So the entire question is: are people sufficiently informed to be held morally responsible for failing to believe in God? The biblical answer to that question is unequivocal... In Paul’s view God’s properties, His eternal power and deity, are clearly revealed in creation, so that people who fail to believe in an eternal, powerful Creator of the world are without excuse -William Lane Craig
Why is it a sin not to believe in God? Why is it important to God for us take his existence on Faith? Will God punish me for not being able to take his existence on faith?
Think of it like this. Let's say an perfectly moral person arrives at the judgement bar. His only failing is that for whatever reason he did not believe in God. Good person. Great Parent. Dedicated years to humanitarian service. Does he deserve to be punished? It just seems so absurd to be that there exists this all-knowing being who is somehow offended by a human beings inability to believe in him.
You can say that I'm wrong as an atheist. That I've come to the wrong conclusion. That I'm ignorant in regards to the philosophical arguments for God. That's fine. But to say that I deserve to be punished for coming to the wrong conclusion... that's something else entirely.
Last edited by _Stormy Waters on Thu Oct 25, 2012 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This is my biggest issue with religion, or a God that casts eternal judgments based on faith. It wasn't until hearing Terryl Givens actually voice this as the one thing that he can't reconcile understanding that it sank in. He's much more succinct.
But he asked how can a God MORALLY judge someone eternally for not having faith, when the system is set up so the deeper you study and look into it the less likely he exists appears? How can God frame a test this complex to make it seem like he doesn't exist, not answer prayers of confirmation or direction, and then judge someone's lack of faith as making them morally corrupt and worthy of damnation?
Bottom line is if people tried so hard to get some clue from Mormon God that he's real, and he chose not to give a response, and the secret to believing is to be as ignorant as possible to everything that points to his lack of existence in this test, then send me to hell or the terrestrial kingdom because the CK must be one f ed up place.
If he is truly Christ-like would he fail to recognize the Savior and his Church in this life or the next? If so, then yes, he deserves to miss out on blessings and no, he was probably not Christ-like in the first place.
There are a variety of scriptures to illustrate this such as Matthew 19:16-20, Matthew 7:21, Ephesians 4:11-14, D&C 76:101, etc.
So the entire question is: are people sufficiently informed to be held morally responsible for failing to believe in God? The biblical answer to that question is unequivocal... In Paul’s view God’s properties, His eternal power and deity, are clearly revealed in creation, so that people who fail to believe in an eternal, powerful Creator of the world are without excuse -William Lane Craig
Why is it a sin not to believe in God? Why is it important to God for us take his existence on Faith? Will God punish me for not being able to take his existence on faith?
Think of it like this. Let's say an perfectly moral person arrives at the judgement bar. His only failing is that for whatever reason he did not believe in God. Good person. Great Parent. Dedicated years to humanitarian service. Does he deserve to be punished? It just seems so absurd to be that there exists this all-knowing being who is somehow offended by an human beings inability to believe in him.
You can say that I'm wrong as an atheist. That I've come to the wrong conclusion. That I'm ignorant in regards to the philosophical arguments for God. That's fine. But to say that I deserve to be punished for coming to the wrong conclusion... that's something else entirely.
And it becomes all the more absurd because this projected being cannot be seen because he won't show himself, but believe in his evidence-less existence you must! What a crock of shit--or, a brilliant leverage by some to convince others to give the lever pullers power over those others.
sock puppet wrote:And it becomes all the more absurd because this projected being cannot be seen because he won't show himself, but believe in his evidence-less existence you must! What a crock of shit--or, a brilliant leverage by some to convince others to give the lever pullers power over those others.
Agreed. Or maybe god is just the biggest abusive asshole to ever exist. *shrug*
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden ~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
If he is truly Christ-like would he fail to recognize the Savior and his Church in this life or the next? If so, then yes, he deserves to miss out on blessings and no, he was probably not Christ-like in the first place.
There are a variety of scriptures to illustrate this such as Matthew 19:16-20, Matthew 7:21, Ephesians 4:11-14, D&C 76:101, etc.
Begging the question or assuming the answer is a logical fallacy that occurs when the conclusion of an argument is used as a premise of that same argument; i.e., the premises would not work if the conclusion wasn't already assumed to be true.
It is often called circular reasoning, although sometimes it's considered distinct with the distinction that circular reasoning is:
A implies B which implies A
Begging the question similarly takes the form:
A implies B and A is only valid because B is assumed.
Circular reasoning is fallacious because reasoning and justification must start with the known and then determine the unknown - in the case of circular reasoning, it starts with the known and ends up with the equally known, thus it proves nothing.
Go get your favorite example of where I have relied on circular reasoning and copy and paste it in this thread.
The reason why it's not circular is because there are observable properties that can be compared to a standard and hence there are no assumptions.
Oh, of course. What we do is take a perfectly just and merciful god that is objectively known to exist, then take the properties that have been objectively observed in the LDS god, and compare those observed properties to the objective standard we have established. Thus, we establish a set standard for comparing the LDS god to theistic gods generally.
How remiss of me not to recognize the objective comparison of established facts in this process.
Second, wholly apart from God’s revelation in nature is the inner witness which the Holy Spirit bears to the great truths of the Gospel, including, I should say, the fact that God exists. Anyone who fails to believe in God by the end of his lifetime does so only by a stubborn resistance to the work of the Holy Spirit in drawing that person to a knowledge of God. On the biblical view people are not like innocent, lost lambs wandering helplessly without a guide. Rather they are determined rebels whose wills are set against God and who must be subdued by God’s Spirit.
What an incredibly arrogant and poisonous worldview.
