>>18780275
Heaven is just Earth but with no sinful desires.

Remember when the Bible says
>wages of sin is death
>believing in Jesus gives eternal life
The most straightforward translation of this is just absolving from sin.


I don't know how OP is confused by this.
Atheists who made the image thought they were way higher IQ than they really are.

>>18780281
Also, Heaven isn't supposed to be the theoretical pleasure cube. There are tiers.
See the 5 Crowns.

Also Hell is tiered too with things like the Abyss.

>>18780281
Then why doesn't God make everything Heaven?

>>18780285
because God doesnt want to share the Heaven with people like Bonnie Blue or Epstein, so rather would see how someone conducts themselves when given God's word without 100% proof.
>thats demented, sick, gross!
okay, you have free will not to choose the Bible.

>>18780287
So what about babies or infants who die so young they never get a chance to conduct themselves, do they go to Heaven

>>18780290
>thread goes from "Heaven is like the Pleasure Cube (wrong)" "how does it work?"
to
>lets bring up this 2000 year old debate Christianity doesn't have a final say on because unborn babies are totally just like Epstein and Bonnie Blue

...

>>18780292
OK you're seething, but why can't you answer the question?

>>18780292
literally no one else mentioned Heaven being a pleasure cube, the image defines it as "a world, existence, or state that is better than our own, often defined as having eternal bliss, no suffering, and no evil"

>>18780294
>atheists cant accept the answer that Bonnie Blue and Epstein are clearly hellbound while unborn babies are a much more theologically complex answer
...
>>18780295
>having eternal bliss, no suffering, and no evil
so the Pleasure Cube, which the Bible doesn't say what Heaven is like. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iyx4XiT2wgw


I dont think i ever met an atheist on here who isnt a retarded midwit that talks like a redditer.
it amazes me what retarded questions you guys will come up with next. My guess is you'll get really obnoxious with the baby answer and try to say something like "what about the sacrifices to Moloch in the Bible"

>>18780298
>conveniently ignored "often defined"

>>18780275
The left hand path is true and not even morally wrong. "Best possible world" is a term even used by Leibniz when he formalized the field of theodicy.

This chart also just handwaves "evil is introduced" with the irrelevant counter question "is there free will in heaven." It also doesn't mention the other theories of humans being made sinful (such as by Satan, Gagtungr, etc)

File: 1767397614483043.jpg (84 KB, 750x956)

84 KB JPG

>>18780275
Humans don't have the understanding that God does.
/thread

>>18780303
It doesn't matter, so long as you define Heaven as a "better world" the question becomes "why doesn't God just make everything Heaven". Even if there is evil in Heaven, there is less evil. So why doesn't God make everything Heaven?

>>18780300
a dictionary also defines a nimrod as being an idiot.
Now, what does the history actually say about Nimrod?

>>18780298
>uhhh it's a complex answer
So what's the answer? Enlighten us o wise Christian anon

>>18780303
So why do Christians give a shit about anything? All evil that will happen in the future is also justified then, and has to happen, because we live in the best of all possible worlds

>>18780307
>God's Mercy: According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1261), the Church entrusts these children to the infinite mercy of God, holding strong hope for their salvation.

>>18780318
>holding strong hope for their salvation.
The absolute state
So the complex answer is "uhhh yeah god may have mercy on those innocent babies"

>>18780318
So if even babies get to go to Heaven then building our souls and our character doesn't matter. If someone who dies too young to conduct themselves can end up in Heaven then God doesn't need to see how we conduct ourselves to send us to Heaven

Why doesn't God make everything Heaven, then?

>>18780320
I have no idea why this answer annoys you so much.

>did you just say Epstein and Bonnie Blue are clearly demonic?
>yet you are leaving the answer of unborn babies to God!
>AHHAHAHAHAH CHRISTIANS DUMB

>>18780321
>why didn't God just setup the world with Karl Popper's Negative Utilitarianism theory applied

>>18780323
Keeps bringing up some weird unrelated shit to simple question
The answer should annoy you too as a Christian, because a truly merciful god should just send babies straight to heaven

>>18780325
>because a truly merciful god should just send babies straight to heaven
"just have man speak for God's judgement based on your feelings"
next youre going to say
>but you just did the same for Epstein and Bonnie
because theres a difference between a literal unborn baby that did not have a chance to choose or reject the Bible and Epstein and Bonnie Blue.

how is this answer so hard for you to understand?

>>18780333
So you think innocent babies don't deserve to go to heaven?
To me this is a super simple question, seems like your morals aren't as good and objective as you pretend them to be.

