Bible Paradox I've always wondered about

[Blitzen 1]

No-- God knowing that some people will not accept him does not change the fact that all those people have the option to accept him. Acceptance is a choice. God simply knows what choice you are going to make.

 

God is passive. God plays no role in day to day life, though some people believe otherwise. God set in motion all the events of time with the flick of an unfathomable wrist. God set up the parameters by which the world would develop and under which humans would make certain choices. Once life was set in motion, he looked forward and foresaw the outcome. That does not mean he doomed anyone to a certain fate. He merely set the game and foresaw the outcome. He does not participate.

Say you had ESP and knew that your wife was going to buy you a Christmas present at you wouldn't like. You have the option of dropping hints to try to get her to change her mind. Or you can be passive and let her get what she intends to get. You are not to be blamed for her choosing a bad gift, even though you foresaw the gift she would choose for you.

 

I wouldn't condemn my wife to eternal damnation if she bought me the gift I don't like. Well, at least I don't think so.

 

So let me get this: God is all-intelligent enough to know, the very second the entire universe is set in motion, what its entire future outcome would be. But he wasn't bright enough to know the future outcome the second before creating it? Cause see if he knew it the second before creating it, s/he could have built a universe where people would be righteous and he wouldn't have to punish them with eternal damnation for not being righteous. That would have saved a lot of grief for everyone involved.

[Blitzen 1]

God told mankind in plain simple rules to obey him.

 

In Genesis 3:3 God told mankind that if they ate of the tree he told them to leave alone, the penalty would be death.

 

How much more of a simple and easy to understand warning can you get then this?

 

Now mankind has a way out of eternal death and punishment, and that way is through the second Adam, Jesus the Christ. It's a concept so simple, that I have seen 4 year old children put their faith in Christ as their only savior.

 

If you are born once, you die twice. If you are born twice, you only die once. In John 3:3, Christ told the Pharisee Nicodemus "except a man be born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

 

Again from the top: why allow people to be born whom you already know will fail you, knowing that you will have to punish them afterwards? I maintain that this is cruel.

[Savage Beast 1]

I wouldn't condemn my wife to eternal damnation if she bought me the gift I don't like. Well, at least I don't think so.

 

So let me get this: God is all-intelligent enough to know, the very second the entire universe is set in motion, what its entire future outcome would be. But he wasn't bright enough to know the future outcome the second before creating it? Cause see if he knew it the second before creating it, s/he could have built a universe where people would be righteous and he wouldn't have to punish them with eternal damnation for not being righteous. That would have saved a lot of grief for everyone involved.

 

It's everlasting life in the eternal kingdom of God for those who love and obey him through Christ Jesus their savior.

 

It's worth billions of people going to Hell of their own free will, in order for the billions of people who chose to love God going to Heaven.

 

God didn't want to force anybody to love him, because forced love is not real love.

 

God treats us just like we treat our own children. We don't and can't force our children to love us no matter how much we love and care for them. Our children have to chose to love us, and some do and some don't.

[Savage Beast 1]

Again from the top: why allow people to be born whom you already know will fail you, knowing that you will have to punish them afterwards? I maintain that this is cruel.

 

Why allow your children to be born, even though you know you will have to punish them when they fail? It's called love. God loves his children, just as we love our children.

[MisanthropicAnthropoid 0]

So let me get this: God is all-intelligent enough to know, the very second the entire universe is set in motion, what its entire future outcome would be. But he wasn't bright enough to know the future outcome the second before creating it? Cause see if he knew it the second before creating it, s/he could have built a universe where people would be righteous and he wouldn't have to punish them with eternal damnation for not being righteous. That would have saved a lot of grief for everyone involved.

 

You're assuming that our happiness is God's highest priority. Maybe other things are more important to Him (like giving us free will).

[Blitzen 1]

Why allow your children to be born, even though you know you will have to punish them when they fail? It's called love. God loves his children, just as we love our children.

 

There is the question of degree of punishment as in: I don't cast my children into an eternal pit of damnation if they misbehave. I'm pretty sure that if I killed my kids because they disobeyed, people would have difficulty seeing this as "love".

