kurt vonnegut said:

---

AGC said:

---

On what basis can/do you object that does not center yourself in God's position?

---

I don't think I understand your argument that my position does center me as God.

Wanting to think for myself means I am playing God?

---

Correct, as an agnostic person couldn't reach such conclusions. What do you know of time, to say that such suffering in meaningful given the fullness of eternity? What do you know of 'good' and 'bad' (as Ramblin as asked) that you're a good judge of it? What do you know of humans, not having created them or given them purpose, that suffering isn't beneficial? In fact, what do you know of creating since you can't do it and even the children you produce are in a system that you're bound by? The limitations of your knowledge are many. How could you as a human do anything but simply say, 'it doesn't make sense to me,' and justly acknowledge your shortcomings? This is what centers you as God, definitive statements about right and wrong, the movement from not being able to know to having moral certainty.

Quote:

---

Let's go with an example: the morality or immorality of 'x'.

Let's say that the sum of my reasoning, personal opinions, life experiences, etc tells me that 'x' is a moral action. The Christian position could be that God considers 'x' to be immoral. The Christian position (correct me if I am wrong) is that God's commandment overrides. Therefore, all reason, logic, life experience, anything at all that suggests something different from God is faulty. It's the ultimate in confirmation bias and devaluing of human experience and philosophy to say that only logic and reason and experience that affirms God should be accepted

---

Logically:
If there is no God, there is no mind before the human mind, thus all morality is subjective and unique to each individual. It's both morally neutral to kidnap Jews and send them to concentration camps as it is to rescue them from concentration camps. There is no moral authority in the universe nor consequences in the next life as there is no absolute moral standard.

Logically:
If there is a God, He has the power and authority to make the rules and hold people accountable in the next life if He so chooses. We are at His mercy whether we like it or not.

Logically:
There cannot be God and not God at the same time in the same way.

Logically:
If someone uses reason to conclude God, and someone uses reason to conclude there is no God. 1 of the 2 people are wrong.

Quote:

---

Of course, I don't believe in God. So, what I wrote above should not be read as anger or frustration with something I don't believe in. Rather, this is a viewpoint of mine and part of why I feel adverse to philosophy of Christianity.

---

This is where evidence comes into play. Which view point is best supported by evidence? Is Christianity a philosophy or has God truly acted in human history and reveled to us what He's like? If I'm reading your post right you feel adverse to the philosophy of Christianity because you value individual freedom and a persons ability to chose their own morality?

This view is one that usually applies to sexual behaviors. "I want to choose this lifestyle and who should stop me?" We often draw our own line at consent. However that's imposing our individual moral standard on others. This is a version of playing God with morality. If someone is a moral purist and believes each one should have freedom and full expression over their own morality we shouldn't stop them from harming or doing horrible things to those we love.

There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death. Proverbs 14:12

Quote:

---

Christianity suggests a God that gives us reason and uniqueness and capacity for different experience and we are meant to all reach identical solutions. . . . If God wanted us to all reach the same conclusions, He would have made us all the same.

---

God has given us the ability to reason as well as the freedom to come to wrong conclusions. Without freedom you and I do not have the ability to love or be loved. In his creativity he made us all unique and placed us all over a world where we will experience different things.

If I were to summarize the conclusion he wants us all to come to it's this:

• He exists and created the world.
• We are not God and are dependent creatures that are made in His image and thus have objective value. (An inconsistent view if atheism is true).
• He has moral authority over all mankind and defines sin.
• Following his moral commands are good. (Look how the bible defines sin and look across humanity and history to see how the impact of breaking those commands in the way we treat others has worked out)
• He wants everyone to have a relationship with Him.
• Our sin in the same way ruins our relationships with each other and separates us, has separated us from Him.
• He bridged the gap of that separation by entering human history and paying for our sins in the person of Jesus whom He sent to earth and we killed.
• He rose from the dead and we can have a future with Him.

There is a massive amount of diversity in the family of God. People who are not the same who agree on an identical conclusion. The only thing sacrificed is each individual paying the penalty of their own sins.

dermdoc said:

---

So if I understand you correctly, you are establishing your own morality based upon your logic?

