NationStates Jolt Archive

I know General probably doesn’t need another thread like this, but I’m hoping to clear up some philosophical points which Christians tend to get snagged on by atheists. While I doubt that many or even any will be converted by this, I hope that some Christians might pick up a few of these points and gain some insight into their own faith. Let’s cut the opening chatter and get to what you guys are probably really interested in (for purposes of learning or butchering).

I apologize in advance for the great length of this post. These are not light topics, they do not deserve light treatment.

Why is there Evil/Disease/War/Famine/Rape/Et Cetera?

This is going to boil down to a simple point: Free Will.

Why doesn’t God just force us to love Him? Why doesn’t God treat us as automata? Simple. God has creatures who are like that: the Seraphim, the Cherubim, the angels. These are all absolutely subject to His will – they do as He commands and do not question. They have great power, of course. Angels are terrifying beings, not at all like the sweet, winged infants of Renaissance art, on the contrary, they are depicted with anywhere from four to hundreds of wings, capable of wasting entire cities to humans. They are powerful, but they do not possess one great power: the power to choose.

That, I believe, is the image of God in which Adam and Eve were made. God has Free Will, absolute Free Will, and it is a gift He provides to humans. We have the power to obey God or ignore Him, according to our own desires, and while God may not like it when we ignore Him, He accepts it because it is our right to do so – Our truly God-given right.

In order for us to choose, though, there must be a choice, and that is what is illustrated in the Garden of Eden. Man and woman were given the possibility of eternal paradise, so long as they did not eat of one tree. One single tree in the whole of the Garden! Yet they ate of it, and why? Free will.

Eden was good, but Adam and Eve could not possibly know it was good because they didn’t even know what “Good” really was. They knew that eating the fruit would anger God, but they didn’t really know what that meant either. They couldn’t know Good because they didn’t know Bad, they didn’t know Evil, and eating the fruit of the tree teaches them Evil, and consequently, Good.

Why then does God issue His command not to eat the fruit if He knows (a) that this is exactly what Adam and Eve will do and (b) that this is the way in which humans will be presented with total freedom of will? The purpose is twofold. First, God wishes to demonstrate from the very beginning that if we go against His will we will ultimately be punished. Second, God wishes to give us this story so that we can see that unless we know Evil in disease and war and famine and rape and every possible sin, misery, and indignation, we will never be able to appreciate Good.

In summary, the purpose of evil is this: To know Good, we must know Evil. To choose, we must have a choice.

But if angels have no Free Will, why is Satan able to Rebel?

Satan is not an angel. The scriptural reference that people tend to infer this from is a stretch in interpretation. Satan is a different creature, allotted power by God to demonstrate evil so that, as above, we may know Good.

Short one, eh?[/b]

Does God’s Omniscience Negate Free Will?

This is a difficult one to tackle, and it took a bit of wrestling for me to try and work out a reasonable explanation. Predestination clearly negates free will, and therefore is not an acceptable doctrine not only to atheists, but many Christians as well. We are looking for an explanation which gives us the freedom to choose (Free Will) and God’s knowledge of everything (Omniscience).

The problem is, we tend to see Omniscience as somehow separate from the rest of God, or rather, unrelated to Omnipotence and Omnipresence. I believe that many see God’s knowledge of all things in the future as the result of a sort of “Magic Book,” or prewritten history of the world. I do not believe this is the case – it is the result of an anthropomorphized God, which we limit to three dimensions. We give Him three-dimensional Omnipresence – that is, God is everywhere. That is inaccurate, God is far more than human. Three-dimensions are too small a confine for an infinite God, who would also have four-dimensional Omnipresence – that is, God is every[I]when. Like one popular saying on many a church’s sign: “Do not fear tomorrow, God is already there!”

God is at tomorrow now, and now now, and yesterday now, He is at all times now. His Omniscience derives not from a Magic Book but from God’s Omnipresence. Our actions are known beforehand by God because He sees them occurring in the future which is part of His eternal Now. We make the choice in the future, but God sees it already because of four-dimensional Omnipresence.

