[Hazaanko]

Freedom of choice / free agency.  If man cannot choose to do evil, and is forced only to do good, then choice does not exist.  Free agency is our greatest gift.  To take that away would be malevolent.

[Kosh]

If that were the case then why pass judgement after death? Isn't telling someone you will burn for eternity not a measure of coercion?

[Hazaanko]

I'd imagine because it is completely up to you whether you want to "burn in eternity" or not.  If you believe in that kind of stuff.  You're just being told the consequences to your actions.

[TrashMan]

It isn't really a flaw considering that God is supposed to be "all knowing and benevolent". Indeed, if God has the power, why wait unless it has no will?

Cause even "evil" people aren't 100% evil. Why should he smite them now? They'll get whats coming to them in the afterlife....good people too.

So that argument is totally flawed, since you can't call God malevolent, given that He's giving away eternal bliss and all that jazz.

[Mustang19]

Freedom of choice / free agency.  If man cannot choose to do evil, and is forced only to do good, then choice does not exist.  Free agency is our greatest gift.  To take that away would be malevolent.

Burn in hell or live in heaven? A choice, I guess, but not much of one. As Kosh put it,

Isn't telling someone you will burn for eternity not a measure of coercion?

In addition, who decides morals? Out of the thousands of religions that exist and have existed, which one follows "proper" rituals and beliefs?

For me, the main argument for atheism is the fact that religion varies across times and cultures and you can't clump all faiths together and create a coherent picture of what God(s) want.

[Mefustae]

Remember, children; eternal suffering awaits anyone who questions God's infinite love.

[Hazaanko]

Freedom of choice / free agency.  If man cannot choose to do evil, and is forced only to do good, then choice does not exist.  Free agency is our greatest gift.  To take that away would be malevolent.

Burn in hell or live in heaven? A choice, I guess, but not much of one. As Kosh put it,

Isn't telling someone you will burn for eternity not a measure of coercion?

In addition, who decides morals? Out of the thousands of religions that exist and have existed, which one follows "proper" rituals and beliefs?

For me, the main argument for atheism is the fact that religion varies across times and cultures and you can't clump all faiths together and create a coherent picture of what God(s) want.

That is the correct question.

Remember, children; eternal suffering awaits anyone who questions God's infinite love.

Really?  That sucks.  I guess Kosh is a goner then.   

[TrashMan]

In addition, who decides morals? Out of the thousands of religions that exist and have existed, which one follows "proper" rituals and beliefs?

For me, the main argument for atheism is the fact that religion varies across times and cultures and you can't clump all faiths together and create a coherent picture of what God(s) want.

Haven't you notice that morals in all major religions are in their core the same? That "core" doesn't change over time

Isn't telling someone you will burn for eternity not a measure of coercion?

Consider it a friendly warning, a pointer in the right direction.
It's no different than our most basic laws like "do not murder". If you're not willing to face the consequences then don't do it..simple.

[Mustang19]

Haven't you notice that morals in all major religions are in their core the same? That "core" doesn't change over time

The Catholic church orders us not to use contraception, Bhuddists and Hindus don't care. Islamic law allows a man to have multiple wives, christian custom allows one. Scientologists want us to donate money to them. There are plenty of differences in religious dogma. Religions share morals no more than all cultures share certain common-sense guidelines, eg, "do not murder".

Isn't telling someone you will burn for eternity not a measure of coercion?
Consider it a friendly warning, a pointer in the right direction.
It's no different than our most basic laws like "do not murder". If you're not willing to face the consequences then don't do it..simple.

OK. The argument was about the relation between eternal punishment and free will. Pointer, friendly reminder, whatever you want to call it, punishment is a way of restricting our behavior. If you have punishment, you cannot have truly free will. I'm not saying that free will is good; in many cases I'd wish we'd take a cue from the Borg. The point is, the christian God applies punishment and does not allow truly free will.

It appears we're talking about christianity here, which isn't conducive to free will by the literal definition. The thing is, christian scholars have a peculiar definition of "free will" that makes these sorts of arguments confusing. As my priest likes to say (yes, my parents make me go to Catholic mass), it's not "freedom to do as you wish, but freedom to do as you ought." Make of that what you will.

[Hazaanko]

Haven't you notice that morals in all major religions are in their core the same? That "core" doesn't change over time

The Catholic church orders us not to use contraception, Bhuddists and Hindus don't care. Islamic law allows a man to have multiple wives, christian custom allows one. Scientologists want us to donate money to them. There are plenty of differences in religious dogma. Religions share morals no more than all cultures share certain common-sense guidelines, eg, "do not murder".

Isn't telling someone you will burn for eternity not a measure of coercion?
Consider it a friendly warning, a pointer in the right direction.
It's no different than our most basic laws like "do not murder". If you're not willing to face the consequences then don't do it..simple.

OK. The argument was about the relation between eternal punishment and free will. Pointer, friendly reminder, whatever you want to call it, punishment is a way of restricting our behavior. If you have punishment, you cannot have truly free will. I'm not saying that free will is good; in many cases I'd wish we'd take a cue from the Borg. The point is, the christian God applies punishment and does not allow truly free will.