[Blitzen 1]

It's everlasting life in the eternal kingdom of God for those who love and obey him through Christ Jesus their savior.

 

It's worth billions of people going to Hell of their own free will, in order for the billions of people who chose to love God going to Heaven.

 

God didn't want to force anybody to love him, because forced love is not real love.

 

God treats us just like we treat our own children. We don't and can't force our children to love us no matter how much we love and care for them. Our children have to chose to love us, and some do and some don't.

 

Let me throw this to you another way: wouldn't it be better if those who loved you didn't have eternal damnation as an alternative? Let's say the alternative was focking babes and playing golf 24/7 for all eternity and guys still chose to love you instead, now THAT would be unconditional love to me.

 

So God snaps fingers and sets world in motion and already knows who will love him and who won't. Already knows how much of a love bang he'll get from humanity. If that won't be enough love, why go through the charade of allowing the people to live anyway? Just snap your fingers again until you get a more pleasing ratio.

[Blitzen 1]

You're assuming that our happiness is God's highest priority. Maybe other things are more important to Him (like giving us free will).

 

If giving people free will is the main thing, then why punish people for using it?

 

I am not assuming anything. From what believers seem to think, God is going through all of this to get some love. It seems that sacrificing billions of people is OK in order for him to reach that goal. My point is that this is incredibly cruel and selfish, especially when you could have prevented their deaths by just choosing a different world path.

[Savage Beast 1]

There is the question of degree of punishment as in: I don't cast my children into an eternal pit of damnation if they misbehave. I'm pretty sure that if I killed my kids because they disobeyed, people would have difficulty seeing this as "love".

 

God doesn't kill anybody. Hell is just as eternal as Heaven is. You either have to use your free will to chose whether to spend eternity in Hell or eternity in Heaven. The human soul is eternal, no matter where you spend your eternity.

 

God would never force you to spend your eternity with him, God is not a rapist who forces people to love him and make them want to spend their eternity with him. Again, love is not forced, it's freely given.

[MLCKAA 586]

I wouldn't condemn my wife to eternal damnation if she bought me the gift I don't like. Well, at least I don't think so.

 

So let me get this: God is all-intelligent enough to know, the very second the entire universe is set in motion, what its entire future outcome would be. But he wasn't bright enough to know the future outcome the second before creating it? Cause see if he knew it the second before creating it, s/he could have built a universe where people would be righteous and he wouldn't have to punish them with eternal damnation for not being righteous. That would have saved a lot of grief for everyone involved.

 

 

But, see, you're talking about a universe in which you, the Geek known as Blitzen, do not exist. You are a human with free will. Creatures programmed to be righteous instead of choosing righteousness by free will are...robots.

 

I love that all this conversation is taking place. All of this discussion is God calling you to Him. And you either answer the call or do not. There is nothing for you to lose by reading some scripture, talking to some people, praying (whether you believe or not), scanning your own heart.

 

A quiet voice is speaking to you right now.

[Blitzen 1]

God doesn't kill anybody. Hell is just as eternal as Heaven is. You either have to use your free will to chose whether to spend eternity in Hell or eternity in Heaven. The human soul is eternal, no matter where you spend your eternity.

 

God would never force you to spend your eternity with him, God is not a rapist who forces people to love him and make them want to spend their eternity with him. Again, love is not forced, it's freely given.

 

But why cast those who don't love you in Hades? What is the point? Why not send them to IHOP for eternity (another slightly lesser form of hell)?

[MLCKAA 586]

Let me throw this to you another way: wouldn't it be better if those who loved you didn't have eternal damnation as an alternative? Let's say the alternative was focking babes and playing golf 24/7 for all eternity and guys still chose to love you instead, now THAT would be unconditional love to me.

 

So God snaps fingers and sets world in motion and already knows who will love him and who won't. Already knows how much of a love bang he'll get from humanity. If that won't be enough love, why go through the charade of allowing the people to live anyway? Just snap your fingers again until you get a more pleasing ratio.

