Religion doesn’t assume that people have free will, nor does it assume that everything is part of god’s plan. This isnt agreed upon by every religion, its not even agreed upon by Christians specifically. What is your point?
Religion doesn’t assume that people have free will, nor does it assume that everything is part of god’s plan. This isnt agreed upon by every religion, its not even agreed upon by Christians specifically. What is your point?
I don’t think OP explicitly said what you complain about. I didn’t read the post as “all religion is like that”. But some of it is. So this post seems to be about the specific groups which make these assumptions and hold these beliefs. The combination of both beliefs is fairly common across many religions and sects.
Yes, I believe that’s what they meant. My problem was more that it wasn’t specified. This community is mostly for arguments against theism, if this doesn’t apply to all theism then its just an argument against a specific belief and should be presented as such. I think the default here should be all religion as the topic, and it should be specified if its not.
I mean. It does seem to state that directly, yes. The whole thing about God hardening hearts and stuff. Not a thing he’s supposed to be doing if choice is on the table.
No, it does not state this directly. It says that god has the power to do this, which why wouldn’t he? It doesn’t say he does this for every decision that people make.
That one part with the pharaoh? While there is an argument for a mistranslation in meaning and I usually err on the side of those, I don’t consider the linguistic nuance to have a huge difference in result here. Whether his heart was hardened or only reinforced, it was still a thing that God is heavily implied to have done to affect someone’s emotional decision-making.
A little birdy tells me Pharaoh was already pretty set on this course, and the only way to avoid impacting someone’s free will is to never interact with them at all (I don’t actually believe in free will for this reason). But some of what God is said to have done sounds more direct than a mere suggestion, and the presence of a plan and purposeful action toward that plan are acknowledged.
Romans 7:17 - 21
17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”
18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”
20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”
21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
A plan without a known end goal is not a plan, no? It’s barely a hobby. He says He has a goal. Either we have the freedom to fuck up the plan and are therefore dangerously close to equality on God’s own turf, or we don’t.
Yeah it says he does this to the pharaoh, not every person for every decision. Just because one person wasn’t in control of their decisions in one specific instance does not imply that no one is in control of their decisions ever. It demonstrates that this is a power that god has, which is obvious considering he’s supposed to be all powerful. This does not mean anything when it comes to free will.
It is a good point that the ability existing isn’t the same effect as the ability being used. Presuming He leaves most people alone, you do have a strong case for individual free will.
I would argue that God’s endgame existing at all does mean quite a bit in terms of how “free” a predictable chain of events can actually be, but it’s easy to get lost in the weeds there and I don’t know if that angle is something either of us is likely to be swayed on. At the very least, this is probably the nicest disagreement I’ve ever had on anything religious.
I return my ticket to heaven (if I get let in…). Hell is where people will need help. Christians can be content to turn their backs on people rather than give them a few hundred more years to learn what ‘good’ is. I don’t think God allowing suffering of innocents at the hands of ‘evil’ people is justifiable.
I’m not sure why you are so insistent on finding ways to make god look bad. It comes off as petty and childish considering you are presumably an atheist.
I’d say they’re just pointing out some of the contradictions most religious belief systems have, which is a reasonable thing to do in an atheist com, no?
No, they are pointing out a potential contradiction in a specific christian belief. This isn’t an in depth critique of christian philosophy, this is a meaningless jab at Christians for no reason other than it made them feel smarter than all the Christians. The atheist community is known for being childish, I don’t see any reason to believe this is different.
Religion doesn’t assume that people have free will, nor does it assume that everything is part of god’s plan. This isnt agreed upon by every religion, its not even agreed upon by Christians specifically. What is your point?
I don’t think OP explicitly said what you complain about. I didn’t read the post as “all religion is like that”. But some of it is. So this post seems to be about the specific groups which make these assumptions and hold these beliefs. The combination of both beliefs is fairly common across many religions and sects.
I guess the point is the apparent contradiction. It is a prominent topic in religious philosophy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theological_determinism#Free_will_and_theological_determinism
Yes, I believe that’s what they meant. My problem was more that it wasn’t specified. This community is mostly for arguments against theism, if this doesn’t apply to all theism then its just an argument against a specific belief and should be presented as such. I think the default here should be all religion as the topic, and it should be specified if its not.
If Christians believe in hell but not free will, it follows that god creates billions of people just to torture them forever in hell.
I mean. It does seem to state that directly, yes. The whole thing about God hardening hearts and stuff. Not a thing he’s supposed to be doing if choice is on the table.
No, it does not state this directly. It says that god has the power to do this, which why wouldn’t he? It doesn’t say he does this for every decision that people make.
That one part with the pharaoh? While there is an argument for a mistranslation in meaning and I usually err on the side of those, I don’t consider the linguistic nuance to have a huge difference in result here. Whether his heart was hardened or only reinforced, it was still a thing that God is heavily implied to have done to affect someone’s emotional decision-making.
A little birdy tells me Pharaoh was already pretty set on this course, and the only way to avoid impacting someone’s free will is to never interact with them at all (I don’t actually believe in free will for this reason). But some of what God is said to have done sounds more direct than a mere suggestion, and the presence of a plan and purposeful action toward that plan are acknowledged.
A plan without a known end goal is not a plan, no? It’s barely a hobby. He says He has a goal. Either we have the freedom to fuck up the plan and are therefore dangerously close to equality on God’s own turf, or we don’t.
Yeah it says he does this to the pharaoh, not every person for every decision. Just because one person wasn’t in control of their decisions in one specific instance does not imply that no one is in control of their decisions ever. It demonstrates that this is a power that god has, which is obvious considering he’s supposed to be all powerful. This does not mean anything when it comes to free will.
It is a good point that the ability existing isn’t the same effect as the ability being used. Presuming He leaves most people alone, you do have a strong case for individual free will.
I would argue that God’s endgame existing at all does mean quite a bit in terms of how “free” a predictable chain of events can actually be, but it’s easy to get lost in the weeds there and I don’t know if that angle is something either of us is likely to be swayed on. At the very least, this is probably the nicest disagreement I’ve ever had on anything religious.
I return my ticket to heaven (if I get let in…). Hell is where people will need help. Christians can be content to turn their backs on people rather than give them a few hundred more years to learn what ‘good’ is. I don’t think God allowing suffering of innocents at the hands of ‘evil’ people is justifiable.
I’m not sure why you are so insistent on finding ways to make god look bad. It comes off as petty and childish considering you are presumably an atheist.
I’d say they’re just pointing out some of the contradictions most religious belief systems have, which is a reasonable thing to do in an atheist com, no?
No, they are pointing out a potential contradiction in a specific christian belief. This isn’t an in depth critique of christian philosophy, this is a meaningless jab at Christians for no reason other than it made them feel smarter than all the Christians. The atheist community is known for being childish, I don’t see any reason to believe this is different.
Yah because Christians aren’t known for being childish at all.
They aren’t. Many of them are childish, but they aren’t known for that the way atheists are.
I’m just making a basic factual statement. If you have an emotional reaction to it that’s not something I’m part of.