Paying taxes is something that makes actual sense, that has some rationale behind it. If I pay taxes, in return I get roads, health care, sewers, fire and police services, etc. I can pay taxes and understand that in return I receive all of these services, I can choose to not pay taxes and still receive all these things at the risk of being caught (and it’s possible that I would never be caught), or I can move somewhere that I do not have to pay taxes. I can think through all of these opinions and make a reasonable choice. If I do not pay taxes and get caught, I do not spend eternity burning in a lake of fire.
I think it’s you who is not grasping something here. By definition, free will means that I have the power to act at my own discretion, unconstrained by necessity or fate. How am I able to do that with a gun held to my head? There is no reasonable choice. I have to do what I am told or face eternal punishment.
If I tell the gun man I don’t want to give him my wallet, am I then choosing to commit suicide? Or is the gunman exercising his free will to shoot me if he wants to? As I see it, I do not have any free will in such a situation. The gun man does, but I do not.
I see what it is you are trying to get across to me, but I don’t see it as the same thing. The laws and rules we have created within society are (in most cases) reasonable and practical, and they are something we all agree to adhere to, given that we want to live as harmoniously and peacefully as possible with each other. The consequences of none of our laws and rules are eternal punishment in hell. And if we don’t agree with society’s laws or think there should be new ones, we have ways of challenging existing laws and/or creating new ones (e.g. civil rights movement, suffrage). I think that last part is one of the major differences here.
Do you think it’s reasonable to lock your kid in the basement for their entire lives if they disobey you?
Call it whatever you like. I’m not into blind obedience. I prefer reason, logic and practicality.
I don’t care if your god can make a rock so big that he can’t lift it. I want to know why he created evil but won’t eradicate the world of it in the simplest way possible.
What’s nonsensical about ending all the suffering in the world in the simplest way possible? I’m not asking god to make a married man single or lift a giant rock or other such petty nonsense. I’m wondering why it’s so difficult for him to end the suffering in the world without all this bumbling and stumbling around. I mean, he messed up by putting the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden in the first place, then he tried to fix everything with a global flood, but that didn’t work either, so then he had to send himself as his son, to sacrifice himself to himself in order to appease himself of the sins of mankind which he had a hand in creating in the first place. None of it makes any sense. Why is it so difficult for this supposed omnipotent creator to get anything right? But humans are supposed to be the ones messing everything up??
So again, I have to ask, Why do you suppose a blood sacrifice was the ONLY way all the wrong could be righted?
Okay. So like I said, it’s just a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of eternity. What has he actually sacrificed? What did he give up?
Umm, god is not a human.
I used to be a Christian, I’ve been through all this many times before and it’s part of the reason I’m not a Christian anymore. I thank you for attempting to explain it from your point of view, but just because you have done so, doesn’t mean I’m obligated to accept it. Yours is far from the only point of view on this. I’d rather stick with reason and things that are demonstrably true.