It appears we're talking about christianity here, which isn't conducive to free will by the literal definition. The thing is, christian scholars have a peculiar definition of "free will" that makes these sorts of arguments confusing. As my priest likes to say (yes, my parents make me go to Catholic mass), it's not "freedom to do as you wish, but freedom to do as you ought." Make of that what you will.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.  Sorry.  Punishment does absolutely in NO WAY restrict free will.  Fact.  Action reaction.  You choose the ACTION, and universal law (some people would call that God - or God's law) dictates the consequence or reaction.  It is up to you whether to decide if you define the consequence is punishment or reward.  Punishment is not a way of restricting behavior.  Punishment is a consequence.

Freedom from consequence only exists where law does not exist.  Free will is another thing entirely.  Without law there is no choice, however.  In fact, without law to dictate consequence, nothing would exist at all.  But thats another discussion.

P.S.  Don't confuse human laws with laws of nature.

[TrashMan]

Haven't you notice that morals in all major religions are in their core the same? That "core" doesn't change over time

The Catholic church orders us not to use contraception, Bhuddists and Hindus don't care. Islamic law allows a man to have multiple wives, christian custom allows one. Scientologists want us to donate money to them. There are plenty of differences in religious dogma. Religions share morals no more than all cultures share certain common-sense guidelines, eg, "do not murder".

The CC encourages not using contraception, it doesn't order it.
Major religion differences are not in the core issues.

OK. The argument was about the relation between eternal punishment and free will. Pointer, friendly reminder, whatever you want to call it, punishment is a way of restricting our behavior. If you have punishment, you cannot have truly free will. I'm not saying that free will is good; in many cases I'd wish we'd take a cue from the Borg. The point is, the christian God applies punishment and does not allow truly free will.

It appears we're talking about christianity here, which isn't conducive to free will by the literal definition. The thing is, christian scholars have a peculiar definition of "free will" that makes these sorts of arguments confusing. As my priest likes to say (yes, my parents make me go to Catholic mass), it's not "freedom to do as you wish, but freedom to do as you ought." Make of that what you will.

Bollocks. Of course, you're entilted to have whatever oppinions you want.

Free Will means you can do a zillion billion things. But not all of those zillion billion are good or encouraged. You have more than enough freedom, but the few "do nots" seem to overshadow everything else for you.

You go to the store with 100$. You have free will to buy whatever you want with those 100$. You got choice - candy, fruit, cerials, meat, veggies...whatever..or you might go and buy video games...or you can go buy drugs.
And drugs are bad. So having to face the negative consequences for buying drugs somehow doesn't make you free, since the other 999999 choices of purchase obviously don't matter.

IMHO, I personally think this is all about people wanting to dodge responsibility for their actions.
Like a spoiled brat telling everyone his parents are mean since they spanked him when he tried to set fire to the curtains..they are killing his free wil and wild spirit...

[Mustang19]

You're right, Trashman and Hazaanko. If someone holds a gun to your head and asks for your wallet, it could be said that you have the free will to refuse. But by that definition, free will means nothing. In fact, Wiktionary gives two definitions for the word.

1. (philosophy) The ability to choose one's actions, or determine what reasons are acceptable motivation for actions.
2. (philosophy) The doctrine that humans (and possibly other entities) are able to choose their actions without being caused to do so by external forces.

Again, not saying that free will is a good thing as it allows morally unrestricted action.

The CC encourages not using contraception, it doesn't order it.
Major religion differences are not in the core issues.

Yes. Virtually all human cultures have certain elements in common.

[BlackDove]

The CC encourages not using contraception, it doesn't order it.
Major religion differences are not in the core issues.

Hey, if you go with religion as to why you don't use contraception, you deserve all the AIDS you get. In fact, one could say I encourage the spread of AIDS that way.

It weeds out the stupid.

[TrashMan]

Hey, if you go with religion as to why you don't use contraception, you deserve all the AIDS you get. In fact, one could say I encourage the spread of AIDS that way.

It weeds out the stupid.

 

Another low stab at religious people, eh Blacky? No self-control whatsoever...tsk, tsk..

[Turambar]

Hey, if you go with religion as to why you don't use contraception, you deserve all the AIDS you get. In fact, one could say I encourage the spread of AIDS that way.

It weeds out the stupid.

 

Another low stab at religious people, eh Blacky? No self-control whatsoever...tsk, tsk..

yeah, come on.  they aren't stupid, they just don't know better

ignorant was the word you were looking for

[TrashMan]

yeah, come on.  they aren't stupid, they just don't know better

ignorant was the word you were looking for

Funny, I was about to say the same thing about you .. 

[Turambar]

ah, the classic "I know you are, but what am I" defense

alas, i am helpless

[Nuke]

the real purpose of religion is so the ruling elite can keep their power while the common people waste all their time debating and practicing religion when they should be dethroning those who have power.

[Fearless Leader]

the real purpose of religion is so the ruling elite can keep their power while the common people waste all their time debating and practicing religion when they should be dethroning those who have power.

thats why the US has separation of church and state, to keep the government from setting up a religion.

[Flipside]

Actually, the only countries where the Government and Church aren't constantly wrangling over 'moral dilemmas' are the ones where the Government IS the church, and many of those are just scary, because they impose what they consider to be a 'higher law', whilst not actually having any accountability to the fact that those laws are being enforced as intended.