PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
RULES
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
Offline 
[MOD EDIT]
Didn't like the tone of the post.
This the KEWK forum. No ad homs.
I don't believe in the concepts of heaven and hell as presented in Christianity, so I wont respond to that part.
My base assumption for G_d is that G_d is the underlying reality of the universe. For all intents and purposes, that would make the universe a figment of G_d's imagination. There would be only one place for things to ultimately come from. That leads into all sorts of interesting and confusing concepts. One of those is that, in some sense, our minds are like a sub-set of G_d. So, the free will we experience, and even our thought process itself, is based on G_d. So it's not that G_d can't interfere with free will as much as G_d is the source of free will.
There's also the traditional 'can, but chooses not to'.
My view on free will is that if free will does not exist, then there is something that produces such a good illusion of free will that, for all intents and purposes, it's real. Like the Matrix
The sentence below is false.
The sentence above is true.
This sentence doesn't care.
Once again, written text fails to denote humor. Yeesh.
First one would have to exist in order to be able to answer this question.
I never understand these questions. A Fundamentalist would say yes, and yes. Contradcitions and weird side affects are because of deficiencies in our capacity to understand. An atheist would say what BGH said and that the contradictions are themselves the evidence of his conclusion. It's like atheists are from Mars and theists are from Venus. So I have trouble seeing the value in the question as it leads nowhere but into the same old quagmire of endless musings.
My Artwork
To prove my previous point,
Theist answer:
The people in hell are forgotten. The people in heaven have no memory of them and hence no awareness of them.
Atheist answer:
Stupid question. Heaven and hell don't exist.
And now we are reduced to the theist offering up all the slippery ideas allowed by assuming the existence of an all-powerful, all knowing deity and the atheist insisting on logical consistency and empirical evidence.
Never the two shall meet.
My Artwork
When an idea leads to a conflict there are two possibilities. Either we have an incomplete understanding in the sense that you suggest, or one or more of our ideas are wrong. The latter case amounts to the same thing, as a wrong idea is an incomplete understanding as well.
The real question is which is the more honest answer to this lack of understanding? Is it "I don't know," or is it "God?"
No matter how strongly you believe in a god, you have no real evidence for its existence. Therefore, the more honest answer to your lack of understanding is "I don't know."
The words in each of the following word pairs are not interchangeable:
"Their" and "there."
"Its" and "it's."
"Your" and "you're."
"Then" and "than."
This is a question I often challenge my Christian family with. I never really get an answer. If the Christian God is omniscient, which is usually assumed by all Christians, he surely knew that Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit was inevitable. He knew when he created the World and Man that Man would disobey him, thus dooming us all to this fallen creation that we all presumably live in. It was easily forseeable to an all-powerful God that the vast majority of us, even after he sacrificed his only son, would be doomed to Hell. In that case, why would he ever create us knowing that so many of us would be doomed to suffering? If he knew this, a loving God would either have created us without free will, or refrained from creating us at all. So, the logical conclusion is either that God is not at all loving and created us out of boredom or something, or is not omniscient, and therefore not omnipotent. Neither is acknowledged as being true by most Christians. The answer I usually get is "His ways are not our ways." Hmm...
So, if any Christians in this forum can answer my question about why God would ever create us in the first place, I'd really appreciate it.
P.S. Sorry if this has been covered before. I just joined.
Ok, so "I know humanity will suffer undescriable pain in hell but I don't care since I will have no knowledge of it."
What a disgusting statement to make. If this is Christians' best answer, we can be excused for repeating the question.
Yes, the batter tactics is to question the reason behind this assumption and show them it is inconsistent. But what is the problem in developing not so central old questions (very badly answered by christians) and making comentaries?
Disrespectful of Religion
Where does the "I don't care" come from? The point of prosletyzing is because Christians are presumably concerned about your (my) soul.
It depends on who you are developing the commentaries for. The basic assumptions about reality are so diametrically opposed between some Christians and atheists that simple being written by an atheist is enough to render a commentary false.
My Artwork