Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Materialists Know What They Say is False. They Say it Anyway

Categories
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Otherwise, they would have to give up their materialism.

Recently I posted about a woman who was charged with attempted murder when she put a newborn baby in a garbage bag and tossed him in a dumpster to die. Here is an exchange I had with Seversky regarding that post:

Barry:

Is it objectively evil to put a baby in a garbage bag and throw him in a dumpster or is it just your subjective preference not to do so?

Seversky:

the overwhelming majority regard dumping newborns in dumpsters as being evil

Barry:

Suppose the overwhelming majority regarded dumping newborns in dumpsters as good. Would it then be good?

Seversky:

Presumably, it would be good in the minds of the majority who approved of it. It would not be a good thing from my perspective.

There you have it. Sev’s position is this: They would prefer tossing babies in dumpsters and I would not. There is no basis on which to determine which preference is superior. Therefore, the preferences are objectively equal.

As I have said before, no sane person actually lives their life as if materialism is true. But Sev’s religious commitments compel him to pretend he believes it is true. Which leads him to say that he holds an outrageous position that we can be certain he does not truly hold. Sad that.

Comments
WJM, oh yes it does. Rational responsible freedom is what makes us morally governed and accountable, and it extends to both our intellect and our attitude, hence, truth in love. It leads to why our core characteristics are distinct from computational substrates [see Crick's Astonishing Hypothesis or Haldane's challenge] which are dynamic-stochastic, mechanical, inherently non rational programmed entities. Thus, we see there is something distinct that makes us self-moved, often termed the soul. Our souls as inherently unitary, are not capable of disintegration, are immortal and so will suffer fates related to our chosen path of life relative to the truth we knew or had access to, how we responded to it and how we respond to others, the love-virtue challenge. Such moral government expresses itself through the Ciceronian first duties, to truth, right reason, warrant and wider prudence, sound conscience, neighbour so too fairness and justice etc. Light is come, do we seek it and seek to live by it or do we go scurrying for our favourite patch and corner of darkness. If the latter, it is because we have wrenched our gifts out of alignment with due ends, i.e. we have twisted away towards evil. KFkairosfocus
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
01:38 PM
1
01
38
PM
PDT
Zweston said:
it seems you don’t think it’s a false claim regarding Jesus being the Son of God….therefore, it’s never been really about the objective truth of the matter, but just the outcomes.
I think the phrase "the Son of God" is problematic. I'm not sure what that means.
You think he is someone to contend with… a peer at best and maybe a subordinate at worst.
Try and remember that, from my perspective, all we are talking about is a hypothetical God with hypothetical attributes and commands in a hypothetical situation. My version of God is purely the ground of being. That's certainly beyond my capacity to "contend" with, and that is certainly not my "peer" in any sense of the word. The rest of your commentary is from the perspective of the hypothetical (in my view; I'm sure to you it's not hypothetical.) If "not loving God" is a sin, then I'm just flat-out doomed. Might as well enjoy this life while I can and just ignore the "sin" warnings. If your hypothetical is true, I'm going to end up in hell anyway.William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
01:30 PM
1
01
30
PM
PDT
Also, Seversky, Chucky D, JVL... would love to hear your response to the thought experiment.zweston
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
01:24 PM
1
01
24
PM
PDT
I'm looking forward to more of your thoughts... Jesus said... he who is forgiven much, loves much. Do you think you would be forgiven much? I think that is probably the main issue here as it seems you don't see it that way. You appear to think you just have some rough edges that need a little smoothing. When my wife forgives me when I'm an idiot or whatever it may be... I cannot help but love her more...because I know I don't deserve it/her! It melts my heart and motivates me to do and be better. That's what God offers you. To dismiss something out of hand because you don't like it or think it's unreasonable means you think you know better than God. I think it's interesting that you don't reject the resurrection, which is pretty interesting. What else does Jesus have to do for him to verify his authority? He fulfilled tons of prophecies specifically and the world really does seem to align with his description of our current reality. In regards to corporal punishment... I'm sparing my kids from a final consequence (running out in the road) when I spank their bottoms. Could this current conversation (or the undoubtedly 100's of them you've had) be the same thing? Remember when a tower fell and the people asked Jesus what they did to deserve it? Jesus just said "they didn't do anything special, but unless you repent, you will likewise perish." Jesus came to warn us. The scriptures are for us to be warned as well. If God is just and perfect and holy he must punish sin! And he has and will. Otherwise he would deny his nature. I know it seems like God is a megalomaniacal control freak (so some say anyways) but if he is truly the only God above any other creation of all time and he made us specifically to worship and glorify himself, we are literally rebelling against our calling and what is best for us. God is what is best for us. Nothing else can substitute.zweston