---

We all decide on a set of principles based on who we are, our experiences, logic, etc. The alternative is be told what what to believe and blindly follow.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

I sympathize with this a bit. Take the popular idea of hell, for instance. Someone dies and suffers unimaginable torture for eternity. There are many, many Christian preachers, priests, pastors, theologians, and luminaries of the various branches of Christianity that all believe this to be the case. However, the sum of my reasoning, personal opinions, life experiences, etc tell me that a God that tortures even one person for eternity is an awful monster and could never be considered good. Much less one that tortures the majority of humanity for eternity for pretty much no reason. Throw in the fact the God created men, created the universe, set all the rules, and basically controls everything, and the whole idea gets worse by orders of magnitude.

---

Hypothetically, there could be a God that tortures humans for eternity for mistakes in life. If that is the case, then that action is objectively good. It would be good for God to torture people because that is what God wills and that makes it indisputable. All of your reasoning, personal opinions, life experiences, etc. are effectively wrong and has led you to an immoral belief.

How are comfortable would you be if you learned this at the 'Gates of Heaven'. Do you tell God that you don't think He should torture people? Or do you submit?

Ignore the specific example of Hell - the troubling theme for me here is that a God like the Christian God makes objective laws. All deviations are wrong. And any human reasoning, logic, experience, opinion, that doesn't affirm those laws are supporting an immoral position.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

I sympathize with this a bit. Take the popular idea of hell, for instance. Someone dies and suffers unimaginable torture for eternity. There are many, many Christian preachers, priests, pastors, theologians, and luminaries of the various branches of Christianity that all believe this to be the case. However, the sum of my reasoning, personal opinions, life experiences, etc tell me that a God that tortures even one person for eternity is an awful monster and could never be considered good. Much less one that tortures the majority of humanity for eternity for pretty much no reason. Throw in the fact the God created men, created the universe, set all the rules, and basically controls everything, and the whole idea gets worse by orders of magnitude.

---

Hypothetically, there could be a God that tortures humans for eternity for mistakes in life. If that is the case, then that action is objectively good. It would be good for God to torture people because that is what God wills and that makes it indisputable. All of your reasoning, personal opinions, life experiences, etc. are effectively wrong and has led you to an immoral belief.

How are comfortable would you be if you learned this at the 'Gates of Heaven'. Do you tell God that you don't think He should torture people? Or do you submit?

Ignore the specific example of Hell - the troubling theme for me here is that a God like the Christian God makes objective laws. All deviations are wrong. And any human reasoning, logic, experience, opinion, that doesn't affirm those laws are supporting an immoral position.

---

I think the laws are made to improve us and our lives now as much as prepare us for eternity. If God says don't put your hand on a hot stove and you do it anyway, why would he be to blame? Granted that's an extreme example but we have a choice, God merely set the laws in place for our benefit. If we ask it he will help guide us and give us the strength to follow them. He knows we will make mistakes, but he knows our heart and that we are still working toward following his laws.
I don't think when your in the presence of God your thoughts would be remotely on criticism of Him. If anything I believe we will become fully aware of the 'why' for everything He does. We tend to posit these things in the reality we live in...but that could instantly be changed. It's like always looking at a lenticular print at the same angle your entire life and thus that's how you interact with it. Then suddenly you can see it from many different angles and your entire perception changes.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

So if I understand you correctly, you are establishing your own morality based upon your logic?

---

We all decide on a set of principles based on who we are, our experiences, logic, etc. The alternative is be told what what to believe and blindly follow.

---

So there is no absolute right or wrong? And "morality" is determined by every individual based on their logic and experiences?

kurt vonnegut said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

I sympathize with this a bit. Take the popular idea of hell, for instance. Someone dies and suffers unimaginable torture for eternity. There are many, many Christian preachers, priests, pastors, theologians, and luminaries of the various branches of Christianity that all believe this to be the case. However, the sum of my reasoning, personal opinions, life experiences, etc tell me that a God that tortures even one person for eternity is an awful monster and could never be considered good. Much less one that tortures the majority of humanity for eternity for pretty much no reason. Throw in the fact the God created men, created the universe, set all the rules, and basically controls everything, and the whole idea gets worse by orders of magnitude.

---

Hypothetically, there could be a God that tortures humans for eternity for mistakes in life. If that is the case, then that action is objectively good. It would be good for God to torture people because that is what God wills and that makes it indisputable. All of your reasoning, personal opinions, life experiences, etc. are effectively wrong and has led you to an immoral belief.

