Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

Question About Age of Reason

GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 3:32:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

1. Everyone has sin in their flesh.
2. Babies have not reached an age of understanding to choose between sin and salvation.
3. All dead babies will go to hell.
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 3:38:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 3:32:50 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

1. Everyone has sin in their flesh.
2. Babies have not reached an age of understanding to choose between sin and salvation.
3. All dead babies will go to hell.

NEW Conclusion: Everyone In Heaven, Would Be In Hell, If They Were Victims of Infanticide

NEW Premise: If the Fate of Hell Could Be Determined By Another
NEW Conclusion: Free Will Would Not Exist
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 3:56:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 3:38:54 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:32:50 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

1. Everyone has sin in their flesh.
2. Babies have not reached an age of understanding to choose between sin and salvation.
3. All dead babies will go to hell.

NEW Conclusion: Everyone In Heaven, Would Be In Hell, If They Were Victims of Infanticide

1. Ezekiel 18:20 : " The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. "

2. Babies have not reached an age of understanding to choose between sin and salvation.

3. All dead babies will go to Heaven.


NEW Premise: If the Fate of Hell Could Be Determined By Another
NEW Conclusion: Free Will Would Not Exist

Define free will.
bulproof
Posts: 25,260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 4:05:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 3:38:54 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:32:50 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

1. Everyone has sin in their flesh.
2. Babies have not reached an age of understanding to choose between sin and salvation.
3. All dead babies will go to hell.

NEW Conclusion: Everyone In Heaven, Would Be In Hell, If They Were Victims of Infanticide

NEW Premise: If the Fate of Hell Could Be Determined By Another
NEW Conclusion: Free Will Would Not Exist

Lurrv ya sig.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 4:11:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 3:56:28 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:38:54 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:32:50 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

1. Everyone has sin in their flesh.
2. Babies have not reached an age of understanding to choose between sin and salvation.
3. All dead babies will go to hell.

NEW Conclusion: Everyone In Heaven, Would Be In Hell, If They Were Victims of Infanticide

1. Ezekiel 18:20 : " The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. "

2. Babies have not reached an age of understanding to choose between sin and salvation.

3. All dead babies will go to Heaven.


NEW Premise: If the Fate of Hell Could Be Determined By Another
NEW Conclusion: Free Will Would Not Exist

Define free will.

OLD Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
OLD Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

NEW Premise: If the Fate of Hell Could Be Determined By Another
NEW Conclusion: Free Will Would Not Exist

Free Will= The ability to choose a choice, which is redundant in its own right.
Not to mention the potential insistence of an oxymoron the likes of an "unpointed arrow"
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 4:15:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 4:05:43 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:38:54 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:32:50 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

1. Everyone has sin in their flesh.
2. Babies have not reached an age of understanding to choose between sin and salvation.
3. All dead babies will go to hell.

NEW Conclusion: Everyone In Heaven, Would Be In Hell, If They Were Victims of Infanticide

NEW Premise: If the Fate of Hell Could Be Determined By Another
NEW Conclusion: Free Will Would Not Exist

Lurrv ya sig.

Thanks bulproof!
It means a lot to me that you took notice. Your sig is all I could ever hope for
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,379
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 8:33:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

Which is preferable?

1. Die as an infant, go to Heaven.

2. As an adult, receive Christ as Savior, go Heaven.
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2014 4:32:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 8:33:49 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

Which is preferable?

1. Die as an infant, go to Heaven.

2. As an adult, receive Christ as Savior, go Heaven.

A cosmic zombie carpenter overlord would mean dying as an infant would guarantee everyone paradise, and get them there sooner, where the latter doesn't.
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,379
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2014 3:07:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 4:32:38 PM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/23/2014 8:33:49 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

Which is preferable?

1. Die as an infant, go to Heaven.

2. As an adult, receive Christ as Savior, go Heaven.

A cosmic zombie carpenter overlord would mean dying as an infant would guarantee everyone paradise, and get them there sooner, where the latter doesn't.
Heaven is eternal, so getting there sooner or later is not an issue. It's not like showing up late to a party.