>>18780340
>So you think innocent babies don't deserve to go to heaven?
i think they do. I hope they do. but its not up to me, its up to God, hence
>>God's Mercy: According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1261), the Church entrusts these children to the infinite mercy of God, holding strong hope for their salvation.


now watch how you autistically can't accept this answer and keep the thread going.

>>18780342
see
>>18780321
Why doesn't God make everything Heaven, then?

>>18780343
see >>18780324

>>18780342
No I can accept this answer, it's just weird to me that your position is morally better than gods

>>18780345
That's not an answer

>>18780347
when did i say my personal feelings are more moral than God?

Do you just think that the Bible always retrofits itself to any Christian's own personal feelings of reality?
Because, thats exactly what liberal Christians do by insisting the Bible never condemns homsexuals (which it does)
Not just limited to libtard Christians. I think the Bible leans more on banning capital punishment, but I personally felt Christa Pike deserved the death penalty.

>>18780349
Yes, because only faggot redditers preach Negative Utilitarianism, so i do not even entertain or consider the question.

>>18780356
That isn't Negative Utilitarianism either. If Heaven has maximum happiness but still has suffering, why doesn't God just make everything Heaven then?

>>18780357
>why doesn't God just make everything Heaven then?
Negative Utilitarianism.

>unbeatable argument unlocked

>>18780362
So is Heaven a better world than our current one or not

If it is, why doesn't God make everything Heaven
If it isn't, why should anyone give a shit about Heaven, it's worse than our current world

>>18780353
>when did i say my personal feelings are more moral than God?
You didn't say it I did. Because saying "yes babies will go to heaven for sure" is a better moralistic view "idk maybe these babies will but these don't, up to my discretion heh". This clearly makes you morally better than your god in at least that regard

>>18780366
>>18780367
>why doesn't God make everything Heaven
because if everyone was in Heaven right away, then there was no trial by faith and people like Epstein and Bonnie Blue are in Heaven automatically too.

I know the main thing you are having an autism fit about is
>but babies never had their faith tested
Then babies got a better (or worse) deal than you, depending how you look at it.
It is the stereotypical saying
>life isn't fair

Except, you are 100% aware of the Bible and can become a Christian today if want.

>>18780381
>babies got a better deal
Then God isn’t just, why doesn’t he give everyone a good deal, he could just send everyone to Heaven. Also it isn’t necessary for him to see our conduct because people can still go to Heaven without that

So why doesn’t God make everything Heaven?

File: IMG_5644.jpg (174 KB, 1206x1627)

174 KB JPG

>>18780381
>because if everyone was in Heaven right away, then there was no trial by faith and people like Epstein and Bonnie Blue are in Heaven automatically too.
Please consult the chart

>>18780381
>God sends babies to Heaven because otherwise it would be unfair
>Wait, but then he could send everyone to Heaven without testing anyone, that’s still unfair
>Well life’s unfair

>>18780385
>Then God isn’t just,
so you hate God, like Christians already say atheists do

>>18780387
fuck no. the charts gay.

>>18780275
God wants to maximise the amount amount of people, because creating free agents is a better than creates robots/lobotomised humans under """Abrahamic theology""" (whatever that means) and god wants to maximise all possible goods.
Evils done against each other are the result of our free will, such as terror attacks, murder, rape.
naturals evils are the result of demons/sprits actions. their actions effect this world; earthquakes, floods, illness, etc are the result of evil actions. Nice weather, rain on dry land, etc are the result of good actions.
((Pretty cool theodicy sounds like an anime plot.))

God creates people in earth first and not heaven because he doesn't want to force people to chose him and he wants them to chose him not force them. God permits certain evils to exist so that second order virtues (i.e self-control) can exist and can be achieved, these certain evils must exist so god can maximises the greatest possible goods.

>>18780393
(im just throwing this one out there)
God created this world and not another world because he is too powerful
You can imagine a world where there is a set amount of good things, then you can do the same and +1, then you can do the same and +2 and so on. There will always be a better world to create, and god would maximise all possible goods but there is always going to be better world to create.
>so does god just not create
Well god can have other desires to motivate it to create other than value maxing, such as acting in accordance to moral perfection, a desire to behave morality is district to a desire to maximise the amount of goodness to exist.
For example, god promises to do something, call it x; fulfilling its promise would increases the amount of goodness which exists but that wouldn't matter, however god also has a desire to behave morally perfect, and its morally wrong to break a promise so a separate desire would motivate god it keep its promise.

So god can act without value maximization
God doesn't stop evil because it screened of value maximization but we can still attribute some aspects some actions to god because other other unspecified desires

>>18780394
Isn’t that basically just saying that we live in the best of all possible worlds? So God intentionally creating a world, knowing all of the genocides, crimes, murders, and evils that will happen, will happen, is him behaving with moral perfection?

