Theological Opinions

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Lotesse

What does that link say, Inked? Can you at least paraphrase it?

I prefer paraphrases over links also, inked. The greater detail and authority links provide can be nice, of course, but hearing you is more fun .

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

I don't think it makes sense to judge a person who lied the same way one judges a person who killed or raped.

They're not judged the same, according to scripture, as Lief pointed out, but they ARE all judged.

My point was this: is it logical to you to think that a perfectly holy being would rightly think that ALL sin should be punished?

Also, do you see the difficulty of WHERE to "draw the line" if you're saying that some sin is OK as long as a person does more good? For example, if a person is right at the balance point in his life and he has done exactly as much good as evil, and then lies once more as he dies, then essentially he will be sent to hell for one lie.

And an interesting point - those who think that a line should be drawn somewhere, in my experience, usually put themselves on the GOOD side of that line...

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

What is impossible with man is not impossible with God. When God enters us, he begins the work of making us perfect, and the perfection of everyone who follows him will be made complete. Jesus said, "My yoke is easy and my burden is light."

Then why didn't he make them perfect from the beginning?

Also, do you see the difficulty of WHERE to "draw the line" if you're saying that some sin is OK as long as a person does more good? For example, if a person is right at the balance point in his life and he has done exactly as much good as evil, and then lies once more as he dies, then essentially he will be sent to hell for one lie.

Not quite, as this man probably did many other bad things before. If we take the sum of good and bad and compare, it should be more accurate than just by the belief in God.

And no, I don't think all sins should be punished. Next question, I assume, will be on which sins one should be punished and on which one shouldn't.
I would leave that to God; and I'm sure he has a better way to decide than by the faith one has to Jesus.

And an interesting point - those who think that a line should be drawn somewhere, in my experience, usually put themselves on the GOOD side of that line...

Heh, by my criterions I should probably be sent to hell. But to tell the truth I don't believe in eternal suffering without chances to be freed, if that's what hell about. (no I have no idea, there's no hell in Judaism. Or afterlife, as far as I know..)

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

And no, I don't think all sins should be punished.

Why?

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

Then why didn't he make them perfect from the beginning?

They were good before they ate of the fruit . We've been over this ground though, as I know you know. Here's another point from a Christian perspective: God experiences all the suffering that we do. He would not inflict horrors on other people, knowing he'll experience it all himself as well, without a darn good reason.

[inked]

Originally Posted by Lotesse

Inked, no offense but how come you don't like to actually WRITE what you want to say, you always use links instead? I personally hate looking up links in this way, when someone just slaps a link down and then says "What about this?" So lazy. What does that link say, Inked? Can you at least paraphrase it?

None taken, Lotesse. The subject matter was discussed from a variety of opinions by 22 persons on the link. That was a bit much to summarize, so I thought BJ could check it out if he was interested. He is not the only person to deal with the apparent problem of "not enough info" as blaiming God for the Adam and Eve debacle.

Sorry, but this was a non-sound-bite reference.

[Lotesse]

O.K. - thanx 4 explaining for me, though!

[inked]

RtB,

You know, or should know from the rabbinic literature, that God didn't make them perfect from the beginning because to be in time is to be subject to change. Persons do not attain maturity or perfection apart from pursuing it (however faultily) or desiring it (however minsculely). To be a person in the image of God means to exercise (in the degree appropriate to humanity) the will. Choice to obedience or disobedience is THE issue.

Unfortunately, the serpent failed to notify Eve of the inability of humanity to know the not good as potentiality only due to the constraints of the amphibious nature of humanity (partly spirit, partly material). And Eve, being distracted by the sensuous nature of the object of desire (the fruit) and the desire to "be as God knowing good and evil" did not think the issue through, nor discuss it with Adam.

