I have a hard time believing that heaven will be filled with unrepentant Hitlers, Dahmers and Mansons just because a loving God doesn't wish to see them perish. I do not believe that a truly loving God will force those who don't want to be in His presence and play by His rules to spend eternity in Heaven with the One they despise.

 

I have to respond to this though...

 

Wouldn't the "All Knowing" could have known that Hitler would be responsible for the deaths of 6 million jews when he created him? Wouldn't an "All Knowing" God have known Dahmer and Manson would have been responsible for many other deaths when he created them?

 

If God knew in advance, when by my understanding, an "All Knowing" God would, why create them in the first place? I have asked this question before: Was he just setting them up to fail?

I believe the Bible says that no one is able to follow the entire law, thus be entirely good enough to be acceptable on their own merits.

 

 

The Mosaic Law required a blood sacrifice to atone for your sins before God. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was a blood sacrifice offered up on behalf of you, me, Fastbreak, TheFrontRowFan, and everyone else. That blood sacrifice cleaned our slates of the long list of sins. It was given freely and must be accepted freely. We are not righteous, but made righteous through His blood. His blood doesn't make me perfect, only forgiven.

 

Okay - great definition of substitutionary atonement - still does not answer HOW it works - answers WHY it occurs (as a fulfillment of Mosaic law, which is not necessarily God's law)

 

What if I believe in expiation or the Moral Influence theory or sociniacism (unitarianism) all of which are part of church history and disagree with YOUR belief in how it worked?

 

None of the writers of the Gospels, nor Paul, tells us how the Death fixes things.

 

Does the blood make you forgiven, or your response to the blood? Even while I was yet a sinner, God loved me and died for me.

I have to respond to this though...

 

Wouldn't the "All Knowing" could have known that Hitler would be responsible for the deaths of 6 million jews when he created him? Wouldn't an "All Knowing" God have known Dahmer and Manson would have been responsible for many other deaths when he created them?

 

If God knew in advance, when by my understanding, an "All Knowing" God would, why create them in the first place? I have asked this question before: Was he just setting them up to fail?

Sigh...

 

You know, it really makes no sense (common or otherwise) for me to attempt to answer you when you've already made up your mind and I genuinely believe all you're doing is trying to trip me up in my own words so you can pounce and say "Gotcha!" We apparently have very little common ground upon which to build.

 

Even so, I have no doubt that the “All Knowing” was/is fully aware of the potential in each one of us... both for good and for evil. As “All Loving” He chooses not to be “All Controlling” choosing instead to allow us the opportunity to choose for ourselves the path we will follow. All Hitler and Manson prove is that evil is a real alternative to grace, love and goodness. Evil exists. So does good. We get to choose. As the parent of teenagers, I see this freedom of choice as the ultimate proof of God’s love.

Wouldn't the "All Knowing" could have known that Hitler would be responsible for the deaths of 6 million jews when he created him? Wouldn't an "All Knowing" God have known Dahmer and Manson would have been responsible for many other deaths when he created them?

 

If God knew in advance, when by my understanding, an "All Knowing" God would, why create them in the first place? I have asked this question before: Was he just setting them up to fail?

I have a few responses for this:

1) Perhaps the 6 million deaths were necessary to create Israel.

2) A Judeo-Christian death is not a tragedy in the eyes of God. Its a homecoming.

3) I don't portend to understand why things happen in this world. I do understand that God has given us freewill and most often allows us to practice that freewill, even when it is against His will.

Okay - great definition of substitutionary atonement - still does not answer HOW it works - answers WHY it occurs (as a fulfillment of Mosaic law, which is not necessarily God's law)

 

What if I believe in expiation or the Moral Influence theory or sociniacism (unitarianism) all of which are part of church history and disagree with YOUR belief in how it worked?

 

None of the writers of the Gospels, nor Paul, tells us how the Death fixes things.

 

Does the blood make you forgiven, or your response to the blood? Even while I was yet a sinner, God loved me and died for me.

