Religious Epistemology

Belief without Warrant

Read 3204 times

harris

  • **
  • 84 Posts
    • View Profile
Reckless Reply of Dr. Craig
« on: June 29, 2016, 12:58:00 am »
Recently, I have seen a response from William Lane Craig to a question “Do Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God?”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAvO_hH6OAY

After hearing that “God loves sinners” my mind was literally blown up.
 
The more we began to investigate about what we think we understand, where we came from, what we think we are doing the more we begin to see we have been lied to. We have been lied by every institution what makes us think for one minute that the religious institution is the only one that has never been touched.

However, the religious institution is at the bottom of the dirt. The religious institution is put there by the same people who gave us our governments, our corrupt education, and who set up our banking cartels. These masters of ours do not give a dame to us or to our families. All they care about is what they have always cared about is MONEY, POWER, and CONTROLLING THE WHOLE DAME WORLD. We have been misled away from the true and divine presence in the universe that we call God.

When it comes to nonsense, bigtime major league nonsense, you have to stand in awe in front of the all-time champion of the false promises and exaggerated claims, the Religion!

Religion has actually convinced people that there is an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do at every minute and every day. This invisible man has a special list of 10 things that he does not want man to do and if you do any of those things then he has created a special place full of fire, and smoke and burning and torturing and anguish where he sends you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry for ever till the end of time.

Yet after all that this invisible man LOVES you because he is ALL LOVING.

The truth of the fact is he indeed loves you because he needs MONEY. He will put you in a place of eternal joy and pleasure if you obediently and regularly bring him MONEY. He is all powerful, all perfect, all knowing, all wise but somehow he just cannot handle MONEY. This invisible man takes in billions of Dollars, pays no taxes, and he always need a little more.

Watch this video to learn some serious truth about “THE SUN OF GOD.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt-qYDb7UcI
« Last Edit: June 30, 2016, 12:58:58 am by harris »

1

compmend

  • *
  • 2 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Reckless Reply of Dr. Craig
« Reply #1 on: September 02, 2016, 10:02:57 pm »
Responding to your statement, "After hearing that “God loves sinners” my mind was literally blown up."

The whole premise behind Christ's life, death, and resurrection, is that we all have sinned and need a Savior.

John 3:16 King James Version (KJV)
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

You will notice that in this verse it starts, "For God so loved the world". By the world it doesn't mean those that are already saved, otherwise why would the need for God to give up his only begotten Son arise?

As for religious institutions, I agree with you 100% that many are corrupt because man is corruptible. I am at the bottom of the Christianity barrel according to many, because I believe we as Christians are the "Church" and that a building is not and never will be a "Church". This makes me more aware that I need to read Scripture for myself and take personal responsibility for my actions. Especially since the Bible states that Jesus is the "Head of the Church". (Note it doesn't say he is the head of a building)

Colossians 1:18King James Version (KJV)
"And he (Jesus) is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."

You wrote:
"Religion has actually convinced people that there is an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do at every minute and every day. This invisible man has a special list of 10 things that he does not want man to do and if you do any of those things then he has created a special place full of fire, and smoke and burning and torturing and anguish where he sends you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry for ever till the end of time. "

I believe that we as Gentiles are not under the law, but, under Grace. Many Christians believe that we are saved by grace, but, continue to try and put themselves and others under the law. It is my belief that Romans to Philemon is written for the Gentiles that are living in the Church age today. That being said, the 10 commandments are a "ruler" or "measuring stick" to show you why you are not perfect enough to get to Heaven without the Grace
 of Jesus.

You wrote:
"Yet after all that this invisible man LOVES you because he is ALL LOVING. "

That is a true statement that I agree with almost 100%. I wouldn't classify God as a man, but, I do believe he is loving. He doesn't send you to Hell, you make the choice to go to Hell. There are only two destinations when you die, a third option doesn't exist. Where you make reservations to spend eternity is where you will be.
 
I have stood where you are at, I had an image of God in my mind that wasn't the God of the Bible, but, was the God created by men in their own image, in other words an idol. An idol will always let you down. The true God offers peace and Salvation through Grace. The truth will still be true whether or not you believe it to be so.

I don't know you and I know that I haven't answered all of your questions satisfactory, but, I love you and wish you the best in your search for the Truth.

2

JLouis

  • **
  • 10 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Reckless Reply of Dr. Craig
« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2018, 04:05:43 pm »
@harris, your argument seems to be the following.

1. God sends sinners to a place of complete suffering for eternity.
2. God does not love anyone he sends to a place of complete suffering for eternity.
3. Therefore, God does not love sinners.

This argument has a good structure. However, I believe premises one and two are subject to critique. In the following discourse, I use hell to refer to a place of complete suffering.

Premise 1 (part 1).
Biblical teaching (as I understand it) does not hold that God sends sinners to hell. Rather, only non-believing sinners go to hell.

