Argument from evil, restated

[Zarith]

Sorry I should have explained, I've gone through these things so many times with others here I forget some do not really know what scriptures say even at there basic. I see Undeceived has help with answers, he does excellent at giving answers.

"Gee, sorry for calling you confused/ignorant and referring the problem somewhere else, I forgot that I really do believe you are confused/ignorant, and please see this other source for more information."

---

Delighted to meet you, Zarith.

If the ability to choose is so important, why then do I end up in a place where I have no choice, if I make the right choice the first time? Free will is the most important thing ... but only up to a point?

Before we enter heaven, we willingly ask God to make us righteous-- to put to death our sinful self. God cannot remove the impure part of us unless we first ask Him to. Suppose you're a brilliant sculptor who makes living clay people. You give them the desire for food, called hunger. But they are clay, they do not need food. Nevertheless, some choose to eat for pleasure. Others tell you, "Take this craving from us!" If you sever their hunger instinct, are you violating their free will?

If god desires for people to choose to love him, then why is there an expiration date on this offer? Surely if hell existed, it would be filled with people who would make a different choice if given one more chance. Don't you think?

Yes, they'd want to be in heaven. But they'd choose heaven for pleasure, not for God. Desiring something, no matter how much, cannot persuade you to love somebody. If a millionaire told you, "Love me and I'll give you a car," could you do it? You might love the car, but not the man. It is impossible to love someone who is a means (of instrumental value) and not an end (destination). If God is not an end in your life right now, the offer of a different end won't change anything. God said, "Have no other gods before me." If you value heaven above God, you cannot inherit heaven.

If this topic still interests you, read Luke 16:19–31:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...ersion=NLT

Thanks for taking the time to write up an actual response, and nice to meet you too.

The statue analogy is an interesting one, so let's run with it. You mention the creator giving the statues "hunger", which I understand as corresponding to the impulse to sin, but this is a bit of a clever word game isn't it? After all, how could we fault a creator for making creations that "hunger"? This seems like a fairly innocuous design choice, especially given how eating (when done properly) can be both enjoyable and morally good.

So let's call it like it is, and state that the creator makes statues that have the impulse to lie, cheat, steal, murder, rape, torture, and whatever other horrible thing we can think of.

This alone ought to be enough to give anybody pause. And it does, which is why I believe we have a convoluted narrative involving a talking snake, a tree, and fresh fruit that essentially distracts from the question of "where does evil come from in the first place?"

But it continues. Some of the statues will be informed that in order to rid themselves of these impulses, they need only to ask. Fair enough, except for all the statues who aren't told, and in fact don't actually know that there exists someone to whom they need to make this request, or worse, believe in the existence of an entity OTHER than the one that made them. Because that serves some sort of purpose in the overall scheme of things.

Then of the statues that make this request, some will make it and claim that it has been granted, while continuing to do bad things.

Others will make the request and it won't be granted, and they will be told that this is because they did not ask in the right way, were not sincere about it, or whatever.

Then of course, for all of the statues that fail for any reason to make this request or make it properly, they will all be consigned to eternal firing in the kiln.

All of this is necessary because it is of the utmost importance that these statues be able to choose to make such a request.

This seems a bit much, doesn't it? And of course in the verses you referenced, there is a bit of schadenfreude in Abraham and Lazarus showing up, isn't there? Passages like this are part of the reason I can't believe in any system that includes the idea of eternal punishment. This is bronze age superstition, and it's been carried over into modern times, and it's deeply immoral.

Of course, I'm told that I'm not allowed to judge this state of affairs using the same moral compass that I have supposedly been given, which is yet another mark against it in my eyes.

Then of course there is the issue of, if heaven and hell aren't supposed to influence our decision, then why are people informed of their existence? Seems to me they were invented with the express reason of influencing people's choices.

Finally, I would note on a somewhat separate topic that I find the very last verse you referenced interesting, in light of the gospel. If this verse is true, what would be the point in spreading the "good news"? It would seem to imply that no non-Jew could possibly avail themselves of this new information.