… but one which is, nonetheless relevant, revealing, and very accessible.
It works best when discussing UR with folks who have kids.
When asked how it is that a God of love can/will torture, kill, or in some other way effect eternal separation from Him, they will say they don’t know. But they know He will/does.
OK I say, tell me now which of your own children you are willing to treat that way; pick a child who deserves ECT or annihilation. Just one name please.
Of course they are appalled and wouldn’t dream of actually deciding on their own. No, they say, they trust God to make the proper choice.
I persist: isn’t it true that you love your child? (yes of course) And isn’t it true that God loves them almost infinitely more? (well, of course yes again) So how is it that the MORE love one has for this child of yours the MORE likely they are to be able to decide to torture, kill, or in some other way effect eternal separation from Himself?? Doesn’t it seem logical that the more loving one is the harder it will be to do such a thing?? What twisted definition of “love” says that as it increases to the levels where God lives and exudes it, so too does the ability to treat that loved one so horrifically??
That often gets them thinking…
Some hang in there long enough (I can only do this with people I’ve known for rather a long time…) to come up with the idea that it is a matter of knowledge; God acts this way (ie tortures, kills, or in some other way effects eternal separation from Him) because he “knows” this is the only way… He does this because (I’ve actually grown to detest this line…) God “knows” they would not be ‘happy’ in His presence.
So the solution to one who would not be ‘happy’ in God’s presence is … … … ECT or annihilation? My God! What parent on earth (earthly parents being flawed, and but partial reflections of God, the ultimate parent) would come close to such a horrific bargain??
No, the obvious solution is to rehabilitate the individual whose delusions actually imagine a God who is not the ultimate bliss.
Well, you know how the argument goes from here… (!)