Evidence for God from Science

Hello everyone. Just in case anyone wanted to know, my former username was ManofGod and some of you might have read my posts in the various forums, but my account got messed up so now I am ConfusedMan. The name change is fitting because I have come to a point where I am seriously doubting my Christian faith. Now, there's no need to freak out...I'm not one step away from atheism or anything like that, but last year I did consider becoming a Deist (not that Deism provides many answers either). Before I state my inquiry in detail, I will let you all know that I want to make this topic an interactive conversation and I will be asking some very tough questions and responses. Well, here goes: First I want to establish that, according to the Bible, God is omniscient and knows everything that has happened and what will happen. That being said, it is then reasonable to conclude that God knew before creating man that man would choose to rebel against Him. He even (at least in a literal interpretation of Genesis) layed the choice right before Adam and Eve with the Tree. In knowing that mankind would rebel, He also thus knew that He would have to send hundreds upon hundreds of millions of souls to eternal punishment. Yes, It is mankind's fault (at least in most cases), but God still knew beforehand that mankind would become self-destructive. The Bible says that God wishes that none would perish, and in the Old Testament it says God takes no pleasure in crushing the wicked. If that is true, why did God create beings with which He would have to see perish and actively crush and punish? I understand that many people go to heaven, but if He had never created mankind in the first place, He would not have to send anyone to Hell, which He supposedly does not want to do. So, if He does not want to do that, why create beings that choose to damn themselves? I know that means that some of those same beings don't go to heaven, but if they were never created in the first place, they would obviously not be deprived of any joy since they never existed theoretically. Someone can not be deprived of anything if they don't exist.
I would greatly appreciate any responses. Please understand that I am not here to challenge anyone or be confrontational about the matter. I just want to see if this can be resolved. I will have more posts like this in the future, so put on your philosophy caps.

Welcome back to the board Confused.

Yes I believe God did know we would fall and he already had a plan in place before we were created and that was Jesus. So he knew the cost of making us, but he made us anyway. Now that to me is amazing.

To the other part of your question - well I am inclined towards annihilationism rather than eternal conscious suffering because that it how I and a number of people interpret scripture. A lot of people on this board would disagree with me on this and that is fine - but for me it sits comfortably with an all-loving God creating a race that he knew some would fail and therefore be extinguish rather than suffer while the rest go on to eternal joy.

ConfusedMan wrote:First I want to establish that, according to the Bible, God is omniscient and knows everything that has happened and what will happen. That being said, it is then reasonable to conclude that God knew before creating man that man would choose to rebel against Him. He even (at least in a literal interpretation of Genesis) layed the choice right before Adam and Eve with the Tree. In knowing that mankind would rebel, He also thus knew that He would have to send hundreds upon hundreds of millions of souls to eternal punishment.

First, it is a hard task to show that it is less good to "have not lived" than to "have lived".
Is "being" inherently good? If so, then it's better God create beings than not. But that's a first hurdle to just chew on.

Second, God doesn't send anyone anywhere. He gives them what they want, which is nothing to do with Him.
Cementing their choices in, is for sure punishment. Who wants to be locked into their own world.

In fact, I'd argue that if a good God exists, then a place such as hell is necessary.
Unless God should just accept everyone. Or perhaps God should remove free will. What else would you have God do. Refrain from creating?
Is God not also Sovereign and entitled to create or not create? Should His decisions by at the whims of what His creation will/will not do?
That's something else to chew on.

And in all the chewing, I'm sure you'll likely gain no clear answer either way.
BUT, I'd be interested to know if you were God, then what your alternative would be, as a good and loving God?

I knew before my children were born that they would do things that would hurt me and themselves, that they would do things that were bad even KNOWING they were bad and I knew that eventually, one day, they would die.
It never even occured to me to NOT bring them into the world because I knew how much I would love them, how much joy I would bring them and how much joy they would bring me.
I knew that I would love them even when I hated what they did.
In short, when love is other-centered as opposed to self-centered, there is no choice other than TO love.
And when you love, you create so that you can share that love.

Thank you for the replies everyone.
To Silvertusk, I would like to believe in annihilationism also, but I find scriptures like Matthew 25:46 to disprove that theology, though it would seem that such a theology would affirm God's power and mercy. However, I don't see how it is amazing that God knew humans would sin but created us anyway so we could just end up sinning.
To Kurieuo, I do not believe that a holy God should accept anyone nor that He should take away our freewill. I believe it is puzzling that He knew that our freewill would lead to our making ourselves unholy but created us anyways.
To PaulSacramento, I understand where your coming from with your analogy, but you are oversimplifying God's actions by comparing it to a human action. For example, if you were given the knowledge (before you had children) that one or more of your children would go to Hell if you had them, would you still choose to have them born? If you did, what does that say about your decision? Yes, they are responsible for their own actions, but if you and let them be born anyways, are you not in some way a part of them going to Hell? It would seem better to choose to not have the children. On a grander, this is essentially what God did. The Bible says God wishes that none would perish, and yet He made an entire race of beings in which hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them would and will perish. Yes, many will go to heaven, but I still stand by what I said earlier about nonexistence. If God has an entire heavenly kingdom (a third of which He still had to banish) with angels worshiping Him continually, why would he create a race of beings in which many of them would end up destroying themselves? How much worship does He need? He has other angelic beings to give love to, so I don't comprehend why he would make more beings that were even inferior to angels to try to give love to.
Thank you again for the replies, and I hope this remains a constructive conversation.