In summary: We do it, God sees it.

The Prest-o-Change-o Deathbed Repentance

Free forgiveness, which Christians teach is part of the covenant of Christ, is another moral snag for us. I have seen the argument raised many times along the lines of:

I am a good person, but your God will send me to Hell while any serial killer could get into Heaven just by asking God to forgive him/her.

Well, that’s almost true. It’s not “just asking.” Just asking sounds like we’re sending God a form letter, a memo or something that says: “By the way, I’ll be making reservations for Heaven.” Not quite. Asking God for forgiveness only works if you do so with a sincere and faithful heart. Lip service doesn’t count, soul service does. So can the serial killer get into Heaven? Yes – but he or she can’t “just ask,” a sinner must ask God’s forgiveness with the tongue, the mind, and the heart in concert.

Yet what of the atheist who is “generally” a good person? How general is generally? Have you ever lied or stolen or coveted that which was not yours? Since all sins are equal, you are just as guilty as the serial killer. Even if somehow you had avoided any other sins, by being an atheist you are breaking the First Commandment and living in that violation of God’s law, which in the eyes of a perfectly Holy God is like spending every second of your life murdering. God wants perfection, and through the salvation and forgiveness of Christ, he offers it to any man or woman or child who asks for it so long as they ask and ask truly, but if you live morally though you do not accept God, though you offer perfection-minus-one – you are giving God imperfection, which He will not accept.

In summary: The doctrine of free salvation is a thing of Infinite Mercy and Love, not an attempt to spite nonbelievers who lead good lives, and not a backdoor into Heaven.

Why are we here?

This is one of those tough questions, and most Christians respond by saying that we are here to worship God, which implies that God needs us to survive. I propose a different theory. I propose that God did not place us here out of vanity – out of some neurotic need to be loved by His creations, but as a gift. God wanted to share the gift of existence with something else. As ultimately Existent, He knew that what He had was good, and because of His benevolence, desired that other things should also experience the thrill and grandeur of existence. Even you atheists, can you deny that you enjoy existing? That life, is somehow inherently wonderful simply because you ARE? Can you even imagine what it would be like simply to not exist? To be as you were pre-birth, or as you believe you shall be after death? I do not think it is within the scope of human understanding to really know what it is not to exist. Could any benevolent being really deny sharing that experience? Existence is a glorious, beautiful thing, and God chose to create, so that the experience of it could be shared not just by Him but by others as well. These others, these angels and archangels, cherubim and seraphim, demon and devil, believer and unbeliever share in that same glorious gift, the gift of Existing, bestowed through God’s Love. And we worship God not because it is our purpose – but because it is natural that we should reciprocate such infinite Love, Love powerful enough to create ex nihilo, Love powerful enough to permit the beloved to choose for themselves, though they choose to ignore that Love, Love powerful enough that It would descend to Earth and suffer and die for those very people would reject it, that they may be forgiven, and that they might return that Love, not just to God but to one another.

I suspect that all manner of debater shall soon descend upon this fragile flower of writing and tear it from the Earth, pry off its petals and burn each one, but I shall trust in God through smoke and flame. I have said my share, I could do no more and no less. God help me. Amen.

We'll here is a question for you. If free will and choices from the humans causes evil what about natural evils such as floods, tornados, and hurricanes? Certainly humanity does not cause these evils and we all can agree that no good comes from them.

...assuming religion makes sense

We'll here is a question for you. If free will and choices from the humans causes evil what about natural evils such as floods, tornados, and hurricanes? Certainly humanity does not cause these evils and we all can agree that no good comes from them.

We can?

EA:
Mind if I get back to you on that one? It's late here and I'm a bit tired from all the typing.


GoG:
Er... that comment doesn't add a great deal.

