. Relating to people around you is a natural inclination, thus it was an external necessity that you learn English, just as it was when you learnt Spanish, and thus it was ordered to achieve the good of you being able to communicate yourself. Thus heredity and environment conditioned your acts, they did not determine them.

Nor were you “predetermined” to type in English, you chose to type in English so as to be understood. Just as you chose to sign on to this message board. There was no biological or physical power which compelled you to sign in and start posting, you chose to.

It’s no different that someone arguing that reason doesn’t exist.

Homosexuals acts are not contrary to nature, they have been well documented in many many species, including our species.

That is called the naturalistic fallacy.

Finally

"If heredity and /or environment determined your acts, and you have had “MANY chances to be homosexual”, then you would have no “choice” but to be homosexual.

You argued yourself right out of that one."

Please explain how I argued myself out of this one? As I was saying that my DNA predisposed me to like females with certain traits, and not males. Why would I have no choice to be homosexual, if sexual orientation is determined at conception by genes and reacts to external stimuli, e.g., copulation with women that meet certain criteria and not men, under any circumstance.

You missed the other side of determinism-environment.

Also you’re presupposing materialism-that everything can be described by material or physical causes(i.e.DNA) , IOW you’re begging the question.

 

[Amandil]

So you have accepted that God creates people knowing that they will refuse God’s goodness and mercy. And guess what happens to them…

Here’s a clue (from Pope John Paul II) ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2heavn.htm:

But man, called to respond to him freely, can unfortunately choose to reject his love and forgiveness once and for all, thus separating himself for ever from joyful communion with him. It is precisely this tragic situation that Christian doctrine explains when it speaks of eternal damnation or hell.

So maybe we can continue…and apologies for reposting this:

God does not send people to hell on a whim.

Again, you’ve created a strawman. The above is not the Christian position, yet you keep stating it as if it is.

God does not send anyone to hell. Nor does his omniscience predetermine that they are hell-bound.

This is bordering on the point of intellectual dishonesty.

The rest of your comments follow from this fallacious premise. Hence your conclusion is false.

 

[Leviticus20vs13]

Perhaps not, but regardless he is not predetermined to type anything at all. He exercised his will freely to do so.

Nope, and I’ll give you evidence that is clear and undisputable as to why…here goes:

1. I was lead here to this forum by a series of previous events, dating back to my birth, and/or God’s divine plan. (no free will, the events resemble a domino or butterfly effect)
2. During these events I was exposed to environment in the Americas that forced me to learn the local languages for survival. Much the way I would give my money at gunpoint to a gang of 5 muscled armed and angry men when forced to do so, for survival. (no free will)
3. Finally, the events led me to be bored and look for a Christian forum to see if anyone could logically explain and defend their belief. So I came on the English oriented forum, and chose to use the skills I previously learned for survival to reply to threads

I did not choose to type in Русский either, as not many people would understand the Cyrillic alphabet.

Again, you may say, “Well you don’t need to learn Russian for survival, thus it was a free choice”; and I would say to you, “Wrong! I am very attracted to Russian women, and thus would like to procreate with one, i.e., procreation equals survival.”