ConfusedMan wrote:To Kurieuo, I do not believe that a holy God should accept anyone nor that He should take away our freewill. I believe it is puzzling that He knew that our freewill would lead to our making ourselves unholy but created us anyways.

Be interested to know whether you feel a good God should have then withheld from creating?

Here is a heretical sounding thought, but perhaps we're more hung up on our sin and doing good works than God is?
God knew now matter what free creatures were created that it was always inevitable in respect of their true free will that they'd reject Him.
Indeed we all sin. There are none of us who are good. And yet, God saw it as nonetheless good to create us.

Maybe you're not giving us enough credit? Truly we perhaps deserve no credit, except God still sees value in loving us despite our sin. (Romans 5:8)
And as such, God's plan was to extend grace to all whose hearts are receptive of Him and who love back.

ConfusedMan wrote:Thank you for the replies everyone.
To Silvertusk, I would like to believe in annihilationism also, but I find scriptures like Matthew 25:46 to disprove that theology, though it would seem that such a theology would affirm God's power and mercy. However, I don't see how it is amazing that God knew humans would sin but created us anyway so we could just end up sinning.
To Kurieuo, I do not believe that a holy God should accept anyone nor that He should take away our freewill. I believe it is puzzling that He knew that our freewill would lead to our making ourselves unholy but created us anyways.
To PaulSacramento, I understand where your coming from with your analogy, but you are oversimplifying God's actions by comparing it to a human action. For example, if you were given the knowledge (before you had children) that one or more of your children would go to Hell if you had them, would you still choose to have them born? If you did, what does that say about your decision? Yes, they are responsible for their own actions, but if you and let them be born anyways, are you not in some way a part of them going to Hell? It would seem better to choose to not have the children. On a grander, this is essentially what God did. The Bible says God wishes that none would perish, and yet He made an entire race of beings in which hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them would and will perish. Yes, many will go to heaven, but I still stand by what I said earlier about nonexistence. If God has an entire heavenly kingdom (a third of which He still had to banish) with angels worshiping Him continually, why would he create a race of beings in which many of them would end up destroying themselves? How much worship does He need? He has other angelic beings to give love to, so I don't comprehend why he would make more beings that were even inferior to angels to try to give love to.
Thank you again for the replies, and I hope this remains a constructive conversation.

I would argue that annihilation is eternal punishment - because there is no coming back from it. Also have you ever noticed that eternal life throughout all of scripture seems to be something you have to earn (through salvation) or inherit. I think there is scope to take it both ways. I just conclude to the one that sits more coherently with an all-loving God. I know many who agree with me and there is a lot of material out there - but also of course many who disagree with me and that is fine.

To PaulSacramento, I understand where your coming from with your analogy, but you are oversimplifying God's actions by comparing it to a human action. For example, if you were given the knowledge (before you had children) that one or more of your children would go to Hell if you had them, would you still choose to have them born? If you did, what does that say about your decision? Yes, they are responsible for their own actions, but if you and let them be born anyways, are you not in some way a part of them going to Hell? It would seem better to choose to not have the children. On a grander, this is essentially what God did. The Bible says God wishes that none would perish, and yet He made an entire race of beings in which hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them would and will perish. Yes, many will go to heaven, but I still stand by what I said earlier about nonexistence. If God has an entire heavenly kingdom (a third of which He still had to banish) with angels worshiping Him continually, why would he create a race of beings in which many of them would end up destroying themselves? How much worship does He need? He has other angelic beings to give love to, so I don't comprehend why he would make more beings that were even inferior to angels to try to give love to.

Ok, lets us look at it from God's perspective then shall we?
Material life is temporary and death is NOT the end, so death, though intense for humans, is really nothing major for God so the issue of death, for God, is NOT an issue at all.
God did NOT make anyone to perish.
God brought forth ALL life and gave humans the ability to decide to have a good life or a bad one and on top of that He gave us a GIFT of eternal life if we so choose it.
God doesn't not create so He can be worshiped, God creates out of love and it is only right to worship the source of Love, I mean, why wouldn't you worship the source of the greatest force and gift in the universe?
Angels have free will just like humans and they were free to rebel and some did.
Their rebelling was because of the special place that God gave us ( some were jealous and felt we didn't' Deseret this gift of Grace).

You have an emotional problem with creation, not an intellectual one.
Just like pain and suffering are an emotional problem and not an intellectual one.
And that is fine BUT you can't judge God;s action based on emotion, anymore than you can judge the actions of your fellow humans that way.

