RE: The Reasons why "Just Following Jesus" Doesn't work
May 28, 2015 at 1:57 am
(This post was last modified: May 28, 2015 at 2:12 am by robvalue.)
This video sums up very well how absurd the idea that people send themselves to hell is, and how such reasoning makes no sense in other contexts.
We warn people not to walk towards danger because (a) we know the danger is there and (b) generally speaking, we didn't create the danger ourselves just as a way to hurt people and refuse to remove it, or are pals with someone else who did.
For the most part, danger in our world is an unfortunate byproduct of something with a purpose, it's not there simply as a danger and nothing else. If it was the latter, we would generally try and remove this danger if we could. Right? If God cannot even match up favourably to a reasonable human, he fails as any kind of benevolent being.
At this point I see only these rebuttals:
1) God literally cannot remove "hell": he was powerful enough to create it but not powerful enough to remove it. It was pretty stupid to make it in the first place, then. It would be like digging a massive hole for people to walk into, knowing you couldn't ever fill it back up.
2) God is beyond our understanding so we can't judge him like this. Well, if we can't understand him, we have no way to know he is actually benevolent other than blind faith.
3) Hell does have a purpose, that being to make sure we follow God. Well, then it's a blatant attempt to influence our decision through threats.
And lastly: Christians are "choosing" Islam hell, as well as every other hell that could ever possibly exist, if they do happen to exist and they are wrong about Christianity. Is that fair? Are you choosing Islam hell, if it turns out that is the real hell? It's no different to us "choosing" your hell, if it turns out your hell is real. You don't think Islam hell is real, and we don't think your hell is real.
http://youtu.be/HaJgLBoB_Pw
We warn people not to walk towards danger because (a) we know the danger is there and (b) generally speaking, we didn't create the danger ourselves just as a way to hurt people and refuse to remove it, or are pals with someone else who did.
For the most part, danger in our world is an unfortunate byproduct of something with a purpose, it's not there simply as a danger and nothing else. If it was the latter, we would generally try and remove this danger if we could. Right? If God cannot even match up favourably to a reasonable human, he fails as any kind of benevolent being.
At this point I see only these rebuttals:
1) God literally cannot remove "hell": he was powerful enough to create it but not powerful enough to remove it. It was pretty stupid to make it in the first place, then. It would be like digging a massive hole for people to walk into, knowing you couldn't ever fill it back up.
2) God is beyond our understanding so we can't judge him like this. Well, if we can't understand him, we have no way to know he is actually benevolent other than blind faith.
3) Hell does have a purpose, that being to make sure we follow God. Well, then it's a blatant attempt to influence our decision through threats.
And lastly: Christians are "choosing" Islam hell, as well as every other hell that could ever possibly exist, if they do happen to exist and they are wrong about Christianity. Is that fair? Are you choosing Islam hell, if it turns out that is the real hell? It's no different to us "choosing" your hell, if it turns out your hell is real. You don't think Islam hell is real, and we don't think your hell is real.
http://youtu.be/HaJgLBoB_Pw
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum