Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Well, if that God exists and is the God of the Bible, then every knee will bow and every tongue confess and give praise to God. In other words, those who judge God now will worship God on judgment day.

---

Or, if this "God" exists (the "Beeswax God") maybe his supposed "revelation" of what he's capable of actually involves blowing a lot of sulfurous smoke up our you-know-whats.

Maybe, when push comes to shove, people who have dared to challenge him will stay standing on their steady knees. And then the Beeswax God will end up having to bend his knee to the real God.

Just a possibility....


--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Anything is possible even Santa Claus. So, if the Dubio-Thomistic God is the real God and the Beeswax God just a demiurge, I think we've answered the question of what religion worships the Dubio-Thomistic God. It's not Christianity. Of course, Gnosticism is no longer much of a religion. You may also look into Zoroastrianism.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Good for Nothing:
Would it not have been better if God had either not created human beings at all - or had made us all perfect, like Jesus? After all Jesus, they say, was perfect and had free will.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Good for Nothing:
Would it not have been better if God had either not created human beings at all - or had made us all perfect, like Jesus? After all Jesus, they say, was perfect and had free will.

---

Say, rather, Jesus had free will because he was perfect. We are not perfect, so our will is not free, as Paul argues persuasively, in Romans 7

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Possibly

Or...

You could be wrong in how you define just.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

But, faced with this cruel monster, I'd probably shrivel up and cry.

---

quote:

---

which is precisely why it would be unjust (contrary to God's nature as Just) to condemn people for failing to accept the Gospel

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

I just can't wrap my mind around a belief that God would ever say, "Time's up, I won't offer you the grace you would need to repent anymore because you obviously don't want it."

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by anteater:
As with so many of these objections, I know of no christian denomination that teaches this. What they do teach is that post-mortem repentance is impossible.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Why?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by anteater:
Boogie:

quote:

---

Why?

---

Well that depends on details. I am in a minority, since I tend to believe in annihilation, in which case it is obvious why.

But most don't, and those will often state that they believe this but are not able to explicate it.

The point of my post was that nobody takes the view that hell is full of people who want to repent but are somehow prevented from doing so by God.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:

quote:

---

Originally posted by anteater:
As with so many of these objections, I know of no christian denomination that teaches this. What they do teach is that post-mortem repentance is impossible.

---

Why?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dubious Thomas:
Only Christian Universalism deals adequately with the problem and posits a God who is both Just and Merciful. Christian Universalism's God will break the bondage of every human will when and how he sees fit. But, I'm quite willing to admit that Christian Universalism's correct theological conclusion is hard to support from Scripture (at least if it is understood the way it has commonly been understood by most Christians). But, maybe, the problem is not with Scripture, but with the way "most Christians" have been interpreting it?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truman White:
For some people, he knows that no matter how many times you give them a choice, they will always reject him.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
... Our lives come to an end, and God in His justice and righteousness will judge them fairly at that point. ... God in His wisdom has put a clear dead-line before us: we will get as many new chances as we want as long as we live, and then none any longer ... the choice simply is binary: beatitude living with God, or torture living without Him ...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by anteater:
The point of my post was that nobody takes the view that hell is full of people who want to repent but are somehow prevented from doing so by God.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truman White:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:

quote:

---

Originally posted by anteater:
As with so many of these objections, I know of no christian denomination that teaches this. What they do teach is that post-mortem repentance is impossible.

---

Why?

---

Nothing in what Jesus taught - or any of the other apostles for that matter - to suggest that you might get another shot at repentance post-mortem. Stuff like Jesus's parable about Lazarus and the rich man is one of the strongest indicators that you get enough time in this life to make your choices for eternity.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alwyn:
Some people live much shorter lives than others. How is what you describe fair or just to someone who dies before they can understand language - can they make the "choice" that you mentioned? Are they condemned to "torture living without Him"?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
If they are baptised, we know that they will go straight to heaven. If they are not, then we can hope that they do. (Traditionally, they would rather go to the "limbo of infants", which after some back and forth came to be seen as a place of eternal natural, but not super-natural, happiness.) ...