All people today are sinners in that we all sin. However, some no longer include "sinner" as part of their identity. For these, the requirement of the law of God has been fulfilled in us through Christ's fulfillment of the law and innocent death as a sacrifice for the remission of sins for those who believe. "Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" (Romans 8:1, NASB). This means the penalty for sin is not imputed to believers even though they still sin.

This is reiterated in Romans 8:13, "for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live" (NASB). In the first place, this says death (going to hell) is required for those who live according to the flesh (do not have God's Spirit living within them; i.e. are non-believers). In the second place, this says life (being spiritually alive and going to heaven) applies to those who are putting to death the deeds of the body (are being sanctified by the Hold Spirit (God's Spirit); i.e. are believers). Notice this does not say life applies to those who do not sin or who have put to death the deeds of the body (sin). It says "are putting to death" to indicate that believers still sin but are being sanctified.

This part of my counterargument can easily be circumvented by replacing "sinners" with "some sinners" in the argument as outlined above.

Premise 1 (part 2).
There is a significant difference between a 'caused by' relation and a 'dependent on' relation. I claim that a person going to hell is dependent on the manner of God's creation, but is not caused by God; that evil existing in the world is dependent on the manner of God's creation, but is not caused by God; and that a person's salvation is dependent on their belief, but is not caused by their belief.

In this view, God does not send a person to hell. Instead, a person going to hell is a consequence of both (1) the way God created the physical and non-physical parts of creation and (2) the person's rejection of God's offer of salvation through belief in Him. This leads to a host of questions concerning the share of responsibility God and the person have for the person going to hell. Is God responsible at all? Is God fully responsible? Does God revealing Himself to all people absolve Him of responsibility "because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them" (Romans 1: 19, NASB)? But, this is not the place to engage these questions. The point is that, regardless of responsibility, God does not (in this view) cause anyone to go to hell.

This part of my counterargument can also be circumvented by modifying the argument as follows.
1. Some sinners go to a place of complete suffering for eternity.
2. God's love of a person is incompatible with God allowing the person to go to a place of complete suffering for eternity.
3. Therefore, God does not love some sinners.

(The modified) Premise 2.
Emotionally, I get this premise. It makes sense to me that the notion of complete suffering for eternity is a barrier to believing in God's universal and complete love of all. Feeling like this is completely valid!

In my view, God's love is not something we can grasp. There is so much more to God's love than whether He allows us to suffer or to suffer completely for eternity. God gave us free will. God made known to us what is known about God (Romans 1:19, again); He did not make everything about Himself known to us. With this, it makes sense that there are aspects of who He is that we do not know, including aspects of His love for us. I'll try to sketch out a little, here, of how I navigate this particular barrier. Keep in mind, this is my current perspective, not something I assert as absolutely true.

Before creation, is was good for God's glory to increase. The only way for His glory to increase was to create beings imbued with free will. A consequence of free will is the ability to choose to do good and evil. Out of our free will, we have chosen to do evil. A consequence of this is our spiritual death. God gives us the opportunity to become spiritually alive while we are physically alive. This opportunity is universal (is offered to everyone). Through our free will, we choose to accept or reject this offer of spiritual life. In a state of spiritual life, we are able to be directly in the presence of God. In a state of spiritual death, we are not able to be directly in the presence of God. In order to satisfy justice, a person's soul endures forever regardless of whether the person is spiritually alive or spiritually dead at the point of physical death. For a person who dies while spiritually alive, their soul endures forever in heaven, which is in the presence of God. At the point of physical death, a person has no other opportunities to become spiritually alive. Thus, for a person who dies while spiritually dead, their soul endures forever in hell, which is separate from the presence of God. This state of eternal separation from God entails complete suffering for eternity.

This boils down to the following. In order for God's glory to increase, there must be the possibility that some people will act of their own free will first to do evil and second to reject the offer to be spiritually alive. A consequence of this possibility is the possibility that some will completely suffer for eternity.

I have questions about this view, myself. Why must this possibility exist in order for God's glory to increase? Why is (1) God's glory increasing plus this possibility existing or being realized superior to (2) God's glory remaining the same without this possibility? Is it necessary that if a person has free will, then the person must have an eternal soul? If not, what property of justice requires the soul to be eternal even in the case of a person who physically dies while spiritually dead? I do not know the answers to these questions, but I seek answers to these questions.

This response does not refute the modified premise two. Instead, it offers a way of thinking about the larger picture and how this premise fits into it. I welcome discussion on these points in order to better understand the nature of God's glory, justice, free will, and the eternality of souls.

In the end, I believe that God has a morally superior reason to creation us with free will despite the possibility or realization of suffering; that God loves us, and the possibility of suffering is not evidence against His love for us; that God's love is revealed to us by Him and by His offer to freely make us spiritually alive; and that God's love for us is not contingent on whether we accept His offer.