We'll here is a question for you. If free will and choices from the humans causes evil what about natural evils such as floods, tornados, and hurricanes? Certainly humanity does not cause these evils and we all can agree that no good comes from them.

thats bs i cause them

-snip-

Whoa, that was really good. Actually, extemely good. You accomplished explaining some very nagging aspects of the Christian faith in a non-flame inducing way. As *technically* an Roman Catholic, though non-practicing and 180 degrees from nearly every church teaching, I'd have to say that you tackled some questions my local priest couldn't answer to my satisfaction when I took my valuable mandatory Teen Youth Ministry time to grill him :) .

when god created us, why did he give us the ability to not believe in him?

We could still have free will and yet be hardwired to believe in god.

So is he dumb, or what?

when god created us, why did he give us the ability to not believe in him?

We could still have free will and yet be hardwired to believe in god.

So is he dumb, or what?"limited Free will?"

when god created us, why did he give us the ability to not believe in him?

We could still have free will and yet be hardwired to believe in god.

So is he dumb, or what?

I suppose we could likewise have free will, but be hardwired to only do what we were supposed to?

We'll here is a question for you. If free will and choices from the humans causes evil what about natural evils such as floods, tornados, and hurricanes? Certainly humanity does not cause these evils and we all can agree that no good comes from them.Sorry but I keep laughing when I see this post.

What makes them Evil?

"limited Free will?"

Well he already limited when he invented gravity and other natural laws. Honestly I see no point in allowing us to disbeleive.

Face it, it is a major flaw in the whole god theory.

I suppose we could likewise have free will, but be hardwired to only do what we were supposed to?

Not at all. You could still have free will, and yet be certain that god exists.

The questions usually answered by atheists, at least in our cushy western culture, are directed at christian-judaic frameworks of god. And in those instances where debate is allegedly freely entered into, it seems little more than a pissing contest.
"God doesn't exists, you're just deluded."
"God does exist, you're just blind."
There's an anticipation on the part of atheists, I think, that a person of faith only enters into a discourse in order to win scalps for Jesus. Similarly, there is an expectation that the atheist only rises to the debate in order to denigrate the person of faith. My experience attests to this in every instance. I advise everyone to Check Your Motivation. Discourse must arise out of GENUINE interests and GENUINE respect for the other person and their beliefs. None of this carefully worded lip service, but genuine rapport that is demonstrable. Only then will we stem the flow of ideological one-upmanship.

I'm also disheartened by the way other conceptualisations of god are deemed without merit, by both atheists and people of faith. It seems that alternative spiritual ideology is beyond the comprehension of individuals whose motivation for debate is to shoot down the framework of belief. The atheist assumes that belief in god implies belief in a christian-judaic structure. The person of faith assumes that because this structure isn't followed, you are lost. There are no shades of grey in this black-and-white way of thinking. If there is no recognisable framework, as is the case in my belief, then there are no rules for the tired, repetitious god-no-god argument to operate within. In this respect, it seems ironic that both atheists and people of faith feel that they are freed by their respective truths.

If you enter into this ideological debate, please do it out of genuine love and respect for the other person, not out of obligation to god or self.

Not at all. You could still have free will, and yet be certain that god exists.

...which takes away the free will with which you are supposed to either turn towards or away from God. If you know for a fact that God is there, then there really is no spiritual journey to take - it is already known.

Sorry but I keep laughing when I see this post.

What makes them Evil?

I guess the pain and suffering associated with them. People die because of them, therefore they are evil? I guess thats what he ment by evil...

There's an anticipation on the part of atheists, I think, that a person of faith only enters into a discourse in order to win scalps for Jesus. Similarly, there is an expectation that the atheist only rises to the debate in order to denigrate the person of faith. My experience attests to this in every instance. I advise everyone to Check Your Motivation. Discourse must arise out of GENUINE interests and GENUINE respect for the other person and their beliefs. None of this carefully worded lip service, but genuine rapport that is demonstrable. Only then will we stem the flow of ideological one-upmanship.

