Here are other pages of Interest about skepticism and or Atheism!

Atheism’s Fall:The Demise of the Deniers of the Faith!

Honest Answers to Skeptical Questioning: The Hard Facts!

Evidence & Answers: Do you believe Truth or Excuses?

Christian Responses to Atheistic Attacks!

What is Atheism? Is it valid to take their word for ’God’?

The real evidence FOR God AGAINST Evolution and Atheism!

If God created everything? Then who created Evil?…Hmmmmmm!

The “Straw-man” syndrome and the state of Good Debate!

Religion SUCKS on so many levels! Atheist’s & Skeptic’s have a valid Point!

Spiritual Gifts HAVE NOT CEASED! The teaching of Cessationism is the Churches SHAME!

The TRUTH about Bodily Healing and God’s ONCE FOR ALL Atonement!

Honest Answers to Skeptical Questioning! Suprised & Silenced By God’s Healing Power!

Skeptical Question # 1

“DID AN ALL-POWERFUL GOD CREATE EVIL?”

What about Human suffering?

This Question is one of the MOST COMMON Questions posed to Christians and is one of the EASIEST TO REFUTE of all misrepresented thoughts of atheist’s around the world!

HERE IS HOW THE QUESTION IS STATED from an Atheist mind!:

“God Is The Creator Of Evil:

I am frustrated at two specific verses in the bible, which applies to this particular topic. The first is the biblical statement that “God is the Alpha and the Omega”.

Loosely defined it means the beginning and the end, the all knowing. Which of course implies that all of his actions and the results are fore known to him.

I have a real problem with this notion. For if God was to know ahead of time that someday he would send me to hell for being an Atheist, I ask what was the purpose in him creating me in the first place?

Was it simply to watch me be tortured?

That seems to be the most logical explanation. I can think of no other rational explanation, neither has any Christian who I posed this question to.

Some people have attempted to tell me that God has a purpose unknown to us, and that we must simply accept his will.

Would you keep a friend who commits evil and offers no self-justification or remorse?

Of course not, so why is this same judgment not applied to God? It’s seems rather contradictory that this trait is despised in humanity, yet, it is worshiped in religion.

Secondly, I want to reinforce the fact that God is indeed the creator of evil.

Please read Isaiah 45:7.

“I form the light and create darkness. I make peace and create evil. I the lord do all these things”.

The Christian God outright claims that he is indeed the source of evil. So how can he then claim to be sinless?

To be more specific, let’s talk about the lord’s creation of evil, let’s talk about the conception of Satan.

This being was created and unleashed by God.

Jehovah knew (for he is the all knowing) that at the time of Lucifer’s creation he would eventually become Satan, and spend his existence reeking havoc on man kind.

Leading people into criminal activities. Suppose I were to build an evil robot, that I knew would go around torturing and murdering people.

Whose fault would it be if I let it loose? Mine or the robot’s? Of course it would be mine, for I created it with that purpose and unleashed it for that purpose.

Now I ask you, whose fault is deviltry in the world? Is it the PUPPET Satan or the being that deliberately created Satan’s evil?

{ This might be a good one if the BIBLE did not make clear that GOD MADE LUCIFER THE LIGHT BEARER IN CHARGE OF WORSHIP BEFORE GOD’S THRONE- NOT SATAN THE DECEIVER CAST FROM THE THRONE OF GOD, HE BECAME SATAN OR CHANGED HIS STATUS AFTER HIS REBELLION FAILED, THIS MISCONCEPTION IS WHAT THE ARGUMENT IS BUILT UPON!}

Now God Plays Switch-A-Roo And Humans Are The Creators Of Evil Not only does the bible imply, but so do many Christians, that we as a people are the creator of evil.

It is clear for reading the bible that this is untrue,

{ NOW WHICH IS IT ?

DOES THE BIBLE IMPLY OR DOES IT TEACH SOMETHING ELSE?}

but the speculation still remains. Supposedly, when Adam and Eve fell from grace, they single handedly brought evil into the world.

All you have to do is think logically for a moment, and you will obviously see something is very unjust with this concept. Could any rational being hold a starving infant in Ethiopia responsible for the actions of two long dead people?

{ FIRST OF ALL BABIES ARE NOT HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR ANY SIN UNTIL THEY KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG BUT ALL MANKIND SUFFERS FROM THE RIPPLE EFFECT OF THE SIN OF ADAM THROUGHOUT TIME!

It is our personal sin that we are held in contempt for BUT it is the effects of the Original sin of disobedience that pollutes our D.N.A. with like actions as those of Adam and Eve.}

Or perhaps, would you find it fair to be convicted of Jack the Ripper’s crimes?

The connection in both of these instances are not only ludicrous but, disgusting to nod your head at. People who use this argument are simply attempting to rationalize sadism.

{ NO THIS IS A WRONG ASSERTION, ADAM & EVE’S SIN WAS THE UNIVERSAL CRIME OF SATAN- REBELLION, AND NO ONE’S REBELLION IS GREATER OR LESSER TO GOD SO WE ARE ON EQUAL GROUND FOR PUNISHMENT.

BUT PERSONAL SINS CAN BE GREATER FOR SOME THAN FOR OTHERS, THIS IS WHY HELL WILL BE WORSE FOR SOME THAN OTHERS, THEIR MENTAL AND PHYSICAL TORMENT GREATER THAT SOMEONE WHO DID NOT SIN AS MUCH BUT STILL REJECTED JESUS- THE WAY OUT!}

I must declare that a Christian that walks into a children’s ward and insists that it is correct that children suffer as a result of the original sin, must destroy themselves of all compassion and mercy.

{ WHY?

THIS IS LIKE SAYING THAT ALL EVOLUTIONISTS WHO WALK INTO A CHILDREN’S WARD AND BELIEVE THAT IT’S JUST A MATTER OF “SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST AT WORK!”

IS IT NOT?

It would be no better under this evil evolutionary system of “Survival of the Fittest” to look at the suffering of mankind and think “Well that’s the way of the world. For those that are weakest should die so that those who are strongest can live….Ohhh Well..so sad!

This is an example of using our emotional responses to make us hate a scape-goat God instead of looking at the facts logically }

I insist that those who worship the lord

{ OR WHO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION}

knowing this hypocrisy must be as cruel as the Christian God

{ OR as EVOLUTION}

he/she believes in.

A complete and utter moral degenerate, taking stabs at protecting their belief system. A person as such would just as easily worship Satan

{ OR as NATURAL SELECTION is worshiped as flawless even in the face of radical flaws.}

as God in their blindness and faith. For apparently, no amount of evidence could convince him that God

{ OR EVOLUTION}

was bad once they decided to worship him

{OR THEIR CONCEPT OF NATURE being the be all end all.}

; their basic assumption is that they are correct, which makes them untouchable by any amount of rationality.”

And that’s NOT the basic assumption of the Atheist?

Wow talk about double speak on a major scale. This ENTIRE RANT can be as it was here turned around on them with the SAME EFFECT!

I WISH NOW TO TAKE HER MISINFORMED QUESTIONS APART INDIVIDUALLY, SO AS TO TAKE AWAY ANY REBUTTALS!

What about Isaiah 45:7

” I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

A HISTORY LESSON TO PUT THIS VERSE IN CONTEXT:

It was the great principle of the Magian religion, which prevailed in Persia in the time of Cyrus, and in which probably he was educated, that there are two supreme, co-eternal, and independent causes always acting in opposition one to the other; one the author of all good, the other of all evil.

The good being they called Light; the evil being, Darkness.

That when Light had the ascendant, then good and happiness prevailed among men; when Darkness had the superiority, then EVIL and misery abounded.

This was the world of Isaiah….

But it was an opinion that contradicts the clearest evidence of our reason, which plainly leads us to the acknowledgment of one only Supreme Being, infinitely good as well as powerful.

With reference to this absurd opinion, held by the person to whom this prophecy is addressed, God, by his prophet, in the most significant terms, asserts his omnipotence and absolute supremacy OVER EVIL & GOOD!

That he is Lord of all, and there is nothing done without him ” I form the light, which is grateful and pleasing, and I create darkness, which is grievous and unpleasing.

I make peace

(put here for all good)

and I create evil , not the evil of sin that Satan and man accepted by their own wills.

(God is not the author of the sin that he hates)

, but the evil of punishment for sin. Please note here that this punishment is NOT AN “EVIL”IN THE SENSE OF TORTURE BUT OF AN EQUALITY OF JUDGMENT TO THE COMMISSION OF SIN BY MEN, WHICH THEY CONSIDER A BAD THING.

This must be done by God in order for the ORDER OF THE UNIVERSE to be upheld, THIS IS THE EXACT SAME PRINCIPLE DICTATED BY DARWIN IN EVOLUTION IN THE SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST DOCTRINE- IN ORDER FOR COMPLETE BALANCE IN THE ORDER OF THINGS:

EVERY LIFE-FORM DIES TO PRODUCE FOOD FOR EVERY OTHER LIFE-FORM, THERE ARE REACTIONS FOR EVERY ACTION COMMITTED-

A BALANCE IS KEPT! This follows all PAGAN religions to the letter!

The Bible view is radically different from all other “Religions in the world”:

suffering is not evil in itself, but a symptom of a deeper evil.

The Scriptures portray suffering as a consequence of sin: not necessarily the sin of the individual who suffers, but sin in the history of man and in human society.

Because the first sin spread throughout the D.N.A of history infecting more and more, deeper and deeper into the fiber and nature of society.

As stated before we suffer in our individual lives as a RESULT OF BAD CHOICES WE MAKE IN LIFE, AND WE ARE BLESSED BY GOOD CHOICES WE MAKE IN LIFE:

SAINT OR SINNER ALIKE!

BUT as far as the NEXT LIFE, ONLY ONE CHOICE MEANS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ETERNITY WITH OR WITHOUT GOD:

We can choose to follow Jesus into the next or choose to go along with the crowd into a HELL of OUR CREATION for eternity- God made the place called Hell for Satan and his angels to be kept in chains of darkness forever BUT because of choosing to FOLLOW SATAN and his EXAMPLE OF REBELLION WE MUST GO WHERE WE WILL BE AT HOME.

AWAY FROM GOD FOREVER SUFFERING THE “TORMENTS OF OUR OWN MINDS REGRET AND THE PHYSICAL RESULTS OF THAT MENTAL BREAKDOWN FOREVER.

” Should People be Saved from Themselves?


Taking such facts as these into account, it must be asked, What is it we are really doing when we require God to remove suffering? Are we not asking that God should

(a) suspend natural law,

(b) divert the consequences of heredity, and

(c) turn aside the effects of man’s inhumanity to man?

Have we the right to expect God to save men from the consequences of human acts?

Would it be a moral universe if He did this?

Better ye, what would happen to your family if YOU made their choices FOR THEM to keep them right where you wanted them forever…NO FREE WILL, NO CHOICE?

At some point RESPONCIPBILITY must over rule having someone else getting me out of trouble all the time….don’t you think?

This is the most selfish act of men to require a God to REVERSE WHAT HE DID TO CHANGE THINGS SO HE WILL NOT SUFFER FOR HIS STUPIDITY!

These questions can only be asked of situations when the hand of man is involved.

Earthquakes, tempests, famine and floods are called ‘acts of God’ because usually there is no other explanation for their occurrence OTHER THAN natural, although the Bible clearly states that Satan is their underlying director for HE IS THE GOD OF THIS EVIL WORLD SYSTEM and uses whatever he can to Kill, steal, and destroy.

So if we look beyond human acts to natural disaster, we find that it falls upon all, innocent and guilty alike. As soon as we begin to question the suffering of innocent victims of these disasters another dilemma is raised. Are we saying that the calamities should be selective in their working, searching out only those who deserve to suffer’?

Man lives in a universe of cause and effect and the consequences of certain causes are inescapable.

Fire burns, water drowns, disease germs destroy.

These facts have moral implications.

Men live in a universe in which the consequences of what they do are inescapable, and therefore their responsibility for what they do is equally inescapable.

Without this burden of ‘natural law’ man could do as he liked with impunity, and there would be no responsibility.

God made the universe this way because He is a moral God who makes men responsible beings with a will to choose how they will act. But keep in mind that there is a tempter out there trying to get you to CHOOSE to KILL, STEAL AND DESTROY YOUR FELLOW MAN AND YOURSELF!

Man’s neglect and misuse of his own life has corrupted the stream of human life itself, and left evils which fall on succeeding generations. These, again as part of natural law, may manifest themselves as hereditary weaknesses and tendencies to disease. The very stuff of life may be affected as it is passed on from generation to generation.

The consequences of man’s acts are not only directly physical.

The social and political evils which they have created throughout history have left a gathering burden on the generations following AND IT IS HIGH IRRESPONSIBILITY TO BLAME GOD FOR OUR DECISIONS.

