The No-Hellers & The Perspicuity of Scripture

 

 

As they are wont to do, those who deny the eternality of God’s just wrath against all unrighteousness, conceive of ideas of judgment more acceptable to the natural man, making hell the annihilation of the wicked. Meaning they are burned up out of existence forever. Since the bible does not teach this, they must wrest and distort the scriptures to their own damnation, strengthening the hands of wicked men removing the fear of God from before their eyes. (Mt.10:28, Lk.12:5)

7th Day Adventists and the Watchtower, Jehovah’s false witnesses (JW.org) are the more popular face of the no-hellers of today. To begin in summary, they will misuse verses referring to Jesus' return to earth in flaming fire in which many wicked will be consumed at his presence (Mal.4:1; Isa.66:15-16; 47:14; Psalms 21:9-10, 37:20, 97:3; Nahum 1:5-6 ; Zep. 1:18 ; Matt. 3:12; 2 Thes. 1:8) only to have their souls awaken in hell fire awaiting the resurrection of shame and everlasting contempt. (Rv.20:11-15, Dan.12:2) The no-hellers say that when you die you do not exist until the resurrection when you will return to non-existence if you are unsaved. This is what we will examine now.

We have already shown consciousness remains in or out of the body and answered the claims of the soul ‘ceasing to exist’ after death, so please read here & here.

Next, since everlasting hell fire was prepared for the devil and his angels, we can see the nature of it and their torment as revealed in scripture.

Mt.25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: v46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Rv.20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are (still 1000 yrs later- Rv.19:20-20:3), and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. Of those who "drink of the wine of the wrath of God" from "the cup of his indignation" they "shall be tormented with fire and brimstone". Rev.14:10 Described in 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night... (Forever means forever- 1:6,4:9-10,5:13-4,7:12,10:6,11:15,15:7,22:5) The smoke of their torment ascends up forever for they shall be tormented forever as their fire shall not be quenched. (Mk.9:43-4,45-6, 48, Isa.66:24) Ye have kindled a fire in mine anger, which shall burn for ever... then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched. (Jer.17:4, 27) The fire of God's wrath that destroyed them out of the earth continues for ever.

This is very clear and perspicuous. Yet the vain jangling employed by JW.org to overthrow the word of God has no end. For example, they write: ‘As a spirit creature, the Devil cannot be harmed by literal fire. —Exodus 3:2; Judges 13:20“ which is a physical product of chemical combustion”. So “cast into the lake of fire” means “hurled into the abyss” thus “the “lake of fire” is not a literal pool of flame”.’ This is how they make the word of God of none effect, by turning it into silly putty. Apparently, the devil is annihilated in hell fire but without fire. The lake of fire has nothing to do with fire or a lake they would bray. Although God states explicitly that he prepared everlasting fire for the devil, JW.org says he couldn’t have literally because fire is only physical. Since the devil is a spirit creature, I suppose there can’t be a chain to bind him or a key to a bottomless pit to imprison him either- Rev.20:1-2. He couldn’t have had “every precious stone” as his covering or he couldn’t have “walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire” (Ezek.28:13-14) since he was a spirit creature. Or the spirit creature Daniel saw whose “loins were girded with fine gold” (Dan.10:5-7) must have been a mistake according to the Watchtower and tract society. As a matter of fact “of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.” (Heb.1:7, Psa.104:4) would be a contradiction since a flame of fire is "a physical product of chemical combustion” and angels are spirits! Jesus said, “So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” (Mt.13:49-50) But since angels are spirits, and we are physical and fire isn’t literal and consciousness isn’t possible after death, it’s hard to say what this could actually mean.

Again, JW.org states that ‘Hell, in the Biblical sense, is simply the common grave of mankind, where all activity has ceased. The accounts at Matthew 8: 29 and Luke 8: 30, 31 equate “torment” with “the abyss,” a figurative place of complete inactivity or death. In fact, several times the book of Revelation uses the word “torment” in a symbolic sense. —Revelation 9:5; 11:10; 18: 7, 10.’ Yes, these are the verses they point to as proof!

Consider their “four reasons why this torment does not refer to literal torture:

1. For the Devil to be tortured eternally, he would have to be kept alive forever. However, the Bible says that he will be brought to nothing, or put out of existence. —Hebrews 2: 14.

