Cold Case Christianity: Why Would God Send Good People to Hell?

This is my reply to an article by J. Warner Wallace entitled

Why Would God Send Good People to Hell? 

Posted: 20 Jul 2017 01:36 AM PDT 

In this blast from the past, J. Warner addresses a common objection to the loving nature of God. Isn’t it unfair for God to penalize people who are otherwise good, just because they haven’t heard about Jesus?

You first have to agree with your debate opponent on the proper standard of "fairness".

THEN you'll be able to tell whether eternal torture in hell merely for never having heard about Jesus, is "fair".

Have fun trying to convince an unbeliever that their idea of fairness is wrong because it doesn't agree with "god's" standard.

 A good God would not send good people to Hell.

In the fundie Christian mind, God standing around and watching a little girl be raped by a man, cannot be considered "bad", and yet when our theological defense mechanisms are not on red alert, we usually DO conclude that where we had ability and opportunity to interfere with such an evil, and we don't, WE are bad.

You will say we are not fit to judge God, but the fact that God sometimes needs humans to drill sense into his head, is clear from the bible:

 9 The LORD said to Moses, "I have seen this people, and behold, they are an obstinate people.
 10 "Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation."
 11 Then Moses entreated the LORD his God, and said, "O LORD, why does Your anger burn against Your people whom You have brought out from the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand?
 12 "Why should the Egyptians speak, saying, 'With evil intent He brought them out to kill them in the mountains and to destroy them from the face of the earth '? Turn from Your burning anger and change Your mind about doing harm to Your people.
 13 "Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants to whom You swore by Yourself, and said to them, 'I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heavens, and all this land of which I have spoken I will give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it forever.'"
 14 So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.
 (Exod. 32:9-14 NAU)

You don't know whether God knew all this in advance and just wanted to give Moses an opportunity to talk.

You just say that because it happens to be the type of excuse that would let you continue believing in your absurdly idealistic image of god.

If your view is correct, then God in v. 10 was lying.  He didn't really want Moses to leave him alone, but he said "leave me alone" anyway.  In the real world, we call that lying.

Cold Case Christianity: What Is the Relationship Between Science and Religious Belief?

This is my reply to an article by J. Warner Wallace entitled:

Cold Case Christianity: What Is the Relationship Between Science and Religious Belief?

Posted: 18 Jul 2017 06:38 AM PDT 

 J. Warner Wallace discusses the relationship between faith, reason and scientific discovery in this interview with Jon Morrison. Are science and faith hopelessly opposed to one another?

 Yes.  In the letters between Galileo and the Catholic Church, the latter made perfectly clear that there is no precedent in Christian writing, whatsoever, for the premise that scriptural statements about the sun ceasing to move, and the earth being immobile, are mere "language of appearance".

The RCC appear to be correct...the only time Christians started thinking statements in scripture that look literal on their face, were merely "language of appearance", is after they started discovering scientific truths that contradicted the literal intepretation.

That is, there was nothing in the grammar or context of such passages to tell pre-scientific Christians that the language about earth and sun was merely one of appearance.

And what do you do with an interpretation of a bible verse that can claim no support from the grammar or immediate context?  Isn't the lack of such support a strong sign that the interpretation is false?

You adopt it anyway and create new lenses through which to view the scripture, if that's what you need to do to keep from admitting to yourself that your infinitely wise holy god lied, that's what.

 Can the scientific method assist believers in determining if God exists?

No, the scientific method is necessarily based on empiricism, which is limited to empirical or material things, while "god" is an incoherent concept (under the Christian/Judaeo understanding), and is thus in that class of things that empiricism most quickly dismisses.  Don't tell me about intelligent design, or I'll tell you about how many apologists there are who hypocritically condemn us for relying on our experience...why they rely on their experience of the world to decide what qualifies as intelligent design.

This clip is from Jon’s podcast series. Be sure to visit Jon’s ministry and subscribe to his recurring podcast.

Yeah, because without you purchasing Wallace's books and learning how to have a forensic faith, your spiritual growth will be stunted.  This guy is just TBN with a bit less emotionalism.  It's all still media, sales, and marketing strategies.  If Wallace really was an atheist, why do you think you'd be able to tell?  Wouldn't an atheist fronting as a Christian, do his level best to look as convincing as he can?

Failure to think critically is precisely why spiritually alive people in Ted Haggert's church never realized what a disqualified homosexual drug-abusing puke he was, until the spiritually dead people in the secular media first exposed him as such.