 

 

Babes and golf would encourage people to reject God. Eternal damnation ~should~ be a deterrent to rejecting God, yet man's free will allows him to choose damnation anyway. Despite fair warning and clear understanding, people choose Hell.

[MLCKAA 586]

But why cast those who don't love you in Hades? What is the point? Why not send them to IHOP for eternity (another slightly lesser form of hell)?

 

 

Only God knows the point. We just know the rules.

[Savage Beast 1]

If giving people free will is the main thing, then why punish people for using it?

 

I am not assuming anything. From what believers seem to think, God is going through all of this to get some love. It seems that sacrificing billions of people is OK in order for him to reach that goal. My point is that this is incredibly cruel and selfish, especially when you could have prevented their deaths by just choosing a different world path.

 

God wants love first and foremost from his greatest creation mankind. God created us in his own image so that we could love him just as he loves us. The word used in the Greek manuscripts for God's love is "agapao" which means to love dearly.

 

In order to love somebody dearly, you must have free will, and with free will, there is freedom of choice, and in order to love somebody, i must do so of my own accord, it can't be forced on me, even with the threat of death. If a man points a gun to my head and says you must love me above all others, it won't work. But if a man loves me enough to sacrifice his very life for me in order that I might have life, then I will love him in return.

 

John 3:16 For God so loved(agapao in the Greek) the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him will have everlasting life. The Greek word for believes is "pisteuo" which means intellectual faith or to have and place confidence in. It's not merely believing that Christ existed that saves you, but it's pisteuo believing in Christ that saves you.

[MLCKAA 586]

I wouldn't condemn my wife to eternal damnation if she bought me the gift I don't like. Well, at least I don't think so.

 

So let me get this: God is all-intelligent enough to know, the very second the entire universe is set in motion, what its entire future outcome would be. But he wasn't bright enough to know the future outcome the second before creating it? Cause see if he knew it the second before creating it, s/he could have built a universe where people would be righteous and he wouldn't have to punish them with eternal damnation for not being righteous. That would have saved a lot of grief for everyone involved.

 

 

Don't mix your arguments. I gave you an illustration to help explain predestination and god's foresight of time. You responded with criticism of punishment for not accepting salvation.

 

Please do not take this the wrong way-- you sound like a man (woman?) who believes in but resents God. That actually makes me happy to think about, because I resented God before I loved Him, too.

[Blitzen 1]

God doesn't kill anybody. Hell is just as eternal as Heaven is. You either have to use your free will to chose whether to spend eternity in Hell or eternity in Heaven. The human soul is eternal, no matter where you spend your eternity.

 

God would never force you to spend your eternity with him, God is not a rapist who forces people to love him and make them want to spend their eternity with him. Again, love is not forced, it's freely given.

 

Would people see it as fatherly love if I caged my kids for the rest of their natural lives because they misbehaved? I doubt it. I'll tell you how I see my kids: I will love them absolutely unconditionally almost regardless of what they do (I would have difficulty if they did something totally gruesome like kill my wife for instance) because I understand that they have free will and are imperfect. As a father, I think that real love involves trying to explain life as best as you can to your kids and prepare them for life as much as possible. Help them along when they make mistakes and try to steer them the right way. Ultimately, I will eventually understand that they are old enough to cut their own path but I will always be there for them like my parents have always been there for me.

 

To me, casting someone to eternal damnation because they didn't give you as much love as you wanted isn't fatherly and it certainly isn't love. It is childish, selfish and cruel.

[Savage Beast 1]

But why cast those who don't love you in Hades? What is the point? Why not send them to IHOP for eternity (another slightly lesser form of hell)?

 

God doesn't send you, you send yourself. Hell is the ultimate form of separation from God and his love, and those who reject God want nothing to do with him, so God gives them exactly what they want. The fire and mental torment of no hope is the best polar opposite scenario to God's love in his kingdom. Hell is the logical polar opposite to Heaven and Paradise, which makes perfect logical sense for a place for those who reject God to spend their eternity. God gives you exactly what you want, which is nothing to do with him and his love, and total separation from Paradise.