2. Everlasting life is a gift from God, not a punishment. —Romans 6: 23.

3. The wild beast and the false prophet are symbols and cannot experience literal torture.

4. The context of the Bible indicates that the torment of the Devil is everlasting restraint or destruction.”

Hell is figurative meaning the grave but only in a figurative sense. That is “a figurative place of complete inactivity or death.” So, hell just means a state of non-existence. “The lake of fire is a symbol of destruction, the Bible says that it is, or that it means or symbolizes, the “second death.” (Rev. 20:14) In no-heller doctrine hell means the absence of existence.

However, if you believe what the bible clearly states you will believe hell is actually in a location in the heart of the earth. Jon.2:2 And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice. Mt.12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Which is to say “he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth”. (Eph.4:9) Act.2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. w/2:27, Psa.16:10. Rev.9:1-2 “...I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace...”

Read what the bible says about hell and see if ‘a place of conscious torment’ or ‘a state of non-existence’ makes more sense:

Dt.32:22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.

Job 11:8 It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know?

Psa.9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

Psa.16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Psa.55:15 Let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick into hell: for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among them.

Psa.86:13 For great is thy mercy toward me: and thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell.

Prv.7:27 Her house is the way to hell, going down to the chambers of death.

Prv.9:18 But he knoweth not that the dead are there; and that her guests are in the depths of hell.

Prv.15:24 The way of life is above to the wise, that he may depart from hell beneath.

Prv.23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

Isa.5:14 Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.

Isa.14:9-10 Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations. All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us? v15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Ezk.31:16 I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, when I cast him down to hell with them that descend into the pit... v17 They also went down into hell with him unto them that be slain with the sword

Ezk.32:21 The strong among the mighty shall speak to him out of the midst of hell with them that help him: they are gone down, they lie uncircumcised, slain by the sword.

Am 9:2 Though they dig into hell...

Mt.5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Mt. 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Mt.11:23 And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell:

Mt.23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Lk.12:5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.

Lk.16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

Mt.18:8-9 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

Mt.8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 22:13, 25:30

What possibly could be meant by the lowest non-existence? Weeping and gnashing of teeth in non-existence? Having two eyes to be cast into non-existence? Thy whole body should be cast into non-existence? Regarding Christ’s resurrection the scripture says “Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.” Act.2:24 Should we understand that it was not possible for Christ to be held in non-existence? If he doesn’t exist then he cannot be held by anything. This is how they interpret the death and resurrection of Christ (well- the JW.org liars deny the bodily resurrection of Christ, rather they claim he arose in another body with fake wounds.) “He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell...” (Act.2:31) His soul was not left in non-existence? It can’t be left when it doesn’t exist. Jonah crying out of the belly of non-existence? Or the rich man lifting up his eyes in non-existence?

Luke 16:19-31 is their most hated text since it destroys all their lies with great ease. They try and make it a parable (assuming parables are never actual accounts of specific events) and all symbolic silly putty. One problem with making this a fictional account is that Jesus quotes Abraham. He “seeth Abraham” v23, “Abraham said” v25, “Abraham saith unto him” v29, “And he said unto him” v31. Was Jesus bearing false witness? He did not see Abraham and Abraham never said those things? Let God be true and every man a liar. Also, angels are in the interpretation of parables (Mt.13:39,41,49) but not here. You can see that once this becomes accepted as a true account their non-existence heresy evaporates immediately and the terror of the Lord persuades men.

Everlasting conscious torment

Mt.3:12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. Also, Lk.3:17. (death & hell; 1st the body destroyed then the soul cast into hell -Lk 16:22-3. Then the resurrection and eternal judgment where the body and soul are cast into unquenchable, everlasting fire. Rv.20:11-15)

Mk.9:43-4 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (v45-6, 48)

2 Kin.22:17 Because they have forsaken me, and have burned incense unto other gods, that they might provoke me to anger with all the works of their hands; therefore my wrath shall be kindled against this place, and shall not be quenched. (2 Chr.34:25, Jer.17:4,27)

Isa.33:14 The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?

Isa.34:10 It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.

Isa.66:24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

Mal. 1:4... The people against whom the Lord hath indignation for ever.