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
01:20 PM
1
01
20
PM
PDT
Zweston asked:
My point in the experiment is this…. do you only reject Christianity because you don’t like the outcome for some people?
I rejected Christianity because of the eternal hell thing. I haven't seriously reconsidered it since. That's a deal-breaker for me.
Objectively, do you find the resurrection to be true and Jesus to be Lord of the universe, you just don’t want to submit?
I have no reason to doubt that the resurrection occurred. If I thought Jesus was lord of all creation I would most certainly submit. As I said, I'm not a self-destructive idiot.
So, I have to introduce their “seat of knowledge” to the “hand of discipline” at times to get their attention.
That's perfectly reasonable because it's a temporary pain as a teaching method.
I’m thinking out loud, and this isn’t in a straight line….but….. it seems no matter what God does after earthly life, you would do what you want and your acceptance of it being true (but not obedience) wholly hinges on whether there is a hell or not.
For Pete's sake, Zweston, do you think I do whatever I feel like doing now wrt the Earthly laws, many of which I find unreasonable and corrupt? And these people aren't even God. If there's an actual Lord of all creation and I know it to be true I find out for certain what that person wants me to do, that's a zero option situation. I will adjust my attitude and psychology accordingly. I might be heartbroken and resentful, but I'll do what I have to do. One thing I cannot do is just decide to love some being. I'm sure I can fake it like a trooper, but that's not going to cut it, is it? That's part of what I was talking about stuff your challenge didn't cover that could also be a deal-breaker. More response to come.William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
01:10 PM
1
01
10
PM
PDT
WJM--- I'm genuinely thankful for your response. I'm going to have to use this experiment more. I think it is also revealing of where many stand. My point in the experiment is this.... do you only reject Christianity because you don't like the outcome for some people? Objectively, do you find the resurrection to be true and Jesus to be Lord of the universe, you just don't want to submit? It is interesting, your responses and the truth that you concede that you don't really feel motivated to change how you live your life any more than you would under another system. I think of being a parent.... I can coax my children and reason with them and try to make them understand, but if they keep disobeying, something terrible could happen. So, I have to introduce their "seat of knowledge" to the "hand of discipline" at times to get their attention. I'm thinking out loud, and this isn't in a straight line....but..... it seems no matter what God does after earthly life, you would do what you want and your acceptance of it being true (but not obedience) wholly hinges on whether there is a hell or not. If there is a hell or not... that still doesn't lead you to worship, exalt, and glorify God, which He created you to do. ----- Maybe I'm incorrect, and I'd be happy to keep the chain of thought going.... it seems you don't think it's a false claim regarding Jesus being the Son of God....therefore, it's never been really about the objective truth of the matter, but just the outcomes. It seems, no matter what God does and whatever system you want to try to put into the Bible (annihilationism, universalism, or traditional) you won't drop your nets and immediately follow Jesus (and worship Him) I would say that your problem isn't a few pet sins here or there... it's outright rebellion and disobedience without any reverence for who he is and his word. You have make your sins out to look small, but you are transgressing the Lord of all the universe. You think he is someone to contend with... a peer at best and maybe a subordinate at worst. The book of James addresses the pride involved to say "we will go to this and this a place tomorrow and do business here or there" without acknowledging God's provision or will. No one's view of God is sufficient...but I acknowledge that to the best of my ability and understand that Jesus is coming back and his word is true. So, I need to live like it. Adam and Eve's problem wasn't the actual fruit, but the heart from behind their action. They wanted to be like God, and the first chance they had to do so, they went for it. If you die and go to hell.... it