[Blitzen 1]

Only God knows the point. We just know the rules.

 

Nice deflection. Why don't you take a stab at the point? I've already shown that a lesser evil as an alternative would make people who chose God even more righteous, fervent or however you want to call them. If the overall goal is more love for the head honcho, wouldn't that be better? Maybe the goal isn't overall love for the head honcho after all.

 

I absolutely have no belief in any god whatsoever, a point demonstrated at several times over my past ten or so years on this Board. I cannot be mad at something I don't believe in. But I am fascinated by religions in general.

[Blitzen 1]

God doesn't send you, you send yourself. Hell is the ultimate form of separation from God and his love, and those who reject God want nothing to do with him, so God gives them exactly what they want. The fire and mental torment of no hope is the best polar opposite scenario to God's love in his kingdom. Hell is the logical polar opposite to Heaven and Paradise, which makes perfect logical sense for a place for those who reject God to spend their eternity. God gives you exactly what you want, which is nothing to do with him and his love, and total separation from Paradise.

 

When did I ask to be born? God snapped his fingers and then immediately knew, millions (billions?) of years before I was born that I would fail but still chose to allow me to be born into a life that would lead me to eternal damnation. If I had chosen to be born, then I would agree with you but someone else chose to bring me on board this experiment in which I would fail. That someone condemned me to Hell, not I. And I don't buy the point about God not being involved in my birth. He involved himself from the minute the experiment began.

[MisanthropicAnthropoid 0]

When did I ask to be born? God snapped his fingers and then immediately knew, millions (billions?) of years before I was born that I would fail but still chose to allow me to be born into a life that would lead me to eternal damnation. If I had chosen to be born, then I would agree with you but someone else chose to bring me on board this experiment in which I would fail. That someone condemned me to Hell, not I. And I don't buy the point about God not being involved in my birth. He involved himself from the minute the experiment began.

 

Not buying it.

 

There is a significant difference between sending someone to hell and not intervening despite knowing their actions will lead them there.

[Blitzen 1]

Not buying it.

 

There is a significant difference between sending someone to hell and not intervening despite knowing their actions will lead them there.

 

But he did intervene, he snapped his fingers and spawned the whole experiment. When did I ask to be a failing part of this experiment?

[MisanthropicAnthropoid 0]

But he did intervene, he snapped his fingers and spawned the whole experiment. When did I ask to be a failing part of this experiment?

 

There's also a difference between presenting someone with a choice (rather than giving them non-existence) and preventing someone from making a bad choice (rather than allowing the choice). By your definition, both count as interventions, but they're hardly the same.

[Savage Beast 1]

When did I ask to be a failing part of this experiment?

 

You chose to fail because you love the darkness of your sin instead of the light of Christ.

 

It's your choice, not God's.

 

I guess you still can't apprehend freedom of choice and love?

[Blitzen 1]

You chose to fail because you love the darkness of your sin instead of the light of Christ.

 

It's your choice, not God's.

 

I guess you still can't apprehend freedom of choice and love?

 

I did not choose to fail. Millions of years ago when God spawned the universe he already knew I would fail and yet I wasn't even born so what choice did I have? What about my behavior is surprising to God? He knew I would fail yet still chose to involve me in the experiment. An eternal life in Hell was chosen for me before I was even born. I am merely confirming what God already knew.

[Blitzen 1]

There's also a difference between presenting someone with a choice (rather than giving them non-existence) and preventing someone from making a bad choice (rather than allowing the choice). By your definition, both count as interventions, but they're hardly the same.

 

Could I have chosen to be a sinner if I wasn't even born? My point is that one intervention is necessary for the other to even be possible.

[VikesFan 1]

K-God gave man free will, correct? So how come at the last supper Jesus says 'tonight one of you will betray me". Doesn't that mean that Judas's betrayal was preordained, that Judas didn't have the free will if it's preordained, right? And didn't Judas end up in hell, if he didn't have a choice that seems pretty harsh.

 

 

This is a subject that has been debated by theologians since the birth of Christianity, so I wouldn't exactly get worked up about it.

