The Christians Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Some people I've met online do. They mostly hate him because of the argument from evil. They're angry that he allows evil in the world, and they believe him to be a monster for it. But what they don't see, or refuse to see, is that the existence of free will requires a possibility to choose evil. As the answer to the "can God make a stone so big..." question I posted earlier goes, he can't simultaneously give free will and withhold free will. Still, they're very angry with God about it.
But wait, how are they atheist exactly?


George MacDonald wrote about this in The Princess and the Goblin. I won't try to retell that part of the story, because honestly I don't remember precisely how it went, but the main idea was that this life is a preparation for the next. What we do now and how we condition our souls will be how we continue for eternity. A person who always makes bad choices and is nasty to everyone can only attain a certain degree of badness in the course of 70 or so years, but give him an eternity and he'll become a real monster. (This is another possible justification for the doctrine of eternal punishment. That by the time you leave this life, the course you've set yourself on will continue through eternity, and like a train following tracks, there's no way you can possibly go but to hell). Contrariwise, a person who's walking on a good path will continue to get better and better as eternity passes. I don't know if that's right, but it's a possibility.
I may have not phased my question well enough. This isn't about good vs evil. I meant to ask about a good moral choice vs a better moral choice. Does the possibility of moving on to the next life weigh against making better moral decisions or making good moral choices in place of inaction?
 
Does the possibility of moving on to the next life weigh against making better moral decisions or making good moral choices in place of inaction?

Nah, the only people like that are crazy suicide cults. Otherwise we'd be seeing churches have actual suicide booths and the like.
 
But wait, how are they atheist exactly?
They don't believe in God, because they think it's a logical impossibility that he could be omnipotent and omnibenevolent and yet evil still exists in the world, but if they were confronted with undeniable proof that He were real, they would still reject him because they believe that he caused or at best, allowed, all the suffering humanity has ever endured.

I may have not phrased my question well enough. This isn't about good vs evil. I meant to ask about a good moral choice vs a better moral choice. Does the possibility of moving on to the next life weigh against making better moral decisions or making good moral choices in place of inaction?
I probably didn't phrase my answer right either, or I misunderstood, or I just went off on a tangent due to my old age lol. I guess you're asking why we should be good if we're going to go to heaven anyway, right? It's the "faith and works" question if I'm understanding it correctly. James 2:14-26

It's not an easy answer either. There are people who believe that you have to do good works in order to get to heaven. Most believe you are justified simply by believing and good works are just what naturally comes from your belief in God. I'm not sure why God puts such emphasis on moral living here in this life if there's a second, better life after this one is over. But I know he does. I assume it might be like I previously said, that this life is a preparation for that one. We're fetuses in a womb so to speak, and we're developing here in this life to be born into the next. If we develop by doing all kinds of evil, we'll be born sick and malformed, fit only for hell, but if we fill our lives with goodness we'll be born healthy and fit for our eternal life with God. Again, I'm not sure if that's right or not, and there are probably better answers that maybe someday I'll stumble across. For now, I just know that God tells us to be good, do right, and not be a jerk to other people.

I'd like to ask a question too that I've never really got a satisfactory answer to. Supposing that there is no God, no heaven, hell or afterlife at all. When we die, we cease to exist. What incentive is there for a person who believes that to live a moral life? Because you're making the world better for future generations? Why bother? You'll be dead, what do you care? Because you're making other people more comfortable in their lives? Why do you care, they're not you, so except for the people in your own social circle, there's no reason to help others. Because it's the right thing to do? Who determines what's right? Isn't what's right just whatever you need to do to make your own self as comfortable as you can for the present moment? I have trouble understanding the motivations of atheists to be moral. As for my own self, I would do whatever I could get away with if I thought there were no consequences for my actions, and I sure wouldn't expend any effort to help anyone other than my own friends and family, and even then only when it would somehow benefit me, directly or indirectly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top