How are comfortable would you be if you learned this at the 'Gates of Heaven'. Do you tell God that you don't think He should torture people? Or do you submit?

Ignore the specific example of Hell - the troubling theme for me here is that a God like the Christian God makes objective laws. All deviations are wrong. And any human reasoning, logic, experience, opinion, that doesn't affirm those laws are supporting an immoral position.

---

I have to be honest. I didn't think the part about God enforcing an objective standard of morality would be the hang up here. When talking about "right" and "wrong", the idea of subjectivity doesn't make any sense. You can't have something that's "right" for you and something that's "right" for me. Just contrast the ideal of Christianity with the ideal of the Aztecs. The ideal of Christianity is that we are all made in the image of God, therefore inherently equal and valuable, and therefore worthy of dignity, goodwill, and love. Pleasing God means no more than doing this. The ideal of the Aztecs was to be more brutal, horrific, and cruel than any other people. To take whatever you want by force and torture people to death to appease the capricious gods.

The subjectivity you desire means that I can put St Paul next to an Aztec priest, and neither is more moral than the other. Kindess is no better than cruelty. Self sacrifice no better than sacrificing others against their will. Humility is no better than domination. Without something objective, there is only preference and desire. There is no right or wrong. So it doesn't make any sense to talk about things that way. The Bible has a phrase for this, "And everyone did was right in their own eyes." It is not meant to be a good tiding

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Since we are talking about objectivity, I think there is one way that Christianity is clearly different from other worldviews and religions. I may be wrong as I am not an expert in other views, but I've studied a bit and welcome correction. All other worldviews are more or less selfish. The ancient Greeks studied philosophy in order to make their own lives better. That's true for Socrates, Plato, the Stoics, the Epicureans, and the rest. They were all trying to figure out how to make their own life better. Maybe some delayed gratification is involved but no real self-sacrifice. Ancient Eastern and pagan religions are much the same. Spirits and gods are worshipped in order to improve the life of the worshipper. It gets a little more abstract in some cases. Hinduism has karma, where doing good things for other people means good things will happen to you. Ancient Egypt had dharma, where doing your duty means you will have good fortune. Buddhism is about letting go of personal attachments to avoid personal suffering. Judaism is about obeying God to improve the outlook for yourself, your family, your tribe and your nation. As far as I can tell, Islam is about improving your own situation and growing Islam.

Only Christianity comes outright and says that your happiness doesn't matter. "Take up your cross". Be unhappy if you must, but put others before yourself. And not your children, family, friends, and loved ones. Make them suffer too if you must. But doing the right thing for a stranger is more important than improving your own life or those you care about. It is fundamentally anti-selfish. All the others could be viewed as natural outgrowths of human desires for happiness or to avoid suffering. Only Christianity embraces suffering and eschews this selfishness.

Even modern thought doesn't fit. In our society, the good morality is "whatever makes you happy and doesn't hurt anyone". It's still just a branch off the tree of selfishness. "Whatever makes me happy is good." Christianity opposes this on a basic level, because life is not about our happiness. Self-sacrifice, charity, compassion, and selfless love are good. Happiness is a side effect, not an objective.

---

Good post.

What is fascinating is that nothing makes me more joyful than helping someone who can not pay me back.

I think this is what Jesus meant that to gain your life you must lose it.

Christians should be the most joy filled people alive.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

I have to be honest. I didn't think the part about God enforcing an objective standard of morality would be the hang up here.

---

It's the combination of an objective standard and 'free will' and diversity of mind. While I appreciate the posts above, we are still left with a situation where we are only given free will to choose exactly as God commands us to choose. There is conflict in how we are made and what we are asked to do, in my opinion.

Maybe I want to put my hand on that hot stove. God will permit me to put my hand on the stove for a bit . . . . But then I must abandon that impulse or pay a consequence.

The whole thing is like telling your kids they can be whatever they want to be when they grow up, as long as they are a doctor. That isn't free will.

And if we are made fully aware of all of the 'why' behind what God does when we die . . . It sorta renders all of this life and experience obsolete.

I would still be interested in thoughts on my 'what if' concerning a God that tortures for eternity. God may not be exactly as you have Him pictured in your mind. And what do you do when this God has a standard that is entirely in conflict with a moral principle, experience, belief that you hood true today?

What if God is a monster in some way - when judged against your current understanding of goodness?

