Good question; I do believe in heaven and think that we will voluntarily not have free choice. If we choose on earth to want to be with God, we are choosing to not have the ability to sin anymore. Everyone who truly loves God will be happy to not be able to sin anymore.
@@ethantong4271 there are many people who have made the choice now to want to be with G0d, but then subsequently realise there is no tangible, consistent evidence for such a thing. If heaven is as you describe, do you not see the problem (if G0d is all loving) with G0d not providing the option to have the ability to not sin anymore, on earth, before something changes your mind? Thanks for your replies; loving this.
@@jodistanleyjs This is an interesting thought! I suppose it would be strange for God to "lock you in" as soon as you believe without giving you your whole life to figure out if you do or do not believe. I might think that if he did so, more atheists would object that that's unfair of him to force people to act a certain way before they've had ample time to voluntarily consent. But happy to keep dialoguing. Christians should not be contributing to the suffering of the world. I regret to say that many people (genuine and non-genuine) have done harm to others. I hope to not be one of those Christians. I hope to be one of the Christians who has done good for the world (whether that's something as big as a non-profit or as small as listening to someone who's in pain).
@@ethantong4271 I couldn't take seriously anyone saying G0d saving you is unfair (creating you and not giving sufficient evidence for you to be saved would be unfair though). In terms of your reply, I suppose I would ask, how long is "the whole of your life"? Do you think that's really a good objection? Even if you lived 100 years, isn't that meaningless in comparison to eternity? Let alone the fact that people die at any age.
@@jodistanleyjs Well, it's meaningless compared to eternity, but at least him giving us a shot at deciding for ourselves is better than him skipping straight to heaven/hell. That'd look for all intents and purposes like he just chose arbitrarily who goes to heaven and hell, if he didn't even give us a chance to decide.
@ethantong4271 hmm I'm fraid that you might be trying to explain away what is actually a false analogy here. It seems like you have to either admit this was a bad analogy and G0d is in fact all powerful etc. or uphold the analogy and conclude G0d has human like limitations. Let me know what you think. Thanks
@@ethantong4271 hmm I'm fraid that you might be trying to explain away what is actually a false analogy here. It seems like you have to either admit this was a bad analogy and G0d is in fact all powerful etc. or uphold the analogy and conclude G0d has human like limitations. Let me know what you think. Thanks
@@jodistanleyjs I suppose if you forced me into it, I'd say God is limited by things that are logically impossible. So, like a mom who is limited by not being able to teach her kid without her kid falling, God is "limited" because of the logical impossibility of a free-yet-robot creature.
Hey man! Those are all evils, so they all fall into the same category of “the world is cursed by sin,” which leads to horrendous, tragic consequences for all.
@@ethantong4271not sure how you decide what is in the "cursed by sin" category. But regardless, your statement only pushes the problem back to why doesn't G0d prevent Sin. Please tell me how you explain the existence of sin without conceding that: G0d either needs it as part of his plan (In which case - how can he be all powerful?) Or he wants sin to exist (in which case - how can he be all loving?)??
@@jodistanleyjs It's closer to the first answer. As I explained in the video, God being all-powerful should be spoken of in terms of powers--he has the power to do EVERYTHING and ANYTHING that is logically possible. But having every person genuinely choose God and yet be unable to choose evil is a logical impossibility. The very notion of choice requires the other possibility be true. So it's not that he's not all-powerful; it's just that atheists are requiring of God that he be able to do something which by definition is not possible. Let me know if you have further questions. Thank you for your commends, my friend! I appreciated reading them and thinking through your points.
@@ethantong4271 if you believe there is an intentional creator, who created everything in all planes of existence. How can they be limited by the laws of logic in their creation and where do you get your justification for such a claim. It's only fair, given how open you've been, that you should be able to critique my beliefs. Well my beliefs go as far as acknowledging that I don't know how the universe is here and I refuse to pretend to. I just try to learn what I can about existence, using the framework which has provided the knowledge to create the technology we have so far.
