Victor Reppert said...
You are telling me that a God who sovereignly created the world, had the world go precisely according to the plan he set before the foundation of the world, down to the falling of the smallest leaf (and yes, Mike Darus, you can have Calvinism without this, but Bnonn and Steve are theological determinists), that this God can't produce the necessary appreciation any other way. In short, the damnation of millions of souls is a means to an end that God could produce by, figuratively, snapping his finger. Or by showing everyone pictures of fictitious denizens of hell and saying that, of course, he could have done that to the blessed (who, given universalism, would now be everybody). I am inclined, paradoxically, to ask the Calvinist "What part of sovereign don't you understand?"
http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2009/08/victor-reppert-said.html#c7578533557062701798
Well, Victor, if you don’t think reality should impose any constraint on theology, then I suppose you could go either of two routes:
1.Christianity in The Matrix
Heaven, hell, the birth of Christ, baptism of Christ, miracle at Cana, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Parousia, and all that swell stuff represent cosmic computer animation. It’s all one big CGI community–like Renderosity.
2.Christianity in the Dark City
Heaven, hell, the birth of Christ, baptism of Christ, miracle at Cana, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Parousia, and all that swell stuff represent false implanted memories. The big loony bin in the sky–or wherever.
This is a non-sequitur. Christ doesn't have to implant false memories, he just has to tell the blessed the truth. As if they don't already know it, since they are, after all, the blessed.
ReplyDeleteWhy would Christ have to deceive the blessed if he wanted to impress on them the graciousness of their salvation? He could do it with no deception, without out all those "object lessons" frying in hell to help them appreciate the grace of God. They're the blessed in heaven, for gosh sakes.
Victor,
ReplyDeleteTry to follow your own argument, silly as it is. "Showing everyone pictures of fictitious denizens of hell" is hardly equivalent to "just telling the truth."
"Fictitious denizens" of a "fictitious hell" hardly count as "the truth." If you can't distinguish between fiction and truth, you belong in a padded cell.