God, come out, come out wherever you are!

[Black Chakram]

1) I hardly see it as unjust. Let's use an analogy (even though all analogies break down at some point). Imagine there's a guy you know. He's perfect in every way. One day, he invites you to a party. You have to decide: Are you happy going to the party, knowing that He'll be the center of attention and you'll just be in His shadow. (Although you'll probably still enjoy yourself since He's such a great guy). OR, do you say to yourself, "Eh. That guy's annoying. He may be perfect, but I'd rather hang out with someone else."

It would be hard to call this "perfect guy" unjust. After all, you're being given the choice to attend or not. He's not forcing you into anything.

2) Honestly, there's not a ton of scripture to support this, which is why this particular view is a little shaky. It's usually argued that the Bible doesn't specifically say that this life is the ONLY chance we get, but that's somewhat of a hollow answer.

The whole "having to choose despite a lack of evidence" is always a rather uncomfortable point. Put simply, God is asking if we trust Him despite having all the answers. It's easy to trust someone when you know for SURE what the outcome is. It's a lot harder when you don't. I'm sure there's some point I could argue here about how the second variety of trust is somehow inherently better, or leads to a deeper relationship, but it's rather late where I live and I had a long day of work. I'd be glad to try and revisit that point later, though, and see if I can add some meat to that bone.

As for whether or not that stance is just, that's also tricky. As far as I understand it, the Biblical logic here is that, "Those who've heard about God/Jesus/The Bible directly, have less of an excuse than those who haven't." But this can also be discussed to a greater extent later.

I don't like single posts that snowball into novels. I'd rather keep things to one or two main questions, then revisit some of the other points later if desired.

1.This is a completely false analogy. in the analogy, you'll be having a good time either way. In your description, the difference is between heaven and eternal suffering (or separation from God as you put it, which you still described as horrible; hence, I use the term suffering)
2. I appreciate your honesty on this.

You might be correct about the trust thing, except that God has given us no real reason to believe in him in the first place. And can it really be considered that deep trust you describe if it comes down to "believe or face eternal suffering and separation from me"?

I hope you'll find time to respond in the future, have a good evening.

*shrug*. Like I said, all analogies break down at some point. There are a few ways to address this:
1) Some views in Christianity posit that without God's influence, we're nothing but selfish bastards and would act only out of greedy motives. If that's true, hell would be pretty unpleasant. However, we won't focus on this point as it's rather non-empirical. Even if true, there's no way I could prove it here.

2) Hell exists more for the sake of Satan and the demons. They rebelled against God so He's giving them a place apart from Him. The reason this is so bad is that Satan and the demons hate God. They despise everything He is. So being defeated and confined to a place where they can never reach out and act against Him is torture. Now, if a person ends up in that same place, it's plausible that demons might take some of that hatred out on the people as well. That would also be pretty unpleasant.

3) This option makes a lot of Christians squirm, but I think anyone who doesn't at least consider it is blinding themself: Logically, it goes like this:
- Some people don't want to spend eternity with God.
- God will honor your choice in the end, thus letting that person to go a place without God, called "hell"
- The person has gotten what they wanted and is happy
- To non-believers, hell is therefore not a bad place

I think the reason Christians view the last one as "bad" is "why wouldn't you want to spend eternity with someone who loves you?". But you have to be a part of the religion to find that last one bad. Still, given an objective decision, if true, I'd rather spend eternity with someone who cares.

---

If man is made in God's image, then how are there so many images of man? Which man was lucky enough to actually be made in God's image?

It's pretty perverse if you think about it. Just think about all of the people killed in the name of God. The murderers are believers yet they kill and, by definition, will gain entrance into Heaven.

This one's actually not that hard. "God's image" simply means that we were created as intelligent, sentient beings with a desire to create and be loved. Nothing more.

---

The other question is easier. God allows all the pain and suffering because He's given us this world to make and choose as we will. As a whole, though, we don't do the best job at being "good". At least not all the time. If God were to step in and put a stop to all the bad stuff, it would invalidate and cheapen the entire point of giving us free will. If He's given us the freedom to make our own choices, He's going to respect that, even if the choices we make sadden and pain Him.

I've heard it said that the core of Christianity is that the Bible is love story between God and mankind. It's not that God NEEDS our worship or approval, it's that He created us to be in relationship with Him. He made each and every person out there with the hope that they'll look at Him and say, "Cool! I like what you've done! Also, I'm dealing with X, Y, and Z. Can you please help?" And God will be more than happy to.

You say that if we asked him, God would be more than happy to help. But you also say that he allows suffering. Well, wouldn't all the religious people who are suffering be praying and begging for his help? I guess he's NOT happy to help then.

Also, if God did exist, you don't know his desires or how he works. It's all bullshit that fits with what you are trying to argue.

1) How do you define "help"? Is having a cushy, comfortable life a good thing? If this world is all that exists, then yes, and you're totally right. God is a selfish asshole who just likes to see us squirm. But IF there's something that comes after, then "help" would be the course of action that results in personal growth, understanding who you are, and a growing sense of compassion and mercy. In most cases, the smoother someone's life is going, the less likely they are to examine themselves and try to become better people. Just look at CEOs of corrupt companies for examples of that.

If you want a simpler example, look at a parent. If a child has done something wrong and a parent punishes them, most of the time, the parent isn't happy to do so. The kid wants something and the parent denies it. Sure, the parent would like to grant the request, but they know it would do more harm than good. If God truly is omniscient, it's pretty obvious He'd know what I need better than I would.

2) Assuming God is the one described in the Bible, that particular book lays out pretty clearly enough of God's character to figure out what His desires are.

3) I sense frustration. Let's back this up a bit. Please state the point at which you started feeling my arguments got circular. If you like, let's back this up to a higher level philosophical axiom.