Mk.3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

Jd.1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Dan.12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Mt.25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: v46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Rv.20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (Forever means forever- 1:6,4:9-10,5:13-4,7:12,10:6,11:15,15:7,22:5)

Rv.14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Hell fire is forever because the LORD changeth not (Mal.3:6) and the wicked have rejected his offer of salvation and change. They not only rejected it; they hate it and mock it. Thus, they cannot change and God cannot change and hell continues forever. In no-heller doctrine everyone receives the exact same punishment as the devil. Do I even need to point out the folly of justice here? This makes God the unjust judge. Or if you say people burn at different lengths until they are at last consumed, then they satisfied God’s wrath by burning and could be permitted to continue existing. But only fools and blind will not believe the clear warnings on the bible and recklessly die in their sins when Jesus has paid so great a price.

Heb.12:28...let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: v29 For our God is a consuming fire.

 

Minimal Facts Argument & Preconditions of Argumentation 

 

The Resurrection Argument That Changed a Generation of Scholars - Gary Habermas at UCSB - YouTube

Gary Habermas - Minimal Facts Argument - 2016 NCCA Part 1 - YouTube

The term ‘minimal facts’ is used to refer to the bare minimum of historical data that even atheist sceptics and scholars of antiquity in the field know such as the high degree of probability that Jesus existed and was crucified by the Romans. If you believe Historical evidence is a legitimate field of inquiry leading to varying degrees of probable knowledge, then you should agree that the evidence points to the life and crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth. Gary Habermas has extensive writings regarding the historical evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead after his crucifixion by Roman soldiers. He offers a list of these evidences in the videos above, which I will summarize here:

(Minimal Facts)

1. That Jesus died by crucifixion is possibly the most well attested fact in ancient history. He makes reference to atheist Bart Ehrman sourcing 15 evidence within the 1st 100 years after Christ died.

2. The disciples believed that they saw him post resurrection.

3. The world was literally changed by the rise of the Christian faith and its martyrs.

4. The resurrection was preached very early, almost immediately among Christians. Early creeds existed when Paul was converted.

5. James the brother of Jesus and Paul both became Christians after believing that they saw the risen Jesus. Paul mentioned the eyewitnesses that he personally knew.

6. The empty tomb. The historical account of Joseph of Arimathea. How else do you explain the empty tomb if not the bodily resurrection of Jesus?

Another leading proponent of the historical evidences of Jesus resurrection working from the minimal facts approach is William Lane Craig.

Evidence for the Resurrection (Dr. William Lane Craig) - YouTube

In the video linked above he offers objective evidences of the resurrection treating the bible as ancient Greek documents like scholars in the field would do. Here is what he offers:

1. After Jesus was crucified, he was buried by Joseph of Arimathea in his tomb, thus the location of the tomb was known and eyewitnesses were available. The burial of Christ was creedal (1 Cor.15:1-3).

2. The tomb was found empty. This was easily disputable in Jerusalem at the time for they knew where the tomb was. Joseph of Arimathea was a leader among the Jews so his burial of Jesus in his own tomb is one of the earliest and best attested facts about Christ’s death. Plus, there were no competing legends about the burial of Jesus. And the earliest accounts lack signs of embellishment, like that the women were first to the tomb when women's testimony was discounted in that era. Josephus recounts that their testimony was not to be admitted into Jewish courts of law. Also, claims of the stolen body proves that the tomb was empty and his body was missing.

3. Under multiple circumstances by various people and groups of people claim eyewitness accounts of the risen Christ. James, Jesus' brother was a skeptic during Christ’s life and likewise Paul until they had an experience that they saw Jesus, post crucifixion.

4. The disciples had post crucifixion experiences of the risen Christ, despite every disposition to the contrary. (Nobody then believed in a crucified Messiah. Nor a resurrection other than the general one at the end.) The curse of one dying on a tree appeared contrary to their Messianic doctrines. And persecution for those naming the name of Christ was a deterrent.

Given these historical facts it is concluded that the resurrection hypothesis is the most reasonable account combining these lines of evidence coherently; i.e. Jesus rose again most likely. This provides the greatest explanatory power of the historical facts surrounding the beginning of the Christian faith (Occam's razor).