won't be for Adam and Eve's sins... it will be for your sins that you willingly committed and even perhaps loved and never renounced. Tell me when someone else has made you lie, lust, steal, covet, blaspheme, dishonor your parents? Maybe there is an exception in there somewhere on a few cases, but ultimately... you have done what you wanted. And God has allowed you to live this long. The scary idea that makes me think of is in Romans chapter 1 talking about God giving people over to their evil desires to do all kinds of wicked things without recourse. I do believe God gives everyone what they want... they can either want him or want the things of the world and the fleeting pleasures of it. You may be familiar with missionary Jim Elliott, who prophetically said this before dying by spear trying to reach a native tribe in South America "He is no fool who gives that which he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose" ---- I know, I rambled and jumped around all over, but your response was fascinating and I'm just processing it through my fingers on a keyboard. I'd been looking forward to hearing your thoughts and am thankful for your response.zweston
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
12:50 PM
12
12
50
PM
PDT
KF @61:
I note, part of your objection pivots on why did God give us the freedom to love [the fountainhead of virtue] and to reason and understand [the wellspring of seeking and living by truth], and why should he be displeased with abuse of same gifts.
Nope. Nothing I have said has anything to do with any of that. This is what I said: Eternal torment is evil. That does not pivot on anything other than being a reasonable, normal human being. It's not an objection to any proposed God. It does not require any reference to Cicero. It doesn't take any in-depth conversation to unravel. Which is exactly the point Mr. Arrington made in the OP with his example.William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
12:41 PM
12
12
41
PM
PDT
chuckdarwin- Reincarnation makes sense with an Omniscient God.ET
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
11:56 AM
11
11
56
AM
PDT
CD, you were answered in the said thread but chose to ignore or deflect and now to cross thread. Let me start with what we start with, rational, responsible freedom, the context for any cognitive endeavour. As responsible indicates, such is inevitabbly morally governed through duty to truth, right reason, warrant and wider prudence, etc -- the Ciceronian first duties of reason that so many so strongly objected to, but only to exemplify by what they appeal to, to gain persuasive leverage for their arguments. Thus, they show the branch on which we sit first principle nature of the duties. The point is, the first problem is not the technical merit of inductive inferences on reliable signs etc, but breakdown of reason, debasing of minds due to evolutionary materialistic scientism and fellow traveller ideologies. The second, broader problem is, that breakdown spreads like wildfire and is eating out the fabric of our civilisation, opening the door to lawlessness and ruthless factionalism, which is a challenge to us all. Not least, to the integrity of science. KF PS: On life, start with the coded D/RNA in the cell with its algorithms. Code, is language. Algorithms are goal directed. There is just one credible source of both, intelligently directed configuration. That shouldn't even be controversial, and yet we see an ideological push to lock out such, because of a priori commitments and agendas that undermine first duties. And of course, the notion that there are no objective truths about duty to right conduct etc . . . including right reason, necessarily . . . is demonstrably self-refuting. But of course that is hotly denied, leading to need for yardstick cases that expose the absurdities at work. Hence the case in the OP.kairosfocus
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
10:41 AM
10
10
41
AM
PDT
WJM, we have a catch-22. Answer selectively and briefly and you are dodging. Answer specifically, in point by point detail and you are belabouring and thus showing you don't have a strong argument. I suggest, such talking points be set aside and the core substance of issues be faced. In the case of the OP, BA has pointed a substantial and highly relevant issue that you immediately tried to pull off on a tangent, which speaks. Further to which, you have been using rather loaded and strawmannish language to push assertions in the wrong forum; if you wanted a substantial answer there are other places with suitable panels of experts, above you will have a combination of people without depth and a few who may know more but have constraints that would not allow a long detailed exchange. I note, part of your objection pivots on why did God give us the freedom to love [the fountainhead of virtue] and to reason and understand [the wellspring of seeking and living by truth], and why should he be displeased with abuse of same gifts. Further to which, a long time ago now, it has been noted to you on the nature of a soul, what is not composite on independent, prior parts is not subject to being broken up so losing existence, our souls are immortal once formed. And, we need the self-moved soul not a computational substrate, to have the freedom required for the noted powers. Where, again, Rom 2: "7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury" -- we are accountable for right use of our gifts as our consciences tell us. Further to which, it is we who by abuse of powers of the soul lock, bolt and bar the doors of hell from inside. Where, too, fire is obviously metaophorical for the self-torment of warped passions and desires, a soul is not a material entity vulnerable to damage from mere combustion. Yet another point, we set the fires of ge hinnon and keep them going, and that process starts even now, as we can see all around. KFkairosfocus
