NationStates Jolt Archive

Since that is real life...yes.

"Spam forum owner"

No joke there, eh?

Since that is real life...yes.

Maybe the Lion King is real, too?

Actually, it is punishing us for something that DOES conform to his wants and needs. He wanted and needed us to have free will.


I beg to differ, but even if that is so, that just turns God from an idiot into a vindictive bastard.

why would he if he was only going to be alive for a short time?
So you're saying that Jesus didn't want to reproduce because he knew he'd only be around for a few paltry decades? The average lifespan of that time period was around 25 years, so I guess it's a damn good thing SOMEBODY was willing to have kids despite their short lifespans.

I beg to differ, but even if that is so, that just turns God from an idiot into a vindictive bastard.
You disagree with what, precisely?

if God loved me he would accept me for who I am and invite me to stay in heaven anyway.

He does accept you for who you are if you believe in the Lord Savior Jesus Christ.

But since God obviously doesn't love me for who I am, I'm not going to make an effort to love God for who he is.

But yet he does love you and he wants you to spend eternity with Him. Why are you rejecting salvation?

The difference is, God created me so that I can love him. He wants my love. I don't want his. It's in Gods best interest not to be a bastard. That's why he shouldn't punish me.

And that is why you will be punished. Its all about you. Guess what? Life does not revolve around you. That is being selfish and selfishness is a sin.

And I'll enjoy it immensely.

I hope you do.

Why shouldn't you be punished? You rejected the father and it is the Father's responsibility to punish his children.
I'd say a true father would be more concerned about helping his children then about throwing them away like garbage the moment they show a lapse in obedience.

Here's an alternative God-theory, sent to me by a good friend a while back:

"Back in my days as a flightdeck firefighter, when our ship's helicopter was on rescue missions, we had to stand around in our gear in case of a crash. There was usually very little to do, so we told stories. One I heard was about a rescue swimmer. She had to pull a family out of the water from a capsized boat, but by the time the chopper got there, it appeared everyone had drowned except the mother, who was for that reason shedding her life vest and trying to drown herself. The swimmer dove in to rescue her, but she kicked and screamed and yelled to let her die. She even gave the swimmer a whopping black eye. But the swimmer said to hell with that, I'm bringing you in! And she did, enduring her curses and blows all the way.

Later, it turned out that one of the victim's children, her daughter, had survived. She had drifted pretty far from the wreck, but the rescue team pulled her out, and the woman who had beaten the crap out of her rescuer apologized and thanked her for saving her against her will. Everyone in my group agreed the rescue swimmer had done the right thing, and we all would have done the same—because that is what a loving, caring being does. It follows that if God is a loving being, he will do no less for us. In the real world, kind people don't act like some stubborn, pouting God who abandons the drowning simply because they don't want to be helped. They act like this rescue swimmer. They act like us."

-Richard Carrier

You disagree with what, precisely?


You contradicted me. I disagree with the logic behind your contradiction. But it's not important.

I'd say a true father would be more concerned about helping his children then about throwing them away like garbage the moment they show a lapse in obedience.

He does help us but we have to accept that help and rejecting God is not accepting His help.

He does help us but we have to accept that help and rejecting God is not accepting His help.

So exactly has God done in the last 2000 years?

You contradicted me. I disagree with the logic behind your contradiction. But it's not important.
You disagree that, in the context of Christianity, God gave mankind free will so that they could choose to be with Him? That is a party line I've heard many a time. If you disagree, I'd like to hear why.

He does help us but we have to accept that help and rejecting God is not accepting His help.

Why do we 'have to accept' that help?

Wouldn't that mean God is not omnipotent?

He does accept you for who you are if you believe in the Lord Savior Jesus Christ.

Love is not a conditional response. I do not love my mother, unless she remains married to my father. Nor does she love me, unless I decide to be leave my country. Love is unconditional or it is NOT love.

Any God who is so vindictive to reject those who led good, honest lives showing love and compassion for his fellow man, just because he chooses not to believe in him, while at the same time accepting mean, deceptive and unpleasant people who believed and went to confession to have their sins absolved does not deserve to be believed in.

And how come you haven't even attempted to answer the questions about the fall? Do you just ignore that which does not fall into your religious world view?

He does accept you for who you are if you believe in the Lord Savior Jesus Christ.

See what I mean. There's an 'if' clause in that. I'm talking about unconditional love. He doesn't love me for who I am. He loves me for what decisions I make.



But yet he does love you and he wants you to spend eternity with Him. Why are you rejecting salvation?

He obviously doesn't want it bad enought. I reject salvation because I hate God.



And that is why you will be punished. Its all about you. Guess what? Life does not revolve around you. That is being selfish and selfishness is a sin.

No. It's all about God. God created the universe for his pleasure. To glorify him. He created ME to love him. Did he ask me if I wanted to be created? Did he give ME a choice? No. It's all about what God wants. He's the selfish one.

Why do we 'have to accept' that help?

Wouldn't that mean God is not omnipotent?

He offers to help us and yet people reject that help. What are you getting at with your statement? It makes zero sense.

Why do we 'have to accept' that help?
It gives us power over God.

He offers to help us and yet people reject that help. What are you getting at with your statement? It makes zero sense.

Perhaps you don't WANT it to make sense?

God 'offers' us help, but he can ONLY 'help' us IF we let him?

Look at the swimmer/drowner in the story - the rescue-swimmer saved her DESPITE her best efforts.

Surely, God is supposed to be more powerful than a rescue swimmer?

If he can NOT 'save me' without me giving him permission, then he is not omnipotent... yes?

He offers to help us and yet people reject that help. What are you getting at with your statement? It makes zero sense.


