Sinerely,
A follower of Christ

I would like to post something I came up with have wrestled with and I was wondering if someone could help me out, though I feel as if I have already solved it. So here it is:

We all know that in the Christian theology, if you do something bad, you go to hell. We also know that in the Christian theology, God knows all, past, present, and future. If God knows the Future, he knows what our Future acts are going to be. So, he must also know whether we will go to hell or not, prior to our being born. Nevertheless, he allows that child to be born, full well that that child will be sent to hell when he dies, say, of old age. This brings up the question: is God just in this action?

A perfect god is just. So why would a perfect god send a child to Earth, only to have him spend eternity in hellfire anyway? This is unanswerable but with the response that God is unjust, therefore imperfect, erego, the Christian god DOES NOT EXIST.

Now, one may use the argument that God endowed us with free will, and it is really OUR choice on how to act. OK, fine. But what is the point of free will, if He knows beforehand whether he will go to Hell or Heaven?

Then, as a desperate grasping of straws, if you will, a Christian used the classic, “It’s not our place to question the Almighty’s divine wisdom” argument. To that I answer, “Then why would God give us Free Will and Free Thought, knowing full well that we would turn it against Him in the future? What does He have to gain?

If you have an answer for this little conundrum, please leave a comment below mine.

Thanks!

– The Doctor

Good points there.

My contention is that it is difficult simply to use Logic as a tool to explain why a person chooses to go insane.

I admit it would come across as internally inconsistent. What happens when we employ Logic to explain a person who is internally inconsisent. I often wonder: “What makes green green? What gives a thing its subjective consciousness? I have seen colour-blind people. Since there are a minority, we, being the majority, imposes the sort of standard colour schemas on our TV and LCD displays.

It would be great if Logic could explore elicidate those questions further. Thanks for your comment.

Appreciate them.

Denying logic is internally inconsistant. If you want to abandon logic though feel free. However, be prepared for lots of assertations rather than arguments

The major premise minor premise valid conclusion method is pretty much the foundation of logical proofs. Further these sorts of categorical distinctions are more or less necessary to leading an effective life (read as Hume’s argument that certain ideas have “survival value” *science is another survival trait*).

Basically you need to assume certain things are true in order to get on with life. Without logic “YOU ARE WRONG” would seem as likely a “good” argument (which is to say emotively effective or persuasive) as the socratic method.

Oh wait, my bad, tried to use logic to explain the situation.

Keep working. Love your work.

I was born a Moslem but disagreed with many parts of its Sharia. It took a while before I became an atheist. But it was no thanks to your site…haha!

I would like to see two things. Is it possible to have a slower paced video clip? Maybe you could redirect us to a site…this is because we need to digest quite a lot in 8 minutes. But I guess you have your reasons. Maybe a compact and a slower version.

Although, I agree much with your course and effort, it would be excellent to see more alternative views from your other posters in your comment section. I would welcome posters from various faith to comment. You have the right to block those vulgar ones though.

I do pop even every month to check out your site.

Also, the problem is these arguements is that we can never prove whether God does or does not exist. And I do think that God is not a solution to humanity’s problem but rather a problem. We’d have to work with what we have.

The trouble is: sheer philosophical logic can’t seem to break this delusion of a Godhead conception. Simply because Logic is faulty and it is essentially a means to an end.

I am not agnostic though or deistic. I just believe in living and let live. This is no way to discourage you, especially if your effort is an affirmation of you “living” it out.

Well done! It would it brilliant if you attempt to provide (if possible), the deconstruction of God from a phenomenological perspective.

I just stumbled upon your site and I am determined to watch all of your videos. You have done an amazing work, keep it up!