Then man's will is greater than God's will. God desires that none should perish, but that all should come to repentance. However, man's free will sends the vast majority of people to hell. Since this choice was made by man's free will then it overshadowed the very will of God that none should perish.

Also, how did God foreknow who would select him and who would reject? If God looked down the corridors of time and saw who would accept, then that would indicate that there is something greater than God or something outside of God ... a fixed destiny that God had no control over. In other words, God was forced to accept the ones that accepted him and to reject the ones that rejected him. He was restricted and could not do otherwise.

The alternative is that God is the one that chose. If this is the case, then God decided that the vast majority of people will suffer eternally in hell (followed by the Lake of Fire) while only a select few from all of history will make it into eternal bliss.

Everybody see the paradox but in this case Christians can reasonably evoke their favourite argument when they are in trouble :

" the mistery of faith "

If God exist it is reasonable to assume that human beings can not fully grasp his design

Some one might argue that such principle is alwayes applicable also for the dispute evolutionism vs creationism but it is a different story
In the former case God simply ask us to believe in a logical paradox in the latter case God first cheat us and then ask us to believe

However as far as I know only the Catholics claim that everybody is fully responsible for his own destiny
The protestants claim that God decides our destiny regardless of our actions

Rather than a paradox a mostruosity

do you believe in causal determinism? free-will in that context is exactly the same. i believe predestination is a logical extension of God's all-knowing and all-powerful nature in combination with causal determinism.

if God knows all, then in making the world and universe in the way that He did He knew how it would turn it. there was always only going to be one way that this universe, created a given way, would turn out without His intervention, so He planned His intervention as well (remember Lukas' argument that God changed His perfect opinion? lol). we still have as much free will as causal determinism allows, assuming God isn't taking control of any of us without our permission (not that He needs our permission, but it needs to be our will for it to be free will, right?).

@Dan: good to see you on the forums again! and good to see your unbiased discussion. i was getting exhausted by some of the awfully useless arguments that were coming out (some more useful than others, but some are an embarrassment to "logical" unbelievers everywhere).

for many (but i highly doubt a proportionally large number of people) this is justified by ideas found in Universalism or Annihilationism.

i don't presume to know how this is justified.

but "free will" is hard, isn't it? if our choices aren't just a product of the circumstances around us and what has happened to us before, then wouldn't they be random? does true randomness give us more free will than causal determinism? i don't think so. so if anyone designed a world that was truly fair, wouldn't everyone make identical choices to each other? now i'm just streaming thoughts from my head. this paragraph doesn't really contribute a whole lot. but there's a lot to be said about "free will".

by the way, this is directed at everyone; the "@Dan" before was just regarding his return to the forums.

what about souls? who here believes in a soul? the thing is, AlbertoT dismissed my comparison with video games earlier, but if we don't have souls, we are nothing more than the product of chemical, physical, and biological processes in our brain, body, and the environment that can act as a stimulus to us. in which case, what makes "cruelty" to us, or to animals, any different from cruelty to a robot constructed similarly; or to an artificial intelligence in a virtual environment that is constructed similarly, even if more simply? is the only thing that separates all that its affect on humans as a species?

it's not an argument as such to encourage people towards my point of view, it's more out of curiosity.

do you believe we have souls? do you believe we are no more special than other animals? do you feel it is cruel to kill insects? do you think an insect feels hard-done-by if its relatives are killed?

is it cruel to destroy a computer running a program written with self-preservation in mind? does that depend on how well it can interact with humans?

julz

EDIT: btw, when i said "awfully useless arguments", it wasn't directed at all arguments in this discussion.

Ok I've been gone for a couple hours, man you guys have been busy...



A fair question to be sure. I realise I didn't explain it enough to make it clear. It's not that verse of the Qur'an in particular that is baffling, nor is it all scientists who are baffled. However there has been a trend of scientists from many backgrounds, when studying the Quran, to have concluded that none of it's verses contradict what we know in the light of modern scientific knowledge. One of these is French scientist Maurice Bucaille.