People today are caught in a net of the consequences of past history, and even when they try to right one evil, another is brought to bear:

“The whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now” (Romans 8:22).

THERE IS NO WAY LOGICALLY AROUND THIS, EVEN EVOLUTION TEACHES THIS SAME PRINCIPLE OF CAUSE & EFFECT EVEN IF GOD WERE OUT OF THIS ALTOGETHER-

THE UNIVERSE WOULD STILL OPERATE THE SAME, SUFFERING WOULD STILL EXIST, BUT ON AN EVEN HIGHER SCALE WITHOUT A LOVING GOD TO INTERVENE AND COMFORT THOSE WHO SUFFER!

The very laws of our universe dictate to us that it is WINDING DOWN TO AN ULTIMATE SELF DESTRUCTION AT SOME POINT-

I COULD WRITE A LONG, LONG ESSAY IN THE SAME WORDS, TAKING OUT GOD AND REPLACING IT WITH “NATURAL SELECTION” & “EVOLUTIONARY THEORY” and BLAME IT FOR MY WOES AND CRY ABOUT HOW UNFAIR IT IS FOR ME AND YOU TO BE PLACED IN A UNIVERSE THAT IS SELF DESTRUCTING.

How fair is it for evolution to dictate that I HAVE TO BE IN TIP TOP SHAPE TO SURVIVE IN A CRUEL WORLD WITHOUT HOPE OF OVERCOMING THE FITTEST AMONG US?

Where is the loving compassion of “Natural Selection” when a baby that cannot defend itself is RAPED by as adult who is fitter to survive?

I ASK YOU MR.& MS. ATHEIST,SKEPTIC- DOES YOUR PLAN ANSWER THESE SAME ACCUSING QUESTION BETTER? WHAT IS YOUR END GAME?

“For if God was to know ahead of time that someday he would send me to hell for being an Atheist, I ask what was the purpose in him creating me in the first place?

Was it simply to watch me be tortured?

” NO MY FRIEND, AS USUAL YOUR COMPLETELY MISSING YOUR OWN POINT, GOD MADE US ALL TO DO ONE THING TO LOVE AND TO BE LOVED BY HIM.

Sure in God’s FOREKNOWLEDGE

{UNDERSTANDING GOD’S FOREKNOWLEDGE! }

HE KNEW HOW YOU WOULD CHOOSE TO LIVE YOUR LIFE, AND BECAUSE HE RESPECTS YOUR CHOICE IN THIS MATTER HE’LL LET GO TO “YOUR PRIVATE HELL FOREVER” NEVER INTERFERING OR CHANGING YOUR MIND IF THAT’S WHAT YOU WANT-

BUT HE WILL NOT LET YOU GO WITHOUT WARNING YOU TO REASON WITH HIM FIRST-

Isa 1:18-19

“Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:”


Here is some more great answers to the Question of Evil in the world!

Is there ULTIMATELY A Good Reason for Evil?

The Atheist believes “God Apparently set humanity up for failure in the Garden, so doesn’t this show Him to be cruel, schizoid, or psychotic?”

The following remarks are from the “Walk Away” site ,Which now does not exist on the net

(Funny how these sites disappear so fast.).

“At the outset God made this into a life-and-death situation.

God staked the entire future of mankind on this one event.

We lost.

The moment that Adam and Eve ate that fruit, wheels were set in motion that would ultimately result in the doom of mankind.

Without some kind of intervention from God we would all be damned.

God does promise to intervene, but it’s like building a nuclear bomb and setting it to go off in a large city at 12:00.

Then, when all of the people of the city come to you for mercy, you disarm it for them.

Does that make you a hero for disarming it or a lunatic for building it in the first place?

The whole thing was orchestrated to make us feel dependent upon God.

That says a lot about God’s character.”

But I would ask you this:

“If God were a sick and twisted person as this sceptic would have us believe, he would likely not be able to even create creatures with hearts sensitive enough to be morally superior to Him since he created us from his own IMAGE…

would that be a far assessment?

If the situation were indeed as the skeptic portrays it, then we all should join him in abject abhorrence and revulsion toward such a “god”.

His response is the heart-full response, to a heart-less situation.

But this skeptic’s position is one of considerable exaggeration and has most of its emotional force in innuendo

You can see that he essentially superimposes his theological ‘portrait’ of God’s heart over a passage that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject.

The accusations he makes of God in the piece about orchestrating the whole thing to get us to fail so that His Son would later “look good to us” is methodologically naive at best, and “reverse fundamentalism” at worst.


What is evil?

Could it have an ultimately good purpose for our lives?


The first step in answering the problem of evil is this: What this thing “evil” actually is.

It does seem to follow that if God created all things, and evil is a thing, then God created evil.

This is a valid syllogism.

If the premises are true, then the conclusion would be true as well.

Great job Mr. Atheist…..BUT….


The problem with that line of reasoning is that the second premise is untrue.

Evil is not a thing , evil has no ontological status in itself.


The word ontology deals with the nature of existence.

When I say that evil has no ontological status, I mean that evil, as a thing in itself, does not exist.


Let me give you an illustration to make this more clear.

We talk about things being cold or warm.

But coldness is not a thing that exists in itself; it has no ontological status.

Coldness is the absence of heat. When we remove heat energy from a system, we say it gets colder.


“Cold” isn’t a thing.

It’s a way of describing the reduction of molecular activity resulting in the sensation of heat.

So the more heat we pull out of a system, the colder it gets.

Cold itself isn’t being “created.”

Cold is a description of a circumstance in which heat is missing. Heat is energy which can be measured.

When you remove heat, the temperature goes down.

We call that condition “cold,” but there is no cold “stuff” that causes that condition.


Here’s another way of looking at it.

Did you ever eat a donut hole?

I don’t mean those little round sugar-coated lumps you buy at the donut shop.

I mean the hole itself.

Donut holes are actually what’s left when the middle is cut out of a donut.

There’s a space called a hole, a “nothing,” the condition that exists when something is taken away.

Same thing with a shadow.

Shadows don’t exist as things in themselves;

they’re just the absence of light.


Evil is like that.

Evil isn’t like some black, gooey stuff floating around the universe (LIKE IT’S COUNTER PART

“THE DARK SIDE OF THE FORCE” IN STAR WARS) that clings onto people and causes them to do awful things.

Evil is the absence of good, a privation of good, not a thing in itself.

Remember that EVIL is not MORE POWERFUL THAN GOOD, it merely FILLS IN the void left after good leaves!


When God created the universe, he created everything good.

He made a universe that was perfectly good.

Everything was as it should be. After God was completely done with creating everything, something happened that reduced the good in the world.

That loss of good is called evil.


That’s why in Genesis 1 we read “it was good” many times.

From the record we know that God didn’t create evil.

But something did happen in which evil-the loss of good-took place, and as a result a lot of other grotesque things came about. This is what happened to Satan :

Ezekiel 28:15 (KJV)

“Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. “

His heart was the BIRTHPLACE of an ever-increasing “Void” born from Lucifer’s growing self-indulgence, and AS MORE OF WHAT MADE HIM GOOD WAS CONSUMED HIS ORIGINAL CREATED PURPOSE WAS CONFUSED TO HIM AND HE COMPENSATED FOR HIS LOST PURPOSE WITH A NEW PURPOSE, ONE OF “EVIL BLACK DESIGN, A BLACKNESS HE COULD FEEL!


So donut holes don’t exist;

they’re just the absence of donut.

Shadows don’t exist;

they’re just the absence of light.

And evil doesn’t exist

(As a tangible thing, IT IS THE EMPTINESS or void left;

it’s just the absence of good.


The next question is, if God created everything good (Which he did), why would He allow evil to infect His creation?


Satan would be the first example of an independent a source of evil.

Adam and Eve would also be a source of evil with regard to the human race.

They didn’t get Satan’s evil; they initiated their own.

Satan influenced them–he made his own hole in goodness–but Adam and Eve made their own holes in goodness.

They’re responsible for their own evil.


It isn’t that Satan did something bad and passed that stuff on to them, because evil is not a stuff.

This is a key point in this discussion.

They cannot “dip into” evil because it’s not a thing to dip into.

When we make a shadow, we don’t do it with shadow stuff, but by blocking existing light.

Satan’s heart was “Blocked up” with self-pride, thinking of himself more highly than he was created to think of himself and each successive ACTION from that moment on caused more and more of a void in his heart toward his MASTER CREATOR!


In the same way, evil doesn’t cause our actions.

In fact, it’s the other way around.

Our actions are what cause evil-or the loss of goodness-in us, and that loss of goodness does have an impact on future actions, giving us a predisposition to cause further evil.

It is our “IMPULSES” to do as we feel that cause us to go deeper and deeper into the void of sinful ACTIONS which only spreads the inner darkness we feel.


God did not create Adam and Eve with bad stuff in them. What He did was to create them with a capability to rebel against Him or choose to do wrong.

This is called moral free will, and it’s a good thing, but it can be used for bad. It can be used to rebel against God, which digs out a hole in goodness, so to speak.


Satan and man both used their free moral agency to originate actions that fell short of the goodness of God.

God had good reason for letting the VOID of evil to take its course, It has caused a lot of suffering, but that suffering has, in turn, also brought about a lot of good under God’s direction.

THIS ONLY SEEMS CRUEL TO US BECAUSE OF FAULTY REASONING ON OUR PART!

Remember that God sees the END of everything FROM the beginning, he knows the PERFECT way to turn every circumstance around to the help and glory of the original plan which WE NOT HE MESSED UP!

Adam & Eve had as much a chance to CHOOSE THE RIGHT TREES FRUIT IN IT’S PROPER ORDER: FIRST the Tree of LIFE THEN the Knowledge of Good & Evil, BUT we were IMPATIENT AND CHOOSE THE WRONG FRUIT FIRST ;EVEN AFTER GOD EXPLAINING IT TO THEM!


When you forgive someone who’s wronged you and you treat him kindly, is that a good thing?

Sure it is, but you couldn’t forgive him if he hadn’t done something bad against you.

I’m not saying that we should do evil so that the good of forgiveness could come about.

I’m showing that it’s not a contradiction to claim that good can come out of evil.

Romans 6:1-2 (KJV)

” What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? “


It’s not good to promote evil itself, but one of the things about God is that He’s capable of taking a bad thing and making good come out of it.

Mercy is one example of that.

Without sin there would be no mercy.

That’s true of a number of good things:

bearing up under suffering,

dealing with injustice,

acts of heroism,

forgiveness,

long-suffering.

These are all virtues that cannot be experienced in a world with no sin and evil.


Now the real question at this point is,

“Was it worth it?

Good can come out of evil, but was it worth it in the long run, the measure of good that comes out of the measure of evil in the world?”

And my response is that the only One who could ever know that is God. You and I couldn’t know that because our perspective is too limited. Only God is in a position to accurately answer that question.


Apparently God thinks that, on balance, the good is going to outweigh the evil that caused the good, or else He wouldn’t have allowed it to happen.

Christ paid a tremendous price, an example of the tremendous love God had for us.

God would not be able to show His sacrificial love unless there was something to sacrifice for.


Here’s the problem, and this is why we don’t think that, on balance, it’s really a fair trade. We think that life is about giving us pleasure and making us happy.

That’s what we think. This view is very prevalent in the United States. Our personal happiness, pleasure, and enjoyment are the most important things in life.


That’s not what the Bible teaches at all, though. There are aspects of enjoyment, but the ultimate reason we were created was not so we can have fun and enjoy life.

God’s purpose for creating us was to develop us into certain types of people who were fit to spend eternity with Him. He does that by conforming us to His image by helping us grow through the process of living in a fallen world.


The point here is that we CANNOT lose sight of the FACT that this world is in the state it’s in BECAUSE WE SCREWED UP,NOT BECAUSE GOD SOMEHOW DIDN’T KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOING!

This is part of the message of the book of Hebrews.

Even Jesus was conformed-made mature-by the process of suffering.

In God’s mind, the goal of the process-being conformed to the image of His Son-is a much greater good than the bad of the evil that we have to put up with on this earth.

The balance is definitely on the side of good.


I admit that this is not an easy issue, and part of the reason is that we bring some personal baggage to the discussion.

Part of the baggage is that we have this idea that if God put us here on this earth and created the world for us to live in, then it seems to make sense that the greatest good in our minds-is our immediate sense of personal pleasure and satisfaction.

Therefore, if there is some circumstance in which we can’t have immediate satisfaction, then God must either have abandoned us, not exist, or be evil for allowing such a thing , IS THAT NOT SELFISH REASONING ?

I had a conversation with a young man about homosexuality. He challenged me with this point:

“Why would God create people as homosexuals if He didn’t want them to experience the pleasure of homosexual sex?”


Now, of course, I and the Bible don’t agree that God created people to be homosexuals.