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
If they are baptised, we know that they will go straight to heaven. If they are not, then we can hope that they do.[/QB]

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I find Christianity convincing precisely because of the stark picture it (traditionally) paints of the afterlife.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
No, it is a problem with Christian universalism, which is simply wrong and which, as you have noted, cannot be defended from scripture.

---

I did not say it "cannot" be defended from Scripture; I said that it is difficult (or words to that effect). That something is difficult to accomplish does not make it impossible to accomplish (nor does the difficulty render it not worthy trying).

In any event, I do appreciate your blunt presentation of traditional Roman Catholic doctrine. I have a lot more respect for your clarity about the terrible fate you believe awaits unbelievers and unrepentant sinners than I do for the approach of a lot of people who insist that they believe in the Heaven-Hell binary and then come up with all kinds of ways of softening the traditional doctrine (mainly, it seem to me, to soothe their own consciences). It's best in these discussions to have clarity about what the options really are.

Your "God" is a moral monster, and to understand what comes from belief in such a creature, we only need to listen to the screams of burning "heretics," "witches," and Jews. [Yeah, yeah, yeah: "We only did that in the Middle Ages. We don't do it anymore. And besides, it was the civil authorities who burned all those people, not the Church.... Well, yes, the Church authorized and presided over the burnings.... And Aquinas fully endorsed the burning of heretics.... And a Pope once declared that he would personally burn his own brother if he turned out to be a heretic.... But, even though the Church did it for centuries ... it was never established as infallible doctrine.... So now we can happily pretend we never did it!" There's a reason Giordano Bruno is frowning so sternly in that statue in Campo de'Fiori. ]

--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dubious Thomas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
If they are baptised, we know that they will go straight to heaven. If they are not, then we can hope that they do.

---

One more example of belief in a "God" who could disappoint people's best, most positive hopes. To imagine such a "God" is to imagine a being who can't possibly be God.

Imagine a mother saying this to her child: "Timmy, if you fall into a raging river, you may hope that I'll jump in to save you ... but there's no guarantee that I will. I might just decide to let you drown." [/QB]

---

Ah, I get it now. The Dubio-Thomistic God comes with His/Her own ontological argument. One I don't find persuasive.

Godel didn't define positive the way you do.


--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by anteater:
I tried, in the OP to keep the cruel-sadist God out of sensible discussion where he belongs.

---

quote:

---

SFAIK, and I can only answer for Conservative Evangelical Calvinists (which I no longer hold to but know and respect) that God's actions to all are based on his nature as both just and merciful, and that the unsaved will freely acknowledge the justice of there fate, which is nothing at all to do with sadism.

---

quote:

---

I'm not aware of any christian denomination that teaches this. Condemnation is based on voluntary sin against God and our neighbour.

---

quote:

---

And can we avoid the Straw Women of the little old lady who never did anything wrong in her life except once she found a £ note and kept it instead of giving it in. If such a person exists, I'll cheerfully admit that she would not be damned for that.

---

quote:

---

"Salvation involves the redemption of the whole man, and is offered freely to all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, who by His own blood obtained eternal redemption for the believer.... There is no salvation apart from personal faith in Jesus Christ as Lord."

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by anteater:
The point of my post was that nobody takes the view that hell is full of people who want to repent but are somehow prevented from doing so by God.

---

Really?! Now, I'm cautious about describing the precise cognitive state of the damned, or indeed of anybody in the afterlife. I do not really know what this will be like. However, the usual strategy of describing the doomed as this single-minded bunch of utter God-haters is in my opinion simply a copout. It tries to claim that God is not actually making a judgement, but is rather simply sorting people, with those that regrettably cannot be reached by even Divine means ending up in the hell bin. But no, God is being described as actually judging our lives. And anyhow, no human being can maintain such a pure state of mind, at least not without Divine help (and God would not help people to be single-mindedly opposed to Him). Indeed, this turns the doomed in some sort of anti-heroes. One would have to have some kind of admiration for their unbendable determination to face down an eternity of torture for their God-hating convictions. It would be a tragically misdirected but incredibly impressive stance. And of course this is just the sort of bullshit we get to hear over and over again on these boards: "If God is like this and that, then I would rather burn in hell for eternity than obey Him." That's a heroic attitude right there, a bold declaration full of guts and glory.