This is basically what is classified as an evidential apologetic approach. This is fine if it is used in subjection to a presuppositional apologetic approach. By itself however, evidential apologetics can only provide probabilities of knowledge (or utter skepticism given the right philosopher) where presuppositionalism provides full assurance of faith and the certainty of the words of truth. The difference is in realizing that evaluating evidence of any sort presupposes or assumes a worldview or a network of necessary pre-commitments to logic and uniformity in the natural order to begin with. Further commitments would be the ability to and obligation of people to be rational, consistent, scientific and ethical. The application of laws of thought and physics to history. We must justify our epistemology, or how is knowledge possible and why should we not lie or use bad argumentation? Why should one expect that there to be rational coherence across various fields of study or disciplines? These are precommitments or pre-conditions of intelligibility. The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge and wisdom. (Prv.1:7, 9:10, Ps.111:10) They must be assumed to evaluate and justify belief in everything else. In other words, the existence of evidence is evidence of God’s existence.

As such they must be self-verifying and self-authenticating. The bible is the philosophy of Christianity and thus proves itself to be necessary in order that thought can be possible. The bible is true by virtue of the fact that if it were not true, truth could not be possible. That is, it is the impossibility of it not being true proves it. This is called transcendental proof in philosophy. (Kant -presupposed and necessary to experience.) It is like proving the law of contradiction in logic by denying it. The denial would be true and the law false. But then this demonstrates the law, that ‘nothing can both be and not be’. It is necessarily and self-evidently true and proven to anyone by thinking. Given the nature of the Christian God, one would expect this form of transcendentally necessary, self-evident and universally accessible proof.

It isn’t the proof that fools demand, as they decry the lack of a physical, visible, repeatable proof of a god of some sort. They want to open the pantry and see the crackers. But God transcends the material universe and it depends upon him and so the evidence for him is likewise transcendental and above the universe. The universe could all change in an instant were it not the word of God’s power upholding it for his purpose. Our ability to recognize truths at all is because of universal invariant laws of thought or logic/math that depend upon the nature of that God who made us in his image with the capacity to think and exercise ourselves in laws of thought.

 

Interesting discussion here:

William Lane Craig RESPONDS to Bart Ehrman's Wild Comments on @CosmicSkeptic​ - YouTube

This is a variation on that theme:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0MrbNFMbFdA

 The Problem of Evil is Your Problem 

From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Jam.4:1

“It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” Federalist No. 51, February 8, 1788 Alexander Hamilton or James Madison

“...whatever is the cause of human corruption, men are evidently and confessedly so corrupt that all the laws of heaven and earth are insufficient to restrain them from crime.” (pg.33 The Devils Delusion- Berlinski) 

 

Along the way from this country’s religious founding, thanks largely to the pantheistic evolutionary thinking of Hegel (1807), and the naturalized form of it in Darwin (1859), Occidental man began to learn how to appreciate himself more and more (which becomes easy to do when comparing one's self to a primate.). He became more ‘progressive’ and drifted away from sound biblical teaching about the nature of sin in man. He thought that no problem was outside his reach to fix with enough money and enough authority (expansion of central banking and state control). Men began flattering themselves more and more until something terrible happened- World War 1 (1914–1918). Which was even thought of positively at the time as “The war to end all wars”. Some ‘experts’ declared that the war couldn’t last more than a few months. To take an excerpt from ‘The Growth of America 1878-1928” (Clarence B. Carson) we can get a glimpse into how deeply the delusion of man’s self-glorification had penetrated. “World War 1 had a tremendous impact upon Western Civilization. Indeed, it was not only shocking to Western sensibilities but it was also not easily assimilated into the prevailing outlook.” “The belief in progress was widespread, and it entailed the view that civilization was expanding and barbarism on the retreat. As men became more and more civilized, many believed that bloodshed and war would be relegated to the brute past. An undergirding utopianism gave support to this view. Nations would settle their disputes with mediation and arbitration...” (pg.180- Carson) But after “nearly 10 million killed on the battlefields, and perhaps three times as many wounded more or less seriously” (pg.180), it was evident man had not in fact evolved himself away from his sin... yet.

"How different had things been before the war! Then, cultured Europeans, Germans especially, had believed that finally, after eons, the human race, or at least their very special part of it, had achieved a level of civilization that would forbid the kinds of actions and behavior that were now commonplace." pg. 293 ‘A History of Knowledge’ Charles Van Doren

After this humanist self-adoration was fractured, early in 1915 "Sigmund Freud published an article titled "Thoughts for the Times on War and Death." In which he "began describing the disillusionment felt by so many people... upon their discovery of the cruelty and brutality of which previously civilized nations and individuals were capable." The stories of rape, torture, and murder emerging about "soldiers of all the warring nations." was too troubling to accept. pg. 293