It wasn’t God’s design that they have this desire, this is a perversion of natural sex drive for so many reasons .

But even if I conceded such a thing, why must I admit that-since one was created with a capacity for pleasure-only a mean, cruel God would allow conditions in which they’d have to say no to that pleasure?


When you think about it for a moment, doesn’t it strike you as odd that we’ve developed a view that in order for us to acknowledge God as good, He must give liberty to all of our passions?

And if God doesn’t give liberty to all of our passions-if He doesn’t allow us what we want, when we want it-

if He ever asks for self-sacrifice,

if He ever allows a condition in which we hurt,

in which we suffer,

in which we are inconvenienced,

if He ever allows a circumstance in which our bodily desires are not given full reign,

then certainly He must be a cruel God?

Isn’t that an odd view?


Do you know what kind of person thinks that way?

A child.

A child sees what it wants and goes to get it,

and if it’s stopped,

that child puts up a fuss.


A little two-year-old who wanted to go into the house while wearing muddy shoes.

She was stopped, and she put up a fuss when her shoes were removed.

Mom and Dad knew, though, that there were other things more important than their daughter’s desires at that moment.

Now she didn’t understand it.

All she knew was what she wanted (understandably, by the way, she’s a two-year-old; that’s the way two-year-olds think).


Unfortunately, we’ve bred a society that are, in many ways, like a bunch of adult two-year-olds, grown-ups who believe it’s their divine right to feel every pleasure they can possibly feel, to never encounter any difficulty, any pain, any suffering. And if they do, then God must be a cruel God.


I don’t at all mean to brush away the terrible impact of evil on people’s lives.

But I’m talking about a frame of mind that we do seem to have, a frame of mind that we are first and our pleasures are first and God owes that to us.

And if He denies us our pleasures to any degree, then there must be something wrong with Him.


Now if God is a good God, and He denies us our pleasures, then I’ll tell you one thing, there’s a good reason He does so.

That’s what it means to be a good God.

I’m not going to buy the idea-

the infantile idea that Americans have-that in order for God to be considered good, He has to give me everything I want, when I want it, or conversely, He must protect me from every injury and every difficulty.

No, it’s fair to say that God has allowed suffering in the world for very good reasons, even though we’re not clear on all of those reasons, yet.


By the way, what’s the alternative?

If you conclude there’s no God because of the existence of evil, then there’s no possibility of ever redeeming that evil for good.


British philosopher Bertrand Russell said that no one can sit at the bedside of a dying child and still believe in God.

My response to Mr. Russell is, “What would you say to a dying child?”

What could an atheist say?

“Too bad”?

“Tough luck”?

“Bum deal”?

You see, in that circumstance, there’s no possibility of redemption for that evil.

In fact, it doesn’t seem to make sense to even call it evil at all if there is no God.


But with God, at least there’s the possibility that the evil can be used for good.

That’s the promise of the Scriptures.

And so, instead of the syllogism, “God created all things, and evil is a thing, therefore God created evil,” we start from a different point.

“All things God created are good-which is what the text says-and evil isn’t good, therefore God didn’t create evil.”

Then we can progress to, “If God created all things, and God didn’t create evil, then evil is not a thing.”


You see, those two syllogisms are just as valid as the first one (if God created all things, and evil is a thing, then God created evil), and it seems that the premises are more reliable.

The premises seem to be accurate and true.


The questions we have to ask ourselves are:

Do we have reason to think that God is good, and do we have reason to think that evil is not a thing?

If we have good reasons to think those two things, then our new set of syllogisms work.


We can then strongly trust that when God does allow a privation of good (evil) to influence our lives, He does it not for evil designs, but ultimately for good purposes.

Below is an interesting article:

How Can A Good And Loving God Permit Suffering?

A.S.A. Jones

The answers given to the question below are not meant to be exhaustive but are intended to teach you how to argue your point using logic.

No matter what that point may be, arguing it successfully will depend on your ability to:

1: Recognize the precision of language in what is being said and in what you are saying.

EXAMPLE 1

Questions concerning Christianity may be passively or aggressively stated:

If there is a loving God, why does He permit us to suffer? – passive

A loving God would not permit us to suffer, therefore, there is no loving God. – aggressive

2: Recognize the argument.

Formalizing this issue into a proper argument allows for greater clarity of thought and would look like this:

A loving God would not permit us to suffer.
Some people suffer horribly.
Therefore, a loving God does not exist.

3: Question a faulty premise

There isn’t anything wrong with the process of inference in the above argument; However, our criticism lies with the legitimacy of the first premise.

Since ‘loving’ is a characteristic that is applied to both humans and God, we make note of the comparison and make an analogy:

A loving parent would not permit his child to suffer.

·** In order to declare this comparison to be a false analogy, your opponent would have to give reasons as to why the analogy would not hold. Some skeptics will accuse you of making a false analogy every time you make an analogy.

While every analogy, by definition, falls short of being 100% representative of the concept it attempts to simplify, it is insufficient to claim an analogy to be weak or false without justifying that claim.

Analogies can be very useful and are considered to be an appropriate tool in inductive reasoning.

Or would he?

A parent who would not permit his child to suffer would never deprive his offspring of any want, nor would he discipline the child.

What then, do we mean by ‘suffer’?

If we limit the definition of suffering to physical pain, then we have to acknowledge that loving parents do permit their children to suffer pain, at least to some degree, when they allow them to have immunization shots, or undergo chemotherapy or teach them how to ride a bike, knowing that the chances of them falling and getting hurt are probable.

Therefore, a loving parent does permit his child to suffer physically, if he considers the suffering to be insignificant and for a greater good.

But would a loving parent permit his child to suffer significant pain for a greater good?

As humans, we have a corporeal concern; no matter how strong our faith in God, this material and physical world is the only world of which we are aware.

Therefore, we consider any significantly painful infliction as harmful to our bodies and our existence.

The difference between man and God is that God is fully aware of man’s spiritual reality in addition to his physical reality.

God knows that physical suffering cannot harm our eternal souls. God knows that our physical destruction is not an end to our existence.

Of what significance is an hour of physical suffering compared to eternity?

Of what significance is a lifetime of suffering compared to eternity?

We can conclude that from God’s perspective, our physical suffering is relatively insignificant.

This is not to say that He is unsympathetic or oblivious to our pain; loving parents feel empathy when their child receives a shot, knowing full well that the pain is inconsequential.

But what greater good can be derived from our suffering? Is there a greater good involved?

What would justify God sending us to live in a physical world with physical dangers?

Why didn’t God let us stay in the Garden of Eden?

According to the Bible, man was removed from the Garden of Eden in order to be born again so that one day, he could eat of the Tree of Life and be forever in God’s company as a holy people.

If men were made to live forever in their natural, sinful state, they would be eternally hellish creatures.

God sees the greater good being accomplished in the transformation that will allow us to live eternally in heaven, a transformation that can only take place in the physical world.

Spiritual lessons can’t take place in the garden; they have to take place in a desert.

It isn’t that God wills us to experience misfortune, but that these misfortunes are merely the consequence of living in a physical world within our physical bodies.

Every day, loving people make the decision to bring children into this world, knowing that it is a world filled with risk and injury.

God is no less loving for having created the world in which we all live.

But one may ask,

“Why doesn’t God do what He can to prevent these injuries, as any good parent would?

The argument quickly reduces itself into absurdity.

At what point should God cease to prevent suffering?

Should He suspend gravity for every trip of the foot?

Should He suspend the properties of heat for every finger that touches a lit stove?

In short, we would be asking God to suspend the physical laws that allow our very existence.

We are saying, “Surely, God, there had to be a better way than all of this!”

But until we can create a better planet that contains no risk to physical life, I shouldn’t think that we would be in a position to criticize.

For all we know, the existence that we are experiencing now may well be the only logical possibility of existence.

4.State your position in the affirmative.

In summary, the initial argument against God’s existence was:

A loving God would not permit us to suffer.
Some people suffer horribly.
Therefore, a loving God does not exist.

We make the following rebuttal:

We make an analogy between God, the loving Father, and human parents. The attribute that we are comparing is the ability of each to love his ‘children’/’creation’.

1) We consider parents to be loving when they permit their child to suffer insignificantly for a greater good.


2) Our greater good is salvation.


3) Our earthly suffering is insignificant when examined in the scope of eternity.


4) Therefore, we can experience suffering and still believe in the existence of a loving God.


ANALYZE THIS!

Some skeptics have a difficult time understanding Divine Rights.

Who does God think He is, anyway?

This argument leaves no doubt that if a Biblical god exists, His declarations of morality and purpose are objective realities, while human morality and purpose can only be imaginary in the absence of a Biblical god.

This is the argument to use when skeptics accuse Christians of having an ‘imaginary’ friend. Why? Because it exposes their own life as an imaginative game of make-believe.

Answers to counter-arguments are given Here.

LIFE’S PURPOSE AND MEANING

In an atheistic philosophy, there are certain things that concern the reality of life that must be accepted as illusion because, without God, that is the only thing they can be. We live our lives as if they have a real and genuine purpose.

Most people will say that their lives have meaning, regardless of their philosophy.

But a life that is created by chance, and natural selection, can have no inherent or objective purpose or meaning.

Instead, such a life can only have a self-assigned, subjective meaning.

A non-objective, self-assigned meaning is purely imaginary!

It is a subjective opinion of what can only be a subjective reality.

Conversely, a life created by design and a designer, such as the one described in Christianity, is given an objective purpose; its meaning is genuine and inherent.

We may have different, subjective opinions as to what that purpose is, but these are subjective opinions concerning an objective reality.

As a demonstration of the imaginary quality of self-assigned, subjective purpose, examine the tumultuous life of ‘Andy’.

When Andy was in school, he decided that his goal in life was to become a doctor and help alleviate the pain of his patients.

This was the self-assigned purpose he gave to his life; without this purpose, his life would have very little meaning. For 6 years, this self-assigned purpose motivated him to get up each morning.

Then he became very ill and his hopes of becoming a doctor vanished. So he married a very handsome woman and put her on a pedestal.

Her love gave his life meaning. His sole life’s purpose was to love this incredible woman; without her, his life would have very little meaning.

Unfortunately, his wife felt the same way about another man and, after 5 years of marriage, she divorced Andy.

Andy then decided to buy a Harley, because he knew that his bike would never leave him for another man.

That bike gave Andy’s life meaning; his purpose was to become one with the wind.

Then he wrecked it…so he turned to chess…he would become the best chess player in the world…

The above scenario doesn’t allow me to equate subjective, self-assigned purpose with objective, inherent designed purpose.

I see the above as latching on to one diversion after another in a desperate attempt to avoid the reality of a meaningless life.

What makes the purpose created by God any less subjective than the purpose created by man?

I would think that the designer of any instrument or creature would be the one to consult in matters of the design and purpose of his design.

If the designer states that the purpose of his instrument is to remove and place screws, then he has declared that purpose as the objective purpose.

The opinion of such a designer, wouldn’t qualify as an opinion, but rather it becomes the objective purpose of the instrument.

There is nothing to stop us from turning the instrument around and using its handle to pound in nails

(and I am not one to decry the usefulness of employing a screwdriver in this manner),

however, that usage would not be the objective purpose for which the instrument was created.

God is, by definition, the author or designer of life.

A designer designs with intention.

Only the designer is in a position to know his intention; all others can only speculate concerning his intention.

For example, players, without the set of instructions for a new board game, can only have opinions as to how the game is designed to be played.

They don’t know, with certainty, the objective intent of its designer. But when the designer reveals the objective purpose of the game through written instructions and rules, he objectively states his intention.

The designer is the authority concerning his design; he is the objective authority when it comes to purpose of the design because only he can know, with certainty, its purpose. He may attempt to make that purpose known to others, but that attempt would make it open to interpretation.

But to agree that the designer’s expressed intentions as to how the game is to be played, are just as subjective as one’s own interpretation of the game, would be like saying to another;

“We know what you think you mean, but we disagree that you really mean it the way you said it.”

Skeptics say that Christians have deceived themselves into believing that there is a god, in order to supply their lives with an objective purpose.

Just as easy to say that the Atheist has deceived himself into the delusion of NO God, so that they can rebel against the idea of purpose having been laid out FOR THEM in advance!

Of course, whether or not this god of the skeptical exists remains open to debate as it may simply exist to give purpose to the skeptics life!

Skeptics, however, reject the concept of a deity of any kind, and, therefore, reject any concept of an objective purpose to their lives, but emotionally maintain that their lives have a purpose, a purpose that can only be imaginary.

At least the Christian can produce great evidence as opposed to Atheistic “Mental Assent Reasoning” ; our God is real, and we don’t have to pretend that our lives have meaning IF we are truly saved and not members of the opposite side of the deception spectrum called Religion.