But this finds no support in scripture. In the outer darkness, there are no stern anti-heroes eating up the punishment of hell with grim determination. In the outer darkness, there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. The doomed are really doomed, they have no delusions of hateful grandeur to support them through an eternity of pain.

It may indeed be the case that the doomed do not want to repent. But if so, then only because they also see clearly now and know that they cannot. Not because they are locked into some self-supporting strength of hatred and evil. There is no strength to hatred and evil in the afterlife, it has all fallen apart to misery and pain. The main punishment for the doomed, tradition has always claimed, is precisely their thwarted desire for God (poena damni), not the "physical" torture (poena sensus). They are weeping and gnashing their teeth for a reason, and in the main so because they cannot repent any longer and hence cannot be with God. And while it may be the case that some feature of the afterlife makes repentance there impossible even for God to grant, nevertheless of course it is God who has created life and afterlife this way. So in an ultimate sense at least, God is in fact denying the doomed any further chance for repentance.

In my opinion, these explanations are all evasive manoeuvres to maintain a huggy-bear version of God. But God simply is not harmless. There is no indication in scripture or from Jesus that He is. Indeed, there is no indication from life that He is. It is a complete mystery to me how people who have been around in this world can come to the conclusion that God is this nice dude who will make everybody happy, eventually. Precisely what are they smoking? I find Christianity convincing precisely because of the stark picture it (traditionally) paints of the afterlife. That sounds just about right to me. The good news is that I can be saved, and indeed that everybody can be saved (not will be saved). Looking at this world with open eyes, that really is astonishingly good news.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
But I'm not sure it's my place to lecture God on morality...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Thing is, it's not about rejection. I don't know anyone who rejects God. I know a lot of people who don't believe he exists. And that's because they don't see a lot of reason to suppose that he does. If God regularly wandered down the street, asking us to accept or reject him, in full knowledge that he really was God, that'd be one thing. But it's not like that. How can you choose someone if you don't know they're there?

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

If you spend too much time reading online arguments between atheists and Christians you do come across a lot of people who 'reject' God. But they probably aren't representative of most atheists.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Thing is, it's not about rejection. I don't know anyone who rejects God. I know a lot of people who don't believe he exists. And that's because they don't see a lot of reason to suppose that he does. If God regularly wandered down the street, asking us to accept or reject him, in full knowledge that he really was God, that'd be one thing. But it's not like that. How can you choose someone if you don't know they're there?

---

quote:

---

38 John said to Him, "Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we tried to prevent him because he was not following us." 39 But Jesus said, "Do not hinder him, for there is no one who will perform a miracle in My name, and be able soon afterward to speak evil of Me. 40 "For he who is not against us is for us. 41 "For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because of your name as followers of Christ, truly I say to you, he will not lose his reward.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Thing is, it's not about rejection. I don't know anyone who rejects God. I know a lot of people who don't believe he exists. And that's because they don't see a lot of reason to suppose that he does. If God regularly wandered down the street, asking us to accept or reject him, in full knowledge that he really was God, that'd be one thing. But it's not like that. How can you choose someone if you don't know they're there?

---

The Psalmist tells us that the fool has said in his heart there is no God. St. Anselm and St. Augustine tells us that we should believe so that me might understand and not seek understanding so that we might believe. IngoB tells us (and I paraphrase) dems da breaks.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Thing is, it's not about rejection. I don't know anyone who rejects God. I know a lot of people who don't believe he exists. And that's because they don't see a lot of reason to suppose that he does. If God regularly wandered down the street, asking us to accept or reject him, in full knowledge that he really was God, that'd be one thing. But it's not like that. How can you choose someone if you don't know they're there?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dubious Thomas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
But I'm not sure it's my place to lecture God on morality...

---

Abraham believed differently....

"Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?" (Genesis 18:25)

Of course, I'm not Abraham!