Since you're basing your comments from the Bible, there are a number of good reasons why the latter is preferable according to scripture.

A couple of them:

The thief on the cross next to Jesus who repented could have already have been in paradise if he died as an infant. However, he is in paradise knowing that people have learned about God's mercy that extends to a criminal on death row because of his extended life into adulthood.

The apostle Paul decided that it would be better that he remained in his mortal body for a time due to the need of others. He actually at that point longed for paradise, but because of his care for his brethren, he considered it better that he remain for a time.
ethang5
Posts: 4,109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2014 8:45:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:

Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

My greatest problem with atheists is that often it is impossible to believe that they have integrity. I don't mind if a person doesn't believe in God, even God Himself allows that, but if a person is deliberately dishonest, what use is he?

I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

Also, with morality, anyone condemning an act as immoral, should have what they consider a moral alternative. What should God have done to remedy the situation?

1. Babies don't go to heaven?
Nope. I can hear the atheists howling bloody murder from here.

2. Everyone going to Heaven regardless of behavior?
Any person advocating this position is a hypocrite and a liar and I can show it.

3. God giving none of his creation free will?
Try to take away the free will of anyone saying they believe this and you'll learn something about hypocrisy.

The point here is, though they condemn God's way as immoral, they have no alternative that is moral! They will accept the principle, "If a moral actor could do nothing else (moral), his action is not considered immoral", in every instance except when it pertains to God. Their stock answer is, "God can do anything, right?" When you ask, "Like what?" They shrug and say, "I don't know. He should know. He's God isn't He?"

GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: What should I have done?
GvI to God: I don't know but, but you're guilty.
God to GvI: I could have let Babies go to Hell.
GvI to God: That is even more evil! You are sick!
God to GvI: How about if I let everyone go to Heaven?
GvI to God: What? Hitler? Jeffery Dahmer? No way. Religious nuts? Thanks but no thanks.
God to GvI: Ok, how about no one has free will so no one is responsible and thus no one goes to Hell?
GvI to God: Hmmmm. That might work.
God to GvI: Ok, I'll start with you.
GvI to God: Wait! I'd have to do whatever you wanted.
God to GvI: Yes. You'd have no free will.
GvI to God: But I don't want that!
God to GvI: Ok. Sooooo.....
GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: Sigh.....

Of course, the presence of babies implies adults. And if God killed all babies it would mean the extinction of the Human Race. None of that is considered. Brain off. God is guilty. End of story.
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2014 11:33:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/25/2014 8:45:56 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:

Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

My greatest problem with atheists is that often it is impossible to believe that they have integrity. I don't mind if a person doesn't believe in God, even God Himself allows that, but if a person is deliberately dishonest, what use is he?

I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

Also, with morality, anyone condemning an act as immoral, should have what they consider a moral alternative. What should God have done to remedy the situation?

1. Babies don't go to heaven?
Nope. I can hear the atheists howling bloody murder from here.

2. Everyone going to Heaven regardless of behavior?
Any person advocating this position is a hypocrite and a liar and I can show it.

3. God giving none of his creation free will?
Try to take away the free will of anyone saying they believe this and you'll learn something about hypocrisy.

The point here is, though they condemn God's way as immoral, they have no alternative that is moral! They will accept the principle, "If a moral actor could do nothing else (moral), his action is not considered immoral", in every instance except when it pertains to God. Their stock answer is, "God can do anything, right?" When you ask, "Like what?" They shrug and say, "I don't know. He should know. He's God isn't He?"

GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: What should I have done?
GvI to God: I don't know but, but you're guilty.
God to GvI: I could have let Babies go to Hell.
GvI to God: That is even more evil! You are sick!
God to GvI: How about if I let everyone go to Heaven?
GvI to God: What? Hitler? Jeffery Dahmer? No way. Religious nuts? Thanks but no thanks.
God to GvI: Ok, how about no one has free will so no one is responsible and thus no one goes to Hell?
GvI to God: Hmmmm. That might work.
God to GvI: Ok, I'll start with you.
GvI to God: Wait! I'd have to do whatever you wanted.
God to GvI: Yes. You'd have no free will.
GvI to God: But I don't want that!
God to GvI: Ok. Sooooo.....
GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: Sigh.....

Of course, the presence of babies implies adults. And if God killed all babies it would mean the extinction of the Human Race. None of that is considered. Brain off. God is guilty. End of story.

YOU SAID:
I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

This is a dishonest strawman argument

My issue is not about morality. My issue is with a systems which leaves ones eternal afterlife susceptible to manipulation. Imagine if a person in heaven or hell were in a different place because they suffered (or luckily failed to suffer) infanticide.
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2014 11:48:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/25/2014 11:33:54 PM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/25/2014 8:45:56 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:

Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

My greatest problem with atheists is that often it is impossible to believe that they have integrity. I don't mind if a person doesn't believe in God, even God Himself allows that, but if a person is deliberately dishonest, what use is he?

I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

Also, with morality, anyone condemning an act as immoral, should have what they consider a moral alternative. What should God have done to remedy the situation?

1. Babies don't go to heaven?
Nope. I can hear the atheists howling bloody murder from here.

2. Everyone going to Heaven regardless of behavior?
Any person advocating this position is a hypocrite and a liar and I can show it.

3. God giving none of his creation free will?
Try to take away the free will of anyone saying they believe this and you'll learn something about hypocrisy.

The point here is, though they condemn God's way as immoral, they have no alternative that is moral! They will accept the principle, "If a moral actor could do nothing else (moral), his action is not considered immoral", in every instance except when it pertains to God. Their stock answer is, "God can do anything, right?" When you ask, "Like what?" They shrug and say, "I don't know. He should know. He's God isn't He?"

GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: What should I have done?
GvI to God: I don't know but, but you're guilty.
God to GvI: I could have let Babies go to Hell.
GvI to God: That is even more evil! You are sick!
God to GvI: How about if I let everyone go to Heaven?
GvI to God: What? Hitler? Jeffery Dahmer? No way. Religious nuts? Thanks but no thanks.
God to GvI: Ok, how about no one has free will so no one is responsible and thus no one goes to Hell?
GvI to God: Hmmmm. That might work.
God to GvI: Ok, I'll start with you.
GvI to God: Wait! I'd have to do whatever you wanted.
God to GvI: Yes. You'd have no free will.
GvI to God: But I don't want that!
God to GvI: Ok. Sooooo.....
GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: Sigh.....

Of course, the presence of babies implies adults. And if God killed all babies it would mean the extinction of the Human Race. None of that is considered. Brain off. God is guilty. End of story.


YOU SAID:
I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

This is a dishonest strawman argument

My issue is not about morality. My issue is with a systems which leaves ones eternal afterlife susceptible to manipulation. Imagine if a person in heaven or hell were in a different place because they suffered (or luckily failed to suffer) infanticide.

You can spend time with children and see they are not innocent. They are sinful worldly from birth.

Even in the afterlife we are said to be working and living a different life. Some of which is learning lessons in this life. So you would be robbing a child of the chance to learn more, preparing them for the next life.

I think some babies go to hell some go to heaven. There is no way to tell and we should not assume anything general about the afterlife.
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2014 11:50:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/24/2014 3:07:38 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/23/2014 4:32:38 PM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/23/2014 8:33:49 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

Which is preferable?

1. Die as an infant, go to Heaven.

2. As an adult, receive Christ as Savior, go Heaven.

A cosmic zombie carpenter overlord would mean dying as an infant would guarantee everyone paradise, and get them there sooner, where the latter doesn't.
Heaven is eternal, so getting there sooner or later is not an issue. It's not like showing up late to a party.

Since you're basing your comments from the Bible, there are a number of good reasons why the latter is preferable according to scripture.

