Atheism

Up PineCreek Without a Paddle

The Youtuber PineCreek was in a comment section:

PineCreek:

if it is true that most are lost, wouldn’t it be better for God NOT to create anything?

Random Person:

PineCreek, on what secular basis do you determine what is “better” or “worse”? How do you judge? Given atheism, humans have no intrinsic or objective value/worth/dignity/purpose.

PineCreek:

It’s ok if you don’t want to answer. I’m asking you based on YOUR def’n of better or worse. Do you desire for most to go to heaven? I’m guessing yes.

TheSire:

This is where I mentioned that PineCreek begged the question in regard to the person’s response. This is a deceptive tactic that PineCreek does. When he wishes to deflect from the myriad of things he can’t answer he will ask you a question with the facade that these are just what smart people would believe.

PineCreek:

I think any reasonable christian could say “yes, going to heaven is better than going to hell”

TheSire:

​He proposed a principle then his programming of street epistemology kicked in.

Random Person:

All things being EQUAL, I would prefer all humans to be saved. All things CONSIDERED (which only God can see), God sees fit that it’s better that some are lost.

TheSire:

Who cares about preferences?

PineCreek:

thank you for answering that you would prefer all humans to be saved. But back to my simple question. IF it were true that MOST are lost, wouldn’t it be better for God NOT to create?

TheSire:

I’m just calling you out for dodging a question because you’re begging the question. You proposed that it is objectively better for more or all people to be saved, but what grounds that fact? Your preference?