 

However, with that said, I don't think it is as much of a paradox as you do. I do not see anything in the Bible claiming that God gave man freewill. Man, presalvation, is described as dead, and Christ's job was to essentially resurrect mankind. This is done by God's will at God's choosing and has nothing to do with what man may or may not want.

 

I'd also note that you cannot divorce predestination and foreknowledge. I actually believe the two are completely intertwined, namely that God

1. knew what He was going to create, or

2. He knew every possible future and then chose one at creation.

 

That, in a way reconciles free will, but when you really think about it, we aren't free in the sense that we can control the future even though we think we are free as we proceed through it. True freedom is an illusion, as we have no power to change, yet at the same time our actions are still judgable...

[Savage Beast 1]

I did not choose to fail. Millions of years ago when God spawned the universe he already knew I would fail and yet I wasn't even born so what choice did I have? What about my behavior is surprising to God? He knew I would fail yet still chose to involve me in the experiment. An eternal life in Hell was chosen for me before I was even born. I am merely confirming what God already knew.

 

You have the freedom of choice, but God knows what choices you will make.

 

Human life is not a experiment from God, it's a blessing from God. You were created in the image of God, so stop acting like Satan.

 

Repent of your sins, and make Christ your lord and savior, and then you will know what real love and real life is.

[MLCKAA 586]

I did not choose to fail. Millions of years ago when God spawned the universe he already knew I would fail and yet I wasn't even born so what choice did I have? What about my behavior is surprising to God? He knew I would fail yet still chose to involve me in the experiment. An eternal life in Hell was chosen for me before I was even born. I am merely confirming what God already knew.

 

 

God knew the choice you would make. It doesn't mean he made it for you.

 

You complain about not asking to have been born like people complain about not liking their jobs. It is what it is. You didn't speak to your parents from some cosmic stew and ask them to begat you, but they did and now you are here, STILL with a choice.

 

You can say you don't believe in God, but you continue to discuss Him in a resentful and bitter tone which implies reluctant belief.

[MisanthropicAnthropoid 0]

Could I have chosen to be a sinner if I wasn't even born? My point is that one intervention is necessary for the other to even be possible.

 

This is true. My argument is that the two interventions have significantly different philosophical ramifications, so you can't treat them as the same thing from God's perspective.

[Savage Beast 1]

That, in a way reconciles free will, but when you really think about it, we aren't free in the sense that we can control the future even though we think we are free as we proceed through it. True freedom is an illusion, as we have no power to change, yet at the same time our actions are still judgable...

 

Since we were all created in the image of god, we indeed have true freedom, just as God has. This is why God can't force his love and salvation upon us, or he gladly would. It's not God's will that any should perish, but that all would come to Christ, as 2 Peter 3:9 states.

[Savage Beast 1]

You can say you don't believe in God, but you continue to discuss Him in a resentful and bitter tone which implies reluctant belief.

 

[Blitzen 1]

This is true. My argument is that the two interventions have significantly different philosophical ramifications, so you can't treat them as the same thing from God's perspective.

 

OK, so God already knows that I - and countless others I might add - will fail and still decides to get the universe going. My point is that the people who will fail, as God already knew, are not condemning themselves to eternal damnation. God already condemned them when he spawned the universe. Unless of course you're telling me that God doesn't in fact know what will happen. The ultimate responsibility for all those people who end up in eternal hell lies with the one who designed the rules of the game to be unattainable to those countless people.

[Blitzen 1]

God knew the choice you would make. It doesn't mean he made it for you.

 

You complain about not asking to have been born like people complain about not liking their jobs. It is what it is. You didn't speak to your parents from some cosmic stew and ask them to begat you, but they did and now you are here, STILL with a choice.

 

You can say you don't believe in God, but you continue to discuss Him in a resentful and bitter tone which implies reluctant belief.

 

Trust me, I have not an ounce of belief in any God. As I said, I am fascinated by all religions not just yours. I have had discussions like these with friends and others for decades. My best friend believes in a Higher Being but does not align himself with any religion. If anything, to me, this is the purest form of faith there is.