Be that as it may, I don't believe I'm lecturing God about morality. I'm arguing that the "God" who would need such a lecture doesn't exist--cannot exist. It's a crude misrepresentation of Christian universalism to present its argument against the damning-torturing "God" as an argument with that "God". I can well-imagine the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel telling Elijah not to lecture Baal about morality.

---

I didn't mean specifically you with that comment (and I nearly didn't put that last line in - still not sure that I should've... ). I don't believe in the "damning torturing God" in the sense of one who willingly and happily consigns people to eternal damnation for doing one tiny little thing wrong.

But I don't believe the only options are universalism or a cruel, sadistic, damning torturing God. I just believe that God respects the decisions we make and the paths in life we choose to follow. I believe that in Jesus, God has revealed Himself and His love and His glory to the utmost degree in the hope that we would see this, believe in Him, and find the abundant life that Jesus in John's Gospel talks about.

--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Thing is, it's not about rejection. I don't know anyone who rejects God. I know a lot of people who don't believe he exists. And that's because they don't see a lot of reason to suppose that he does. If God regularly wandered down the street, asking us to accept or reject him, in full knowledge that he really was God, that'd be one thing. But it's not like that. How can you choose someone if you don't know they're there?

---

I do get that. But that's what I meant when I wrote about God revealing Himself in Jesus - that God has wandered down the street, literally and metaphorically, in Jesus. And, in a sense, I do think he regularly asks us to reject or accept him - continually, keeping coming back at us to try and persuade us to do so.

---

quote:

---

I also think this is where faith comes into play: that faith in God is about something other than "knowing" God exists. I don't know God exists, I don't believe I can prove to anyone's satisfaction that He does. I believe and have faith that He does and that He's willing to put up with a crappy servant of His like me. I don't think we'll ever get proof that He does exist - I think He calls us to take a risk and have faith that He does.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Thing is, it's not about rejection. I don't know anyone who rejects God. I know a lot of people who don't believe he exists. And that's because they don't see a lot of reason to suppose that he does. If God regularly wandered down the street, asking us to accept or reject him, in full knowledge that he really was God, that'd be one thing. But it's not like that. How can you choose someone if you don't know they're there?

---

The Psalmist tells us that the fool has said in his heart there is no God. St. Anselm and St. Augustine tells us that we should believe so that me might understand and not seek understanding so that we might believe. IngoB tells us (and I paraphrase) dems da breaks.

---

So - you reckon either that atheists are too stupid to realise God exists, or have decided to pretend he doesn't?

Given that I also find it hard quite often to believe God exists, do you think I'm too stupid to see the truth or merely self-deceptive? I'd love to know.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dubious Thomas:
But, is it really the case that those atheists know that God exists (that is, they're really theists) and they have, nevertheless, rejected him/her?

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
If we decide to ignore God or shut him out of our lives ... and resist whatever God does to win us back....

---

Do you really believe that it is possible for mere dust to effectively resist God?

As I engage with this thread, I realize what a "Calvinist" I really am, at least as far as "effectual calling" and "irresistible grace" are concerned.

If God really did "respect" our choices, we'd all be lost, because not one of us could freely choose God. Romans 9:16: "So it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who shows mercy." Ephesians 2:8: "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not your own doing; it is the gift of God...."

I really think "damnationists" and "annihilationists" who try to justify their position based on God's respect for "free will" are going to have to come to terms with the strong biblical witness for God's absolute sovereignty and irresistible grace. It's not just us universalists who have a hard row to hoe when it comes to defending our beliefs in relation to Scripture.

But, in the end, a TUUIP is a much more beautiful flower than a TULIP!

--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
I didn't mean specifically you with that comment (and I nearly didn't put that last line in - still not sure that I should've... ).

---

Sorry! I didn't mean to imply that I was taking your statement personally. It's simply a "charge" I encounter a lot, and since your post was the latest to suggest it, I "pounced." My argument was not directed against you, but against the often-expressed idea that universalists are lecturing God on morality.

I'm glad you did put the comment in -- because this really is an important issue: Who/What are universalists arguing with/against when they insist that a damning/annihilating God is "immoral"? I can't and won't speak for other universalists, but my beef isn't with God, it's with God's PR firm!

--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6