We might not like to think our boys can behave in demonically depraved ways, but sample this if you can stomach it (discretion advised): https://jockopodcast.com/2016/07/13/31-book-review-four-hours-in-my-lai-by-michael-bilton/

I am reminded of a WW1 documentary where a French soldier, if memory serves me, was pulled from the trenches and given leave for a time before returning to the battlefield. He expressed his discouragement upon seeing life in the city so carefree in contrast to the horror he just left for a moment. As if nobody was aware, and even indifferent to the enormous price their countrymen were paying with shattered bodies as they laughed and savored delicacies daily. (Look up images of ‘broken faces from WW1’ for a reality check.) This apathy to others suffering is also a product of our wickedness. (Num.32:6, 20-23, Jam.4:17)

"German civilization, especially, had been viewed by Germans and other cultivated Europeans as the acme of human accomplishment. German science. German music and art, German scholarship, German ethical philosophy, had set standards for the rest of the world considered to be higher than ever before." pg.293 And yet Freud said "Let us hope that they are wrong... and that we Germans are not as bad as they think we are." pg.294 Yet, it was not the Germans alone that descended headlong into depravity having unhitched from Christianity, the entire globe for the next century embarked upon mass murder of its brethren in an unparalleled 100-year bloodlust, with Darwin as priest and Karl Marx as prophet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM

And still the irradicable utopian dream and hope in man is as alive as ever in the face of overwhelming evidence to the incapacity of man to save himself. The drunk optimist. More Socialists promise more salvation every election season as the country drifts ignorantly to the left. “And there shall be, like people, like priest: and I will punish them for their ways, and reward them their doings.” (Hos.4:9) “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee...” (Hos.4:6) “The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof?” (Jer.5:31)

Forced to accept the fact of the sinfulness of men Freud offered his shot at explaining to men the issue they face within. Noting that “the human being is not as happy civilized as he says he is.” And “there is a deeper self, a kind of primitive savage, in all of us, who wishes to be freed from civilization’s restrains. I know this, Freud said, for I have seen it in all of my patients, without exception: men and women, old and young, cultivated and uneducated. Therefore, I am not surprised by what the war has revealed, and you should not be surprised, either.” (pg.294 Van Doren)

Freud recognized the obvious: “Man is a wolf to man.” Adding “Who, in the face of all his experience of life and of history, will have the courage to dispute this assertion?” “Freud made another point in his 1915 paper, about the changed attitude toward death that the war had brought about. In peacetime death may be held at arm's length. One can deny it, at least avoid mentioning it or even thinking about it. In war such denial becomes impossible.” But “deep in our primitive, unconscious selves, we are very aware of death, even if on the surface we deny its existence. We desire the death of our enemies, are ambivalent about the death of our loved ones, and fear our own death, in which at the same time we do not really believe.” (pg.294-5) Freud himself was reported to have had a "preoccupation with his own mortality" or "repeated attacks" of a "dread of death". (The Myth of Disenchantment, J. Storm- Pg.205)

Concerning Jesus Christ God decided “that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.” “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.” (Heb.2:9,14-5) For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Rom.6:23)

But why is this the case Doctor Freud? Why is it that “People are not at heart very good”? Well, it would seem “Men need war... to work off the intolerable burden of society. The alternative to war is neurosis, both individual and group, which itself can become intolerably destructive. People cannot go on indefinitely acting as if they are civilized. They must be allowed an outlet for their murderous deeper desires. Dreams are not enough.” (pg.295 Van Doren) If we evolved the need for war, it becomes impossible to condemn it as morally outrageous. Murderous rampage becomes an outlet for the burden of society. Apparently, it will help us continue evolving. Plus, since we can drop the utopian dream now, we are not evolving towards anything we are just changing constantly absent of meaning or value.

This is good news for atheist philosopher Frederick Nitzsche though, because you are totally free now to do anything you choose. Be brave as you face the abyss and clothe yourself with glory as a superman. Or, just drink beer and watch football, get fat and die. I mean, there is no value system other than your own to determine what is honorable. As atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell stated “Life on this earth is not only without rational significance, but also apparently

unintentional. The cosmic laws seem to have been set going for some purpose quite unrelated to human existence. Man is thus a sort of accidental by-product, as the sparks are accidental by-product of the horseshoe a blacksmith fashions on his anvil. The sparks are more brilliant than the horseshoe, but all the same they remain essentially meaningless.” (Religion and Science- London, Oxford, 1949)

But the fact that we have found out meaning in an apparently meaningless universe is evidence against the supposition that the universe has no meaning. In other words, if the universe is meaningless, we should never have found this out. Furthermore, it would also be meaningless to say there is evil. The existence of evil and that experience of evil in ourselves and others is meaningful only in a Christian worldview. They problem of evil is only a psychological problem for Christians, but it is a logical absurdity for everyone else.