Taking the figures allegorically (and I am not saying this is the only way they may be taken, historically works well for me; in fact, the usage of the characters works well on at least as many levels as they do in Dante - see here http://www.entmoot.com/showthread.ph...ighlight=Dante item #44), we can see that the mother of all sin is desire to be as God knowing good and evil, in Eve's case captured by the thought and the appealingness of the fruit as a concrete object to be desired apart from the rule. We can all reflect on Adam's even more truncated thought process since he had more information, but obviously would not refuse Eve (sexual politics, girls? or merely male stupidity? or - more likely - both? )

Had obedience been chosen, the knowledge would have been obtained at the proper time and in the proper mode to the nature of humanity, and humanity would have grown towards a more perfect state by that process. Perfection achieved without effort is not what God had in mind. Think of the analogy of a parent desiring a child to learn to walk.

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Why?

Because it's pointless. It's not very educational either. (in my opinion)

They were good before they ate of the fruit . We've been over this ground though, as I know you know. Here's another point from a Christian perspective: God experiences all the suffering that we do. He would not inflict horrors on other people, knowing he'll experience it all himself as well, without a darn good reason.

I don't know - I don't really understand God's motives usually. As far as I'm concerned, he could've done so earlier avoiding his and the human kind's suffering altogether, yet he chose not to do so..

RtB,

You know, or should know from the rabbinic literature, that God didn't make them perfect from the beginning because to be in time is to be subject to change. Persons do not attain maturity or perfection apart from pursuing it (however faultily) or desiring it (however minsculely). To be a person in the image of God means to exercise (in the degree appropriate to humanity) the will. Choice to obedience or disobedience is THE issue.

Unfortunately, the serpent failed to notify Eve of the inability of humanity to know the not good as potentiality only due to the constraints of the amphibious nature of humanity (partly spirit, partly material). And Eve, being distracted by the sensuous nature of the object of desire (the fruit) and the desire to "be as God knowing good and evil" did not think the issue through, nor discuss it with Adam.

Taking the figures allegorically (and I am not saying this is the only way they may be taken, historically works well for me; in fact, the usage of the characters works well on at least as many levels as they do in Dante - see here http://www.entmoot.com/showthread.p...highlight=Dante item #44), we can see that the mother of all sin is desire to be as God knowing good and evil, in Eve's case captured by the thought and the appealingness of the fruit as a concrete object to be desired apart from the rule. We can all reflect on Adam's even more truncated thought process since he had more information, but obviously would not refuse Eve (sexual politics, girls? or merely male stupidity? or - more likely - both? )

Had obedience been chosen, the knowledge would have been obtained at the proper time and in the proper mode to the nature of humanity, and humanity would have grown towards a more perfect state by that process. Perfection achieved without effort is not what God had in mind. Think of the analogy of a parent desiring a child to learn to walk.

God is all knowing. Therefore he knew Eve would eat the fruit, and that would do so afterwards. He knows no human can be perfect and live without sins. Why, then, did he choose to kill billions of people, when he could create them the way he wants them to be from the beginning? He is all powerful, so surely he could do that without the need to mass murder most of the human race.

(So basically: IMO the outcome of the process to reach perfection is unnecessary, as God can do anything he would like to do)

(And the link doesn't work )

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

Because it's pointless. It's not very educational either. (in my opinion)

In your opinion, what makes human justice valuable? Why is it good that we have law courts?

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

I don't know - I don't really understand God's motives usually. As far as I'm concerned, he could've done so earlier avoiding his and the human kind's suffering altogether, yet he chose not to do so..

. . . so he's off his rocker?

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

So basically: IMO the outcome of the process to reach perfection is unnecessary, as God can do anything he would like to do

But the process is valuable. It is what gives us depth of personality. What you're saying sounds to me like, "why should we bother with having flesh and blood children and raising them to adulthood, when we could just find some other adult somewhere and make friends with him?" That other relationship, though certainly valuable, has nowhere near the depth of a parent/child relationship because the parent has taken care of the child from birth, trained the child from ignorance to maturity, and developed the relationship through hardship and spankings as well as pleasure and joyful experience together.

There's just no comparison between the two types of experience, I think. Correct me if you think I'm wrong.