Some of it's verses indicate kean insight into certain natural phenomenon, which have only recently been discovered through scientific inquiry. I am not including any of these references here, I don't want to take up too much room, and it would not really be in the scope of this thread. If you want more information, I could include some references in my next post.



Your assumption is right, the Quran teaches a very similar cocept of the afterlife. To me, the Last Judgement and the afterlife are the completion of this existence. All the wrongs which were allowed to occur, are righted, and those who believed and did good are rewarded, while the wicked are punished. So in that sense, Heaven AND Hell, and our choices which determine where we end up, are the point of creation. One without the other would be pointless.



This is a real phenomenon called cosmic background radiation. It is measured at some 3 degrees Kelvin and exists throughout the known universe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background_radiation



Dan, I struggle with this idea too, but no matter how unfair we believe the world to be, it is still the world. We still have to decide what we believe, and enjoy, or suffer the consequences, that's reality.

However, if we accept the existence of Hell (even if we consider it to be unfair) we must also accept that God is the most just of judges, and that He really knows what's best, both concepts are presented through the same revelation. The point is that even if we can't understand why there would be a Hell now, once we are in the afterlife, it will be made clear to us. I hope this makes sense, I realise it's a bit of a self fulfilling argument, but in this case I believe it serves.



I don't want to shoot down your argument. Of course you can prove Christian doctrine with the Bible. However, my point was that I can also prove Islamic doctrine with the Bible. In either case, I suggest if we want to continue this conversation, we do it outside of this forum, which is supposed to be about whether Creationism should be taught in schools. email me at mkschmidt30@hotmail.com



You can start your email by siting exactly where Jesus claimed to be God, as you have claimed.



So far this thread has been pretty respectful of differing points of view. Your posts have been anything but respectful. However, you bring a logical argument here, so I feel compelled to respond (on Smitty's behalf).

I was raised by Christian parents in the USA, a majority Christian country. However, I never could accept some of the fundamentals of the Christian faith, so I did my own research. When I learned about Islam, I had no trouble believing in it's 'fairy tales', and I converted. So my personal experience would seem to disprove your argument in this case.

Speaking of fairy tales, if you were a scientist, would you have believed in Scandinavian folklore's tales of the Kraken, a giant sea creature with many arms? Science rejected these as 'fairy tales' until they found one washed up on shore. Rather than admitting their mistake, the quickly named it a giant squid, and saved themselves from a lot of embarrasment.

How about the Platypus: (from wikipedia)
When the Platypus was first discovered by Europeans in 1798, a pelt and sketch were sent back to the United Kingdom by Captain John Hunter, the second Governor of New South Wales.[4] The British scientists were at first convinced that the attributes must have been a hoax.

My point is that science doesn't know everything, the platypus is a real animal with a duck bill, a beaver's tail, an otter's feet, and it lays eggs! There are some things which science will only be able to speculate about, because science is limited by what is observable. I've maintained from the beginning of this thread, that science is unable to prove or disprove the existence of God.

At the same time, I also believe that our beliefs should not contradict reality. This is why I don't believe in the Bible anymore.

There's nothing illogical or unscientific, when confronted by all of the amazing things in the world, like the complexity of the living cell, the regularity and predictability in the day/night cycle, or the harmony of the cycle of rain and weather, to conclude that they are the result of an intelligent creator's plan. I think it's illogical to assume otherwise.

But those that end up in eternal bliss (heaven) will be without any influence of sin/evil whatsoever. As such, would not existence there then be pointless as well (according to your logic)? Since, according to this belief, sin and evil would be eradicated from the being of each one that enters heaven, then in the heavenly realm free choice would be impossible and, as such, those residing there not be free. Is this correct (according to your logic)?

I am not trying to argue (in the negative sense), so I hope that you don't take it that way. I am trying to understand where you are coming from and, frankly, I am testing your logic for any loopholes ... pushing to see the soundness of the argument, so to speak.



According to many belief systems, man is created in the image of God. This is the Bible teaching and, I assume, the teaching of the Qu'ran as well. It seems obvious that the "image" of God is not about physicality (arms, legs and such) since the Bible describes God as a spirit, having no body. Therefore, the image of God could refer to moral ideas (as well as a few other concepts). If this is the case, then, despite the teaching that the image of God is corrupt within man, a sense of the morality of God would be within each man. This would help to explain why most civilizations come to the same conclusions about things like stealing, murder, etc.