>>18780393
>God wants to maximise the amount amount of people, because creating free agents is a better than creates robots/lobotomised humans under """Abrahamic theology""" (whatever that means) and god wants to maximise all possible goods.
Do you think angels are robots or something?

>>18780400
Yea pretty much, is there a logical contradiction with theodicy in particular

>>18780402
No, but that’s basically admitting every evil in the past, as well as every evil that will ever happen in the future isn’t preventable. We can’t have even one less murder. If that’s the case it’s practically identical to nihilism since no evil that will ever occur, could have ever been prevented

It also means God sees us all as disposable pawns

>>18780401
Depends what sect and religion you hold.
Islam would say angels don't have free will.

And sects of Christianly would also say they do also have free will, such as Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant, etc.
Although some sects of Christianly might say they don't

>>18780402
So in other words Epstein needed to rape those kids, if he didn’t the world would have been worse off

>>18780404
If you say this means libertarian free will is false, it wouldn't matter because I don't hold to libertarian free will; just like the majority of theologians I'm a compatibilist.

And how i define Compatibilism is the position that free will and universal determinism are completely compatible because freedom does not require breaking the physical laws of cause and effect; instead, it simply means that an individual possesses the psychological autonomy to act according to their own internal desires, beliefs, and rational deliberations without being blocked or forced by external coercion, even if those internal desires themselves are the inevitable product of a lifelong chain of prior genetic, environmental, and physical causes.

>>18780418
He chose his actions entirely out of his own broken, uncoerced character/desire. The theodicy means that God allowed the reality containing free agents to exist because a world with real freedom is a greater good than a world of like lobotomized puppets even though some agents will choose to act like Epstein.

>>18780428
Okay, but if it’s about free will then is there free will in Heaven?

>>18780430
Yea there will be and evil does not exist in heaven because human nature is glorified and fully aligned with God, making the desire to choose evil obsolete.

>>18780431
So if Heaven has free will then it’s a better world than ours that has free will. Why didn’t God just make everything Heaven?

>>18780450
>>18780393

>>18780363
And just like that it was beat

>>18780453
you keep arguing in circles retard, you can't just point to an argument further up the chain as justification for further down the chain

>>18780466
Lmao where did the honestly come from, just because you have nothing else to say doesn't mean you can just seethe about lmao

>>18780469
hostility*

Also you haven't showed how this is a logical contradiction

>>18780469
>seethe
ok let me explain since you're clearly a brainlet and think pointing out your retardation is "seething"

you
>we live in the best of possible worlds
counter
>that means evil acts like epstein are necessary otherwise the world would be worse off
you
>muh free will, it was his desire god just allows it because muh greater good
counter
>so is there free will in heaven? (implying that heaven is a better state with no evil which is an obvious contradiction to best of all possible worlds)
you
>yes (confirm free will is in heaven and there's no evil)
counter
>so why not just make everything heaven?
you
>muh free will

>>18780393
Why are these the possible evils that exist? Why not earthquakes/fires all the time?

>>18780472
>you
>we live in the best of possible worlds
>counter
>that means evil acts like epstein are necessary otherwise the world would be worse off
>you
>muh free will, it was his desire god just allows it because muh greater good
>counter
>so is there free will in heaven? (implying that heaven is a better state with no evil which is an obvious contradiction to best of all possible worlds)
>which is an obvious contradiction to best of all possible worlds
Lmao lol no, heaven can exist with best of all possible worlds. Both this physical reality and heaven part of the The Created Order meaning in a metaphysical sense, "the world" can mean the entirety of created existence. And to maximise good without being blocked or forced by external coercion individual possesses the psychological autonomy to act according to their own internal desires, beliefs, and rational deliberations would also result in the physical universe being created
>you
>yes (confirm free will is in heaven and there's no evil)

So i gave counter to every point here nice
>so why not just make everything heaven?
Again
God creates people in earth first and not heaven because he doesn't want to force people to chose him and he wants them to chose him not force them.

You haven't shown how this is a logical contradiction but just started seething when you hand nothing else to say.
Very good faith

>>18780473
Same reason why there is not terror attacks, murder, rape all the time

See>>18780428 and relate it to
>naturals evils are the result of demons/sprits actions. their actions effect this world; earthquakes, floods, illness, etc are the result of evil actions. Nice weather, rain on dry land, etc are the result of good actions.