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
10:26 AM
10
10
26
AM
PDT
ET @59 I think this is the first time you and I actually agree on something….chuckdarwin
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
09:28 AM
9
09
28
AM
PDT
Reincarnation makes more sense than eternal damnation.ET
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
08:23 AM
8
08
23
AM
PDT
IF it takes an encyclopedia of apologetic reasoning to purchase intellectual cover for what conscience and heart scream out as evil, then our conscience and hearts are so fatally flawed that there's no reason at all to consult them on any matter. If eternal torment is not wrong, nothing is.William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
08:07 AM
8
08
07
AM
PDT
My $.02-- This all started with Mr. Arrington's post "A Case of Bad Timing." I actually posted a comment to his original OP asking what relevance his post had to intelligent design and evolution. At that point he ignored my question and launched into a discussion about "objective morality" and tossing babies into dumpsters, which is fine by me since it was his OP to begin with. His posts are nothing if not provocative.... Relevant or not, I disagree that in order to "responsibly engage" in theological or philosophical issues we need "a panel of competent theologians" or a separate forum. If folks want to pursue these topics, let them do it. Obviously, the interest is there. And it's a lot more interesting than amateur discussions on recombinant DNA or the teleology of neutrino stars....chuckdarwin
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
07:59 AM
7
07
59
AM
PDT
KF said:
F/N: Notice, that BA’s point in the OP, though distracted from, is highly cogent. KF
Yes, Mr. Arrington's point is well-made and perfectly cogent: that regardless of any theological training, particular beliefs, moral subjectivist, relativist or objectivist, and without any additional argument or explanation necessary, at least in some cases we all recognize what is evil even if we then strive to justify or deny it. And, that is exactly the point I continued with my #2 with another example, and exactly the same thing is playing out, as happens with Sev, as various people attempt, in order to salvage their ideology, to justify as not evil that which clearly evil and more horrendously evil than the original example.William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
07:59 AM
7
07
59
AM
PDT
F/N: Notice, that BA's point in the OP, though distracted from, is highly cogent. KFkairosfocus
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
07:50 AM
7
07
50
AM
PDT
WJM That man with a knife is a surgeon performing an operation to remove a cancer he himself infected you with
Oh my ,I missed that part. Could you give us that quote from the Bible where is mentioned that God infected the humans with sin? As I said before you should stick with full description of Christian God not to cherry pick only some info like Viola Lee and not to add new "informations" that are not in the Bible like WJM .Lieutenant Commander Data
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
07:49 AM
7
07
49
AM
PDT
Folks, the above exchanges (with fairly obvious gaps in understanding and all too much of loaded language) underscore the point as to why UD is not and should not be a forum on theological/biblical difficulties and debates. To responsibly engage such requires engaging a panel of competent theologians [who are fairly scarce and often have other priorities]. I have repeatedly suggested, that such questions properly belong in fora which have panels as described, several of which are online. Meanwhile, I can observe on my comments at 18 and 33 - 35, that material considerations are being sidelined. Those, are tantamount to, the doors of Hell are locked, bolted and barred from the INSIDE; start with, Rom 2: "7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury." KF PS, I would think procreation in a context of redemptive provision is not quite original creation, on just one point of needed rebalancing that caught my eye. A raft of mis-statements requires one of two things, identifying the pattern and providing a start-point to fix it for the willing, or a for record point by point refutation of a likely multiplying raft of mis-statements. Enough has been said for the former and on too much track record, the latter is liable to meet a refusal, so that it becomes a for record. We can take it to the bank that insistence on pushing aggressive and loaded talk points in a forum not suited to such is a telling, sad sign.kairosfocus