Now, in light of this, if a man were to torture someone for a period of time that man would be considered a monster for doing so. Even if a man were to torment an animal, like a dog, then people would regard such a one as a monster, being very cruel indeed. Even if the dog did something wrong, people do not torment the dog. They may quickly put the animal to sleep, but they do not torment the animal. And if someone where to devise a way to torment an animal for long periods of time ... years ... then they would certainly see such a person as a monster and perhaps not deem this person fit to live.

However, for some reason it is acceptable when God decides to take a lessor being (humans) and torment them, not just for a long period of time, but for eternity. If a man is a monster for tormenting a dog for a short period of time, then god is a monster for tormenting a man, no matter the crime, for an eternity.

Also, please consider this: If a man murders (even multiple victims), but repents of his deeds and accept Christ (according to the Christian religion) he will be ushered into eternal bliss in heaven. He could have lived his life in the worst possible way ... been a Hitler, for example ... but accepted Christ on his deathbed and, as a result, go straight to heaven.

However, a man that lives a decent life ... never actually commits those crimes ... but never accepts Christ ... he gets to spend eternity in hell.

The Christian will be quick to point out that all men are sinners and that the man who did not physically do the crimes was equally as guilty before god ... even Jesus said that if you are angry with your brother you have committed murder in your heart ... therefore the man deserves his eternal punishment.

Again, the human makes a vast difference between what is actually committed and what is thought. It is not wrong, in human society to be angry with someone, but it is wrong to murder (as an example). I know that some will try to argue that god's ways are higher than ours and thus he judges the heart of man, but this actually makes no real sense. Some primitive man somewhere in the jungle of Africa goes to hell, having never had a chance to hear of Christ, because of his thought life (if we assume he never murdered, etc)?

I could go on, but I think you get the point. A man would never torment someone for lying. But god would do that and for an eternity (if the man never accepted Christ). We would never torment a lesser being (like a dog) for as long as we could sustain the torment simply because the dog did not accept our authority. But god would do that. Yet god remains a god of love instead of becoming a monster.

If, on the other hand, someone believes in annihilation (in order to rectify the problem of eternal torment) then they do an injustice to the teachings of the Bible (and I am assuming the Qu'ran) by ignoring the clear teachings on eternal torment.

Anyway, I have gone on too long and probably am not making a lot of sense at the moment (I am tired).

But we know that there are giant squids in the ocean this has nothing to do with believe. Just because your christian believes provides you comfort it doesn't make it true. Science proved with the chromosome 2 merge that we share a common ancestor with chimpanzees aso. so why christians deny that?

Science doesn't know everything but if a theory in science is proved to be wrong it will be replaced by another and better theory, whereas blind believes will not be replaced by logic and reason.

And if you say my religion gives me morals , all I can say that most of these were archived against the the churches around the world. If theres is only one reason for you to act moral because you are afraid of god or hell or what ever then thats not a good reason at all.

Not really. Once paradise is achieved, the person going there can look back and feel really good about him/herself, knowing that they could have entered Hell instead. So it is because of our choices, i.e. exercising our free will, that we were able to end up there. That's what I meant when I said that Heaven and Hell are the point of creation (at least for us).

God could have created Heaven and put everyone in there, and everyone would have been happy... or would they? According to Islamic teaching, this is exactly what happened...

"Lo! We offered the trust unto the heavens and the earth and the hills, but they shrank from bearing it and were afraid of it. And man assumed it. Lo! he hath proved a tyrant and a fool." (Quran 33:72)

Humans took upon themselves the responsibility of having free will (the trust), where the rest of creation refused. It was our choice which got us here to begin with.

Regarding your second point, the following line seems to sum it up:


This is a big problem with Christian doctrine, and one of the reasons I do not accept it. The Quran is very different on this matter, please read the following verses.