Interestingly enough, my boyfriend of 4 years is an atheist. We have had more than one discussion involving religion and out personal beliefs, without either of us throwing either of these in.

I'm also disheartened by the way other conceptualisations of god are deemed without merit, by both atheists and people of faith.

Those who are insecure in their beliefs will generally attempt to flippantly brush aside others'.

I guess the pain and suffering associated with them. People die because of them, therefore they are evil? I guess thats what he ment by evil...

Still a silly viewpoint - why do good and evil only pertain to human beings?

But if angels have no Free Will, why is Satan able to Rebel?

Satan is not an angel. The scriptural reference that people tend to infer this from is a stretch in interpretation. Satan is a different creature, allotted power by God to demonstrate evil so that, as above, we may know Good.


Umm...thats crap.

Im an atheist myself, but I have read the bible.
Its seems to imply that Satan, is pretty much thge same as "Lucifer", who, was the most beautiful angel, and "The Angel of Light", or "Morning Star", according to some texts.

All of them pretty much agree taht Lucifer was most certainly an angel, perhaps even Gods right hand dude at some point, then he decided "Better to rule in Hell, than serve in heaven."

So, that kinda shoots your angel logic out of the water.


More to a point....If God "has a plan for me", then that means that however my life turns out, is according to his plan.
THAT eliminates free will.

Why doesn’t God just force us to love Him? Why doesn’t God treat us as automata? Simple. God has creatures who are like that: the Seraphim, the Cherubim, the angels. These are all absolutely subject to His will – they do as He commands and do not question. They have great power, of course. Angels are terrifying beings, not at all like the sweet, winged infants of Renaissance art, on the contrary, they are depicted with anywhere from four to hundreds of wings, capable of wasting entire cities to humans. They are powerful, but they do not possess one great power: the power to choose.

Satan is not an angel. The scriptural reference that people tend to infer this from is a stretch in interpretation. Satan is a different creature, allotted power by God to demonstrate evil so that, as above, we may know Good.


I disagree, angels can rebel by sinning:

4For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment; (2 Peter 2:4)

According to Jude there are fallen angels.

6And the angels that did not keep their own position but left their proper dwelling have been kept by him in eternal chains in the nether gloom until the judgment of the great day; (Jude 1:6)

...which takes away the free will with which you are supposed to either turn towards or away from God. If you know for a fact that God is there, then there really is no spiritual journey to take - it is already known.

Nope, you could know he exists and still turn away from him.

Nope, you could know he exists and still turn away from him.

That is an assumption.

Meanwhile, part of a spiritual journey is defining whether or not you believe in a God and what that God/lack thereof means to you - thus, knowing that God exists with absolute certainty would remove the very beginnings of the journey.

That is an assumption.

No it isn't. Arguably you could know that god exists and still choose to turn from him. After all, people who commit crimes often knoe that they are breaking the law.

Meanwhile, part of a spiritual journey is defining whether or not you believe in a God and what that God/lack thereof means to you - thus, knowing that God exists with absolute certainty would remove the very beginnings of the journey.

Why though? Why do we have to have a spiritual journey in that sense? It seems rather cruel that god would create us, then deliberately turn his face away, doesn't it?

when god created us, why did he give us the ability to not believe in him?

We could still have free will and yet be hardwired to believe in god.

So is he dumb, or what?

That's not Free Will. That's as much Free Will as the angels have, the will to "hard-wired" belief in God. What kind of freedom is that? What God has in the angels are willing and loyal servants, eager to defend Him and do His bidding, but they, because of their absolute servitude, they are limited. God created in us creatures of low physical power (compared to angels) but greater spiritual power, again: the power to obey or ignore, to accept or deny God.