MORALITY

This same argument can be used to make a case for God’s standard of morality.

Just go through and substitute ‘morality’ for ‘meaning’ or ‘purpose’.

God’s standards of morality are objective, because He is the designer of Life.

OBJECTIONS

Some may say that they refuse to play the game that God has designed.

The game that He has designed, however, is the Game of Life.

If you are alive, you are already in the game, like it or not, no way out but death.

So it isn’t a question, then, of refusing to play God’s game, but rather if you are going to play to win or play to lose.

Question # 2 Who did Cain Marry? Was she his SISTER? Does Genetics explain this Question?


Who was CAIN’S WIFE?

And if he married his SISTER,WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS FACED HERE?

WHY WAS IT O.K. FOR THEM & NOT US ?

It is not lawful to marry your sister, so who did Cain marry?

Were there other people on the earth?

Does this have any relevance to the BIBLE’S VIEW OF SALVATION?


Skeptics have used Cain’s wife time and again to try to discredit the book of Genesis as a true historical record.

Sadly, most Christians have not been able to give an adequate answer to this question. As a result, the world thinks Christians cannot defend the authority of Scripture and, thus, the Christian faith.


For instance, at the historic Scopes trial in Tennessee in 1925, William Jennings Bryan, the prosecutor who stood for the Christian faith

(Who had NO scientific prowess…He was a Lawyer after all.)

, failed to answer the question about Cain’s wife posed by the outspokenly anti-Christian ACLU lawyer Clarence Darrow,who consulted with the science teachers of the day who were evolutionist’s.

The world’s press was focused on this trial, and what they heard has affected Christianity to this day—Christians are seen as unable to defend the Biblical record.

And skeptics then make the logically fallacious jump of concluding that the Biblical record is indefensible!


We are not told when Cain married or any of the details of other marriages and children, but we can say for certain that some brothers had to marry their sisters at the beginning of human history.

Many people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve’s sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage.

Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don’t marry your relation, you don’t marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—all are of ‘one blood.’

The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18–20).

Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God’s law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other.


Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob.

It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages,WHY ?

Did God JUST realize 400 years later, that it was “Perverted to have “Incest” in the ranks and decided to invent NEW LAWS to avert it ?

Let’s be real here, do Evolutionist’s believe that at one point in their VAST TIME-LINE; AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF HUMANS THAT THERE WASN’T SEX BETWEEN FAMILY MEMBERS ?

PLEASE GET REAL!

It had to happen NO MATTER which “SYSTEM” YOU BELIEVE IN,CREATION or EVOLUTION!


Today, brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed.

The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.


There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes that specify how a person is put together and functions. Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent.

Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways.

For instance, some people let their hair grow over their ears to hide the fact that one ear is lower than the other—or perhaps someone’s nose is not quite in the middle of his or her face, or someone’s jaw is a little out of shape—and so on.

Let’s face it, the main reason we call each other normal is because of our common agreement to do so!


The more distantly related parents are, the more likely it is that they will have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with pairs of genes containing a maximum of one bad gene in each pair.

The good gene tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may only have crooked ones!

(Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate, generation after generation.)


However, the more closely related two people are, the more likely it is that they will have similar mistakes in their genes, since these have been inherited from the same parents.

Therefore, a brother and a sister are more likely to have similar mistakes in their genes. A child of a union between such siblings could inherit the same bad gene on the same gene pair from both, resulting in two bad copies of the gene and serious defects.


However, Adam and Eve did not have accumulated genetic mistakes.

When the first two people were created, they were physically perfect. Everything God made was ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31), so their genes were perfect—no mistakes!

But, when sin entered the world (because of Adam—Genesis 3:6ff, Romans 5:12), SIN entered and cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay (Romans 8:22).

Over thousands of years, this degeneration has produced all sorts of genetic mistakes in living things.


Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He (as well as his brothers and sisters) would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with (it takes time for these copying errors to accumulate).

In that situation, brother and sister could have married with God’s approval, without any potential to produce deformed offspring.
By the time of Moses

(a few thousand years later)

degenerative mistakes would have built up in the human race to such an extent that it was necessary for God to forbid brother-sister (and close relative) marriage (Leviticus 18–20).

(Also, there were plenty of people on the Earth by now, and there was no reason for close relations to marry.)

WHAT ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF RACE IN THE BIBLE & WHAT SCIENCE HAS FOUND OUT?


Genetics and evolution have been enemies from the beginning of both concepts. Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics, and Charles Darwin, the father of modern evolution, were contemporaries.

At the same time that Darwin was claiming that creatures could change into other creatures, Mendel was showing that even individual characteristics remain constant.

While Darwin’s ideas were based on erroneous and untested ideas about inheritance, Mendel’s conclusions were based on careful experimentation.

Only by ignoring the total implications of modern genetics has it been possible to maintain the fiction of evolution.


An explanation of how the races came into being is quite puzzling for the average Christian.

It is not uncommon to hear Christians responding to this question with explanations which have roots in evolution

( God CREATED and then LET EVOLUTION TAKE OVER!)

and other unbiblical teaching.

Many times we hear false explanations such as tanning effects of the sun on the people who settled in Africa caused them to develop very dark skin, or those in the East, because of a more moderate climate, developed the yellow tones of the Oriental peoples.

The Caucasian peoples of the Northern hemisphere have lighter or white skin because of being exposed to a lesser degree of sun light.

Other explanations often offered as the origin of race are the curse on Cain (Gen. 4:10-15) and on Ham’s son Canaan (Gen. 9:20-25). Such explanations are false not being supported by the Bible or by science.


At some point in life every Christian will be confronted with what is called the “racial problem.”

When this occurs Christians and churches have often responded in ignorance to the truth as to the origin of race .

The problem is often compounded both by false interpretations of the Bible and the erroneous teachings of evolution which has caused many to doggedly support false ideas. In order to face the issue and make a correct Biblical response, the Christian first needs to understand what the Bible has to say on the matter.

Second, he needs to accent this Biblical knowledge with information from modern unbiased scientific investigation.
“Can race be Biblically defined?”


The term race does not appear in the Bible and it refers to differing peoples in terms such as family, tribe, people and nation. It groups people according to familial relationships and then into nationalities.

An example of familial relationship is found in Genesis 10, where the genealogies listed are grouped by family. It should be noted that nowhere are the sons of Noah associated with race or color.

An important passage on this matter is found in Genesis 10:5:
“By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations” (Gen. 10:5).

NATION IS DEFINED AS ” ethnos” in the Greek New Testament

eth’-nos :

a race (as of the same habit), that is, a tribe; specifically a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication pagan): – Gentile, heathen, nation, people.


And from the Hebrew word :

gôy gôy
go’ee, go’-ee


Apparently from the sense of massing; a foreign nation; hence a Gentile; also (figuratively) a troop of animals, or a flight of locusts: – Gentile, heathen, nation, people.


Nowhere in the Bible is prejudice based on what we determine as race; i.e. color of hair, skin, eyes or physical characteristics.

When God commanded the children of Israel to be a separated people or to utterly destroy other peoples, it was always based on the principle of separation from sin, NOT because of being of a certain skin color or sex.

The same principle of separation is presented in the New Testament when Christians are commanded to come out of the world

(The System under Satan’s deception)

and not be unequally (spiritually) yoked (Tied too in a way that DIMINISHES YOUR POWER to OVERCOME SIN,which is the natural result of “EVIL:

The void left when “Good” departs any system) with the unsaved (Those whose “Spiritual Essense,D.N.A. has been Darkened by the void of evil ). (See 2 Cor. 6:14) The principle here is clear,that the Bible defines “RACE” in spiritual NOT physical terms:

THERE ARE ONLY TWO RACES (TWO SETS OF D.N.A. PREDISPOSED TO TWO DIFFERENT OUTCOMES) ON THE EARTH IN TERMS OF THE SPIRITUAL CONTEXT,”THE SAVED” & “THE UNSAVED”,WHAT THE BIBLE TERMS “THE JEW”(or those who are chosen) & “THE GENTILE” (those WITHOUT GOD); THE CHILDREN OF CAIN or THE CHILDREN OF SETH,

THE PRINCIPLES ARE THE SAME!

Question # 3″Human Judgment CONCERNING GOD! Are you Worthy to Judge God?

AN ATHEIST BUILDS MORE STRAWMEN TO KNOCK DOWN.
“One of the criticisms most frequently leveled at me when presenting any of the above arguments has been that I have no right to judge God. A pretty feeble grasp at the straws.
Christians proclaim that God is the definition of good. All morality proceeds downwards from him, so it makes no sense to apply moral standards to him.
But I must interject. God allowed my ancestors Adam and Eve to eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge.
Thus, allowing us “to be like gods, and know the difference between good and evil”.
This very biblical verse, written in the first book of Genesis, conflicts with the same argument these Christians attempt to use.
If we as humans are now capable of knowing good and evil LIKE THE GODS why can’t we use our judgment?
How can it be lower then God’s if God is the one who claimed that we are like him?”

{ IN THE FIRST PLACE, KNOWING ABOUT GOOD AND EVIL FROM EXPERIENCE AS WE NOW DO AND “KNOWING HOW SIN DESTROYS AND LEVELS ONES LIFE FOR THE WORST ARE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE.
IT WOULD BE LIKE KNOWING ABOUT NATURAL SELECTION FROM EXPERIENCE AND READING ABOUT IT IN A BOOK.
IT WOULD BE GOOD TO KNOW THAT THIS STATEMENT CAME FROM SATAN NOT GOD BUT IT STILL HAS SOME VALUE AS A QUESTION! }
“Let’s say for the sake of argument that I should not judge God. Well then, would it be fair to hold him up to his own standards?”
{ REMEMBER THAT GOD IS PERFECTION IN JUDGMENT, HE JUDGES FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF KNOWING THE END FROM THE BEGINNING-
SO HE UNLIKE US CAN DEAL OUT THAT JUDGMENT FAIR AND BALANCED WITHOUT PRECONCEIVED IDEAS, IF YOU CAN MEASURE UP TO THAT GO RIGHT AHEAD!
BUT AS TO GOD’S OWN STANDARDS- YES WE CAN! BECAUSE THE “STANDARDS”OF GOD AND JUDGMENT BY HUMAN IDEALS ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS! }
“Please consult :
Matthew 25:41-46
We hear Jesus say:”
“Go away from me with your curse upon you, to the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you never gave me food; I was thirsty and you never gave me anything to drink; I was a stranger and you never made me welcome, naked and you never clothed me, sick and in prison and you never visited me. . . And they will go away to eternal punishment, and the virtuous to eternal life.”
“Now, I have never personally seen Jesus feed the hungry nor, have I seen him give drink to those who thirst.”
{ OF COURSE NOT IF YOU DENY HIS HISTORICAL EXISTENCE IN THE FIRST PLACE, BUT A PROPER INTERPRETATION OF THIS IS TO BE EXPECTED HERE-
AS JESUS IS REFERRING TO THE “JUDGMENT”AT THE END OF TIME WHEN ALL WILL STAND BEFORE HIM AND BE JUDGED ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS.
And ALL those who SAY I’M A BELIEVER AND REALLY ARE NOT WILL BE FOUND OUT FOR WHO THEY REALLY ARE-
ATHEIST’S SHOULD LIKE THAT-
JESUS IN THE BELIEVER KNOWS WHO IS HIS AND WHAT THEY DID AND DID NOT DO, SO HERE HE STATES THAT CASE AT OUR JUDGMENT-
SO THE CONTEXT REFUTES HER USE OF THIS TEXT }
“But, I do personally see thousands of people die of starvation.”
{ I DON’T THINK SHE MEANS THIS THE WAY IT SOUNDS, SHE PERSONALLY “ALLOWS” THOUSANDS TO DIE OF STARVATION, If God’s “Seeing” is Allowing then so is her’s….right?}
“I do not recall Jesus dispensing clothes. He has never made me feel welcome, let alone acknowledged.”
{ WELL..ALLOW ME TO APOLOGIZE FOR ANY BELIEVER WHO DID NOT DO WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO-
BUT LET ME ASK YOU HAVE YOU TAKEN A BREATH BETWEEN INSULTS OF MY GOD LONG ENOUGH TO EVEN SEEK SUCH THINGS?
OR HAS THAT HATRED BLINDED YOU SO MUCH THAT YOU ONLY SEE THE EVIL SIDE OF LIFE? }
“I see the faithful
{ FAITHFUL WHO? ATHEISTS? Funny that Christians are deluded in all things but she calls us FAITHFUL. }
sicken and die on a daily basis.
In light of this Jesus himself is the worst of all sinners; if there is no double standard he will be at the head of the line into eternal punishment. He is guilty of every crime of which he accuses the damned.”
{ REALLY, SENSE YOU HAVEN’T PRESENTED ANY EVIDENCE OF THIS THEN THAT’S QUITE THE STATEMENT-
BECAUSE BLAMING GOD FOR “NATURAL SELECTIONS “FAULTS IS HYPOCRITICAL AT BEST! }
As if these statements are not enough to curl the toenails of God she makes a last ditch comment directed at God and Christian alike:
“I do not believe in the reality of God, except as a psychological phenomenon, but if I did believe I would not worship that horror.
It violates my morality to worship a hypocritical, judgmental, self righteous murderer. In punishment, it {God } could send me to the hell it’s made for those it dislikes, and if there was no other choice but worshiping it {God }, I would walk in proudly.”
Can’t add to much to this statement, it about says it all for an Atheist who’s LOUD & PROUD!
I do have to give credit where credit is due, SHE SURE CAN BUILD A GREAT “STRAWMAN “TO KNOCK OVER AND LOOK GOOD TO HER ATHEIST FRIENDS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY-
NO STRAWMEN AT THE JUDGMENT, JUST YOU AND YOUR WORKS…..PERIOD!!!
If God does not exist, then life is futile?
If the God of the Bible does exist, then life is meaningful?
Only the second of these two alternatives enables us to live happily and consistently?
Therefore, it seems to me that even if the evidence for these two options were absolutely equal, a rational person ought to choose biblical Christianity?
It seems to me positively irrational to prefer death, futility, and destruction to life, meaningfulness, and happiness?
God has given us strong data/evidence for trusting Jesus Christ. And, once we have ‘validated’ Him, we then have access to all the data about ‘other things’ that He brings with Him.
Hebrews 11:1 says
“Faith is the SUBSTANCE (“hupostasis”) of what we hope for, the TESTABLE, INSPECTABLE, CONTROLLABLE, CRITIQUEABLE EVIDENCE
(“eleghos”; also found in John 16:16; 2 Tim. 4:2)
of what we do not SEE
(hence the importance of reason, hence Thomas’s lack of faith being not due to reason but rather due to empiricism –
why touch the scars of someone who has already walked through a solid door and whose presence is seen by all those present, and who died three days before?)
Isn’t this why we read “HOPE…” [NOT “faith”]
“…that is seen is no hope at all; for who hopes for what he already has?”
In other words, while eternal life has to commence after death if I am to HOPE for it, don’t I need to KNOW the truth-
of the value of the claims concerning it in order to not doubt for what I hope for
(for what I hope for to have IS A “SUBSTANCE”?)
IS TRUTH JUST RELATIVE TO WHAT WE WANT TO BELIEVE?
Friedrich Nietzsche said:
“You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist,”
Relativism is the position that all points of view are as valid and as any other points of view and that the individual is the measure of what is true for that person.
I see a big problem with this.
The following is an illustration to demonstrate it.

