A classic debate on the Christian doctrine of hell

[Sena]

The debate is between Raymond Bradley (atheist) and William Lane Craig (Christian theologian). Craig speaks first.

[Deb]

I haven't listened yet, it's a long one, but I'm downloading the audio from this YouTube for my next long walk.

It's interesting to me that in the past couple of days I've come across scientific articles that also mention god, heaven and hell. It's just surprising to me that physicists etc. would believe such old-school things.

From the video I posted in the other topic about free will (I realize these comments could be figurative):

Michio Kaku (theoretical physicist): "This of course Einstein hated because he said God doesn't play dice with the universe. Well hey, get used to it. Einstein was wrong. God does play dice. Every time we look at an electron it moves. There is uncertainty with regards to the position of the electron."

And from my dark matter post referring to quasars.

Antonucci (astrophysicist): "Eventually, I suppose we'll get it, although I may be in heaven by then, or else in the other place!"

[Sena]

From the video I posted in the other topic about free will (I realize these comments could be figurative):

Michio Kaku (theoretical physicist): "This of course Einstein hated because he said God doesn't play dice with the universe. Well hey, get used to it. Einstein was wrong. God does play dice. Every time we look at an electron it moves. There is uncertainty with regards to the position of the electron."

Deb, I agree that quantum physics reveals that there is uncertainty in the physical world, and therefore allows the possibility of free will, but exactly how free will operates I don't understand. I think that free will is limited. In Sethian terms, our Inner Self may sometimes make decisions for us in situations where we imagined that we had free will.

I may be wrong. This Seth quote says "I want to stress that within each life full free will operates once the conditions of that life are set."

"The inner self is aware of all of your existences, in other words. It sees where and how your many lives fit together. It is only because you are so oriented outward from birth that this inner self can sometimes seem alien or distant and unrelated to the self that you know. It would be impossible to be consciously aware of all of the infinitesimal details that exist in even one life; your consciousness would be so full and cluttered up that you would be unable to make choices, or to use free will.

It would be even more difficult to try to handle the information of many lives at one time. In your terms, "it" takes time to think, and you would be so caught up in thinking itself, that action would be impossible. The inner knowledge of all of your lives, from your point of view, is in the same category as those automatic processes that underlie your existence.

[... 4 paragraphs ...]

I want to stress that within each life full free will operates once the conditions of that life are set."

—Way to Health Chapter 12: June 17, 1984

[Deb]

I did listen to the debate, it brought up some good theoretical questions around "if god is ___ then why ____," some things I questioned as a young person being drilled with Catholicism. Both men are well spoken, intelligent, logical in their own ways. My searching on Craig and Bradley turned up this debate review that has a transcript of the whole thing. Funny that Hitler would come up once again. I also thought this was great:

"But not all fictions are on a par. Stories about Santa or the Tooth Fairy are fairly innocuous. But the Christian fiction, with its story of evils and an afterworld, demonstrably isn't. Belief in it has been responsible for some of the most horrendous evils of this world: the evils of witch hunts, religious wars, persecution, evils such as those in which the conquistadors first baptized Indian infants, thus saving their souls, then dashed out their brains so as to ensure that they couldn't become heretics; evils such as those in which the Inquisition cast non-conforming thinkers into temporal fires so that their souls, thus purified, might escape the fires of eternity. If there were an omniscient God, He would have known from the very beginning that all these atrocities and many more would result from believing in Him. He therefore bears as much responsibility for such evils as that other creature of Christian mythology, the devil."

As far as free will, I don't have an issue with it. I think if we had none, there would be no creativity, a lack of richness of experience for the entity. No surprises. ["The gods not only have surprises for you, but you have surprises for the gods and it can be no other way."—TECS2 ESP Class Session, March 17, 1970]

A few months ago I put up a topic about free will and it kind of cleared some things up for me. We do have free will/choices, but they are limited because of specific goals of the higher self. That's probably a good thing, or chaos could result and no one would accomplish anything. We're not ready to handle that much freedom.

"I want to make it plain that free will does exist, but that it is limited through use of a more extended free will on the part of the entity."

"Within certain limits there is free will. Yet these limits themselves were set, or if you prefer, chosen, by the entity itself for any given present personality; and at the entity level free choice or free will is much more extensive, and really has much more meaning." —TES1 Session 36 March 18, 1964

In a way I see free will and its limitations similar to living in a town or state or country that has certain laws. We usually have a good amount of freedom to make choices, but there are laws set by authorities. Many of those laws were also made to protect us from ourselves, or others who have poor decision making skills. Also like the 'natural laws' of our plane of existence.

[Sena]

My searching on Craig and Bradley turned up this debate review that has a transcript of the whole thing.

Deb, that transcript is useful.
"So Craig moves on to the point about heaven being a possible world in which all free persons freely choose Christ:

Heaven may not be a possible world when you take it in isolation by itself. It may be that the only way in which God could actualize a heaven of free creatures all worshiping Him and not falling into sin would be by having, so to speak, this run-up to it, this advance life during which there is a veil of decision-making in which some people choose for God and some people against God."

Is God an egomaniac who wants everyone to worship him? This goes back to the age of Absolute Monarchs who wanted people to worship them.

[Deb]

Is God an egomaniac who wants everyone to worship him?

Well, yeah, that was one of my original problems/questions about god when I was a kid. None of the stuff about Christianity or religion in general made sense to me. I'm no genius, far from that, but there were always some things that didn't make any sense to me. Considering all of the people that felt otherwise, I always felt there was something wrong with me.

[Sena]

Considering all of the people that felt otherwise, I always felt there was something wrong with me.

I read somewhere that people like to say they believe in God because it makes them feel they are morally good. If you are on the side of the "goodest" person in the Universe, you must be good, right?

[Deb]

If you are on the side of the "goodest" person in the Universe, you must be good, right?

Good point. Isn't it sad that humans need that in order to feel good about themselves? I wonder if it's also people's need to feel they belong, sort of pack mentality. There is a massive church complex about 4 blocks from my home. 255,000 sq ft of building spanning 66 acres, has seating for 3,500. They have three services on Sunday, one on Saturday. The police have to direct traffic around the area because of the crowding.

There are also many smaller churches in the area, all filled to capacity. I find that mind-boggling. It seems to me like there are more church goers now than when I was a kid.

[Zron]

I found this amusing.

[Deb]

Very charming and funny, but he speaks a lot of truth. I'm going to look into him a bit more, I like him a lot. Oh, and his skin... it's so beautiful. I wonder what his secret is.