Happiness

One problem that faces Christianity is that there is surely an unfair punishment taught against those who sin. Does stealing a pencil really deserve purgatory or hell? Telling a little lie about eating one piece of boba to my mom? Using God’s name in vain once as a kid? It seems unfair prima facie. But I argue that it is actually not unfair after further examination. Firstly, Christianity teaches that those who are invincibly ignorant, meaning through no fault of their own, they do not know the gospel and/or they do not know Jesus, can in fact be saved.  So does that mean every Christian should just stop evangelizing those who are invincibly ignorant then? Well no. First, Christians do not know who is invincibly ignorant, so not evangelizing those who are potentially not invincibly ignorant is dangerous because those who are culpable (not invincibly ignorant) for sins will be sent to hell or purgatory. Maybe the potentially not invincibly ignorant is “on the fence,” so to speak, an...

 Let’s say you’re being interrogated and you aren’t allowed to ask any clarifying question and you must give an answer per question. Your answer options will be: Yes, No, I don’t know, Most of the time, or A small amount of time.  The inquisitor’s intention is to see if you’re mentally stable for a job you would be able to have if you pass the interrogation. If you fail, you don’t get the job. The inquisitor: Do you at times feel like smashing something? You thinking silently to answer the question: *I felt like smashing things when I was a boy angry about not getting my toy. But should I answer, “Yes” to the inquisitor’s question? If I answer, “Yes” it will lower my chance of getting the job and it may make me seem like someone who is easily angered or smashes things abnormally. Moreover, even if I didn’t feel like smashing things when I was a boy not getting my toy, surely I wanted to smash the hammer against the high striker machine at the carnivore last week. Should I say,...

Some hold that everything is subjective. I argue against this proposition in this post.  Firstly, I define subjectivity as "The belief something is merely an opinion, which cannot be expounded upon nor be proven wrong." But clearly, having the subjective belief being explained as a subjective belief is evidence of some expounding that's happening. So expounding can happen on subjectivity. How about subjectivity being proven wrong though? I say this is possible to prove also. Consider the subjective claim that a human makes which says, "I am a horse." It is a subjective claim, yes, but it is a wrong claim.