The setting:
A thief is casing a jewelry store so he can rob it. He has entered it to check out any visible alarm settings, locks, layout, etc.
In the process, he has unexpectedly gotten involved in a discussion with the owner of the jewelry store whose hobby is the study of philosophy and believes that truth and morals are relative.
“So,” says the owner, “everything is relative. That is why I believe that all morals are not absolute and that right and wrong is up to the individual to determine within the confines of society. But there is no absolute right and wrong.”

“That is a very interesting perspective,” says the thief. “I was brought up believing that there was a God and that there was right and wrong.
But I abandoned all of that and I agree with you that there is no absolute right and wrong and that we are free to do what we want.”

The thief leaves the store and returns that evening and breaks in. He has disabled all the alarms and locks and is in the process of robbing the store.
That is when the owner of the store enters through a side door.

The thief pulls out a gun. The owner cannot see the man’s face because he is wearing a ski mask.
“Don’t shoot me,” says the owner.
“Please take whatever you want and leave me alone.”
“That is exactly what I plan to do,” says the thief.

“Wait a minute. I know you.
You are the man that was in the store earlier today.
I recognize your voice.”

“That is very unfortunate for you,” says the thief. “Because now you also know what I look like. And since I do not want to go to jail I am forced to kill you.”

“You cannot do that,” says the owner.

“Why not?”

“Because it is not right,” pleads the desperate man.

“But did you not tell me today that there is no right and wrong?”

“Yes, but I have a family, children, that need me, and a wife.”

“So?
I am sure that you are insured and that they will get a lot of money. But since there is no right and wrong it makes no difference whether or not I kill you.
And since if I let you live you will turn me in and I will go to prison. Sorry , but that will not do.”

“But it is a crime against society to kill me. It is wrong because society says so.”

“As you can see, I don’t recognize society’s claim to impose morals on me. It’s all relative. Remember?”

“Please do not shoot me. I beg you. I promise not to tell anyone what you look like. I swear it!”

“I do not believe you and I cannot take that chance.”

“But it is true!” I swear I’ll tell no one.”

“Sorry, but it cannot be true because there is no absolute truth, no right and wrong, no error, remember?
If I let you live and then I left, you will break your so-called promise because it is all relative.
There is no way I could trust you. Our conversation this morning convinced me that you believe everything is relative.
Because of that, I cannot believe you will keep your word. I cannot trust you.

“But it is wrong to kill me. It isn’t right!”

“It is neither right or wrong for me to kill you. Since truth is relative to the individual, if I kill you, that is my truth.
And, it is obviously true that if I let you live I will go to prison. Sorry, but you have killed yourself.”

“No. Please do not shoot me. I beg you.”
“Begging makes no difference.”
…. Bang….
If relativism is true, then was it wrong to pull the trigger?
Perhaps someone might say that it is wrong to take another life needlessly.
But why is that wrong, if there is no standard of right or wrong?
Others have said that it is a crime against society.
But, so what?
If what is true for you is simply true, then what is wrong with killing someone to protect yourself after you have robbed him?
If is true for you that to protect yourself you must kill, then who cares what society says?
Why is anyone obligated to conform to social norms?
Doing so is a personal decision.
Though not all relativists will behave in an unethical manner, I see relativism as a contributor to overall anarchy.
Why?
Because it is a justification to do whatever you want.
THE ATHEIST IS AN EXAMPLE OF A RELATIVIST WITHOUT THE OPTION OF HOPE-
A SELF IMPOSED REJECTION OF ALL EVIDENCE THAT EVEN REMOTELY RESEMBLES “ABSOLUTE TRUTH.” 98% OF ALL ATHEIST OBJECTIONS ARE VITRIOL HATRED OF A SO-CALLED NON-EXISTENT GOD BUT ABSOLUTELY NO PURE EVIDENCE IS EVER PRESENTED.
BUT THEY GO TO GREAT EXTREMES TO INSULT AND MOCK- NOW I ASK YOU, IF THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “GOD.”
WHY WOULD AN ATHEIST SPEND ANY TIME AT ALL FIGHTING HIM AND HIS FOLLOWERS UNLESS THERE IS THAT NAGGING CONVICTION IN THE BACK OF THEIR MINDS THAT THERE MIGHT BE AN OUTSIDE CHANCE THAT HE COULD BE REAL?
IF YOU ARE “CERTAIN BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT” THAT THERE IS NO GOD, THEN YOU SHOULD BE CALM ABOUT THE WHOLE ISSUE.
RESTING IN YOUR KNOWLEDGE, SECURE IN YOUR FACTS –
NOW HERE’S THEIR PROBLEM, I DON’T NEED TO KNOW ANY FACTS CONCERNING MY GOD’S EXISTENCE BECAUSE I HAVE FAITH HE’S THERE.
THEY HAVE NO FAITH AS DEFINED IN HEBREWS 11:1 IN ANYTHING SPIRITUAL AND THEREFORE MUST ATTACK ANY REFERENCE TO THE NON-EXISTENT ONE THEY HATE.
FOR THEY HAVE NO SUPPORT IN THEIR BELIEFS!
HERE IS A SIMPLE REASON I BELIEVE IN GOD:
I the Ministerofblog have seen TONS of my prayers answered–
beyond my ability to manipulate either the ‘ambiguity’ in the request, or the ‘outcome’ itself.
I have seen changes in my character beyond my ability for self-improvement thru ‘positive thinking’ or wish fulfillment or normal maturation and growth processes.
I WAS VERY MUCH AN ATHEIST IN REGARDS TO GOD BUT VERY MUCH A SPIRITUALIST IN REGARDS TO THE WORLD OF THE OCCULT!
I have seen events occur IN MY LIFE that correlate too highly with a pattern of divine protection-
Directing me toward a specific end beyond the reasonable definition of ‘coincidence’ or “fate.”
It is not possible to convince me there is no God, for he has revealed himself personally to me in ways I never thought possible…..
ways beyond those of the occult world I was so familiar with, HE CAME THROUGH ALL THE SIN, THE DRUGS AND THE ALCOHOL- TO A MIND NUMB OF REASON AND A HEART FILLED WITH PAIN AND DOUBT-
TO A MAN WHO HATED HIM AND HE LOVED ME “NONE- THE- LESS.”
IN THE END THE GREATEST PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS IS YOUR PERSONAL TESTIMONY, YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH GOD CANNOT BE REFUTED BY THE SKEPTIC OR THE ATHEIST FOR IT BELONGS TO YOU-
IT IS GOD’S GIFT TO YOU FOREVER PROCLAIMING HIS ENDLESS MERCY AND GRACE!
God’s moral authority

What gives God the right to have total control of the universe?
The real question is, why wouldn’t an omniscient, omnipotent, morally perfect God have the right to do as he sees fit?
We are used to thinking about human rights and what humans should and shouldn’t do, so we are likely to make the mistake of thinking of God as a more powerful (and therefore more corrupt) human.
However, God is not a human who has somehow acquired great power; instead he is Deity, a supernatural being who is far superior to humans and who has a perfect mind and heart.
There are many reasons why mere humans do not have the right to be supreme rulers of the universe:
They might make a disastrous mistake due to ignorance, inexperience, fatigue, etc.

They could have evil intentions and use their power for evil, or they could be fooled by an evil person.

They might be corrupted by flattery and think themselves wiser and greater than they really were.

Even if they wanted to do good, they wouldn’t know for sure what would be best for everyone.

They are likely to show favoritism to some and treat others unfairly.

Yet none of these reasons are applicable to God.
God has perfect knowledge and wisdom; God never gets tired or makes mistakes; and God is perfectly good and just.

What makes it right for God to take human life, when he forbids us to do so?
Humans can take life, but we can’t bring the dead back to life, nor can we control what happens to someone after they die.
A human’s killing another human is a destructive and irresponsible act, for once we kill someone, we can’t undo it or control the harm that results.
God, however, has greater abilities and knowledge than we do, including control over life and death.

If God kills someone, he is able to bring them back to life or to place them in any sort of afterlife he chooses.
God’s use of death is comparable to someone burning a fire in a fireplace:
it can be controlled, lit or extinguished at will, and used for a purpose.
In contrast, humans’ use of death is like setting fire to a dry field: the fire rages out of control, and consequently is dangerous and destructive.
Furthermore, what is death?
Many believe that death is the end of both one’s body and one’s mind/personality/soul.
If so, death is a destructive act for both humans and God. Yet if Christianity is true, one’s soul is not destroyed, but continues to exist in an afterlife. In this case, death is not destruction, but rather a transfer from life on earth to an afterlife of eternal joy or just punishment.
What gives God the right to do things to others without their permission?
God has given people autonomy in a wide range of areas. We make choices every day about how to spend our time and money, whether to do right or wrong and even whether to follow God or not.
God does not force us to do his will, for he wants us to choose to do what is right (2 Cor 9:7, 1 Jn 4:18). Yet God has the right to, and does, change the circumstances of our lives.
If God were required to ask people’s permission before he did anything that affected them, he would be prevented from doing good, including some good which only he is able to do (e.g. miracles).
People might not give permission for God to do some good things because they wouldn’t be able to understand how it would result in good, wouldn’t want to endure short-term suffering to receive a long-term benefit, or even because they wished to harm themselves or others.
Suppose parents had to ask their children’s permission instead of requiring them to do certain things.
There would be a lot of children who would be malnourished and/or sick, ignorant, selfish and unable to care for themselves, for what child willingly consents to receive shots, go to school, do chores, etc.?
While adults have more knowledge and maturity than children, we are still ignorant and immature in comparison with God, and consequently don’t always know what’s best for us.
Also, there are things which we would never realize would make us happy until they were given to us or happened to us.
Many Christians would never have given their consent to the circumstances that led them to become Christians, and probably could not have realized in advance what joy and peace they would have after becoming Christians.
If God had to get their consent beforehand, he wouldn’t have been able to bring them true happiness and fulfillment.
Requiring God to receive the permission of humans before he acts would make him dependent on and controlled by humans.
How can it be good for God, who is omniscient and morally and otherwise perfect, to be controlled by humans, who have limited knowledge and intelligence and often make mistakes or commit outright evil?
What about human rights?
What is a human right?
When we talk about human rights, we generally mean that one human doesn’t have the right to do particular things to another human, like kill them, enslave them, etc.
Why is it wrong for someone to do a certain thing to another? There are several possible reasons:
Humans have an inherent, inalienable right not to have that thing done to them, because it’s always immoral for anyone to do that thing to another.

