Questions for Christians

[X-Christian]

I have a couple of questions for Christians.
1 - if god is all knowing then he knew before time began who would accept him or could even possibly have ever heard of him. There's too many religions on this planet as of right now that doesn't even know the name jesus even exist. This is not including the billions people that has died believing in the god of their time based off of the geographical location they were born in. Just liked Christians. Since jesus said that he is the only way to god and since god is all knowing then he knew before time began who he was sending to hell to be burned. Sounds like an evil dictator. Personally, id rather had not been born then to be born by God but predestined for hell. And any response that disagrees and says he still gives me the choice totally takes away the claim that he's all knowing.
2nd question is why didn't gods curse for Satan to slither on his belly and only eat dust in the garden didn't stick? We obviously see Satan walking around in the book of job. He was standing with Jesus when he offered him the kingdom after jesus's baptism and he's all over revelation walking around. What happened to God's curse? Apparently god isn't as powerful as Christians say?

[Divine Insight]

I don't want Christians to start bombing me with emails and calling me stupid for believing that Zeus is real.

I don't know why they should. There is no more reason to believe that Jesus is real than there is to believe that Zeus is real.

Christians will argue for their religion against all odds. And against all facts. They aren't interested in truth, all they are interested in it propping Jesus up as their savior.

And they totally ignore any serious questions.

Like, if, "With God all things are possible", then why didn't God heal Satan of his mental illness the moment that God recognized that Satan was mentally ill?

Clearly saying that God had to respect Satan's Free Will makes no sense here.

I actually started a thread on this for those who might like to address this problem:

With God all things are possible?

[PghPanther]

I have a couple of questions for Christians.
1 - if god is all knowing then he knew before time began who would accept him or could even possibly have ever heard of him.

This is an extremely good point, and it goes much deeper than this.

Let me give you two examples:

1. This God is said to know what he's doing and even have a "Master Plan". However, in the story of the Great Flood the Bible proclaims that God had repented that he had ever created mankind.

This can only suggest that God was not expecting this. How could this have been part of his original plan if he was repenting that he had ever created mankind? If God has a Master Plan then when it came time to drown out the humans with a Great Flood he should have been elated. He should have screamed "Eureka! My plan is going along precisely as I had planned". But no the Bible doesn't have him doing this. Instead it has God repenting that he had ever created mankind in the first place.

The Bible is nothing more than very poorly thought-out superstitious fables. In fact, they clearly weren't thought-out at all.

2. A second point on this one is that if this God had even the remotes clue about how humans might think then he should have known that I would reject the crucifixion of his demigod Son to pay for my sins before he ever came up with that immoral plan. He also should have been able to recognize precisely why I would necessarily need to reject this as being immoral.

And since this God was totally clueless on both of these counts he could hardly be omniscient. In fact, he couldn't even be very wise or moral. I would necessarily be the intellectual and moral superior of God, and that's impossible, so this God myth necessarily has to be false.

2nd question is why didn't gods curse for Satan to slither on his belly and only eat dust in the garden didn't stick? We obviously see Satan walking around in the book of job. He was standing with Jesus when he offered him the kingdom after jesus's baptism and he's all over revelation walking around. What happened to God's curse? Apparently god isn't as powerful as Christians say?

Well, if you want to talk about omnipotence then why not ask why this God didn't just heal this mentally ill Satan fellow?

Cursing him to crawl on his belly and eat dirt isn't going to solve anything. As you point out, that didn't even slow him down.

This is a God who has no ability to cure or correct a bad situation in any positive way at all. Instead of curing Satan he curses him using a totally ineffective lame curse that is extremely barbaric and non-productive at all.

Christians like to claim "With God all things are possible", well if that's true then why couldn't God heal Satan of his mental illness?

Clearly this God is as inept as can possibly be.

And this makes perfect sense since we aren't even talking about any real God here. What we are talking about is a very lame mythology of a God character who has been given the very same ignorance and lack of wisdom and abilities as the barbaric culture that created it.

Good points all but when you really think about it the people who wrote all this down and claimed it to have a supernatural source were really people who had no idea how to understand or explain the good and bad things that happen in the world......so it would make sense in their time to make up all this stuff to try to give a reason or excuse of why it happens.....