Why would He do this? God is complete without us, remember, so unquestioning worship and obedience are not necessary attributes from a created creature, though of course God would prefer it since that is the response to His infinite Love. We must look at it from the perspective of God giving a gift to His creations, and our gift, as I have said, is absolute Free Will.

More to a point....If God "has a plan for me", then that means that however my life turns out, is according to his plan.
THAT eliminates free will.

You seem to be ascribing to that same "Magic Book" mentality of which I spoke. "God has a plan" doesn't mean that at the time of your birth a committee of archangels met and drew up an outline of what was going to happen in your life, which was then submitted for revision and approval. "God has a plan," I believe, has more to do with God's desire for you to live your life according to His will than any prewritten sequence of events to occur in your life. God has a plan, but you have the freedom not to follow it.

Squatches' and SI's responses regarding fallen angels/Satan will be answered shortly.

This is the scripture most commonly quoted in the defense that Satan is a fallen angel:

12You, the bright morning star, have fallen from the sky!
You brought down other nations;
now you are brought down.
13You said to yourself, "I'll climb to heaven
and place my throne above the highest stars.
I'll sit there with the gods far away in the north.
14 I'll be above the clouds, just like God Most High."

15But now you are deep in the world of the dead.
16Those who see you will stare and wonder,
"Is this the man who made the world tremble
and shook up kingdoms?
17Did he capture every city and make earth a desert?
Is he the one who refused to let prisoners go home?"

18When kings die, they are buried in glorious tombs.
19But you will be left unburied, just another dead body
lying underfoot like a broken branch.
You will be one of many killed in battle
and gone down to the deep rocky pit.b
20You won't be buried with kings;
you ruined your country and murdered your people.

You evil monster! We hope that your family
will be forgotten forever.
21We will slaughter your sons to make them pay
for the crimes of their ancestors.
They won't take over the world or build cities
anywhere on this earth.

22The LORD All-Powerful has promised to attack Babylonia and destroy everyone there, so that none of them will ever be remembered again.

12-14 seem to support the commonly held view that Satan was once the greatest of all angels who sought to replace God on His Throne, but to say that would be to butcher context utterly. Verse 16: “[…]Is this the man who made the world tremble and shook up kingdoms?” Satan is not a man, and he did not have a country or people to murder as verse 20 indicates the “Morning Star” – or Lucifer - has done. This scripture is far better applied to the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. Isaiah is simply saying, “You think you’re great, you think you’re better than God. Guess what, you’re a mortal too and you’re going to die like the rest of us.”

If you have other scriptural references which name Satan as Lucifer and give him the status of fallen angel, please let me know. Extrascriptural sources, such as Paradise Lost, do not count.

Now as for fallen angels, let us refer to Job briefly. One of the prime premises of Job is that Satan only has the power allotted to him by God. I do not argue that the demons are not fallen angels, but that the circumstances under which they fell were not ordinary. I would surmise that God enabled Satan to tempt and deceive the angels and allowed the angels some Free Will as we humans have for a period. During this time, the demons fell as they followed Satan instead of God. Again, this is not covered extensively in the Bible and no one can be truly certain what happened, we can only make inferences.

Why though? Why do we have to have a spiritual journey in that sense? It seems rather cruel that god would create us, then deliberately turn his face away, doesn't it?

Well, if we knew without question that there was a God, what kind of Free Will would we have? If the Heavens were to open up, spewing fire and blood on the Earth with Christ and all the angels riding down upon us on white stallions - would we really have any choice but to believe? God, I think, tries to keep the world in a careful balance, so that the choice to accept or deny Him is still something of a leap of faith. The very fact that the Christian-Atheist debates on these forums can go on for aeons without ceasing in back-and-forth banter and bickering indicates to me that there is just enough evidence for both sides that they allow for a comfortable existence within their respective paradigms, but not enough that one paradigm is considerably more convincing than the other. That is, despite constant fighting, the argument never really ends, and no one really one-ups the other side (not that either side should stop trying), and I think that is the result of the balance God is trying to maintain. There needs to be enough Good and enough Evil, enough Evidence and enough Counterevidence that choosing between one side and the other is individual preference - Free Will.