And what's the point of God just implanting memories or feelings in people so that they feel as if they'd gone through all that past relationship, when the people can really go through the relationship? The difference is between a game and the real thing.

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

In your opinion, what makes human justice valuable? Why is it good that we have law courts?

It's not the same thing: you're not punished in the courts for every little thing. Also some of the reason for punishments is to scare people not to do any crimes, something that's missing in God's decision to kill everyone because they don't believe in Jesus.

And what's the point of God just implanting memories or feelings in people so that they feel as if they'd gone through all that past relationship, when the people can really go through the relationship? The difference is between a game and the real thing.

Disagree: God can make it that we won't feel any difference. We would think and do exactly the same as if it all happened. The only difference would be sparing the life of billions.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

It's not the same thing: you're not punished in the courts for every little thing.

Of course not.

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

Also some of the reason for punishments is to scare people not to do any crimes, something that's missing in God's decision to kill everyone because they don't believe in Jesus.

And which also, in my mind, is one of the more unjust aspects of our justice. When we're judging someone not with the exact penalty the crime warrants punishment for, but rather because of the political situation we're in or as a preventative, that's less just. This is one of the reasons I disapprove of torture too, because it's unjust, not in proportion to crime but in proportion to what we want.

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

Disagree: God can make it that we won't feel any difference. We would think and do exactly the same as if it all happened. The only difference would be sparing the life of billions.

Last night, I dreamed about a chap breaking lots of bones. Virtually whenever he moved, he broke a bone. It was an awful dream for me to experience (experienced because of a doctor movie I saw a few days ago, I'm certain). In the morning, I had forgotten about the dream completely. I went along blissfully not remembering it for about twenty to thirty minutes, and then abruptly I remembered it. Before I remembered it, to me it was as though it never had happened.

It may be that the same thing is true with people. If someone exists and then ceases to exist, is it as though the person never happened? I don't know. It was with my dream, so I'm just theorizing. If this is the case, does the eternal death of billions make a difference? Tough to say. Perhaps they are like the bad dream that is here and then gone.

About your idea of God putting memories into people's heads: First of all, the memories aren't real. They may feel real, we may feel more mature, but none of it actually happened. We would be built on fakeness.

Secondly, I don't much like the idea of God being a liar. Would you want to have a good life built on lies? Not very worthwhile to me. Jesus said that all liars will be thrown into the lake of burning sulfur. Lying is not part of God's nature, IMO, and should not be. Now if God were not a liar and told you what you'd experienced wasn't real, how would that make you feel? How would you feel if someone came and told you all the suffering you've experienced and all the lessons you've learned for it, any courage you've shown in the face of wrongdoing and any act of nobility you've made, all never happened? It sure would make me feel . . . ah, a little limp, shall we say. It is to me as though it happened, but it didn't happen. There's little point there, IMO.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

About your idea of God putting memories into people's heads: First of all, the memories aren't real. They may feel real, we may feel more mature, but none of it actually happened. We would be built on fakeness.

Another reason why I don't buy your "apparent free will" theory ...

Secondly, I don't much like the idea of God being a liar. Would you want to have a good life built on lies? Not very worthwhile to me. ... Lying is not part of God's nature, IMO, and should not be.

Another reason why I don't buy your "apparent free will" theory ...

How would you feel if someone came and told you all the suffering you've experienced and all the lessons you've learned for it, any courage you've shown in the face of wrongdoing and any act of nobility you've made, all ....

.... all were not your choice at all?
Another reason why I don't buy your "apparent free will" theory ...

I think God gives human beings a great amount of free will. God's purposes will be accomplished, and He can intervene at times, but on the whole, I think He gives us a huge amount of free will and the ability to choose our courses, because otherwise justice would be meaningless, and rewards empty. The only part of God's will that I see "thwarted" is this: in BOTH the Old and New Testament, it says that God desires that NO ONE should perish - that ALL should come to fulness of joy in knowing Him. Yet ... this desire of God is sometimes "thwarted" by man's free will choice, for the scriptures are also clear that some DO perish by their own actions, their own choices.