>>18780478
>God creates people in earth first and not heaven because he doesn't want to force people to chose him
this blatantly contradicts all conventional christian mythology and reasoning. if you're some fringe christcuck that's fine, but you're commiting blatant heresy by saying shit like this kek
1) did you already forget your own statement of there being free will in heaven? saying "forced to choose" means there's an implication of there being limited free will in heaven
2) did you forget about the garden of eden? do you think adam and eve had no free will?
3) this is basically Pelagianism (condemned at Carthage, 418)

>>18780478
>Lmao lol no, heaven can exist with best of all possible worlds. Both this physical reality and heaven part of the The Created Order meaning in a metaphysical sense, "the world" can mean the entirety of created existence. And to maximise good without being blocked or forced by external coercion individual possesses the psychological autonomy to act according to their own internal desires, beliefs, and rational deliberations would also result in the physical universe being created
This is literal gibberish and betrays a complete ignorance towards modal logic.

>>18780323
>christianity is much better than science because it answers what happens after we die
>ok, so what happens after a baby dies (extremely frequent occurrence in poorer countries and especially until 100 years ago)?
>W-WELL IT'S A MYSTERY WE TRUST THAT GOD DOES SOMETHING
wow so many answers you have got, I think I'll stick with annihilation

>>18780487
>this blatantly contradicts all conventional christian mythology and reasoning. Drivel

>1) did you already forget your own statement of there being free will in heaven?
No I dint, I'm not slow like some other people here

>saying "forced to choose" means there's an implication of there being limited free will in heaven
What lmao; I'm assuming you are referencing "force people to chose him", yea if god did that then yes that would be limitation on their will.
But again thats why I say he doesn't do that. XD

>2) did you forget about the garden of eden? do you think adam and eve had no free will?
Adam and Eve had free will because they acted entirely on their own internal desires without being physically forced by an outside power. God allowed the Fall to happen because a dynamic universe where real agents can stumble, learn, and grow is a drastically greater good than a static world of mindless, forced obedience.

>3) this is basically Pelagianism (condemned at Carthage, 418)
>Can't track and forgets
>evil does not exist in heaven because human nature is glorified and fully aligned with God

>>>18780491
>This is just gibberish, because like, just because

>>18780503
>thats why I say he doesn't do that
he literally does to babies tho. unless you're again denying that babies go to heaven

>>18780507
>official Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1261):
"As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children... allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism."

So the Vatican's International Theological Commission, with the approval of Pope Benedict XVI, a published a document concluding that there are strong theological and liturgical reasons to hope that unbaptised infants who die are saved and enjoy the Beatific Vision in Heaven. If you don't believe me you can read the full text of this theological study on the Vatican's Official Archive regarding the Hope of Salvation for Infants.
Additionally Eastern orthodoxy and OO also hold to this to the best of my knowledge
:. while Pelagianism said babies go to Heaven because they don't need saving, we can hope babies go to Heaven because God's grace and mercy can save them outside the ordinary sacrament of baptism.

>>18780516
That's a lot of words just not to answer the question
Here I'll make it simple for you:
>free will exists in heaven but god doesn't force people into heaven because that would restrict it
correct or not?
>babies go to heaven
yes or no?
if yes
>god forced babies into heaven, thus your original point doesn't make any sense
if no
>god is evil
There's no "we don't know" copout here, this is a simple binary choice and we covered poth sides of the binary choice.

>"Then god is unjust"
says who?
>"Me"
Why should we listen to you?
>"Umm....."

that's what I thought.

>>18780541
>That's a lot of words just not to answer the question
there is an answer but you need to use your brain first anon

>free will exists in heaven but god doesn't force people into heaven because that would restrict it
correct, you already asked me this

>babies go to heaven
I couldn't say a yes or no; again
>So the Vatican's International Theological Commission, with the approval of Pope Benedict XVI, a published a document concluding that there are strong theological and liturgical reasons to hope that unbaptised infants who die are saved and enjoy the Beatific Vision in Heaven.

>There's no "we don't know" copout here,
no its not, you just gave me a false dichotomy.

You are a waste of my time desu

>>18780545
>actually babies not going to heaven is le mystery and le just, you have to trust me on this anon
arguing with christcucks is hillarious because you really quickly unravel how deranged their moral views on their own ideology are

>>18780550
>how deranged their moral views
based on what?
Basic human empathy?

>>18780549
>I couldn't say a yes or no; again
you don't need to, do you understand what a hypothetical argument is you absolute brainlet?
we pose a binary question, in this case "do babies go to heaven?"
this binary question has two options in it's answer, either it is yes, or it is no
then we walk the path of both answers, regardless of whether we know which one is the correct one
then we find out both paths make you lose, they either show you're retarded, or they show your god is evil