You just touched on what I think is the hardest thing to convince non believers of, that God is good. All of the time.

Quote:

---

The whole thing is like telling your kids they can be whatever they want to be when they grow up, as long as they are a doctor. That isn't free will.

---

There is more than one way to be a good person. God give us free will, talents and gifts that can be used in many ways. A person with the same background and talents might grow up to be a doctor, priest, public defender, entrepreneur, charity founder, plumber, electrician, architect, or a missionary. None of those are bad. All of them are good in their own way. Choices like hitman, burglar, mercenary, assassin, and human trafficker are clearly bad. So yes, God is giving you free will, but God will not respect your informed and heartfelt decision to become an assassin. That doesn't mean there are no choices. It's not like there is only one way to be good and any minor deviation is complete and utter depravity.

Quote:

---

I would still be interested in thoughts on my 'what if' concerning a God that tortures for eternity. God may not be exactly as you have Him pictured in your mind. And what do you do when this God has a standard that is entirely in conflict with a moral principle, experience, belief that you hood true today?

What if God is a monster in some way - when judged against your current understanding of goodness?

---

A hypothetical scenario where I'm entirely wrong and God tortures people for eternity would probably end badly for me. I'm ornery enough to raise objections without entirely thinking through the consequences for myself. But then you never know, maybe God is testing me by pretending to be okay with eternal torture. And if I don't speak up and object, then I fail His standards and my own? All I can do is be genuine and me and try to embody the spirit of goodness.

Quote:

---

Hypothetically, there could be a God that tortures humans for eternity for mistakes in life.

---

Observation: This is a diminished view of sin, the nature of God, and salvation. This implies that people are going to spend an eternity separated from God because of accidents, that God is going to make a mistake in his judgement, or that God cannot differentiate between a mistake and a sin.

Example: If a parent leaves their gun unlocked in a draw and a toddler picks it up, pulls the trigger, and kills his older sister, this is a mistake not murder.

God's power in salvation is that all sins one commits in life can have their debt of sin freely forgiven in Jesus.

Quote:

---

If that is the case, then that action is objectively good. It would be good for God to torture people because that is what God wills and that makes it indisputable. All of your reasoning, personal opinions, life experiences, etc. are effectively wrong and has led you to an immoral belief.

---

This is a challenging one to navigate for the following reasons.

1. Judgment from our perspective is limited. We do not have all of the information God has about a person.

• So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.
• And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, "Why are you thinking evil in your hearts?
• "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. 2 But there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known. 3 Accordingly, whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed upon the housetops.
• Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men's hearts; and then each man's praise will come to him from God.
• All the ways of a man are clean in his own sight, But the Lord weighs the motives.
• Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually

2. We know God prefers mercy over wrath.

• Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord God, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?

3. When people suffer the consequences for their own sins, it's not good. Recent example: It's not good to see how one's alcoholism and addiction to porn has caused a man that I know to abandon his wife over the last few years to the point where she doesn't want to have anything to do with him. It's not good to see how their children will suffer from his sins. It's not good to see him suffer for all that's he's losing.

In that sense, the natural consequences of sin are not good.

On the other hand, God made a cause and effect world for our good. We have a body of evidence in His law to see how our sin impacts other people and the negative impacts its has. We also have enough information to know that God is not capriciously ripping people off due to His abilities, and how He's treated people in the person of Jesus.

Does a looking deeply at the character of Jesus lead us to believe God is going to rip people off or make mistakes?

I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom:

Quote:

---

How are comfortable would you be if you learned this at the 'Gates of Heaven'. Do you tell God that you don't think He should torture people? Or do you submit?

---

Jesus asked God to let the cup of suffering pass.
Paul asked God to remove the thorn.
Moses asked God not to destroy everyone.

God can handle our questions and thoughts as He knows them anyway. If God exists, resistance is foolish.

Quote:

---

Ignore the specific example of Hell - the troubling theme for me here is that a God like the Christian God makes objective laws. All deviations are wrong. And any human reasoning, logic, experience, opinion, that doesn't affirm those laws are supporting an immoral position.

---

Some of the reasons for the rebellion against God's laws and moral authority go back to the garden. They generally stem from the view that God is not good, that's he's holding out on us, pride - that we could do better, lust - I strongly desire what's forbidden.