Only problem is they were clueless to how reality works compared to how we understand it today.

[ttruscott]

[Replying to post 3 by ttruscott]

If Adam sinned, us as well, because of free will then did God take away our Free Will in Heaven? If we have free will in heaven then we will be able to sin. And to argue that we won't want to sin in heaven means that God took away the desire of anything I have and stripped me of my free will.

Prove we do not have free will in heaven. Free means the ability to choose without coercion between two opposites. IF we cannot choose we are not free, therefore a free will has the ability to choose evil at any time. So what is the problem?

Ability ≠ necessity:
1. GOD has a free will but will never choose evil because of HIS commitment to loving holiness within the Trinity. THEY, the divine Trinity, do not do evil, nr will they ever to evil.

2. The holy angels with GOD have a free will as they worship and sing HIS praises and there is no such thing as forced worship...if it is forced it is not real worship nor real praise. True worship can only arise from a free will desire to worship. They do not do evil nor will they ever do evil.

3. The converted saints will be holy and righteous with a free will in heaven but they to will not do evil nor will they ever choose to do evil again. They have learned their lesson from living with those who will never regain their free will due to their eternal nature being evil, tha tis, the demonic goats.

So to argue we will not choose evil in heaven DOES NOT MEAN that God 'took away the desire of anything I have and stripped me of my free will.' Your premise invalidates this topic.

So the other argument is that if we don't have free will then Adam could only do what he did because he was predestined to do it. Sin is a byproduct of free will.

Yes, all sinners became sinners by their free will decision to reject YHWH as GOD or to rebel against HIS will. Sin is enslaving so a sinner has no free will. Pre-determining Adam's life did not go against his free will because he was already a sinner (naked) but against his evil enslaved will.

The whole Christian religion is based off of the Bible but the Bible has been completely, indisputably, undeniably proven to be inaccurate.

Oh yes? By whom, when and in what manner, please, or is this or your own personal belief?

Evidence is what atheist want,

.. yet they reject the evidence given to them as you do in this sentence:

not scripture or voices in your head, or your own personal belief.

If something is true with undeniable pure evidence then you don't need any kind of faith or any kind of belief in it. It just is what it is which is facts.

You are demanding proof, not evidence. Good luck with that...

[rant deleted]

[H.sapiens]

You are demanding proof, not evidence. Good luck with that...
[rant deleted]

No, proof is often just evidence stacked up, so we'll start with evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Got any facts? Got any information? Got any evidence?

What goes on inside your head or my head is none of the three.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 6 by Divine Insight]

You are exactly right. Lots of good points made. The problem I'm finding with debating Christians is how hard it is to get them to engage in a serious debate without them continually using scriptures to try to show evidence of what they believe. Then when you ask them why they believe in the Bible they just say the Bible says to. It makes no sense. If Zeus were to come down in the flesh and show the whole world that he was actually God than Christians would still close their eyes and ears off and be too stubborn to accept it and just keep believing in Jesus. I am not saying Zeus is real, I am an atheist, that was just an example that I used. I don't want Christians to start bombing me with emails and calling me stupid for believing that Zeus is real.

Moderator Comment
Hi X-Christian while I hope you are using the X like the X-men as in extraordinary that's not the purpose of this comment.

This is a debate site where we engage in the topics and try to refrain from preaching. So if you get verses shoved at you just report them. And if you see atheists just ranting about Christians please report them as well. This is the place for neither.

Also please consider using paragraphs.

Comments don't count against users and welcome to the site.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Bust Nak]

Free means the ability to choose without coercion between two opposites. IF we cannot choose we are not free, therefore a free will has the ability to choose evil at any time.

If you know this, then why have you insisted time and time again, that God appearing to us directly to convince us of his existence here on Earth, or giving us proof back when we were still spirits, would violate our freewill? We can still chose whether to worship him without coercion, it would just be completely obvious which is the better option out of two opposites.

Either God giving us 100% reassurance would not be a violation of freewill, or we do not have free will in heaven. You cannot have your cake and eat it.

So to argue we will not choose evil in heaven DOES NOT MEAN that God 'took away the desire of anything I have and stripped me of my free will.' Your premise invalidates this topic.

And yet there you were, arguing that if God was to gave us proof about the consequence of our choices so we would not ever choose evil, while still having the option to choose evil, our freewill would be violated.