@@jodistanleyjs It's not that God created the laws of logic. If so, you'd be totally correct--why did God create this odd restriction that allows suffering? It's that the laws of logic are part of who God is--order. Without the law of non-contradiction, nothing would be "true" or "false" and nothing could be said to exist in reality. That's why even non-Christians believe the law of non-contradiction is logically required, with or without "proof." So when it comes to humans, God could not create something that was both completely free and completely bound (to do good). It's not that he made that an artificial law; that's just part of what it takes to have order in the universe. Thanks for sharing your framework. I, too, acknowledge that I do not know all! In fact, I know less than I think. I was a philosophy major in college, so I have learned a lot about how much I don't know. I think humility with respect to the world is good. But I also think you can come to tentative conclusions (like I have with Christianity) without losing that humility. :)
@@elkeism because we didn't create ourselves, natures or the universe in which suffering, war or mafia bullies were possible. But apparently believers think an all powerful and loving G0d did..
@@elkeism hmm how about reacting to my reply? Where did I say/imply anyone must serve us. Believers think there is an all powerful all loving G0d who doesn't want sin etc. But they struggle to convincingly explain why then he created a world where it exists..
@@jodistanleyjs It WAS implicit, because in context we were pre-supposing his existence.How can you not see that? "all loving" is a European construct: the OT shows he gets angry all the time, so your question should be why create a being that constantly pisses him off: Because creation was like a cosmic orgasm repercussions/limitations be damned FWIW
So disappointed! Your video seemed so close to steel manning and actually tackling the issue. But then you go ahead and describe how G0D is limited like the Mom in your analogy 🤦🏾♀️ The mom is only allowing her child to fall because she has no other way for the child to learn. If she was able, she would provide the knowledge to the child without the child having to fall!
Regarding your point about suffering due to free choice. Do you believe in heaven? If so, is there free choice there?
Good question; I do believe in heaven and think that we will voluntarily not have free choice. If we choose on earth to want to be with God, we are choosing to not have the ability to sin anymore. Everyone who truly loves God will be happy to not be able to sin anymore.
@@ethantong4271 there are many people who have made the choice now to want to be with G0d, but then subsequently realise there is no tangible, consistent evidence for such a thing. If heaven is as you describe, do you not see the problem (if G0d is all loving) with G0d not providing the option to have the ability to not sin anymore, on earth, before something changes your mind? Thanks for your replies; loving this.
@@jodistanleyjs This is an interesting thought! I suppose it would be strange for God to "lock you in" as soon as you believe without giving you your whole life to figure out if you do or do not believe. I might think that if he did so, more atheists would object that that's unfair of him to force people to act a certain way before they've had ample time to voluntarily consent. But happy to keep dialoguing.
Christians should not be contributing to the suffering of the world. I regret to say that many people (genuine and non-genuine) have done harm to others. I hope to not be one of those Christians. I hope to be one of the Christians who has done good for the world (whether that's something as big as a non-profit or as small as listening to someone who's in pain).
@@ethantong4271 I couldn't take seriously anyone saying G0d saving you is unfair (creating you and not giving sufficient evidence for you to be saved would be unfair though). In terms of your reply, I suppose I would ask, how long is "the whole of your life"? Do you think that's really a good objection? Even if you lived 100 years, isn't that meaningless in comparison to eternity? Let alone the fact that people die at any age.
@@jodistanleyjs Well, it's meaningless compared to eternity, but at least him giving us a shot at deciding for ourselves is better than him skipping straight to heaven/hell. That'd look for all intents and purposes like he just chose arbitrarily who goes to heaven and hell, if he didn't even give us a chance to decide.
I don't know why apologists try to use analogies with limited humans at the center, in order to explain the actions of a supposedly all powerful G0d..
That's the point of analogies, my friend! It's not supposed to be a 1-to-1, just something to help us think outside the box.