This disagreement with God is a historical pattern of rebellion, "In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes. The freedom to rebel and sin does not grant the freedom from the natural and spiritual consequences of sin.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Quote:

---

I would still be interested in thoughts on my 'what if' concerning a God that tortures for eternity. God may not be exactly as you have Him pictured in your mind. And what do you do when this God has a standard that is entirely in conflict with a moral principle, experience, belief that you hood true today?

What if God is a monster in some way - when judged against your current understanding of goodness?

---

A hypothetical scenario where I'm entirely wrong and God tortures people for eternity would probably end badly for me. I'm ornery enough to raise objections without entirely thinking through the consequences for myself. But then you never know, maybe God is testing me by pretending to be okay with eternal torture. And if I don't speak up and object, then I fail His standards and my own? All I can do is be genuine and me and try to embody the spirit of goodness.

---

And this is the heart of my concerns. We can be genuine, authentic, true to ourselves, and do our best to embody goodness. And in the end, it doesn't matter. All that matters is God's concept of goodness. If God says that torturing people forever is good, then it is. And everything that tells you otherwise is wrong.

It's an uncomfortable idea.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Quote:

---

I would still be interested in thoughts on my 'what if' concerning a God that tortures for eternity. God may not be exactly as you have Him pictured in your mind. And what do you do when this God has a standard that is entirely in conflict with a moral principle, experience, belief that you hood true today?

What if God is a monster in some way - when judged against your current understanding of goodness?

---

A hypothetical scenario where I'm entirely wrong and God tortures people for eternity would probably end badly for me. I'm ornery enough to raise objections without entirely thinking through the consequences for myself. But then you never know, maybe God is testing me by pretending to be okay with eternal torture. And if I don't speak up and object, then I fail His standards and my own? All I can do is be genuine and me and try to embody the spirit of goodness.

---

And this is the heart of my concerns. We can be genuine, authentic, true to ourselves, and do our best to embody goodness. And in the end, it doesn't matter. All that matters is God's concept of goodness. If God says that torturing people forever is good, then it is. And everything that tells you otherwise is wrong.

It's an uncomfortable idea.

---

How is this not centering yourself, a finite limited being, as God? Your arguments always come back to why not you being able to determine good instead of God.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Quote:

---

I would still be interested in thoughts on my 'what if' concerning a God that tortures for eternity. God may not be exactly as you have Him pictured in your mind. And what do you do when this God has a standard that is entirely in conflict with a moral principle, experience, belief that you hood true today?

What if God is a monster in some way - when judged against your current understanding of goodness?

---

A hypothetical scenario where I'm entirely wrong and God tortures people for eternity would probably end badly for me. I'm ornery enough to raise objections without entirely thinking through the consequences for myself. But then you never know, maybe God is testing me by pretending to be okay with eternal torture. And if I don't speak up and object, then I fail His standards and my own? All I can do is be genuine and me and try to embody the spirit of goodness.

---

And this is the heart of my concerns. We can be genuine, authentic, true to ourselves, and do our best to embody goodness. And in the end, it doesn't matter. All that matters is God's concept of goodness. If God says that torturing people forever is good, then it is. And everything that tells you otherwise is wrong.

It's an uncomfortable idea.

---

Agreed but I dont' see how it's any less uncomfortable than the pervasive purposeless of atheism. In that scenario, you can be genuine, authentic, true to yourself and do your best to embody goodness, but it doesn't matter. It never mattered, and it never will matter. You'll be forgotten in a few generations. If you're lucky, some mythic caricature of you will carry on. In that case, any attempt at goodness is just you making yourself feel better by relieving unnecessary feelings of guilt or by making yourself feel morally superior to others. Then we're right back to the core of selfishness, which is the only source of meaning in an accidental existence.

It is my fervent belief that God imbues us with a moral compass. You don't have to teach a child to walk or talk. You don't have to teach a child to recognize themselves in a mirror or to tell a lie. You don't have to teach children to steal, but you also don't have to teach them to share. Some things are just part of being human. So I have to believe that once I minimize my own selfishness, then my sense of goodness will be accurate.

Now I could be wrong and God could enjoy torturing people for eternity. But that doesn't make sense to me. Same as with universal salvation. He could just skip to that part. Why give us choices? Why let us have happiness? If the goal is eternal suffering, then just make beings and torture them from the start.