I have few answers on how God's creation works, let alone how God works. I won't give you the old mysterious ways line. When I was little, my parents worked in mysterious ways. I didn't understand, and they didn't explain. What was important was what they did, not what I understood about it. I hope to answer many of my questions some time in the future with the Big Guy.

Fast Break and HHS,

 

Freewill is not an excuse to why an "All Knowing" God would create people like Hitler. If so, I don't see the logic in how you make the argument. It is one thing to allow humans to control their own life and their own world, it is another entirely to punish them for acting on that free will.

 

Again, I ask you: Isn't that just setting them up to fail? He is creating something he knows is not going to live by his doctrines and whose soul will ultimately be tortured endlessly?

 

Wouldn't he be doing them, the world, and as an "all loving" God himself a favor by simply never creating them in the first place?

 

I don't pretend to know the answer to ever religious question or even most of them - but at this point, I feel as though I have simple logic on my side. I am not closed to the idea of you changing my mind with some life alterting bomb of information. I am also not closed to the idea of understanding how you believe in a system of belief that I find no logic and thought in.

 

Let me ask again so as I am sure you will see the question: Wouldn't he be doing them, the world, and as an "all loving" God himself a favor by simply never creating them in the first place? If youre answer is going to be something along the lines of "I dont know, or I don't pretend to know." - where do you find the nerve to put faith in a God that shows such characteristics?

I don't believe in a fatalistic god. I believe he is omniscient in that he knows all things at present, and knows all possibilities for the future. But he doesn't condemn us with preconceived decisions. Those are ours to make.

I have a few responses for this:

1) Perhaps the 6 million deaths were necessary to create Israel.

2) A Judeo-Christian death is not a tragedy in the eyes of God. Its a homecoming.

3) I don't portend to understand why things happen in this world. I do understand that God has given us freewill and most often allows us to practice that freewill, even when it is against His will.

 

I have few answers on how God's creation works, let alone how God works. I won't give you the old mysterious ways line. When I was little, my parents worked in mysterious ways. I didn't understand, and they didn't explain. What was important was what they did, not what I understood about it. I hope to answer many of my questions some time in the future with the Big Guy.

 

My question was not about the mystery of God, but about the fact that there is genuine disagreement on what the death on the cross meant. For some it is an honour payment to God, for others it is the removal of sin from us so that God can love us, for others it is a ransom payment to Satan to save us, for others it is a one time payment for all sins (universalists).

 

So when I asked what does "except by me" mean I was asking an honest question - does the death mean redemption for all? Even those who have not heard the word of God. I too, like FRF, cannot worship a God who would condemn to death an aborignee who never heard the gospel so therefore could never repent of his sins so therefore must spend eternity in hell.

 

There is nothing righteous, or just, or loving about a God that plays by those kinds of rules.

My question was not about the mystery of God, but about the fact that there is genuine disagreement on what the death on the cross meant. For some it is an honour payment to God, for others it is the removal of sin from us so that God can love us, for others it is a ransom payment to Satan to save us, for others it is a one time payment for all sins (universalists).

 

So when I asked what does "except by me" mean I was asking an honest question - does the death mean redemption for all? Even those who have not heard the word of God. I too, like FRF, cannot worship a God who would condemn to death an aborignee who never heard the gospel so therefore could never repent of his sins so therefore must spend eternity in hell.

 

There is nothing righteous, or just, or loving about a God that plays by those kinds of rules.

See post #8.

Based upon your apparent definition of "common sense" I agree.

 

I genuinely wish you well. :thumb:

 

and I (and I am sure other Christian BGP'ers) will pray for him (or her) that God would open his (or her) eyes before it is eternally too late.

See post #8.

 

That is not what the scripture quoted on this board says. "You cannot come to the father except by me."

 

I will return to my old favorite -

 

Matthew 25 - those who treat the least of these well will be sheep and enter heaven - those who do not will be goats and will not enter heaven.

 

Why does this scripture not mention anything about what one believes?

 

I also have yet to figure out why FRONTROWFAN never responds to my posts.