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
07:26 AM
7
07
26
AM
PDT
It is, instead, LCD that is cherry-picking information to excuse the evil in question.
That man with a knife is a surgeon performing an operation.
That man with a knife is a surgeon performing an operation to remove a cancer he himself infected you with (by creating you in a state of already being infected with original sin,) and refuses to perform the surgery unless you actually love him (not just say you love him.)William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
07:11 AM
7
07
11
AM
PDT
CD said:
Try as I might, I have never found any coherent argument justifying Augustine’s exoneration of God as the author of evil–it just stands as a stark, unqualified claim. It is not enough to consign God’s creatures to an eternity of torment, but Christianity must make mankind solely responsible for this pitiable situation.
And, we are created into this world already on the road to hell (original sin.) It's not even a matter of us sinning in our life that is the problem; it's that we thrust into this world as sinners on the road to hell from the get-go. God literally throws us in the path of the oncoming train, and then tells us that unless we love Him, the train will not only hit us, but it will be eternally crushing us in unmeasurable pain under its wheels. Mr. Arrington's example of tossing a baby in the garbage is nothing compared to this evil. In what other imaginable circumstance do we accept that love is meaningfully acquired or given when done so under the duress of threat of extreme harm?William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
07:03 AM
7
07
03
AM
PDT
Viola Lee LCD says this person saved my life, but I don’t believe that at all.
:lol: So you chose to (cunningly) "believe" the part that allow you to judge God and in the same time you just "don't believe" the part that prove God loves you . To judge corectly is to analyze full Christian description of God (not cherry picking only those information about hell that helps your hateful side to hate) . I guess everybody knows why you let aside the information than doesn't help you to hate. Example: Info 1: A man cut another man with a knife. Question: Is that man bad or god? Viola Lee: Is very bad. Info2 : That man with a knife is a surgeon performing an operation. Viola Lee: I don't believe that is a surgeon . I think it's a criminal. I believe only Info 1 but not Info 2 even both info were part of full picture. It sounds familiar ?Lieutenant Commander Data
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
07:01 AM
7
07
01
AM
PDT
WJM @ 38 & 39 I have to say that WJM's comments at 38 and 39 are the finest examples of clarity I've seen in a long time critiquing Christian soteriology. His point about the bizarre machinations necessary to defend a God who consigns the bulk of his creation to eternal damnation is especially well-taken. The simple fact that Christianity has not been able to coherently address this issue for over two millennia demonstrates that there ultimately is no reasonable justification for this insidious doctrine. The fact that attempts to mitigate the doctrine with notions such as universalism or annihilationism have not gained traction show how deeply rooted our instinct to inflict punishment on our fellow human beings runs. The only thing I would add to WJM's comments stems from a line found in Augustine's Confessions which has haunted me since I first read it 40+ years ago:
And yet I sinned, O Lord my God, creator and arbiter of all natural things, but arbiter only, not creator, of sin. Book 1, Section 10 (my emphasis)
Try as I might, I have never found any coherent argument justifying Augustine's exoneration of God as the author of evil--it just stands as a stark, unqualified claim. It is not enough to consign God's creatures to an eternity of torment; Christianity must make mankind solely responsible for this pitiable situation.chuckdarwin
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
06:51 AM
6
06
51
AM
PDT
And I strongly agree with WJM when he writes,
Know what else is patently obvious? When you need an encyclopedia’s worth of content to develop the apologetic reasoning that is needed to justify something as “not evil,” it is clear you are dealing with so obvious an evil that it requires all of that in the attempt to justify it as “not evil.” You don’t need complicated arguments to convince people that obvious evils are evil; you only need complicated arguments if you’re attempting to convince normal, reasonable people that an obvious evil is not in fact evil.
Viola Lee
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
06:28 AM
6
06
28
AM
PDT
To Es58 at 32, who wrote, "Monstrously petty? Is there no crime sufficiently monstrously evil to earn such an outcome?" This is not a pertinent question. The "crime" under consideration is just not believing in God and Jesus as savior. This is not "monsrously evil". This is in fact a reasonable conclusion that the whole Christian God/Savior story isn't true at all. LCD says this person saved my life, but I don't believe that at all. If some type of universal God exists and is interested in human beings, it seems inconceivable that such a God would expect people to believe such an unbelievable story and then damn them to eternal torment when they didn't believe it.Viola Lee