Yes, all sinners became sinners by their free will decision to reject YHWH as GOD or to rebel against HIS will. Sin is enslaving so a sinner has no free will. Pre-determining Adam's life did not go against his free will because he was already a sinner (naked) but against his evil enslaved will.

Just so we are clear, I am talking about pre-Earth.

[pshun2404]

First premise is a logical fallacy....knowing (even foreknowing) does not equal causing.

Second fallacy is that "people of other religions that do not know the name of Jesus" ...there are no such people....

The second paragraph is an absurdity which all proves you were never an actual Christian (though probably a member of the club of Churchianity, maybe by parental descent or desire to fit in)

[ttruscott]

You are demanding proof, not evidence. Good luck with that...
[rant deleted]

No, proof is often just evidence stacked up,

What goes on inside your head or my head is none of the three.

What magical thinking... You open your eyes and what you see is reality, your reality. Not mine, not Rambo's but yours. What goes on in your head defines your reality - you only think it is defined by what comes to you. That is why some people accept the evidence and others reject it.

[ttruscott]

Free means the ability to choose without coercion between two opposites. IF we cannot choose we are not free, therefore a free will has the ability to choose evil at any time.

If you know this, then why have you insisted time and time again, that God appearing to us directly to convince us of his existence here on Earth, or giving us proof back when we were still spirits, would violate our freewill? We can still chose whether to worship him without coercion, it would just be completely obvious which is the better option out of two opposites.

You are talking about earth so I can safely say that I never ever said what you wrote, neither once nor time and time again BECAUSE I do not believe humans have a free will !!! and that I have written over and over.

I contend that GOD does not prove HIS existence to the world in these days because 1. the world would stop acting naturally and would mitigate their evil and (falsely) worship YHWH to hide their evil to ensure the postponement of the judgment day is not broken and 2. HE DID prove HIS divinity and power by the creation of the physical universe yet those under HIS wrath repressed that proof from their conscious minds for their love for sin as Romans 1:20+ I suppose once was enough to prove their rejection of HIM is so total they will not even believe their eyes.

Either God giving us 100% reassurance would not be a violation of freewill, or we do not have free will in heaven. You cannot have your cake and eat it.

Ummm, reassurance of what??? I am quite lost. Again.

So to argue we will not choose evil in heaven DOES NOT MEAN that God 'took away the desire of anything I have and stripped me of my free will.' Your premise invalidates this topic.

And yet there you were, arguing that if God was to gave us proof about the consequence of our choices so we would not ever choose evil, while still having the option to choose evil, our freewill would be violated.

Only at the time before we settled upon the option we most desired, only before our choice was finalized, could proof destroy our ability to make THAT ONE choice by a free will decision. After the choice was finalized nothing can change our decision...it is what we decided. Those who chose for GOD kept their free will and those who rejected HIM lost it to the addicting enslavement of evil.

Those sinful elect on earth have a will just as enslaved to sin as any demon, but by the process of our redemption and rebirth, our wills are freed from the addiction to evil and made free again. Since choices about HIS deity and power and the nature of heaven and hell are finished, proof about these things has no bearing upon the other decisions we will and do make by our free will.

You seem to be thinking of free will is like a stick, once broken always broken but the only thing I know of that can destroy free will forever is to choose to become eternally enslaved by evil in which case the proof you were wrong about YHWH has no effect anyway as Romans 1 insists.

Just so we are clear, I am talking about pre-Earth.

We seem to have quite a different understanding of the pre-earth reality...

[pshun2404]

DI you really should look at the illogical reasoning in your statements...

You said "And they totally ignore any serious questions.

Like, if, "With God all things are possible", then why didn't God heal Satan of his mental illness the moment that God recognized that Satan was mentally ill?

Clearly saying that God had to respect Satan's Free Will makes no sense here. "

a) Because He could have does not necessitate He would have had to...just as because He did not, does not necessitate He would have or should have (that's YOUR value judgment)....

b) because something is possible does not mean it must occur (only that it was possible to have occurred)

And because He chooses NOT to violate one's free will neither speaks to their not having it, not does it demand He violate it (which would by nature negate it)

You think you pose a challenge but you make ZERO sense.