That's what's so amazing, to me, about God's decision to create people. Here is God, self-existant in the Trinity, in perfect love and fellowship, knowing that to create humans will break His heart with love, but also with sorrow - and He does it.

Fairy tales often convey great truths, because they're wrapped in different coverings, as JRR Tolkien knew well (and wrote an essay about). One of my favorite fairy tales contains a little scene between a queen and a witch. This queen could not conceive a child, so obviously the thing to do is consult the local witch She goes to visit the witch - there's a funny picture of a fringe of snakes hanging from their tales over the doorway, trying their best to bow snakily while upside down! Anyway, the queen says she wants a child. The witch says, "She'll bring you great sorrow." The queen answers, "Greater joy."

I think that's why God created. Just like His Son, years later, "... endured the cross for the joy set before Him...", I think God thinks although there is sorrow, there is greater joy. And there is no real love, unless there is real free will.

You well know of God's analogy of the bride and groom. You also know that He abides in us and we in Him. These things cannot be true of an author and the characters he writes. The author/character analogy may be good for some situations, but IMO, it fails in the most important one - the relational aspect. Read through the OT - Jeremiah, Lamentations, etc. - this is NOT the picture of an author mourning and lamenting over his written characters. Read the NT and see where Jesus weeps - this is NOT the picture of an author mourning and lamenting over his written characters. This is the picture of a being with deep, deep love for fellow beings - not equal, for how can a created beings ever equal their creator? - but fellow beings, like Him and in His image - capable of decisions, capable of relationship. God is a relational God - before the universe was even created, He was in relationship in the Trinity.

I think Lewis expresses it well - at the end, there will be two paths. Those who love God will say, "Thy will be done," and to those who hate and willfully deny Him, God will say, "Your will be done." And since their will is to flee from God, the only place where that is possible is Hell.

Heaven is a real place, with real characteristics, the most important being that God lives there and His glory and splendor and power are fully revealed, shining for all to see. To those that love Him, any place where God is is heaven; for those that hate him, anyplace that God is is Hell, anyway. Heaven is not heaven for those that hate its King. Hell is the only alternative - and it is CHOSEN, as is Heaven.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Rian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lief Erikson
About your idea of God putting memories into people's heads: First of all, the memories aren't real. They may feel real, we may feel more mature, but none of it actually happened. We would be built on fakeness.

Another reason why I don't buy your "apparent free will" theory ...

I don't understand. If predestination were true, we would still become more mature, we would still have experienced all that we think we've experienced. It just means that God lovingly chose our future for us, rather than leaving it to random chance.

Originally Posted by Rian

Quote:
Secondly, I don't much like the idea of God being a liar. Would you want to have a good life built on lies? Not very worthwhile to me. ... Lying is not part of God's nature, IMO, and should not be.

Another reason why I don't buy your "apparent free will" theory ...

Am I lying if I tell someone the world is round without saying, "the world is round but it has all these crevices on it too"?

Originally Posted by Rian

Quote:
How would you feel if someone came and told you all the suffering you've experienced and all the lessons you've learned for it, any courage you've shown in the face of wrongdoing and any act of nobility you've made, all ....

.... all were not your choice at all?
Another reason why I don't buy your "apparent free will" theory ...

Except that there is human choice here, but also divine choice. In the end, it's all God. However, God created a creature that would choose these things. In the final analysis, it's God, but it also is from us. God made us who we are and chose what we choose.


I'll respond to the rest of your post from home. Be back soon.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

I don't understand. If predestination were true, we would still become more mature, we would still have experienced all that we think we've experienced. It just means that God lovingly chose our future for us, rather than leaving it to random chance.

I don't see why you keep saying "random chance". I think he leaves it, within boundaries, to our choices and the choices of others. As the Bible says, we are fearfully and wonderfully made. And I - I - can affect those around me for good or for evil. And so can you - and everyone else. But just like in the Sil, God trumps all evil and can work a greater good out of it.