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
06:24 AM
6
06
24
AM
PDT
To Es58 at 32, who wrote, "Monstrously petty? Is there no crime sufficiently monstrously evil to earn such an outcome?" This is not a pertinent question. The "crime" under consideration is just not believing in God and Jesus as savior. This is not "monsrously evil". This is in fact a reasonable conclusion that the whole Christian God/Savior story isn't true at all. LCD says this person saved my life, but I don't believe that at all. So if some type of universal God exists and is interested in human beings, it seems inconceivable that such a God would expect people to believe such an unbelievable story and then damn them to eternal torment when they didn't believe it.Viola Lee
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
06:24 AM
6
06
24
AM
PDT
I didn’t know that you have to be forced to love a person who saves your life. It seems that your arrogance(false imagination about your value) is more important than your own life.
And it seems your love can be so cheaply acquired that you're willing to hand it over to the very person that thrust you into danger in the first place. If I deliberately push a woman into the path of an oncoming train, then reach out my hand and say, "If you love me, I will pull you out of this danger," is it not insane to expect that woman to then love you? Or, is it more reasonable to expect that woman to despise you and fear the hand you are offering?William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
06:22 AM
6
06
22
AM
PDT
It’s monstrous because God forced Viola into the very dire situation that requires her to love Him for rescuing her. If you can’t see what’s monstrous about that, what is evil about that, nobody can help you.
I didn't know that you have to be forced to love a person who saves your life. It seems that your arrogance(false imagination about your value) is more important than your own life.Lieutenant Commander Data
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
06:09 AM
6
06
09
AM
PDT
Zweston asks:
There are some people holding to the Bible who say that God will eventually save everyone (universalism). That after death, people will realize their failures and ultimately be restored to God. If the Bible said that, would you be a Christian… meaning: You would repent of your current lifestyle, renounce sin, and follow Jesus wholeheartedly and dedicate your life to seeing others do the same?
That's a very interesting question. There's a lot that is not fully addressed in this question, but taken as-is in its both general and limited scope, I can't think of any reason not to do so. But, to reiterate, there's too much here left generalized and external of the scope of the question for me to actually make the decision to become a universalist. I'd have to learn more about the specifics of that perspective. However, I'm not exactly motivated to do so. Perhaps that is your point? That without the threat of some final painful outcome, who the heck would be motivated to be good? That's also an interesting question. I mean, it's not like I have IMO all that much to change about my lifestyle. I think I would definitely enjoy making arguments for and having discussions about that ontology. It's not like I'm living a life chock-full of sin as organized in the ten commandments anyway, and in that scenario my position that eternal torment is evil would be true, right? My following those commandments would only require relatively minor adjustments in my daily life and weekly routine. Since this one point is the focal reason why I ditched Christianity in the first place, I don't think I would have ever had any reason to leave it. As a relevant aside, my brother-in-law believes that after we die, we gain full, clear knowledge of how things are without any doubt, and that is when, being fully informed, we make our choice. I'm not an idiot or so insanely prideful and egotistical that I'd choose hell in that situation, for crying out loud.William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
06:06 AM
6
06
06
AM
PDT
LCD:
What is so monstrous in God Himself dying for you NOT to go to hell but somehow this is not enough for you( such a perfect and moral person ) . Guess what? It’s not God ,it’s you.
It's monstrous because God forced Viola into the very dire situation that requires her to love Him for rescuing her. If you can't see what's monstrous about that, what is evil about that, nobody can help you.William J Murray
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
05:22 AM
5
05
22
AM
PDT
WJM.... Will you engage with my thought experiment? If the God of the Bible were universalist.... would you repent of your sins and surrender your life to Jesus, following all of his teachings and sharing his good news?zweston
January 23, 2022
January
01
Jan
23
23
2022
04:55 AM
4
04
55
AM
PDT
1 10 11 12 13 14

Leave a Reply