Humans possess certain characteristics (e.g. the capacity to reason) which makes it immoral for anyone to do that thing to them.

Humans are equals and one equal does not have the right to do that thing to another.

Which human rights are inalienable?
Thanks to Thomas Jefferson, we speak of our “inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
Yet these so-called inalienable rights are alienable.
If someone walks into a school and begins shooting the students and teachers, others have the right to take the shooter’s life to prevent further murders or take away their liberty by incarcerating them for life.

Are there any truly inalienable human rights?
Humans have the right to a fair trial for their crimes and just punishment for the crimes they’ve committed.
There is no case in which a biased trial or undue punishment is morally justifiable, thus these rights are inalienable – and they are respected by God.
If reason (2) applies to any of our rights, which rights are they and which human characteristic grants us those rights?
Animals can feel pain and emotion, and they have conscious minds and the ability to make choices and act on them.
Yet most people believe we have the right to limit their liberty (by keeping cats indoors, keeping dogs on leashes or inside fences, etc.) and cause them some amount of fear and pain (by taking them to the vet) in order to protect them.
Additionally, many people believe we have the right to perform medical research on animals in order to save human lives.
Twelve-year-old children are human, have intelligence and can communicate their desires and even make moral decisions, yet their liberty is restricted by their parents and the government and they are forced to do many things against their will.
Finally, reason (3) applies only to interaction among equals; it applies to human-human interaction, but not human-God interaction. God is not merely our physical superior, but our mental, intellectual and moral superior as well.

Question # 4 Why, if God is a God of LOVE..DID HE CREATE HELL?

The question of why hell exists has perplexed many people through the ages BUT WHY?

When the Bible is CLEAR CUT on it’s existence, it’s TORMENT and WHO will be going there!

The question usually goes:

“If God is so good, why would He create a place like hell?”

This is similar to asking,

“If our government is so good, why would it create prisons criminals?”


The answer seems simple enough –

Places like hell and prisons exist because some people will choose to do the wrong thing, and because of that, they need to be punished and kept from the rest of us.

It is fairly easy to understand how this reasoning applies to the existence of prisons, but does it really pertain to hell as well?

BUT think about this question a little more in depth, is it fair to PUNISH SOMEONE FOR LIFE FOR THE SINGLE CRIME OF MURDER or to take away a person’s FREEDOM for 20 or 70 or 100 years to life for RAPE, PEDOPHILIA, or SELLING DRUGS TO OUR CHILDREN?

Think hard about this, because WHAT WE DO IN ALL THESE CASES REFLECT ON HOW WE VIEW WHAT GOD WAS DOING IN CREATING AN ETERNAL PLACE OF TORMENT FOR THE ETERNAL RAMIFICATIONS OF PERSONAL SIN!

Whenever someone asks this question it is a direct ASSAULT AGAINST THE INTEGRITY OF GOD’S JUSTICE SYSTEM, AND HIS PERSONAL INTENT TOWARD MAN, make no mistake about this !

MAN cannot stand INNOCENT OF THIS SAME QUESTION ABOUT HIS OWN “PERSONAL INTENT OF JUSTICE”.

If we are to truly believe that the God who made the heavens & the earth with such complexity and precision and has such LOVE for us that he sent his only son to die for us all, CAN WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT HE CREATED A PLACE LIKE HELL WITH ALL THE ETERNAL TORMENTS?

The answer is YES to all,WHY?

Because ALL who break the Law of God must be incarcerated WHERE THEY WILL BE AT HOME..

PLEASE REALIZE THAT FOR GOD TO ALLOW ANYONE INTO HIS PRESENCE WITHOUT “THE COVERING OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST “WOULD BE ” FAR MORE CRUEL THAN HELL WOULD EVER BE!

Just think about this for a moment, spending ETERNITY WITH SO MUCH CONDEMNATION AND GUILT in God’s holy, perfect paradise of heaven;that’s why we don’t put CRIMINALS ( AS A RULE!) in regular society BUT IN PRISONS WHERE THEY ARE WITH SURROUNDINGS THEY CAN RELATE TO AND RULES TO LIMIT THEIR SIN SO THEY CAN’T HARM US AND OUR CHILDREN!

In the biblical Creation account found in the book of Genesis, no mention is made of a place called hell.

Everything that God made during the time of Creation was good. However, the Bible tells us in Matthew 25:41 that hell was later prepared for “the devil and his angels” (see also Isaiah 14:12).

God did not create hell for man; it was never His intention in the original perfect plan before sin that any man or woman should go to hell.

In 2 Peter 3:9, we learn that God does not want “anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.”

What is hell ?

It was Derived from the Saxon word “helan”, meaning to cover over ; hence the covered (HENCE :THE GRAVE) or the invisible place (HENCE: THE PLACE OF THE DISEMBODIED).

In Scripture there are three words so rendered:-


(1.) Sheol, occurring in the Old Testament sixty-five times. This word sheol is derived from a root-word meaning “to ask,” “demand;” hence insatiableness (Pro_30:15, Pro_30:16).

It is rendered “grave” thirty-one times (Gen_37:35; Gen_42:38; Gen_44:29, Gen_44:31; 1Sa_2:6, etc.).

The Revisers have retained this rendering in the historical books with the original word in the margin, while in the poetical books they have reversed this rule.

In thirty-one cases in the Authorized Version this word is rendered “hell,” the place of disembodied spirits.

The inhabitants of sheol are “the congregation of the dead” (Pro_21:16). It is (a) the abode of the wicked (Num_16:33; Job_24:19; Psa_9:17; Psa_31:17, etc.);

(b) of the good (Psa_16:10; Psa_30:3; Psa_49:15; Psa_86:13, etc.). Sheol is described as deep (Job_11:8), dark (Job_10:21, Job_10:22), with bars (Job_17:16). The dead “go down” to it (Num_16:30, Num_16:33; Eze_31:15, Eze_31:16, Eze_31:17).


(2.) The Greek word Hades of the New Testament has the same scope of signification as sheol of the Old Testament. It is a prison (1Pe_3:19), with gates and bars and locks (Mat_16:18; Rev_1:18), and it is downward (Mat_11:23; Luk_10:15).

The righteous and the wicked are separated. The blessed dead are in that part of Hades called paradise (Luk_23:43). They are also said to be in Abraham’s bosom (Luk_16:22).


(3.) Gehenna, in most of its occurrences in the Greek New Testament, designates the place of the lost (Mat_23:33). The fearful nature of their condition there is described in various figurative expressions (Mat_8:12; Mat_13:42; Mat_22:13; Mat_25:30; Luk_16:24, etc.)

Hell is a real place.

We know this from many verses in the Bible, several of them spoken by Jesus, Himself; and we know that the wicked and unrighteous will go there when they die.

So once again, we are back to the main point that God is good, and life in hell is terrible, so why would God create such a place?

Even though hell was initially created to hold Satan and the angels that fell with him, there will also be men and women in hell PUT THERE OUT OF THE STUBBORNNESS OF THEIR OWN WILLS.


God’s perfect justice also demands that there be a hell to punish (Any pain or suffering inflicted on a person for a crime or offense, by the authority to which the offender is subject, either by the constitution of God or of civil society.

The punishment of the faults and offenses of children by the parent, is by virtue of the right of government with which the parent is invested by God himself.

This species of punishment is chastisement or correction. The punishment of crimes against the laws is inflicted by the supreme power of the state in virtue of the right of government, vested in the prince or legislature.

The right of punishment belongs only to persons clothed with authority.


Divine punishments are doubtless designed to secure obedience to divine laws, and uphold the moral order of created intelligent beings.) the unrepentant and wicked among us.


Walter Martin said about the existence of hell and eternal punishment in his book, The
Kingdom of the Cults,

“They (The Cults) make much to-do about God being Love but forget that because He is Love, He is also Justice and must require infinite vengeance upon anyone who treads underfoot the precious blood of Christ, who is the Lamb slain for lost sinners from the foundation of the world.”

What kind of a loving God would He be if the wicked were never punished? Why would He have sent His Son to die for our sins, if we could reject that redemption and not eventually pay the price?

What incentive would we have to do good and love God if we knew we could reject His Son and choose to do evil all of our lives and never be punished?

We would not want this lack of justice in the streets of our cities and towns, so why do we expect that God would not punish injustice in the overall universe?

Now a word from the CLUELESS and GODLESS:

The web-site “NO GOD NETWORK Say no to Religion”

( I personally AGREE WITH them about religion!)

…this UGLY STATEMENT WAS MADE TO CHRISTIANS

” I am disgusted that most Christians do not know this.

Twice in the New Testament, as said to be Jesus Christ’s own words, does the Bible clearly and literally state that there is one unforgivable sin that will damn you eternally without any chance of ever experiencing anything after death than eternal suffering.

In the books of Mark and Matthew (as I said in my “Children’s Faith” blog) it is obvious:

“Truly I say unto you, All their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter: but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: because they say, ‘He has an unclean spirit’.” (Book of Mark 3:28-29)


Jesus speaking:

“He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.” (Book of Matthew 12:30-32)


(NOW,NOTICE HIS RESPONSE TO THIS :)

“This is horrendous. Every single sin, from theft to murder and rape, can, and WILL be forgiven by Jesus, except for denying the Holy Spirit.

That’s right. Go out and kill that b*#*#*d you don’t like across the street. Rape his wife and daughter until they bleed, its okay.

Afterward, just beg Jesus for forgiveness and everything’ll be alright. Oh, but didn’t I mention?

Atheists will be in hell for their blasphemy.

Jesus hates them.

They have unclean spirits and are pure evil.”

( It just amazes me! How do Atheists TAKE IT SO PERSONAL when they read a book they SAY is not true about a God they SAY doesn’t exist who wishes THEM HARM in a place they SAY can’t exist for a time they SAY isn’t real?

If it’s a POINTLESS point they wanted ,they have won the day!

It’s not real go home with your wounded pride and lick your FAKE SORES or you could just be Intellectually HONEST and INTERPRET SCRIPTURE RIGHT FOR ONCE!)


“If you are Christian, then you have no choice but to believe this, or accept that you are an idiot.

This is the New Testament, so you can’t wave it off with that old “It’s just the old Testament” argument. “

( Actually this verse is in the official Old Testament class because the NEW COVENANT BEGINS AT JOHN CHAPTER 20 when the disciples received the Holy Spirit and were BORN AGAIN.)

“And you can’t say it’s out of context. Go read it. And you can’t say it’s a metaphor, because Jesus said it very literally,”

( Funny how Atheists know it’s literal even though it’s not a real “BOOK of God’s Word” isn’t it? They love to use words that put us in a box EXCEPT when those same words PUT THEM IN A BOX,THEN IT’S NOT LITERAL AND ALL OF A SUDDEN PULLED OUT OF THE HAT AGAIN IS METAPHOR!)

“and it’s obvious it is to be taken literally, straight from Jesus’ mouth. So, you have two choices here: ”

(Your RIGHT SO FAR!)


“One, deny these quotes. That means excusing all credibility to these quotes and passing them off as fiction.

That would, however, excuse all credibility to Matt and Mark, since you cannot logically believe anything they say without believing everything they say with the same merit, and therefore discrediting Jesus, and the New Testament, and the whole Bible, and therefore your entire religion, proving you to be a moron.”

(Which it would by the way!)


“Two, you could hate all Atheists”

( Personally I would rather talk to someone who doesn’t believe in God than to waste my time talking to someone who “thinks they know god and really doen’t”)

“and wish them to burn eternally, just like your Holy Father does.”

(THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE, IF IT WERE TRUE WHY SEND JESUS TO REDEEM YOU WHEN YOU WERE ALREADY GOING TO HELL?)

“This would, however, make you a terrible person for believing such hateful terrible things about good people, and therefore proving you to be brainwashed and in denial, since these people do not deserve to be hated, and yet you still insist because of an unproven, ridiculous two-thousand year old book.”


Wow I’m speechless, (ALMOST) that was the SINGLE MOST RIDICULES STATEMENT I’VE EVER ENDURED, BUT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO KNOW BECAUSE YOU’VE JUST WITNESSED THE “STRAWMAN THEOLOGY”AT IT’S BEST!

Talk about setting up God to fail with no out..WOW!

Good thing they DON’T KNOW GOD!

What Atheists are trying to do here is NOT TO GET AN ANSWER TO THEIR QUERY!