A couple of them:

The thief on the cross next to Jesus who repented could have already have been in paradise if he died as an infant. However, he is in paradise knowing that people have learned about God's mercy that extends to a criminal on death row because of his extended life into adulthood.

The apostle Paul decided that it would be better that he remained in his mortal body for a time due to the need of others. He actually at that point longed for paradise, but because of his care for his brethren, he considered it better that he remain for a time.

YOU SAID:
Heaven is eternal, so getting there sooner or later is not an issue. It's not like showing up late to a party.

Showing up late to a party is not bad because it eventually ends. It is only bad because you may have been missing out on the fun.

YOU SAID:
The apostle Paul decided that it would be better that he remained in his mortal body for a time due to the need of others. He actually at that point longed for paradise, but because of his care for his brethren, he considered it better that he remain for a time.

Babies going anywhere other than where they otherwise would have, had they lived into adulthood, would allow for the manipulation of one's personal ability to choose their own afterlife. If babies went to heaven, then "Paul's brethren", would have seemingly been better off in a perfect paradise if dead from infanticide.
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2014 11:57:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/25/2014 11:48:12 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/25/2014 11:33:54 PM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/25/2014 8:45:56 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:

Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

My greatest problem with atheists is that often it is impossible to believe that they have integrity. I don't mind if a person doesn't believe in God, even God Himself allows that, but if a person is deliberately dishonest, what use is he?

I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

Also, with morality, anyone condemning an act as immoral, should have what they consider a moral alternative. What should God have done to remedy the situation?

1. Babies don't go to heaven?
Nope. I can hear the atheists howling bloody murder from here.

2. Everyone going to Heaven regardless of behavior?
Any person advocating this position is a hypocrite and a liar and I can show it.

3. God giving none of his creation free will?
Try to take away the free will of anyone saying they believe this and you'll learn something about hypocrisy.

The point here is, though they condemn God's way as immoral, they have no alternative that is moral! They will accept the principle, "If a moral actor could do nothing else (moral), his action is not considered immoral", in every instance except when it pertains to God. Their stock answer is, "God can do anything, right?" When you ask, "Like what?" They shrug and say, "I don't know. He should know. He's God isn't He?"

GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: What should I have done?
GvI to God: I don't know but, but you're guilty.
God to GvI: I could have let Babies go to Hell.
GvI to God: That is even more evil! You are sick!
God to GvI: How about if I let everyone go to Heaven?
GvI to God: What? Hitler? Jeffery Dahmer? No way. Religious nuts? Thanks but no thanks.
God to GvI: Ok, how about no one has free will so no one is responsible and thus no one goes to Hell?
GvI to God: Hmmmm. That might work.
God to GvI: Ok, I'll start with you.
GvI to God: Wait! I'd have to do whatever you wanted.
God to GvI: Yes. You'd have no free will.
GvI to God: But I don't want that!
God to GvI: Ok. Sooooo.....
GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: Sigh.....

Of course, the presence of babies implies adults. And if God killed all babies it would mean the extinction of the Human Race. None of that is considered. Brain off. God is guilty. End of story.


YOU SAID:
I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

This is a dishonest strawman argument

My issue is not about morality. My issue is with a systems which leaves ones eternal afterlife susceptible to manipulation. Imagine if a person in heaven or hell were in a different place because they suffered (or luckily failed to suffer) infanticide.

You can spend time with children and see they are not innocent. They are sinful worldly from birth.

Even in the afterlife we are said to be working and living a different life. Some of which is learning lessons in this life. So you would be robbing a child of the chance to learn more, preparing them for the next life.

I think some babies go to hell some go to heaven. There is no way to tell and we should not assume anything general about the afterlife.

Even the idea that we should not assume anything general about the afterlife is itself a generalization
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2014 12:07:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/25/2014 11:57:22 PM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/25/2014 11:48:12 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/25/2014 11:33:54 PM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/25/2014 8:45:56 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:

Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

My greatest problem with atheists is that often it is impossible to believe that they have integrity. I don't mind if a person doesn't believe in God, even God Himself allows that, but if a person is deliberately dishonest, what use is he?