Whoa, that was really good. Actually, extemely good. You accomplished explaining some very nagging aspects of the Christian faith in a non-flame inducing way. As *technically* an Roman Catholic, though non-practicing and 180 degrees from nearly every church teaching, I'd have to say that you tackled some questions my local priest couldn't answer to my satisfaction when I took my valuable mandatory Teen Youth Ministry time to grill him.

Thank you. I'm really surprised at how incompetent some priests are at answering these sorts of questions. I'd figure they'd learn some pretty decent apologetics in Seminary, but usually not. It can't be that hard... I mean, I figured it out and I'm not ordained. Hell, I'm not even out of High School. If a Junior in New Jersey can get this stuff, you'd think maybe a priest who's supposed to have devoted his (or her, if you're in one of them woman-ordainin' denominations like me) life to God would figure this stuff out too. It's not like they have other things to do. I don't have anything against the clergy, understand, but I think that a lot of Christians and clergy who go out evangelizing are dangerously unprepared for the very tough and valid queries raised by other people.

Hmm, the christians obsession with heaven and hell. Seems to me to be the most monumentally unfair peice of beleif whilst at the same time trying to come across and good and just.

Putting aside for a second the thought that no crime deserves an eternity of punishment, and the inherent flaws in an either/or attitude of rewards or punishments. We should at least consider the circumstances.

I am an atheist. I wasn't really introduced to religion at all when i was young. I went to church a few times but never really understood what it was all about when i was young so i never grew up with the beleif in god. I am rather an ardent supporter of atheism, at least when the subject comes up and i can be bothered to reply, but i think if i had been raised in harder times, and instilled with the beleif from an early age, i would be just as ardent supporter of christianity. Therefore how is it fair that according to the original poster's rules, i would go to hell, but a similair person with a different upbringing would go to heaven?

There are other circumstances to be taken into account too. Such as genetic predispostition to violence, encouraging people to commit crimes ad be more likely to go to hell. So i ask, how is this fair?

God wants perfection, and through the salvation and forgiveness of Christ, he offers it to any man or woman or child who asks for it so long as they ask and ask truly, but if you live morally though you do not accept God, though you offer perfection-minus-one – you are giving God imperfection, which He will not accept.

In summary: The doctrine of free salvation is a thing of Infinite Mercy and Love, not an attempt to spite nonbelievers who lead good lives, and not a backdoor into Heaven.

Just a note:He isn't much of an omnipotent being if he wanted perfection and created all the imperfection.

It also seems silly to have been able to create perfection for all and then not only not do that,but have to murder/sacrifice someone to offer another imperfect plan without any verifiable proof that any of it is true.

I'm also disheartened by the way other conceptualisations of god are deemed without merit, by both atheists and people of faith.

When I was posting this, I was considering the problem you highlight. Certainly the world is not Christian-Atheist, and certainly there are enormous multitudes of other faiths beyond these two. I chose to leave these other conceptualizations out of this discussion because I primarily wished to answer a few of the most difficult conundrums atheists use on Christians. Expanding the discussion into other faiths would make this more a bloodbath than it needs to be. If you want to have those discussions, however, let me know or open a new thread.

Hmm, the christians obsession with heaven and hell. Seems to me to be the most monumentally unfair peice of beleif whilst at the same time trying to come across and good and just.

Putting aside for a second the thought that no crime deserves an eternity of punishment, and the inherent flaws in an either/or attitude of rewards or punishments. We should at least consider the circumstances.

I am an atheist. I wasn't really introduced to religion at all when i was young. I went to church a few times but never really understood what it was all about when i was young so i never grew up with the beleif in god. I am rather an ardent supporter of atheism, at least when the subject comes up and i can be bothered to reply, but i think if i had been raised in harder times, and instilled with the beleif from an early age, i would be just as ardent supporter of christianity. Therefore how is it fair that according to the original poster's rules, i would go to hell, but a similair person with a different upbringing would go to heaven?