@ethantong4271 hmm I'm fraid that you might be trying to explain away what is actually a false analogy here. It seems like you have to either admit this was a bad analogy and G0d is in fact all powerful etc. or uphold the analogy and conclude G0d has human like limitations. Let me know what you think. Thanks
@@ethantong4271 hmm I'm fraid that you might be trying to explain away what is actually a false analogy here. It seems like you have to either admit this was a bad analogy and G0d is in fact all powerful etc. or uphold the analogy and conclude G0d has human like limitations. Let me know what you think. Thanks
@@jodistanleyjs I suppose if you forced me into it, I'd say God is limited by things that are logically impossible. So, like a mom who is limited by not being able to teach her kid without her kid falling, God is "limited" because of the logical impossibility of a free-yet-robot creature.
@@ethantong4271 I appreciate the reply with your honest thoughts. Is this not a contradiction, biblically?
That does not explain why God would not prevent infant starvation, birth defects, mental illness, etc
Hey man! Those are all evils, so they all fall into the same category of “the world is cursed by sin,” which leads to horrendous, tragic consequences for all.
@@ethantong4271not sure how you decide what is in the "cursed by sin" category. But regardless, your statement only pushes the problem back to why doesn't G0d prevent Sin. Please tell me how you explain the existence of sin without conceding that: G0d either needs it as part of his plan (In which case - how can he be all powerful?) Or he wants sin to exist (in which case - how can he be all loving?)??
@@jodistanleyjs It's closer to the first answer. As I explained in the video, God being all-powerful should be spoken of in terms of powers--he has the power to do EVERYTHING and ANYTHING that is logically possible. But having every person genuinely choose God and yet be unable to choose evil is a logical impossibility. The very notion of choice requires the other possibility be true. So it's not that he's not all-powerful; it's just that atheists are requiring of God that he be able to do something which by definition is not possible. Let me know if you have further questions. Thank you for your commends, my friend! I appreciated reading them and thinking through your points.
@@ethantong4271 if you believe there is an intentional creator, who created everything in all planes of existence. How can they be limited by the laws of logic in their creation and where do you get your justification for such a claim.
It's only fair, given how open you've been, that you should be able to critique my beliefs. Well my beliefs go as far as acknowledging that I don't know how the universe is here and I refuse to pretend to. I just try to learn what I can about existence, using the framework which has provided the knowledge to create the technology we have so far.
@@jodistanleyjs It's not that God created the laws of logic. If so, you'd be totally correct--why did God create this odd restriction that allows suffering? It's that the laws of logic are part of who God is--order. Without the law of non-contradiction, nothing would be "true" or "false" and nothing could be said to exist in reality. That's why even non-Christians believe the law of non-contradiction is logically required, with or without "proof."
So when it comes to humans, God could not create something that was both completely free and completely bound (to do good). It's not that he made that an artificial law; that's just part of what it takes to have order in the universe.
Thanks for sharing your framework. I, too, acknowledge that I do not know all! In fact, I know less than I think. I was a philosophy major in college, so I have learned a lot about how much I don't know. I think humility with respect to the world is good. But I also think you can come to tentative conclusions (like I have with Christianity) without losing that humility. :)
why should he if we allow/cause suffering of others: war mafia bullies abuse...
True indeed!!
@@elkeism because we didn't create ourselves, natures or the universe in which suffering, war or mafia bullies were possible. But apparently believers think an all powerful and loving G0d did..
@@jodistanleyjs it's our responsibility to end the suffering we cause each other. Why must he serve US?
@@elkeism hmm how about reacting to my reply? Where did I say/imply anyone must serve us. Believers think there is an all powerful all loving G0d who doesn't want sin etc. But they struggle to convincingly explain why then he created a world where it exists..
@@jodistanleyjs It WAS implicit, because in context we were pre-supposing his existence.How can you not see that? "all loving" is a European construct: the OT shows he gets angry all the time, so your question should be why create a being that constantly pisses him off: Because creation was like a cosmic orgasm repercussions/limitations be damned FWIW
So disappointed! Your video seemed so close to steel manning and actually tackling the issue. But then you go ahead and describe how G0D is limited like the Mom in your analogy 🤦🏾♀️ The mom is only allowing her child to fall because she has no other way for the child to learn. If she was able, she would provide the knowledge to the child without the child having to fall!
Fair point. I didn't mean to say that God is limited! I'll respond to your other critique in my reply to your comment above.