I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

Also, with morality, anyone condemning an act as immoral, should have what they consider a moral alternative. What should God have done to remedy the situation?

1. Babies don't go to heaven?
Nope. I can hear the atheists howling bloody murder from here.

2. Everyone going to Heaven regardless of behavior?
Any person advocating this position is a hypocrite and a liar and I can show it.

3. God giving none of his creation free will?
Try to take away the free will of anyone saying they believe this and you'll learn something about hypocrisy.

The point here is, though they condemn God's way as immoral, they have no alternative that is moral! They will accept the principle, "If a moral actor could do nothing else (moral), his action is not considered immoral", in every instance except when it pertains to God. Their stock answer is, "God can do anything, right?" When you ask, "Like what?" They shrug and say, "I don't know. He should know. He's God isn't He?"

GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: What should I have done?
GvI to God: I don't know but, but you're guilty.
God to GvI: I could have let Babies go to Hell.
GvI to God: That is even more evil! You are sick!
God to GvI: How about if I let everyone go to Heaven?
GvI to God: What? Hitler? Jeffery Dahmer? No way. Religious nuts? Thanks but no thanks.
God to GvI: Ok, how about no one has free will so no one is responsible and thus no one goes to Hell?
GvI to God: Hmmmm. That might work.
God to GvI: Ok, I'll start with you.
GvI to God: Wait! I'd have to do whatever you wanted.
God to GvI: Yes. You'd have no free will.
GvI to God: But I don't want that!
God to GvI: Ok. Sooooo.....
GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: Sigh.....

Of course, the presence of babies implies adults. And if God killed all babies it would mean the extinction of the Human Race. None of that is considered. Brain off. God is guilty. End of story.


YOU SAID:
I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

This is a dishonest strawman argument

My issue is not about morality. My issue is with a systems which leaves ones eternal afterlife susceptible to manipulation. Imagine if a person in heaven or hell were in a different place because they suffered (or luckily failed to suffer) infanticide.

You can spend time with children and see they are not innocent. They are sinful worldly from birth.

Even in the afterlife we are said to be working and living a different life. Some of which is learning lessons in this life. So you would be robbing a child of the chance to learn more, preparing them for the next life.

I think some babies go to hell some go to heaven. There is no way to tell and we should not assume anything general about the afterlife.



Even the idea that we should not assume anything general about the afterlife is itself a generalization

Yes I break it often.
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2014 12:16:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/26/2014 12:07:46 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/25/2014 11:57:22 PM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/25/2014 11:48:12 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/25/2014 11:33:54 PM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
At 6/25/2014 8:45:56 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 6/23/2014 3:15:37 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:

Premise: Dead Babies Go To Heaven
Conclusion : Everyone In Hell, Would Be In Heaven, If They Were Victims of Infanticide.

My greatest problem with atheists is that often it is impossible to believe that they have integrity. I don't mind if a person doesn't believe in God, even God Himself allows that, but if a person is deliberately dishonest, what use is he?

I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

Also, with morality, anyone condemning an act as immoral, should have what they consider a moral alternative. What should God have done to remedy the situation?

1. Babies don't go to heaven?
Nope. I can hear the atheists howling bloody murder from here.

2. Everyone going to Heaven regardless of behavior?
Any person advocating this position is a hypocrite and a liar and I can show it.

3. God giving none of his creation free will?
Try to take away the free will of anyone saying they believe this and you'll learn something about hypocrisy.

The point here is, though they condemn God's way as immoral, they have no alternative that is moral! They will accept the principle, "If a moral actor could do nothing else (moral), his action is not considered immoral", in every instance except when it pertains to God. Their stock answer is, "God can do anything, right?" When you ask, "Like what?" They shrug and say, "I don't know. He should know. He's God isn't He?"

GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: What should I have done?
GvI to God: I don't know but, but you're guilty.
God to GvI: I could have let Babies go to Hell.
GvI to God: That is even more evil! You are sick!
God to GvI: How about if I let everyone go to Heaven?
GvI to God: What? Hitler? Jeffery Dahmer? No way. Religious nuts? Thanks but no thanks.
God to GvI: Ok, how about no one has free will so no one is responsible and thus no one goes to Hell?
GvI to God: Hmmmm. That might work.
God to GvI: Ok, I'll start with you.
GvI to God: Wait! I'd have to do whatever you wanted.
God to GvI: Yes. You'd have no free will.
GvI to God: But I don't want that!
God to GvI: Ok. Sooooo.....
GvI to God: You are guilty!
God to GvI: Sigh.....

Of course, the presence of babies implies adults. And if God killed all babies it would mean the extinction of the Human Race. None of that is considered. Brain off. God is guilty. End of story.


YOU SAID:
I'm willing to bet that GOD-vs-ITSELF thinks the killing of babies in the OT is evil even by the standard of Christian doctrine itself. But he seems to be implying here that God is somehow at fault for NOT killing all babies. It is a contradiction he maintains just so he can condemn the God candle at both ends. That is dishonest.

This is a dishonest strawman argument

My issue is not about morality. My issue is with a systems which leaves ones eternal afterlife susceptible to manipulation. Imagine if a person in heaven or hell were in a different place because they suffered (or luckily failed to suffer) infanticide.

You can spend time with children and see they are not innocent. They are sinful worldly from birth.

Even in the afterlife we are said to be working and living a different life. Some of which is learning lessons in this life. So you would be robbing a child of the chance to learn more, preparing them for the next life.

I think some babies go to hell some go to heaven. There is no way to tell and we should not assume anything general about the afterlife.



Even the idea that we should not assume anything general about the afterlife is itself a generalization

Yes I break it often.

How couldn't you?
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2014 12:21:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I find it funny people are too stupid to realize that if a god existed there would be no need for life, god could just start everyone in heaven.
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2014 12:31:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/26/2014 12:21:23 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
I find it funny people are too stupid to realize that if a god existed there would be no need for life, god could just start everyone in heaven.

Maybe this world has some value.

Maybe it is to sort out the people that will be beneficial for heaven and those that won't be?

Maybe this is to shake the chaff from the wheat? The weeds from the crop.
bulproof
Posts: 25,260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2014 12:40:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/26/2014 12:31:13 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/26/2014 12:21:23 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
I find it funny people are too stupid to realize that if a god existed there would be no need for life, god could just start everyone in heaven.

Maybe this world has some value.

Maybe it is to sort out the people that will be beneficial for heaven and those that won't be?

Maybe this is to shake the chaff from the wheat? The weeds from the crop.

An omniscient god wouldn't create chaff.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2014 12:43:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/26/2014 12:40:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/26/2014 12:31:13 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/26/2014 12:21:23 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
I find it funny people are too stupid to realize that if a god existed there would be no need for life, god could just start everyone in heaven.

Maybe this world has some value.

Maybe it is to sort out the people that will be beneficial for heaven and those that won't be?

Maybe this is to shake the chaff from the wheat? The weeds from the crop.

An omniscient god wouldn't create chaff.

He did make chaff. Why he would want all that wheat I don't know. Maybe Heaven has a lot of bread.
GOD-vs-ITSELF
Posts: 274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2014 12:51:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
That is exactly the problem, it reduces the human experience to chatteled puppetry
If You Believe In Free Will, Then Don't Picture A Hippo For One Minute. Starting NOW
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2014 12:54:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/26/2014 12:51:10 AM, GOD-vs-ITSELF wrote:
That is exactly the problem, it reduces the human experience to chatteled puppetry

So many people, wake-up, work, eat, work, sometimes sleep.. and they roll though each day like that.

There is worst puppetry in existence today by governments of man and the world bank.

By the way. OUTLAW the federal reserve. America free from shackles of the world order!