Okay - great definition of substitutionary atonement - still does not answer HOW it works - answers WHY it occurs (as a fulfillment of Mosaic law, which is not necessarily God's law)

 

What if I believe in expiation or the Moral Influence theory or sociniacism (unitarianism) all of which are part of church history and disagree with YOUR belief in how it worked?

 

None of the writers of the Gospels, nor Paul, tells us how the Death fixes things.

 

Does the blood make you forgiven, or your response to the blood? Even while I was yet a sinner, God loved me and died for me.

 

See Romans 5:12-6:14

I think this is more appropriate here.

 

You're kidding me, right? Gravity has been proven countless times for hundreds of years now. Scientists may continue testing its properties - what it is capable of - but anyone who would say that gravity may not be proven is simply either in denial, has no idea what they are talking about, or is attempting to dance around debating religion in a religion section.

 

I have my thoughts on which one you fall into, Hab.

 

This is rich. Gravity has been proven for hundreds of years, but scientists are continuing to try and figure it out? How could it possibly be “proven” if many of its properties and effects are not known or understood? I wish someone would have gotten to Einstein and Hawking before they wasted so much time with gravity, since it has been solved for hundreds of years.

Fast Break and HHS,

 

Freewill is not an excuse to why an "All Knowing" God would create people like Hitler. If so, I don't see the logic in how you make the argument. It is one thing to allow humans to control their own life and their own world, it is another entirely to punish them for acting on that free will.

 

Again, I ask you: Isn't that just setting them up to fail? He is creating something he knows is not going to live by his doctrines and whose soul will ultimately be tortured endlessly?

 

Wouldn't he be doing them, the world, and as an "all loving" God himself a favor by simply never creating them in the first place?

 

Let me ask again so as I am sure you will see the question: Wouldn't he be doing them, the world, and as an "all loving" God himself a favor by simply never creating them in the first place? If youre answer is going to be something along the lines of "I dont know, or I don't pretend to know." - where do you find the nerve to put faith in a God that shows such characteristics?

Ezekiel 28:12-15 (quoted below) is a description by God through the prophet Ezekiel describing Lucifer/Satan. It is clear from this description that Satan was not created to be evil. He became evil through his own pride and rebellion.

 

"'You were the model of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone adorned you: ruby, topaz and emerald, chrysolite, onyx and jasper, sapphire, turquoise and beryl. Your settings and mountings were made of gold; on the day you were created they were prepared. You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the holy mount of God; you walked among the fiery stones. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you."

 

It appears that God grants even His angels the power of a free will.

 

Therefore, it is difficult for me to accept that God is in the business of creating evil just so he can turn around and punish evil.

 

God did the world a favor by sending us His very own Son to provide a payment for and a way out of our evil deeds and choices.

 

John 3:16-21 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."

I don't know how I can respond to this without saying something offensive. I will just say that I absolutely disagree with you. 100%. I think your idea of God and the way it operates is quite scary, to say the least. For whatever reason, you can worship a God capable of allowings its creations to be tortured. I, in no way, believe such a God exists, and if it did - out of respect to myself and humankind - I could not worship such a God.

 

I don't think I will ever get any common sense answer from you of why you believe such things. If not, then there is no point for you and I to continue debating such things.

 

I think that TFRFan asks a lot of the same questions we Christians ask ourselves. The one thing I don't think I've read anyone say is that we are supposed to question God. We are called not to have blind faith, but to seek the answers through God's Word. I believe in the priesthood of the believer - which means that God can speak to each individual in different ways. People can read the same scripture and come away with different opinions and imo - both be correct.

I've always found Pascal's Wager to be very interesting. The following information was obtained from various internet websites (most of the info is viewed from an atheist's perspective per the websites): For the record, I am a Christian who believes acceptance of Jesus Christ as our Lord is the true path to Heaven.

 

The Wager

Pascal's Wager can be presented in many different forms, usually something like this:

 

"If you believe, and God exists, you gain everything. If you disbelieve, and God exists, you lose everything."