While I appreciate the emotional force of the question (and I mean that sincerely--not demeaning it at all, it has tremendous emotional force), I think the question itself is actually a giant category error on the level of "how much does blue weigh?" After all, the entire thing is based on the unspoken premise that the words "ought" or "should" apply to God, that somehow God is under some moral standard. Morality is something we are so very much under, it really is an objective part of reality, that we just cannot conceive of how God could be bigger than that. That very statement sounds as if (to my own ears anyway) that I'm suggesting that God doesn't have to be moral. But, again, that's just another category error. Shoulds and oughts don't apply to God at all. For that matter, neither does "why?" Because that assumes God needs a reason, and that assumes that God would be compelled on the force of this or that reason to act this or that way. But God is compelled by absolutely NOTHING. He and He alone is absolutely free. When I say the question is a category error, I mean that, insofar as it sees God as a being and therefore subject to reality just as you and I are. But God is no such thing. God is being itself. Such terms just don't apply to God.

So to K's point, perhaps we need to be less concerned with all of this and realize that we're really projecting something on God that makes no sense. Its fine that we are concerned about sin and good works. That's a part of our world because it affects us. But it doesn't affect God, so perhaps we should stop thinking that God cares so much. Remember, all of those commandments and promises are for our benefit anyway. God gets nothing nor loses anything out of us, not our glorification neither our suffering. It really is all for us. That's the GRACE of the matter. God is absolutely, perfectly complete and happy in and of Himself. So let's stop with the "why" and looking for divine reasons and suggesting that God is under some standard. That just betrays a misunderstanding of the nature of God.

While I agree Jac, this here;" God is absolutely, perfectly complete and happy in and of Himself." begs the question of, "If so, why create?"

Jac,
I'd be interested in all of your thoughts on this, if you're interested to fully elaborate.

Silvertusk wrote:

ConfusedMan wrote:Thank you for the replies everyone.
To Silvertusk, I would like to believe in annihilationism also, but I find scriptures like Matthew 25:46 to disprove that theology, though it would seem that such a theology would affirm God's power and mercy. However, I don't see how it is amazing that God knew humans would sin but created us anyway so we could just end up sinning.
To Kurieuo, I do not believe that a holy God should accept anyone nor that He should take away our freewill. I believe it is puzzling that He knew that our freewill would lead to our making ourselves unholy but created us anyways.
To PaulSacramento, I understand where your coming from with your analogy, but you are oversimplifying God's actions by comparing it to a human action. For example, if you were given the knowledge (before you had children) that one or more of your children would go to Hell if you had them, would you still choose to have them born? If you did, what does that say about your decision? Yes, they are responsible for their own actions, but if you and let them be born anyways, are you not in some way a part of them going to Hell? It would seem better to choose to not have the children. On a grander, this is essentially what God did. The Bible says God wishes that none would perish, and yet He made an entire race of beings in which hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them would and will perish. Yes, many will go to heaven, but I still stand by what I said earlier about nonexistence. If God has an entire heavenly kingdom (a third of which He still had to banish) with angels worshiping Him continually, why would he create a race of beings in which many of them would end up destroying themselves? How much worship does He need? He has other angelic beings to give love to, so I don't comprehend why he would make more beings that were even inferior to angels to try to give love to.
Thank you again for the replies, and I hope this remains a constructive conversation.

I would argue that annihilation is eternal punishment - because there is no coming back from it. Also have you ever noticed that eternal life throughout all of scripture seems to be something you have to earn (through salvation) or inherit. I think there is scope to take it both ways. I just conclude to the one that sits more coherently with an all-loving God. I know many who agree with me and there is a lot of material out there - but also of course many who disagree with me and that is fine.

You know what, I'll look more into that. Maybe there are some scriptures that I haven't noticed concerning that line of thought.

Thank you all again for your thoughtful responses. I have taken all your responses very seriously and am feeling a little more grounded about the matter. It has been a very stressful past few days because of my doubts, but I have come to a point where I feel I can understand this better. What I understand now is that I will not simply know the motives of God's mind, nor will I have all the answers to my questions. I do appreciate God's love, and as for the unsaved, I must come to realize that they are responsible for their actions and that God does not let them get in the way of His sole purpose of giving His love to us.
I will have more questions in the days ahead, but I am sure that you will be able to answer them just as intelligently and politely as my latest question. Thank you everyone.

PaulSacramento wrote:While I agree Jac, this here;" God is absolutely, perfectly complete and happy in and of Himself." begs the question of, "If so, why create?"

Sure, but before I could really address that, I'd ask two simple questions:

1. Is God bound by anything? That is, is there any external principle that binds God to necessarily do this or necessarily not do that?
2. Does God lack anything? That is, is there anything that God could desire outside of Himself that He would somehow profit by obtaining?

I think it is self-evident that the answer to both is necessarily, "no." What say you?

To your first question, I would say the only thing God is bound to is morals. I think it is biblically correct to say that God can not do anything unmoral. Other than that I would also say no to the first question. To your second question, can we really know if God does or doesn't desire something outside Himself? It is a hard question to answer. After all His ways are above our ways, and His thoughts above our thoughts. We cannot claim to know for sure about all of God's thought's and desires.