[Savage Beast 1]

OK, so God already knows that I - and countless others I might add - will fail and still decides to get the universe going. My point is that the people who will fail, as God already knew, are not condemning themselves to eternal damnation. God already condemned them when he spawned the universe. Unless of course you're telling me that God doesn't in fact know what will happen. The ultimate responsibility for all those people who end up in eternal hell lies with the one who designed the rules of the game to be unattainable to those countless people.

 

Dr. Naismith created the basketball game we play today, but he doesn't determine who wins or loses the game, the players do.

[MisanthropicAnthropoid 0]

The ultimate responsibility for all those people who end up in eternal hell lies with the one who designed the rules of the game to be unattainable to those countless people.

 

Here lies our disagreement. Knowing the game's outcome is hardly the same as designing it to where every other outcome is unattainable.

 

We can invent a parallel in sci-fi. Say the founders of the NFL were time travelers and knew the outcome of all games that would be played in the league they founded. Do they hold the ultimate responsibility for the Patriots losing this Super Bowl? Or do the Patriots and Giants? I suppose you could argue the former, but the latter seems more reasonable to me.

[Blitzen 1]

Here lies our disagreement. Knowing the game's outcome is hardly the same as designing it to where every other outcome is unattainable.

 

We can invent a parallel in sci-fi. Say the founders of the NFL were time travelers and knew the outcome of all games that would be played in the league they founded. Do they hold the ultimate responsibility for the Patriots losing this Super Bowl? Or do the Patriots and Giants? I suppose you could argue the former, but the latter seems more reasonable to me.

 

I understand your point but the founders of the NFL didn't have a specific preferred outcome to the future games when they designed the rules. They didn't wish for the Gints to win. Or look at it this way: if their goal was to have high-scoring games and they designed the rules so that they already knew that most games would be low scoring, how could they be surprised and saddened by the outcome? Sure the players could still have played the games but high scores would have been rare. I absolutely don't see the point in designing a game that will surely yield an outcome contrary to your wishes. Especially when you could design it differently. And I still don't see how sending people who fail to Hades is necessary. I absolutely see how that threat was necessary to keep the uneducated masses quiet however while Kings and Bishops made the laws.

[Blitzen 1]

Dr. Naismith created the basketball game we play today, but he doesn't determine who wins or loses the game, the players do.

 

And he was Canadian I might add.

[MisanthropicAnthropoid 0]

I understand your point but the founders of the NFL didn't have a specific preferred outcome to the future games when they designed the rules. They didn't wish for the Gints to win. Or look at it this way: if their goal was to have high-scoring games and they designed the rules so that they already knew that most games would be low scoring, how could they be surprised and saddened by the outcome? Sure the players could still have played the games but high scores would have been rare. I absolutely don't see the point in designing a game that will surely yield an outcome contrary to your wishes. Especially when you could design it differently.

 

Well you could design a sport to have no losers by avoiding any scoring. Then it's just people running around, having fun, and no one has to go home upset. God could've created the world similarly. But I don't think that would've necessarily been a better sport or a better world.

[Blitzen 1]

Well you could design a sport to have no losers by avoiding any scoring. Then it's just people running around, having fun, and no one has to go home upset. God could've created the world similarly. But I don't think that would've necessarily been a better sport or a better world.

 

Maybe, maybe not. But I would argue that most of the people currently on the planet would probably vote for a planet redo. I think we are far from optimal.

 

Ultimately, maybe we're version 2.15 of God's great experiment and he's up to version 5.23 somewhere and has stopped supporting us. We need something like UbuntuEarth to breath some new life in us. When we die, we'll end up faced with a BSOD for eternity with no rescue disc or power button in sight.

[MisanthropicAnthropoid 0]

But I would argue that most of the people currently on the planet would probably vote for a planet redo. I think we are far from optimal.

 

That comes back to what I was saying earlier. It's how you define optimal. I think other factors are far more important than human happiness in determining the goodness of the world. I think we may well be optimal. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that though.