Am I lying if I tell someone the world is round without saying, "the world is round but it has all these crevices on it too"?

I don't see how that relates to "it looks like you have free will but you really don't." Your example of the world being round is more information on a basic fact; your free will example is not.

Except that there is human choice here, but also divine choice. In the end, it's all God. However, God created a creature that would choose these things. In the final analysis, it's God, but it also is from us. God made us who we are and chose what we choose.

Now you're saying that there IS human choice?

I think God is an artist/creator, as is clear from his creation. I think He made us in His image, also as artists/creators. He gives paper and paint and brushes to one, clay to another, pencil and paper to another, marble to another (IOW He gives us different things to work with), but He also says, "Make something!" and stands back to watch. And there is judgement for our bad choices, and praise for our good choices. As I said, if he writes all of our lines ahead of time (versus just knowing what the lines will be but not forcing them), judgement is meaningless and praise is worthless, IMHO.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

The only difference would be sparing the life of billions.

Rad, why is life worth sparing, IYO?

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I think God gives human beings a great amount of free will. God's purposes will be accomplished, and He can intervene at times, but on the whole, I think He gives us a huge amount of free will and the ability to choose our courses, because otherwise justice would be meaningless,

How so? If God creates an evil creature, that creature is evil and deserves destruction. Even if God planned its choices, it still participates in those decisions. It chooses freely according to the personality God gave it, and it chooses evil. That personality God made is wicked and deserving of destruction because it is wicked. No matter whether God made it so or not, it is wicked, and because of what it is, wickedness, it because of that fact deserves destruction. God doesn't force people to do wickedness. He gives them personalities and gives them the freedom to be who they are. If he designs that they be wicked, their personality brings them to wickedness, but the personality is evil, no matter whether God made it so or not.

In the scripture, Jesus said the Pharisees go across the sea to win a convert and then "make him twice as much a son of hell as you are." Even if the Pharisees made the person a son of hell, the person is still a son of hell and deserving of destruction.

The scripture also talks about the human who turns someone else to evil deserving of terrible judgment, yet this would not apply to God, for God is far higher than humans and his will is righteous. The fact that God chose genocide in Canaan does not mean we're in the position to decide others are deserving of genocide. Some rights God has that we do not, and what would be evil if we did it is righteousness in God's hands.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

and rewards empty.

Rewards are not based on merit but on God's pleasure. Anything good that we do is simply corresponding to God's righteous law that governs the universe. Anything good we do is therefore natural. Any evil we do is unnatural. Therefore we have no right to boast, and rewards are merely God's gracious gift rather than in any way our right.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

The only part of God's will that I see "thwarted" is this: in BOTH the Old and New Testament, it says that God desires that NO ONE should perish - that ALL should come to fulness of joy in knowing Him. Yet ... this desire of God is sometimes "thwarted" by man's free will choice, for the scriptures are also clear that some DO perish by their own actions, their own choices.

This is why I see a difference between God's will and God's plan, a difference that I think does make sense. Remember when Jesus was on Gethsemane, he said, "Take this cup from me! But not by my will, but your will." His will was not to suffer and die. I believe God the Father also did not will for Jesus to suffer and die. However, he planned it. Jesus said, "for this very reason I was sent to the Earth." God had planned this, but he did not will it.

In the same way, God may will for every soul's personality to choose him, but he plans that they don't. So I believe God's will can be thwarted by our freedom, but his plan cannot.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

That's what's so amazing, to me, about God's decision to create people. Here is God, self-existant in the Trinity, in perfect love and fellowship, knowing that to create humans will break His heart with love, but also with sorrow - and He does it.

And predestination does not reject this. I agree with all of this:

"The only part of God's will that I see 'thwarted' is this: in BOTH the Old and New Testament, it says that God desires that NO ONE should perish - that ALL should come to fulness of joy in knowing Him. Yet ... this desire of God is sometimes 'thwarted' by man's free will choice, for the scriptures are also clear that some DO perish by their own actions, their own choices."