BUT RATHER TO DUMBFOUND THE BELIEVER WITH “CIRCULAR REASONING”ABOUT GOD’S TRUE INTENTIONS AND GOODNESS AND THUS BREAK THE LEGS OF YOUR FAITH IN HIM.

Now I agree about false RELIGION; IT’S AN EVIL THING TO GOD TO TRY TO REACH HIM APART FROM FAITH,REAL CHRISTIANITY IS NOT A PART OF THIS FAKE WORLD OF MAN MADE RITUALS WHICH GOD ABHORS !

When reading these verses, it is very clear what Jesus was getting at here…whenever ANYONE attributes the work of SATAN TO THE HOLY SPIRIT..not just says it off the top of his or her head, BUT HAS A LEARNED BELIEF FROM DEEP DOWN IN THEIR HEARTS!

This is where these WORDS OF TRUE BLASPHEMY COME FROM;THE HEART NOT THE HEAD!

When this “INNER BELIEF” MANIFESTS FROM US IT IS A DEEP DOCTRINAL BELIEF SYSTEM THAT HAS CONDITIONED US TO RESPOND TO THE “AGENT OF FORGIVENESS” THE HOLY SPIRIT AND PREVENT HIM FROM DOING HIS WILL IN US.

This is NOT JUST another “SIN”ADDED TO A LIST AND MADE SEPARATE, this is the REASON THAT ANY OF THE SIN’S LISTED ABOVE “COULD NOT BE FORGIVEN” ALL SIN CAN BE FORGIVEN- UNTIL YOU REJECT THE AGENT OF THAT FORGIVENESS.

The Holy Spirit is GOD’S AGENT who metes out his forgiveness, he wipes the slate clean with the “BLOOD OF THE EVERLASTING COVENANT’ AND IMPUTES TO YOU “GOD’S OWN RIGHTEOUSNESS” IN THE PLACE OF THE TRANSGRESSION!

So it would follow that in order for him to do his job; you would have to recognize him for who he really is

( The agent holding forgiveness)

and NOT LAY A FALSE CLAIM AGAINST HIM

(BELIEVING HIM TO BE SATAN)..RIGHT?

Let’s put it in another way

..say an insurance agent calls you on the phone or sends you an invite to buy “Fire insurance’.

BUT when he comes to your home one evening and knocks on your door,you won’t answer and get angry at him for coming, he continues to knock and you get irate and call the cops!

The authorities kick him off your property, because you tell them he was trying to harm you or break into your home…they arrest him and put him in jail even though he says he’s trying to sell you something to help you…

Do you think that same insurance salesmen could EVER COME BACK TO YOUR HOME AGAIN after you made it impossible for him to enter your home?

BUT….the plot thickens…

Without “Signing the paperwork your fire insurance will be null & void”

Who’s fault was it YOURS or HIS?


The Holy Spirit is the AGENT who has SALVATION TO OFFER YOU.

BUT WHEN YOU TELL HIM HE IS “NEVER WELCOME TO COME IN AND DO HIS WORK” BY CALLING HIS OFFER OF THE DEVIL OR OF SOME FORM OF FALSE WORK!

YOUR IN A PLACE OF NOT BEING ABLE TO RECEIVE, NOR CAN HE GIVE IT TO YOU THEREFORE YOU WILL DIE WITHOUT FORGIVENESS-

THIS IS YOUR PERSONAL CHOICE AND NOT THE FAULT OF GOD!

Hard Question # 5 :What about those who have never heard about Jesus? Are they damned to hell without mercy?

How can those who have never heard about Christ and what he did ever be saved?

Such a question can be raised only by those who have heard about Jesus Christ.

So none of us belongs to the category of those who never heard about him.

Therefore posing this question can be either a way of justifying one’s adherence to atheism or to other religions (since the answer is not easy at all), or the way of expressing a genuine interest for understanding how one’s Christian faith can be reconciled with the claims of other religions.

Whatever the case might be, finding a proper answer to this question is important.

This answer may not be a complete answer to this question, but I hope it will begin to REVEAL how much God loves the world DESPITE the fact his church sometimes does not EXPRESS HIS LOVE AS COMMANDED!

Romans 10:13-14 (KJV)

” For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?”


Two extremes must be avoided when addressing the salvation of those who have never heard about Christ.

First,

if humans can be saved only after hearing about him, the multitudes which never had this chance during their lifetime would necessarily be damned to eternal suffering in hell.

THIS is the position of the HYPOCRITICAL FALSE FAITH’S WHO DO NOT LOVE ANYONE WHO DOES NOT CONFORM TO THEIR FORM OF RELIGION.

It is obvious that such a cruelty would not be consistent with his love for us, which sent Christ to die on the cross for our sins.

If God is all-loving, all-knowing and all-powerful, he must have a solution for those who have never heard about his final revelation in Jesus Christ.


Ecc 3:11

“He hath made every thing beautiful in his time”:

also he hath set the world ( properly concealed, that is, the vanishing point; generally time out of mind (past or future), that is, (practically) eternity; frequentative adverbially (especially with prepositional prefix) always: – always (-s), ancient (time), any more, continuance, eternal, (for, [n-]) ever (-lasting,more, of old), lasting, long (time), (of) old (time), perpetual, at any time, (beginning of the) world (+ without end). in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.”


He hath made all (the travail, Ecc_3:10) beautiful (fit, in harmony with the whole work of God) in its time; also He hath set eternity in their heart (i. e., the heart of the sons of men, Ecc_3:10).


The word, translated “world” in the text, and “eternity” in this note, is used seven times in Ecclesiastes.


The interpretation “eternity,” is conceived in the sense of a long indefinite period of time.

God has placed in the inborn constitution of man the capability of conceiving of eternity, the struggle to apprehend the everlasting, the longing after an eternal life.


Second,

if all other religions were valid ways to God, the Christian claim that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross is the only possibility for human salvation should be rejected.

If humans could have worked out their salvation by carefully following any available known religion, God shouldn’t have allowed the crucifixion of Christ to happen, for it was unnessisary.

Christianity would have been a mere extra alternative to reach God to those already existing, and Jesus only one religious teacher among others.


John 14:6 (KJV)

“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. ”

So if we are believers in Jesus,we must accept what Jesus said as TRUTH OR REJECT HIM OUTRIGHT!


Is it possible that only those who have heard about Christ can be saved?

Or is salvation also available for those who haven’t heard about him?


What happens to those who haven’t heard the gospel when they die?

Do the unevangelized go to hell?


Can God be considered loving and just if He fails to provide large numbers of people with an opportunity for salvation through Jesus Christ?


If the unevangelized have an opportunity for salvation, how is it made available to them?


Differing viewpoints on the eternal destiny of the unevangelized


1. Restrictivism (also called Particularism or Ecclesiocentrism):

tragically, all the unevangelized are damned.


2. Universalism: everyone, including the unevangelized will be saved.


3. Religious instrumentalism:

non-Christian religions have a positive saving potential similar to Judaism in the Old Testament


4. Universal evangelization: God ensures the gospel will somehow get to those who are searching


5. Universal opportunity at moment of death.


6. The “If” theory:

God will save those who would have accepted Christ if they had heard about Him.


7. Postmortem evangelization:

people can hear about Christ and accept him after they die.


8. Wider hope (called Inclusivism by some writers):

salvation is possible apart from evangelization.

The unevangelized are saved or lost on the basis of their following what light they have.


God never intended anyone to be out of fellowship with Him. Heaven was intended to be man’s destination.

God is holy and loving and wants everyone to repent (Exod. 34:6-7; Jonah 4:10-11; 2 Peter 3:9).

Though He is a just and righteous God AND WILL PUNISH ALL UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, He’ s also a loving God.

Romans 1:18-32 (KJV)

” For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.

Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. “


God’s nature prevents Him from being unfair.

The Bible teaches that God judges fairly

(Gen. 18:25; Psalm 7:11, 9:18; 1 Peter 1:17).

In His infinite justice, He will be much fairer than we with our limited understanding of justice could possibly be.


Man is not in total ignorance or spiritual darkness concerning his knowledge about God.

The Bible clearly teaches that man has an awareness both of God and of eternity

(Psalm 19:1-4; Eccl. 3:11; John 1:9; Acts 14:15-17;Rom 2:15).

It was the Roman sage Seneca who said, “God is near you, is with you. A sacred Spirit dwells within us, the Observer and Guardian of all our evil and all our good.

There is no good man without God.”

[Quoted in J. Oswald Sanders,

How Lost Are the Heathen?

(Chicago: Moody, 1972), 53.]

We all are BORN with a “God sized hole” in our souls that we ATTEMPT to fill with what we think is that “Missing Piece.”


However, this God-consciousness is not enough it is the shadow of the real thing meant only to remind us of that which we must follow.

Man must have more information than this in order to be saved.

The Christian message is in jeopardy at either extreme.

If God-consciousness were sufficient for salvation, then the Bible’s revelation is unnecessary.

This is wrong because the Bible places such an importance in bringing the message of Jesus Christ to those who have not heard (Rom. 10:14).

But if the Bible is the only way a person can be saved, then we are back to our initial question about those who haven’t heard.

God will provide the necessary information to those who seek Him.

God rewards those who seek Him (Heb. 11:6).

He will give anyone who earnestly seeks Him enough information to make a decision

(1 Chron. 15:2; Psalm 9:10; Prov. 8:17; Jer. 29:13; Acts 8:30-31).

God sent Peter to a Roman official named Cornelius to tell him about Jesus (Acts 10).

It is also possible that God may work faith in a person’s heart so that, like Job, he may say,

“I know that my Redeemer lives,”

without knowing the identity of the Redeemer.

The responsibility for a decision concerning this information belongs to each one of us.

We are ultimately responsible for the course we choose.

No one can make the decision for us. As C.W. Hale Amos wrote, “From what we know, respecting the terms of salvation, we are led irresistibly to the conclusion that no man can perish except by his own fault and deliberate choice.” [Ibid., 54.]


I have heard many stories of people coming to faith in Christ as the result of a dream or vision where He appears to them, inviting them to trust in Him.

This is particularly happening in the Muslim world.

Many people instantly know it’s the Lord Jesus when He appears to them, but some do not.

In some dreams and visions, He tells them who He is, and in others He does not—He just loves them and calls them to come to Him.

After the dream/vision, the Lord provides someone to identify Him as they continue to seek Him. (We see something similar in the story of Cornelius in Acts 10.)


People are putting their trust in Christ, but some don’t know anything more about Him than that He is God, He loves them and He invites them to trust in Him.

Two recurrent invitations continue to appear in the dreams and visions we are hearing about:

1)

“I am the way, the truth and the life,”

and 2)

“You belong to Me.”

As people are then able to get a copy of the Bible or talk to a Christian, their knowledge of Christ, the Cross, and the Christian life grows, as well as their faith and their understanding of who Jesus is and what He did.


So what that means is that if a person has never heard of Jesus through the preaching of the gospel, that is no obstacle for God. He can, and testimony shows that He does, appear directly to—and call a person to—have faith in Him.


A classic example of how people belonging to cultures foreign to the Judeo-Christian world can still have a revelation of God and meet him is the Magi from the east mentioned in Matthew 2,1-12.

Despite the fact that they were astrologers and probably believed that human destiny is shaped by the stars, which is contrary to biblical teaching, they were still granted a special revelation from God regarding his intervention to save humankind from sin.

They worshiped Jesus as king of the Jews and brought him gifts worthy of a king. Their coming to Bethlehem was obviously not customary.

It was not a rule for the Magi to worship a new king born in Judea. Their visit was rather a surprise for all, and a serious reason for Herod to feel his throne threatened.

This example shows that God can use unorthodox methods to reveal himself to those who are completely foreign to his revelation in the Bible.

He has sufficient means to do it all over the earth. Again we can notice that the most important factor in defining faith is human response to his revelation.

The Magi could have ignored the Bethlehem star.

However, their journey proves their faith and this faith brings them to worship the true God.

The problem of humanity has never been the lack of revelation, but rather pride and the refusal of grace.

People do not respond to the amount of revelation they already have; they know what to do, but refuse to do it.

Most of Jesus’ contemporaries rejected him because they refused to believe despite all fulfilled prophecies, miracles, healings and even despite his resurrection.

The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16,19-31) is extremely relevant here.

People are given everything they need in order to be saved, but if they refuse the available revelation, they are fully responsible for it and cannot be justified at God’s judgment.


God will and does go FAR out of his way to reconcile the world to himself,through the WITNESS of MEN,all of CREATION,the STARS ABOVE,DREAMS,VISIONS,EVEN GRACE REVEALLED IN DIFFERENT FALSE RELIGIONS AROUND THE WORLD!

There have been many spiritual masters who recognized the necessity of grace and the impossibility of attaining salvation by one’s own efforts.