 

Alternatively :

 

"It makes more sense to believe in God than to not believe. If you believe, and God exists, you will be rewarded in the afterlife. If you do not believe, and He exists, you will be punished for your disbelief. If He does not exist, you have lost nothing either way. "

 

It amounts to hedging your bets. The consequences upon your death are shown here:

 

1)I believe in God; God exists; I go to Heaven 2)I believe in God; God does not exist; Nothing happens 3)I don't believe in God; God exists; I go to Hell 4) I don't believe in God; God doesn't exist; Nothing happens

 

The worst case for the theist is no afterlife, the worst case for the atheist is an eternity in Hell. You can see why this appears to be a potentially convincing argument - it is sensible to choose the least-worst case.

 

The most obvious problems with Pascal's Wager are:

 

How do you know which God to believe in? There are plenty to choose from, and if you pick the wrong one, you could be in big trouble (e.g. what if you choose Jesus, but get to heaven only to come face-to-trunk with Ganesh?). This is known as the "Avoiding the wrong Hell problem". If a dozen people of different religions came to you with Pascal's Wager, how could you possibly choose between them? After all, many religions are quite specific that they are the One True Religion, and not any others. Jesus Christ said "I am the way, the truth and the light. None shall come to the Father except through me." and no doubt most other religions make similar claims. If a Christian considers the Wager as strong support for his faith, surely he must accept that it is equally valid for all other religions when presented to himself?

God is not stupid. Won't He know that you're just trying to get a free ride into Heaven? How can you sincerely believe in a God simply out of convenience?

 

If there is no God, you have still lost something. You have wasted a good portion of your life performing the various devotional rituals, attending Churches, praying, reading scripture and discussing your deity with His other followers. Not to mention giving your hard-earned money to the church, wasting your intelligence on theological endeavours and boring the hell out of people who really don't want to hear your Good News.

 

Can you get away with just sort of generally believing in a Supreme Being, without specifically believing in one particular Deity? Probably not - God will still know what you're up to. Also, many Gods are quite particular about how they should be worshipped. Many born-again Christians will tell you that the only way to Heaven is through accepting Jesus Christ as your personal saviour - nothing more and nothing less. General-Deity-Belief and being nice simply won't do. Many people believe that all the different religions are merely alternative routes to the same destination. Nice and tolerant (if a little warm'n'fuzzy) though this may be, there is no valid reason to accept this stance over the fire-and-brimstone fundamentalist position : if the fundies are right, then the un-Saved liberal theists are in just as much trouble as the nonbelievers.

 

Few, if any, atheists disbelieve in deities out of choice. It's not as if we know the god is really there, but somehow refuse to believe in it (for example, see if you can choose to truly believe that Australia does not exist). Most atheists disbelieve simply because they know of no compelling evidence to suggest that any sort of god exists. If you want an atheist to believe, show her some good evidence, don't just say it's in her best interests to believe even if there is no god. A person cannot choose to sincerely believe in something, just because it is pragmatic to do so. Sure, you could say all the right prayers and attend church regularly, but that is not the same thing as actually believing, and any God worth his salt would obviously see straight through that.

 

It is quite insulting. It amounts to a thinly veiled threat, little better than saying "Believe in my God or He'll send you to Hell" (in fact, this is often the form it is presented in). Also, the theist making this threat assumes that the atheist believes there is a Hell or a God to send her there in the first place. If you don't believe in Hell anyway, it's not a scary thing to be threatened with - a bit like saying "If you don't start believing in unicorns, one will trample you to death while you're sleeping." Who would be worried by that?

It is often self-refuting, depending on the person's description of God. If you believe that God will forgive anyone for anything, or judge people purely on how they lived their life and not what they believed, or that everyone gets to Heaven regardless (unless maybe they were genocidal cannibal serial killers), then the Wager is meaningless. You might as well say "Believe in God, or you'll... erm... go to Heaven anyway." In such a case, it doesn't make a scrap of difference whether the person believes or not.

 

 

An alternative - The Atheist's Wager

This seems to be much more reasonable, both for atheists and theists :

 

"It is better to live your life as if there are no Gods, and try to make the world a better place for your being in it. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent God, He will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in Him."

(And if God is not benevolent, he's gonna git ya whatever you do!)