However, I would just differentiate between God's will and his plan, and there is evidence in the Bible that this is the case.

Another example would be Judas, the one who according to Jesus was "doomed to destruction." However, God's will was that no one should perish. It is clear from the Bible that he loved Judas- he took the man as a close personal companion, friend and disciple, and I think the Bible also talks about him handing over divine power to Judas to use on behalf of the Israelites. I think he did that for all the disciples, including Judas, the "one doomed to destruction."

Don't you think he also loved the pharoah of Egypt, the one he planned for destruction in order to reveal his glory, the one who's heart God hardened? God loves ALL people and wills that NONE of them be destroyed. However, he doomed Judas and the pharoah, and himself, to destruction. God's will was thwarted in this way, while at the same time, his plan was not and cannot be thwarted.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Fairy tales often convey great truths, because they're wrapped in different coverings, as JRR Tolkien knew well (and wrote an essay about). One of my favorite fairy tales contains a little scene between a queen and a witch. This queen could not conceive a child, so obviously the thing to do is consult the local witch She goes to visit the witch - there's a funny picture of a fringe of snakes hanging from their tales over the doorway, trying their best to bow snakily while upside down! Anyway, the queen says she wants a child. The witch says, "She'll bring you great sorrow." The queen answers, "Greater joy."

I think that's why God created. Just like His Son, years later, "... endured the cross for the joy set before Him...", I think God thinks although there is sorrow, there is greater joy.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

And there is no real love, unless there is real free will.

If by this you mean freedom to be who we are, to behave according to our personalities, I agree. If you mean freedom to behave in a way that God did not plan, I disagree. For example, my author analogy. I know you love J.R.R. Tolkien's characters. They are not real, but you love them even though they're predestined. We are on a COMPLETELY HIGHER level than that, for we have the breath of life in us. I know that I would care 1,000,000 times more about the characters I'm writing if I knew that they actually experience everything I write for them. I would love them a heck of a lot more, and I would also claim, in a very different way than I already do. I would also be in an insane asylum in a week, because the responsibility would break me . But one can love characters that are predestined.

I have another point to make on this. Two more, actually, but I'll requote you before posting the second.

We already believe that we do nothing good that does not come from God. When God enters into us, he transforms us inside. You told me earlier that you pray to God that he will change you so that you love people as he loves them.

God, living in us, does good things through us and changes us to make us more like him, so that he can do this. The more and more we surrender our lives to him and let him transform us, the more good we are. However, the less and less will we have that is distinct from God. Will that is not God's will, actually, is always wrong. Anything we will that is different from God's will is sin. Will that is in accord with God's will is righteousness. How does this tie in with free will? If we can only be right when we do what God would have us do, and one would suppose the complete rightness is the complete accord with and surrender to God's will, how are we free, in your view? Aren't we marching steadily towards slavery as we develop our relationship with God, rather than marching into higher and higher freedom?

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

And there is no real love, unless there is real free will.

In light of this, how would you justify God's hardening pharoah's heart? Did he not love pharaoh?

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

You well know of God's analogy of the bride and groom. You also know that He abides in us and we in Him. These things cannot be true of an author and the characters he writes. The author/character analogy may be good for some situations, but IMO, it fails in the most important one - the relational aspect. Read through the OT - Jeremiah, Lamentations, etc. - this is NOT the picture of an author mourning and lamenting over his written characters. Read the NT and see where Jesus weeps - this is NOT the picture of an author mourning and lamenting over his written characters. This is the picture of a being with deep, deep love for fellow beings - not equal, for how can a created beings ever equal their creator? - but fellow beings, like Him and in His image - capable of decisions, capable of relationship. God is a relational God - before the universe was even created, He was in relationship in the Trinity.

Agreed. This is indeed the place where the author model really falls short. We have the breath of life in us, and characters in a book do not. They are not real, and we are. This is the biggest difference between us and the author, IMO.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I think Lewis expresses it well - at the end, there will be two paths. Those who love God will say, "Thy will be done," and to those who hate and willfully deny Him, God will say, "Your will be done." And since their will is to flee from God, the only place where that is possible is Hell.

