(December 27, 2014 at 4:08 pm)Glitch Wrote:Quote:Her: I'm saying if people have the chance to accept Christ and they do then they're saved. But if they reject him then they're not... But if they never had the chance to know Him then they probably aren't condemned because they had no way of knowing.
This line of reasoning is always so weird to me. I understand the notion that they don't want their god to looks like a monster, but this apologetic has some very bizarre consequences.
Her stated position is that people who did not know about God have a 0% chance of going to hell, and people that do know about God now have a choice to accept or reject him. This means that people who know about God have a non-zero chance of going to hell. So, by evangelizing to people, you are increasing their chance of going to hell.
The highest moral good is to stop telling people about God. The more standard apologetic I hear on this topic is that the Holy Spirit comes to everyone in some undeniable way, and it is up to them to accept or reject God. How you can reject something that is "undeniable" is beyond me, but that's beside the point. You can look at a map and have a pretty good idea what religion a person is by knowing where they're from. So, even if this is all true, the Holy Spirit is demonstrably less effective than regional demographics and religious upbringing. So, people teaching people is way more effective than the "undeniable" influence of the Holy Spirit. Oops.