There are other circumstances to be taken into account too. Such as genetic predispostition to violence, encouraging people to commit crimes ad be more likely to go to hell. So i ask, how is this fair?

Heaven and Hell, eternal punishment seems unfair... good points, tough question. They are points I admit that I am not really fully equipped to answer. Nobody's perfect. I'll develop an argument and get back to you... hopefully someone might be able to answer it for you before then? I will say this however: genetic predisposition is merely predisposition - not law. You can go against such a predisposition. Additionally, the doctrine of Free Salvation severs the connection between crimes/sins in life and the soul's fate after life. A firm trust and belief in God and the salvation of the soul through Christ are what place a person in Heaven.

As for the rest of your question... give me time, and I will try to answer.

Reply to: EVERYONE
Random corrections:

Free-will, IRT angels, doesn't mean the ability to chose what to do. Roughly "translated," free will is about the abilty to commit sin, -want- forgiveness, -feel- sorry, and still recieve passage into heaven. Angels can disobey (see: Angelic Wars, War in Heavings, [google 'em, jist is that there was a civil war in heaven between angels, its 1230am and I'm NOT going to do the citations, this is probably my last post]) but angels do not have a -soul-, the soul is what can be forgiven from the sins of the living body. Thus, if an engel "dies," they are returned to Oblivion.

Hell did not always exist. When a person died, they went into Purgatory. Jesus' death marked the opening of the gates of heaven to those who died and were worthy. Prior to Jesus' time, people acted... blindly. Since being kicked out of Eden, man(kind) was alive, then dead, no heaven v. hell to worry about. You went to the "land of the dead," kinda like a ressurected world, sorta. God gave Lucifer, the most beautiful and loved of angels, Exactly what he waned... He is the Prince of Darkness... Lord of Sin... Lucifer -is- a God, just not God of All. Now, why create a special Hell and allow evil to happen? God does not -allow- things to happen. God does not Intervene in everyday affairs. Only saints and angels do that, which is why you are supposed to pray to -Saints- and -Angels- who actually -do- the miracles. (God is like a CEO, he just sits on his ass and gets credit and the board meetings ^^)
NOW, there was/is a choice. Live a righteous life, and be granted eternal prosperity. Live a life of sin, and be granted an Eternity of it. That's what free will means. You chose where you go in your afterlife, by how you live in this life. You don't need to grovel before God to get into heaven.
*Gays are just as likely to pass through the gates as anyone else, permitted they lived a righteous life.* There are some gays I know who will probably make it into heaven faster than the "faithful" others >.>

I was going to say more, but I'm tired, and subsequently forgot what I was going to say.

Still a silly viewpoint - why do good and evil only pertain to human beings?

How is it a sill viewpoint? What would you call them good disastors? You have events which only serve to destroy and yet we can not label them as evil because they are not human? So was the tsunami that recently happened good?

Philosophy has been doing the theist/atheist arguments for centuries now.

http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/index.html

This site is a good intro into the basic arguments for either camp, you'll find much of what people use as rationales based on these.

How is it a sill viewpoint? What would you call them good disastors? You have events which only serve to destroy and yet we can not label them as evil because they are not human? So was the tsunami that recently happened good?Events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and tornadoes are not good or evil...only the people who cause them.







Yes, I said "the people who cause them".

*locks door, draws a knife and advances on a crowd of huddling NSers*

But none of you shall escape to transmit that information to the outside world.....*maniacal laughter*

How is it a sill viewpoint? What would you call them good disastors? You have events which only serve to destroy and yet we can not label them as evil because they are not human? So was the tsunami that recently happened good?

We cannot label them as evil simply because they harm humans. No one has yet to name any event which truly serves only to destroy.