Free will vs Omniscience

depends WHO you are being disobedient to and also WHY. What are your motives? Its one thing to simply be ornery and another thing to hurt others for your own selfish gain

But is that really true? Have you read the Bible stories Phat?Can you point out where those being killed were evil?Does being disobedient justify getting killed?Does worshiping idols justify getting killed?Does the behavior of other people justify YOU getting killed?

Floods, slavery, etc. are NOT the natural consequences of disobedience, idolatry, etc. They are artificial consequences imposed by your God, according to your Bible.You wouldn't make such a silly argument to defend anybody but God.

slavery is a natural consequence of idolatry...since we become a slave to whatever addiction masters usI suppose you would argue that religion is itself an addiction...and I doubt i would argue much with you regarding that!One problem in these types of debates is in reference to god as simply a character in a book rather than an actual relationship in the mind and heart. It is rather difficult to arrive at any sort of consensus when the character is a creation of humanity in the belief of some, while an actual presence in the belief of others.

That is just another really embarrassing thing for you to say. Do you seriously think slaves were the result of being addicted to some master?Sheesh Phat, think. Yet what does the evidence show Phat. Can you make a case for any of the Gods in the Bible stories being anything other than characters in a book?

I think you have it here.Why is Jesus Christ in your heart and mind but not mine?I think you need to think really hard about that. Why you but not me? I am, after all an equal member of his creation. Up until the age of about 13 God spoke to me too. He was as real as a jam sandwich. Then he wasn't. So now I'm apparently on my way to hell for no fault of my own.How does that work Phat? Why some people but not others? Why no Hindus or Muslims? Why just you?Does that seem fair? Moral?And please don't give me any of that 'we can't judge god' shit. We can and we do because he gave us the capacity to do exaclty that, otherwise we could not tell right from wrong.How do you explain it Phat? And no biblical bullshit please.

In the Bible, God's Chosen people were enslaved because God actively chose not to protect them. You can teach your child a lesson by letting him burn his fingers on a hot stove, and you can call that a "natural" consequence of his own decision if you like. You can also call it negligence. The problem is the discrepancies between the character in the book and the "buddy" in your heart and mind. Who would want the character in the book as a buddy? You cherry-pick the parts of the book that you like and ignore the rest. It's like having a relationship with Long John Silver in my heart and mind because he was a jovial storyteller - but ignoring the fact that he was also a bloodthirsty pirate.

It is my belief that you can only understand the character in the book through knowing the character outside of the book first. It is not the other way around.People indict God based on the book yet don't even know God.I suppose you may argue that God is unknowable without reading the book...but what of people who have claimed to have met "Him" who have yet never read the book?This is why consensus is difficult. One side claims the other side needs to meet God...while the other side claims that the book is the only way to get a grasp of the character.(and can't conceive of "knowing" a character in a book after all....)

Logic would dictate that one of us is wrong. I may well ask why you never allowed your belief to over ride evidence or lack thereof. You may in turn ask me why I persist in believing unsubstantiated fairy tales.All that I see is that you value objective proof and evidence to the extent that there is no room (nor need) of belief. I, on the other hand, stand stubbornly on belief despite lacking objective proof and/or evidence. First of all, its not just me. There are many Hindus and Muslims who have accepted Jesus. Granted the beliefs are largely cultural, but not exclusively so. An argument could be made that acceptance of a living Christ transcends cultures...though not for everyone. Thus your question stands...why some and not others?

You're not getting it Phat. I did believe - heart and soul, the whole 10 yards. Then suddenly realised it was a pile of horse manure from top to bottom. Anti-road to Damascas moment.Now why would God do that if it meant my damnation? So what is your answer? I have one, do you?

It might help to have some biblical theology on the subject. The doctrine of election hits all of us as unfair, It's hard to understand why some and not others. There is really only one criterion given in scripture and that is that He chooses the least deserving, the least interesting, the least influential so that the chosen will clearly be His own work and not the work of human achievement. It's not an ironclad rule, there are exceptions, and in any case perhaps you qualify. Simply being human isn't the qualification, however, or all would be saved. There's no doubt, however, that if you truly wanted to believe, wanted sincerely and humbly to belong to the corps of the foolish, weak and base, truly and sincerely desire to love God above all else and give up all your complaints against Him, you'd be saved too. You could pray for that perspective if you really want it. On that level it really is your own choice. Plenty of Hindus and Muslims have become Christians. They don't stay Hindus and Muslims of course, they convert to Christ. On the one hand, no, we want the good and deserving to be saved, that's what seems fair, not the foolish and base. But the fact is that nobody qualifies on that ground anyway. You say because He appears not to have chosen you that you are now going to hell, but that's not biblical. It really ISN'T "through no fault of your own" if you go to hell. Biblically we're ALL going to hell on our own merits, and any who are saved are saved completely by God's merciful choice. It makes for gratitude. If you admit you're a rotten sinner, knowing you deserve nothing at all from God, and beg Him to save you out of sheer mercy, I have no doubt you'd be saved. Keep on complaining that He's unfair and immoral, on the other hand, and you justify His rejection of you. Oh well, I'm sure I failed your test here. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This is how the doctrine of election gets terrifically misused. It never invalidates our own decisions, it is more like the overarching background against which we make our decisions. YOU made that decision and are blaming it on God. It's a mistake to treat God's sovereign will as on the same level as our own wills but that's what you are doing.There's plenty of scripture that says it's our own decisions that we will be judged by and gives lots of reassurance of God's goodwill towards us. "A bruised reed He will not break," etc., "a contrite heart He will not despise." and A bruised reed doesn't shake its fist at God. nor a contrite heart. Meekness is the opposite of accusing God, and the brokenhearted don't rail against Him. Do you mourn your own sins, do you mourn the sinfulness of the world? These are the attitudes of the saved. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Like I said, that's the last thing that will help. Forget the biblical rationalisations, I'm interested in how you reconcile it personally. If the only way you can do it is to quote chunks of fiction that have been written specifically to avoid the problem, then you've failed.

quote:

---

Plenty of Hindus and Muslims have become Christians. They don't stay Hindus and Muslims of course, they convert to Christ.

---

That is not the point of course. Lots of Christians also covert to Islam. No, the question is why is it that no peasants in remote villages in the Atlas mountains ever spontaneously become Christians. Why does it take a visit from a Christian to happen? The answer is obvious and it's got nothing to do with your god. Which is the point I'm making. This god of yours is a monster. Just as well he's fictional.

You're entirely missing the point. I made no decision, it just happened. I got to the age where it made no sense anymore. One day you believe in father Christmas, the next You don't. Now of course, like father christmas, it was the original belief that was in error so it all makes sense. But from a believer's point of view it makes no sense at all for a belief to just fall away. These are the attitudes of the deluded and the words of pious rationalisations. 'Mourning my own sins' - what a pile of nonsense. The late Christopher Hitchens used to say that god creates people sick then commands them to be well. People like you simply can't see the internal contradictions and have to make up all these crazy self-flagelating metaphors. It's a strange thing to watch.

Can you introduce me to Long John Silver so I can get to know him outside the book? And people embrace God based on the book yet don't even know the book. What of the Buddhists and Hindus and Muslims who have read other books and claim to have "met" other gods?I have no problem with your belief in God - but either it's based on the Bible or it isn't. You can't just cherry-pick parts of the Bible that you like and expect people to take your picks seriously.