Well put . I am not far off from this view, only mine, I think, goes a little further. I would just add to this that God's will they had thwarted in the freedom that comes from their ability to choose what their personalities naturally choose. God gave them what they chose for themselves- hell. And hell was not what he wanted for them. However, at the same time, all of this was according to his plan (like the cross was his plan), and done for a glorious purpose.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Heaven is a real place, with real characteristics, the most important being that God lives there and His glory and splendor and power are fully revealed, shining for all to see. To those that love Him, any place where God is is heaven; for those that hate him, anyplace that God is is Hell, anyway. Heaven is not heaven for those that hate its King. Hell is the only alternative - and it is CHOSEN, as is Heaven.

Chosen by not only us though, I would say, but chosen also by God for some of us. We cannot conceive of the full scope of his plan, and it is human arrogance to say he could not have any good reason for pain- especially in view of the astounding example we have of the glorious beauty God's plan for pain can reach in Jesus, the God made flesh.

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

And which also, in my mind, is one of the more unjust aspects of our justice. When we're judging someone not with the exact penalty the crime warrants punishment for, but rather because of the political situation we're in or as a preventative, that's less just. This is one of the reasons I disapprove of torture too, because it's unjust, not in proportion to crime but in proportion to what we want.

I take back some of what I said: I think part of the reason for punishment is to teach the criminal a lesson, so he won't do it again. The fact it (should) scare other criminals is a good side-effect..

Last night, I dreamed about a chap breaking lots of bones. Virtually whenever he moved, he broke a bone. It was an awful dream for me to experience (experienced because of a doctor movie I saw a few days ago, I'm certain). In the morning, I had forgotten about the dream completely. I went along blissfully not remembering it for about twenty to thirty minutes, and then abruptly I remembered it. Before I remembered it, to me it was as though it never had happened.

It may be that the same thing is true with people. If someone exists and then ceases to exist, is it as though the person never happened? I don't know. It was with my dream, so I'm just theorizing. If this is the case, does the eternal death of billions make a difference? Tough to say. Perhaps they are like the bad dream that is here and then gone.

Of course it does.

"Whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world", every person is "an entire world" in other words. It should matter to the poeple surviving, and probably God if he's truly good and moral. The idea of mass murder doesn't seem too good to me. And only because of one's beliefs, no less.

About your idea of God putting memories into people's heads: First of all, the memories aren't real. They may feel real, we may feel more mature, but none of it actually happened. We would be built on fakeness.

Indeed.. and that's worse than killing billions? No, IMO.

Secondly, I don't much like the idea of God being a liar. Would you want to have a good life built on lies? Not very worthwhile to me.

What's the difference? I wouldn't really mind, if it saves innocents (innocents in my opinion anyway).

Jesus said that all liars will be thrown into the lake of burning sulfur.

But everybody lies. Is our predestiny is to swim in a great pool of sulfur?

Lying is not part of God's nature, IMO, and should not be.

And killing is?

Now if God were not a liar and told you what you'd experienced wasn't real, how would that make you feel? How would you feel if someone came and told you all the suffering you've experienced and all the lessons you've learned for it, any courage you've shown in the face of wrongdoing and any act of nobility you've made, all never happened?

First, it shouldn't be different than predestination. Even better maybe.

Second.. I don't think it would make me feel very different, if from this moment on we'd start to live our lives. I don't really see the problem, except from a religious point of view. But if you can deal with 'God murders' surely you can explain his lies as well.

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Rad, why is life worth sparing, IYO?

Do you think it's right to kill billions? It's just wrong. If God exists, I'm sure he won't do what you say he said he'll do. He has absolutely no reason to do it.

[Rían]

No, I definitely don't think it's right to kill billions!!!!

I was trying to get at something, but my brain is fuzzy now - I'll have to try later ...