You're missing the plot.
I'm saying this is extortion and is immoral.
i.e. I'm saying God, as portrayed here, is being immoral. You have not changed that, only affirmed it.
Let's talk about Satan
- Thread starter Barnabas
- Start date
You're missing the plot.
I'm saying this is extortion and is immoral.
i.e. I'm saying God, as portrayed here, is being immoral. You have not changed that, only affirmed it.
How is it that sin is not considered somethong natural for humans, but there's only been a handful of human's that never sinned?
What does that have to do with anything?
The RUF had power over their clay. That power was chopping off people's arms to stop them from mining diamonds to support the government and discourage people from voting.
Might makes right I suppose.
You are allowed anything. I am simply curios why you find it worth discussing an illegitimatly fabricated idea before we discuss how it would function. Would not the first step be the origin of such an idea to determine its worth?
Last edited:
Because I'm pragmatic, not necessarily realist.
In other words an idea doesn't have to be real to be useful, so I find it worth discussing to see exactly how useful it might actually be.
Also there's some hope to find something that I might have missed, learn something new, or hear something that I haven't heard a thousand times before.
I can agree with this. There is value in pursuing most anything. Even things that seemed the most improbable have changed the way we have viewed the world. There is also value in practicality. Perhaps a balance of both is best.
I do think though, that the source of the concept should be determined before we discuss how it would function. Context is important.
Nope, at all. I know what you're saying, those things are not said for the first time!
Romans 11:36
For from him and through him and for him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen.
It would be extortion if other possibilities have been in the plot. But there are two possibilities only: you either serve God with all your heart or you refuse to serve Him. Everything is related to God like I said.
The first possibility-serving God- is moraly perfect and is intrinsically good. The second one-not serving God-is morally evil and sinful against the Law of God.
So, the problem lays here : God is the absolute standard of perfection, and the Moral Law flows inherently from His very nature.To serve God it is morally perfect- the Moral Law, which is the nature of God, demands for God to be worshiped. That is to say, by His very essence, God must be worshiped and served. This lays in the nature of God, to be worshiped. If one don't like it, that's another thing.
To not worship God - this is immoral. Whatever it's immoral in Creation, will die spiritually.
Luke 19:40
“I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”
Ezekiel 18:4
The one who sins is the one who will die.
Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
One question for you, [MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION] : What do you believe, what is your worldview? I'm asking this because it's important to me to know with who am I speaking! Are you an atheist, a pantheist ? I am a christian .
I disagree. Extortion does not consider other possibilities as far as I see it. It only requires compliance, or you suffer. That's exactly what this is. I don't know where you get this idea that this is somehow different. Even if God can't do otherwise because God is 'perfect', it's still extortion.
You serve God with all your heart or be punished if you refuse. Say it correctly!
Intrinsic? I don't believe so.
Says who? God? Is it evil because God says it is, or is the evil independent of God?
According to who or what?
'Must be' is the wrong choice of words I think.
Will be punished in eternal fire. Say it correctly!
I don't think it's important for you to know. Knowing about me should not change the information you give me in the slightest, and I will not be sidetracked, so I am not going to tell you.
Why should her religious views factor into the discussion? Weigh the points and ideas on their own merit, not on how you feel emotionally about the person presenting them.
http://www.christnotes.org/commentary.php?b=1&c=3&com=mhc
One must piece together an entire book to understand the story, n'est pas?
One must piece together an entire book to understand the story, n'est pas?
The problem with Hell is an ethical problem related to religions in which portrayals of Hell are ostensibly cruel, and are thus inconsistent with the concepts of a just, moral and omnibenevolent God. The problem of Hell revolves around four key points: Hell exists in the first place, some people go there, there is no escape, and it is punishment for actions or inactions done on Earth.
The concept that nonbelievers of a particular religion face damnation is called special salvation. The concept that all are saved regardless of belief is referred to as universal reconciliation. The minority Christian doctrine that sinners are destroyed rather than punished eternally is referred to as annihilationism or conditional immorality.
There are several major issues to the problem of Hell. The first is whether the existence of Hell is compatible with justice. The second is whether it is compatible with God's mercy, especially as articulated in Christianity. A third issue, particular to Christianity, is whether Hell is actually populated, or if God will ultimately restore all immortal souls (universal reconciliation) in the world to come.
Criticisms of the doctrines of Hell can focus on the intensity or eternity of its torments, and arguments surrounding all these issues can invoke appeals to the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God. In some aspects, the problem of Hell is similar to the problem of evil, assuming the suffering of Hell is something God could have prevented; The discussion regarding the problem of evil may then also be of interest for the problem of Hell.
The punishment of Hell is disproportionate to any crimes that could be committed, an overkill. Because human beings have a finite lifespan, they can commit only a finite number of sins, yet Hell is an infinite punishment.
Another argument against the justice of Hell is that humans are not culpable for their sins, since sinning is unavoidable to them. "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" (Epistle to the Romans, 3:23).
Oh but what about our “free will”?
An Omniscient God would be aware of the future choice of the individual human's free will, to accept or reject God, prior to the creation of the individual human. This Omniscient God would then exercise his/her own free will in choosing to create a human that he/she knows, a priori, would be condemned to eternal torture. God could, in this circumstance, simply choose not to create the human. Such a choice would be incompatible with God's infinite mercy or omnibenevolence.
Some modern theorists claim that, even if Hell is seen as a choice rather than as punishment, it would be unreasonable for God to give such flawed and ignorant creatures as ourselves the responsibility of our eternal destinies.
In other words - God would not allow one to be eternally damned by a decision made under the wrong or flawed circumstances.
Well you could say that once a person finally and competently chooses to reject God, out of respect for the person's autonomy, God allows them to be annihilated. The fact that one must believe in God or be subject to eternal damnation or annihilation, even if the choice is completely made by a person, is often perceived as a scare tactic that inevitably forces or scares one into having to believe in God, and God would seem corrupt and evil in saying, "You can believe in me or not, but if you do not, you will either suffer for all eternity in Hell or else be destroyed or obliterated out-of-existence". The argument runs flaw in that as a matter of fact, God does not say "you can believe in me or not”. This rebuttal seems to work against itself by implying that since God does not give any other option, humans have no choice but to believe in God to enter Heaven; this view would ultimately brand God as evil for demanding worship on the threat of eternal damnation or annihilation.
Not really. I gave my views about Satan a while back and am now talking about other stuff.
I said I won't be sidetracked. This may be a side discussion from the thread, but I am exactly where I want to be.
Yes, he exists. He used to play hockey for the Boston Bruins and the Buffalo Sabres, but I think he's been too busy doing other things, like plotting to overthrow God or working on the next flu pandemic.
View attachment 19175
View attachment 19175
I like getting what I want at the expense of Barnabas too. Makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
I have faith that people are at least grown enough to handle more than one line of discussion.
I never said I like it either. This is not for my amusement. I have better things to do for that.