"Then lo! thy Lord for those who do evil in ignorance and afterward repent and amend--lo! (for them) thy Lord is afterward indeed Forgiving, Merciful." (Quran 16:119)

"Forgiveness is only incumbent on Allah toward those who do evil in ignorance (and) then turn quickly (in repentance) to Allah. These are they toward whom Allah relenteth. Allah is ever Knower, Wise. The forgiveness is not for those who do ill deeds until, when death attendeth upon one of them, he saith: Lo! I repent now; nor yet for those who die while they are disbelievers. For such We have prepared a painful doom." (Quran 4:17-18)

"Whosoever goeth right, it is only for (the good of) his own soul that he goeth right, and whosoever erreth, erreth only to its hurt. No laden soul can bear another's load. We never punish until We have sent a messenger." (Quran 17:15)

"Lo! those who believe (in that which is revealed unto thee, Muhammad), and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabaeans whoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doeth right surely their reward is with their Lord, and there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve." (Quran 2:62)

If you take all these verses into consideration, it becomes clear that God does not punish someone who is truly ignorant of his crime. This may imply two things for your man in the jungle. First, if he was truly ignorant of God (Allah), and never even thought about his accountability before Him, then of course God (Allah) would not punish him. Alternatively, it may imply that everyone on earth will be exposed to enough truth so as to be fit for judgement. I actually prefer implication #1, because there are sayings of Prophet Muhammad which further illustrate this point. One is that a child will not be held accountable until he reaches puberty, a madman will not be held accountable until he regains his sanity, and a sleeping person will not be held accountable until he wakes up.

To reiterate, a person can only be judged according to what they were aware, not according to what some guy with a big hat says (i.e religious authority), and only God knows what is within each and every heart. With that said, we were all given a conscience, and the basic ideas of right and wrong are innate within each person. So if someone never learned one bit about God, he still would be judged according to his conscience.

Finally, in effect you are judging God, based on whatyou imagine Heaven and Hell to be like. Since neither you nor I have been there, this is not a sound argument. I want to re-enforce my point again, that if we accept that there is a Hell, we cannot blame God (Allah) for the people being punished therein, because God (Allah) also explains the following:

"And if a breath of thy Lord's punishment were to touch them, they assuredly would say: Alas for us! Lo!
we were wrong-doers." (Quran 21:46)

"Lo! Allah wrongeth not mankind in aught; but mankind wrong themselves."(Quran 10:44)

So if we accept that there is a Hell, and we want to base an argument from it, we must also accept that it is a just and balanced Hell. Whether we can understand the justice of it now is irrelevant. As a side point, Heaven and Hell are not a black and white thing in Islam. There are degrees of reward, and degrees of punishment.

"There are degrees (of grace and reprobation) with Allah, and Allah is Seer of what ye do." (Quran 3:163)

I hope this makes my position more clear.

For everyone else:
I think this is still (however remotely) linked to teaching creationism (or intelligent design) in schools, because I am defending the idea that not all monotheistic religions are illogical or unscientific.

All religions are unscientific no evidence no science , a book of tales is no evidence.

The sun IS the only light. Try to take a walk at night! You will see that in the forest the only light will be the moon. The moon is reflecting light from the sun. So the sun is the only light. If there is no moon you will see nothing. It will be pitch black.

If there is no sun then it will be extremely cold, dark and only death will surround us. There cannot be life without a star (sun) providing warmth and light.

So there cannot be plants without sun and there cannot be light without sun. This is indeed a bible contradiction right from the start. And there are much more if you try to simulate the development of the population of people, the heritage and much more. But this is not that bad for a fairy tale. But if you take it seriously then you should really realize these problems.

LMAO

Hell? Me likes that place. I have cold feet all the time. So nothing better than a warm place. And no religious bigot too. Excellent place for me. Maybe i even become a little devil there to have some fun. burn. BURN :P

Again, your whole concept is wrong and not longer fitting into our age. It is outdated and disproven. There is not just black and white. And we have showed you not just one example where the bible conflicts with itself.

Still not noticed that your weapon of fear, pain and perdition will not work here? We are the ones with real free will. We are not bound to lies and a book of tales. We rely at facts. And make us our own picture