Ramanuja and Madhva are brilliant examples in the Hindu tradition, as is Shantideva in Mahayana Buddhism.

The spiritual trend called prapatti in Hinduism and the Pure Land school of Buddhism focus on grace as the only solution for attaining liberation.

According to them, the whole merit for being saved belongs to the god (in Hinduism) or bodhisattva (in Buddhism) they worship.

There are also many cases of tribal religions in which grace plays a key role in salvation.

The God who reveals himself in the Bible knows one’s inner attitude and motivation for performing certain religious duties.

Any efforts which aim at self-justification are of no value, no matter how impressive they might be.

The proper attitude is one of humility and openness towards God’s grace, which he offers unconditionally.

We have observed this attitude in the prapatti devotional trend of Hinduism, which demands giving up the control of one’s personal life to the god Vishnu and leaving to him all responsibility for attaining salvation.

The follower of this trend has to acknowledge that he is not good enough to attain liberation by performing rituals and moral obligations.

The whole prapatti philosophy can be summarized in the following verse, written by Vedanta Deshika, a 14th century follower of Ramanuja:


“Lord, I, who am nothing, conform to your will and desist being contrary to it, and with faith and prayer, submit to you the burden of saving my soul” (Nyasadashaka 2).

This is PURE REVELATION FROM THE GOD OF THE BIBLE to those who HAVE not heard as yet the TRUE GOSPEL of Jesus,What would be the result of a missionary finally reaching these people with the REST of the revelation?

It must also be remembered that God is UNWILLING for ANYONE to perish, so he will go to GREAT length’s to lead the world to himself WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF HIS REVEALED WORD TO THE WORLD-HIS PERFECT WILL!


The same is the case with the Pure Land School of Mahayana Buddhism, which flourished in Japan.

According to its doctrine, the bodhisattva Amida (the Buddha of Infinite Light) is able to save even the most despised sinner by his grace (tariki).

Heaven (Amida’s Pure Land) can be reached only by his grace, not by human efforts such as meditation or performing good deeds.

Such spiritual trends in other religions prove that the Holy Spirit is at work in the world, convincing people of their sin and limitations and turning their hearts toward God’s grace.

According to the character displayed by the God of the Bible, we can expect that he will save such people, by the grace available for all in Jesus Christ.

They will be saved not through their native religions, but despite them, not because they didn’t hear about Christ, but despite the fact that they didn’t hear about him, as a reward for their humility and recognition of the need for grace.

In other words, it is not Vishnu or Amida who saves them, but Christ through his grace, as a result of their need for grace expressed towards Vishnu or Amida.

Whether there are many or few people in this category we cannot know.

God revealed himself through his GRACE to Martin Luthor WHILE he was in BONDAGE TO WORKS in the Catholic faith,so nothing is IMPOSSIBLE TO HIM!


If people can be saved without hearing about Christ, does it mean that Christian missions are futile?

By no means.

There are two important reasons for Christian missions in the world.

First,

Jesus himself commanded it (Matthew 28,18-20). He is the final revelation of God and his message of salvation has to be proclaimed “to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1,8).

That people can be saved without hearing about Christ is only a temporary solution, which operates only until his message will reach all people.

Second,

all people should share the fullness and blessings of the Christian life, not only in eternity, but also during this present earthly life.

Jesus came to redeem our earthly life as well, so that we could start to experience his love now, in a personal relationship with him and also in the Christian community.

If the salvation of tribes living in remote areas depended entirely on missionaries’ preaching, a lot of people would suffer eternal damnation in hell only because Christian missionaries didn’t manage to reach their part of the world in time.

In many cases the disobedience of Christians to go into remote parts of the world would be responsible for that.

Even worse is the case of missionaries that have reached remote parts of the world but didn’t preach the “right” Jesus.

Remember how the New World was colonized.

Christian missions have not always been inspired by love but by forced venues.

They haven’t always preached the message of love, but one of greed and hypocrisy. Therefore, God could not condemn people to hell only because his so-called followers perverted his message. This wouldn’t be at all consistent with God’s perfect justice and love for the lost.

God didn’t leave the world without a proper testimony about himself (Acts 14,17) and doesn’t condemn anybody without first revealing his grace.

Although this article may not offer an acceptable answer to the question in the title, nobody’s salvation depends on how convincing such an answer could be.

The sacrifice of Christ on the cross is and remains the only ground for human salvation.

Rejecting it (by those who have heard about him) cannot be justified by the lack of intellectual satisfaction one gets from polemical debates.

The real question I have to now ask is

“Do you know about Jesus and if you do,are you USING QUESTIONS to try and REFUTE in your own conscience that nagging conviction of your personal sin before God..

THE BALL’S IN YOUR COURT NOW,WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH IT?

Hard Question #6: If God KNOWS EVERYTHING BEFORE HAND, Why doesn’t he do something about it?

Is GOD:

TEMPTER or TESTER?

ARE WE ALL JUST LIKE RATS IN A MAZE, BEING TEMPTED THEN TESTED FOR GOD’S AMUSEMENT?


Believe it or not some people assume this to be true because of a lack of understanding about the difference between “Four-knowledge” and “Pre-destination.”

FIRST I’LL DEAL WITH “FOUR-KNOWLEDGE” which is Knowledge of a thing before it happens; pre-science.

NOTICE THIS EXAMPLE:

“If I foreknew, foreknowledge had no influence on their fault.”

In other words just because I know something BEFOREHAND does NOT change it’s outcome at all.


In the King James Bible the term “Forsaw”means To BEHOLD in Advance,to notice previously or to keep in one’s view.


Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

For David speaketh concerning him, I FORESAW the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved. (Act_2:24-25)


There is NOTHING STRANGE ABOUT GOD HAVING KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THINGS BEFORE THEY HAPPEN!

AS GOD UNLIKE US IS NOT BOUND IN ANY WAY BY TIME, HE ALWAYS SEES BEFORE HIM THE “End from the beginning” God can “Behold” at any time, the past, the present and the future simply because he does not exist within the framework of the limitations of time.

HE EXISTS IN A REALM OUTSIDE OF TIME…THEREFORE HE CAN BE WITNESS TO ALL OF TIME AT ONCE!


One of the KEY THINGS that makes God,God is the fact that he is ALL-KNOWLEDGEABLE about all things in every circumstance…

Isa 42:9

” Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.”


Isa 44:7

” And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them show unto them.”


Isa 48:3

” I have declared the former things from the beginning; and they went forth out of my mouth, and I showed them; I did them suddenly, and they came to pass. “


Isa 48:5

” I have even from the beginning declared it to thee; before it came to pass I showed it thee: lest thou shouldest say, Mine idol hath done them, and my graven image, and my molten image, hath commanded them.”


Isa 48:6

” Thou hast heard, see all this; and will not ye declare it? I have showed thee new things from this time, even hidden things, and thou didst not know them. “


You see there is NO MYSTERY involved in God’s foreknowledge..he stands outside of all history and therefore can see what is going on, past,present and future..therefore ONLY a prophet inspired by him will be right 100%.

Jer 1:5

“Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.”


Dan 2:28-29

“But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these; As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed, what should come to pass hereafter: and he that revealeth secrets maketh known to thee what shall come to pass.”


Mat 6:8

“Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.”


O.k. so foreknowledge is not a problem, but what about “Predestination” did God determine before hand our PAIN and SUFFERING?

Did God determine before I was born I would go through so many problems?

In order to properly answer this question I must cover other doctrines first such as what God is, does he have “evil intent? “

First we must define Evil:

Remember I told you that “EVIL” as a thing does not exist it can only be felt by a spiritual presence because evil is the ABSENCE OF THE GOOD.

Evil is Having bad qualities of a natural kind; mischievous; having qualities which tend to injury, or to produce mischief.


Having bad qualities of a moral kind; wicked; corrupt; perverse; wrong; as evil thoughts; evil deeds; evil speaking; an evil generation.


Unfortunate; unhappy; producing sorrow, distress, injury or calamity; as evil tidings; evil arrows; evil days.

Evil is natural or moral. Natural evil is any thing which produces pain, distress, loss or calamity, or which in any way disturbs the peace, impairs the happiness, or destroys the perfection of natural beings.


Moral evil is any deviation of a moral agent from the rules of conduct prescribed to him by God, or by legitimate human authority; or it is any violation of the plain principles of justice and rectitude.


There are also evils called civil, which affect injuriously the peace or prosperity of a city or state; and political evils, which injure a nation, in its public capacity.


All wickedness, all crimes, all violations of law and right are moral evils. Diseases are natural evils, but they often proceed by cause, from moral evils.


The real question is “Can God be evil?”

Jas 1:17

“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness (CHANGEABLENESS), neither shadow of turning (CHANGING OF THE MIND).”


1Jn 1:5

” This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.”


Notice this verse, in God there is NO CHANGE and there is NO SHADOW..and remember shadows are what is left after light leaves a place, so GOD IS INCAPABLE OF EVIL INTENT IN ANY FORM!

Shadow is defined as “Shade within defined limits; obscurity or deprivation of light, apparent on a plane and representing the form of the body which intercepts the rays of light; as the shadow of a man, of a tree or a tower.”

God has NO SHADOW for he is PURE LIGHT BOTH IN FORM AND THOUGHT, to think of God in any other way is to say he is IMPERFECT and FAINT in representation and in OPPOSITION TO REAL SUBSTANCE.

What is DARKNESS?

It is Absence of light,Obscurity; want of clearness or perspicuity; that quality or state which renders any thing difficult to be understood; as the darkness of counsels.It is A state of being intellectually clouded; ignorance.


So we can conclude from this that God is perfect and pure and has NO EVIL INTENT IN THOUGHT OR DEED,ELSE HE COULD NOT BE GOD! In order for the above question to be true God would have to be a cruel, void of Love taskmaster without feeling for his creation.

So we know from our study here that God KNOWS EVERYTHING that has happened and that will happen,THIS IS FOREKNOWLEDGE.

We know that God has the ability to PREDETERMINE WHAT HE KNOWS IS FOR OUR BEST INTEREST, this does not mean, he wills anything EVIL TO HAPPEN TO US..IT SIMPLY MEANS THAT AS JESUS SAID THERE IS ONLY ONE NARROW PATH BY WHICH WE MUST GO TO GET TO HEAVEN AND ALONG THAT PATH TO EITHER SIDE IS EVIL “THE VOID OF LIGHT”AND TO STEP OFF THE PATH AT ANY POINT HAS CONSEQUENCES TO IT THAT ARE NOT HIS WILL.

Such as Adam and Eve and their choice to eat of the wrong tree first.

It was not God’s fault that they disobeyed him BUT because God knew they would he made a plan to reverse the process of sin through his son BEFORE THEY EVEN CHOOSE!

God DID NOT put the trees there to tempt them BUT rather to TEST THEM,in other words just because you don’t pay attention in school, DOES THAT MEAN THE TEACHER WON’T TEST YOU AT SOME POINT?

And since we have proved that God has no VOID within him and will not do evil then the conclusion MUST BE THAT GOD INTENDED GOOD FOR THEM AND NOT EVIL.

To PREDES’TINATE means To predetermine or foreordain; to appoint or ordain beforehand by an unchangeable purpose.


Now think real hard about this is “EVIL”an unchangeable purpose? Will darkness EVER RULE the universe? NO!

So how could a God of GOOD,ORDAIN ANY EVIL IN PURPOSE OR THOUGHT?

Rom 8

“Whom he did foreknow, he also did predesignate to be conformed to the image of his Son.”


God knew that each of us would choose to come to him and he knows that some will not,BUT THE PLAN REMAINS THE SAME REGARDLESS OF OUR CHOICE!

Eph 1.

“Having predestinated us (The Church,NOT individuals) unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself.”


God did not predestinate EVERY PERSON ON EARTH,PAST,PRESENT, and Future to be saved weather or NOT they choose it,what he did do was to PREDETERMINE HIS PLAN OF REDEMPTION FOR ALL MANKIND WHICH IS AN “UNCHANGEABLE PURPOSE FOREVER”!


So let’s recap; TO HAVE FOREKNOWLEDGE MEANS THAT GOD WHO SEES EVERY MOMENT OF TIME FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE END, HAS THE BIG PICTURE.

But to PREDESTINATE MEANS THAT GOD USES HIS “WISDOM or FOREKNOWLEDGE” TO DETERMINE HIS PLAN OF ACTION WHICH HAS NO “SHADOW or VOID IN IT’S MATRIX” meaning The womb; the cavity in which the fetus of an animal is formed and nourished till its birth.

A mold; the cavity in which any thing is formed, and which gives it shape; as the matrix of a type.

The place where any thing is formed or produced; as the matrix of metals; gang.


In dyeing, the five simple colors, black, white, blue, red and yellow, of which all the rest are composed.


You see what God made cannot be evil if where it was formed was perfect in the first place!