I’m reading “godless; How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America’s Leading Atheists” by Dan Barker. It a really good read, and the arguments by the co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation have to give pause to believers because a) Barker’s background as a beloved pastor; b) his well-reasoned arguments; and c) his lack of bitterness/excess of love.
Writing a God himself, Barker takes on (and I think shreds) the Christian concept of hell. Here’s an excerpt:
[Because I send anyone who doesn't believe in me to hell,] I may as well have created only believers in the first place.
Since I am onmiscient, I would know in advance which of my creations would … choose me. This would produce no conflict with free will since those who would not have chosen me would have been eliminated simply by not having been created in the first place. (I would call it Supernatural Selection.) This seems much more compassionate than hell.
For the believers out there, how would you counter than argument?
3 responses so far ↓
1 ProfessorSteve // Feb 8, 2009 at 1:13 pm
This strikes me a bit like an argument along a similar path as the movie Minority Report. If someone hasn’t done something yet, are they still guilty of it?
Let me ask you this: if you knew that one of your sons was going to rebel against you and your wife, and never turn back, but make a point of twisting the knife annually, would you kill him now, before he got that chance? (lets assume this is legal)
Let me ask you another one: Suppose there had been a pill you could have given your then-future wife on the day you met that would have caused her to fall instantly in love with you. Would you have done it? And, how satisfying would that love be, knowing that it had been forced – never knowing if she would have loved you without that pill?
2 Tim Stroud // Feb 10, 2009 at 12:56 am
Logical contradictions do not always dissuade Christians from their formal theology. Christians have grappled with them for almost two thousand years and have come up with some creative solutions. And sometimes have just laid the argument down to rest as a “mystery”. But it does make for interesting philosophical debate.
Does God’s omniscience (that is, knowing everything about everything throughout all space and time) logically contradict the concept of human free-will (that is, that human actions are not pre-destined or pre-ordained)?
If it is already known that in the future you will turn left, then in what real sense are you free to act in the opposite way, actually free to turn right?
I don’t think that Christians rise to the bait of perceived logical contradictions anymore. It’s just not that important to them.
3 Craig // Feb 10, 2009 at 1:03 am
Bill,
Have you read anything by Greg Boyd? He’s a proponet of “open theism” or as he prefers “open futurism.”
Open theists maintain that some of the classical attributes of God are contradictory and unintelligible.
I did read Dan Barkers book about a month ago and have mixed feelings about what he had to say. I would guess from Barkers statement above that when he was a Christian, he was coming at it, as a classical theist.
On a personal note, I really enjoy reading your blog, and I’m looking forward to reading your book. I’m on a similar journey. Keep up the good work!
You must log in to post a comment.