The Existence of Evidence is Evidence of God’s Existence

https://greers1611.wixsite.com/mysite/post/the-existence-of-evidence-is-evidence-of-god-s-existence

 

 

Pro-Choice? What are you actually choosing?

If you talk with pro-choicers about killing babies you begin to realize that they toggle between contradictory appeals to “science” to confirm their claims that the baby in the womb is just a “clump of cells” (which is basically what everyone is) and the metaphysical claims that personhood doesn’t apply to the child until some arbitrary point in time which varies depending upon who's making the assertion. They vehemently allege that science is on their side, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. Science can indeed affirm what is, regarding the material world but not what ought to be. This is the traditional “Is–ought problem” in philosophy. Namely that one cannot logically move from what is to a conclusion of what ought to be. This is because there are different types of laws.

The sperm determines the sex of the child (the evil patriarchy back at it again). And the baby’s sex is determined at conception when a full set of chromosomes and DNA are present. Everything to make you you is there at conception. Even though you are in the process of developing- just like you do your entire life. Science tells us this. But it has nothing to say about whether rights ought or ought not to be conferred upon the child. And so, philosophy and religion are called upon at this point to answer when a human is a person fully qualified for life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Pro-choice is really about a woman’s right to choose when personhood begins. But what sort of dualistic worldview could this possibly make sense in? Personhood is an immaterial idea that she cannot create by sheer force of will? Perhaps she wanted the baby and it is a child but then she changed her mind and suddenly it’s a clump of cells and not a person. What about her own body (not the baby's body for the moment)? Her body was not her making or design, so what does ‘my body my choice’ mean? This would assert unalienable rights (generally considered endowed by the Creator) from somewhere that she declares she has a right or claim to by virtue of the fact that she owns her body and not other people. Like, if the majority decide personhood is not available to a child in the womb maybe they can decide her body is not her choice as well. Again, the is-ought problem ‘it is my body and ought to be my choice’. Post-modernist Marxism would group us into classes imposing will of force on members of other classes, so my body not my choice. But they don’t believe in logic or science either so... whatever.

This is purely arbitrary thinking, like a child who wants the freedom of adulthood without the responsibility. The childish demand that reality order itself according to my desire. It explains their anger at biology that a woman is ‘forced to carry the pregnancy’ or that their ‘body determines their sex’. How dare reality be thus! I don’t like it so it must not exist! The post-modernist tantrum.

The scriptures however are not at all silent on the question of abortion. For instance, you will see that a woman is “with child” all through the Old and New Testaments when she is pregnant. Regarding the twins Jacob and Esau in Rebecca’s womb it says “the children struggled together within her”. (Gen.25:22) When Mary greeted Elisabeth the latter exclaimed “For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.” (Lk.1:44) As a matter of fact, Bathsheba “conceived, and sent and told David, and said, I am with child”. (2 Sam.11:5) The term “be with child” is synonymous with “conceive”. (Mt.1:23, Isa.7:14) It makes sense then to make statements like “There is a man child conceived” (Job 3:3) “did my mother conceive me” (Ps.51:5) and “her that conceived me” (Song 3:4) because I am me at conception. Who else would I be?

A woman whose child is injured when she is pregnant would require full retribution of law; that “thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot”. (Ex.21:22-4) Regardless of how far along the pregnancy was the scripture shows we are fearfully and wonderfully made as “thou hast covered me in my mother's womb”. (Psa.139:13) “As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all.” (Ecc.11:5) “Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.” (Psa.139:16)

Unequivocally the bible teaches a child is a child in the womb and to kill it is murder. But in an age that has walked away from the bible they have embraced childish, arbitrary, irrational demands upon the laws of nature and natures God. 

This however is not such a dualistic world as pro-choicers ignorantly demand. To quote the hymn "This is my Father's world". It is God's body and therefore his choice. The world we experience is the world the Christian religion declares as revealed in the bible.