People don't reject the help. People want the help. Some people though just don't have the capacity to obtain the help. If God really wanted us to be in heaven with him he would have made it easy for ALL people to achieve salvation, not just the ones that are willing to throw common sense out the window.

Everybody needs to read the Incarnations of Immortality books by Piers Anthony.

They do a pretty good job of sorting through Christianity and making sense of it.

What you consider "free will" is simply us being the threads of chaos put into the mortal world so that eventually all chaos will be sorted into heaven and hell, and order will be restored.

Perhaps you don't WANT it to make sense?

God 'offers' us help, but he can ONLY 'help' us IF we let him?

Look at the swimmer/drowner in the story - the rescue-swimmer saved her DESPITE her best efforts.

Surely, God is supposed to be more powerful than a rescue swimmer?

If he can NOT 'save me' without me giving him permission, then he is not omnipotent... yes?


God wants us to be saved. BVut God is not willing to deny us the choice to be saved. God can, if he likes, save us all. But he wont do it unless we choose to be saved. Which is God being selfish again. I'd much rather be a robot and achieve salvation because I have no free will, rather than be forced into choosing hell.

God wants us to be saved. BVut God is not willing to deny us the choice to be saved. God can, if he likes, save us all. But he wont do it unless we choose to be saved. Which is God being selfish again. I'd much rather be a robot and achieve salvation because I have no free will, rather than be forced into choosing hell.

According to Corneliu, God can NOT save us, without our accepting his help.

Seems like a bit of a cheat to me - after all, one cannot CHOOSE to believe - so God punishes NOT for 'hating him' or 'ignoring him'... but for simply being the flawed creations he made.

God wants us to be saved. BVut God is not willing to deny us the choice to be saved. God can, if he likes, save us all. But he wont do it unless we choose to be saved. Which is God being selfish again. I'd much rather be a robot and achieve salvation because I have no free will, rather than be forced into choosing hell.

So god is selfish and jealous? So theoretically there are humans with better souls than god? Because I know of some unselfish and unjealous people that are still great people in general, nice as hell never hurting anyone kind of stuff.

Why not worship that guy I know? Obviously he's a better person.

According to Corneliu, God can NOT save us, without our accepting his help.


God can. But he choosed not to.

God can also make it much easier for us to accept his help. But he chooses not to.

Why do we 'have to accept' that help?

Sounds a bit like Pelagius, no? Wasn't Pelagius declared a heretic?

Not that there's anything wrong with being a heretic. I'm sure the church would label me one several times over. I'm just wondering if Corneliu knows that his views were declared as such long, long ago.

Wouldn't that mean God is not omnipotent?

Not necessarily, no. It would mean that God has placed rules on what God will and will not do. Omnipotence does not mean doing all things - it just means that a being is able to do all things.

It's a lot like the difference between my fiance's mother and my own. My fiance's mother is going to help - whether you want/need her help or not. The woman practically throws money at us, is full of advice she will all-too-gladly share, etc. My mother, on the other hand, would gladly help if we asked. If we needed money/advice/etc., we could go to her and she would gladly give it. Is one better than the other? I tend to prefer my mother's tactic. *shrug*

God can. But he choosed not to.

God can also make it much easier for us to accept his help. But he chooses not to.

So he chose not to. Okay. Why? He never explained it.

So god is selfish and jealous? So theoretically there are humans with better souls than god? Because I know of some unselfish and unjealous people that are still great people in general, nice as hell never hurting anyone kind of stuff.

Why not worship that guy I know? Obviously he's a better person.


I know a person like that to. Unfortunately I rather hate her because she reminds me of God too much. But, yes, it would appear as if there are many people with more compassion and more common sense than God.

Sounds a bit like Pelagius, no? Wasn't Pelagius declared a heretic?

Not that there's anything wrong with being a heretic. I'm sure the church would label me one several times over. I'm just wondering if Corneliu knows that his views were declared as such long, long ago.



Not necessarily, no. It would mean that God has placed rules on what God will and will not do. Omnipotence does not mean doing all things - it just means that a being is able to do all things.

It's a lot like the difference between my fiance's mother and my own. My fiance's mother is going to help - whether you want/need her help or not. The woman practically throws money at us, is full of advice she will all-too-gladly share, etc. My mother, on the other hand, would gladly help if we asked. If we needed money/advice/etc., we could go to her and she would gladly give it. Is one better than the other? I tend to prefer my mother's tactic. *shrug*

Correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm not, but neither your mother or your mother-in-law are GOD. They didn't create you or the rules which you live by. Slightly different situation. God's rules still don't make sense.

God can. But he choosed not to.

God can also make it much easier for us to accept his help. But he chooses not to.
wow, your version of God sounds like a real nice fellow

"What's that? What do you mean you can't pull yourself back up? You're the one that fell off that ledge, fix it yourself!"

Perhaps you don't WANT it to make sense?

God 'offers' us help, but he can ONLY 'help' us IF we let him?

Look at the swimmer/drowner in the story - the rescue-swimmer saved her DESPITE her best efforts.

Surely, God is supposed to be more powerful than a rescue swimmer?

If he can NOT 'save me' without me giving him permission, then he is not omnipotent... yes?

Free Will, doofus.

Sorry for the insult, but if ever a post deserved it, that one did.

So he chose not to. Okay. Why? He never explained it.


Sorry about that spelling error there. Should be "chooses" not "choosed"


We don't know why. God refuses to tell us why. He wants us to trust him. But I feel that trust is to be earned. If God wants my trust, he has to first answer just a few of my questions.

Correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm not, but neither your mother or your mother-in-law are GOD. They didn't create you or the rules which you live by. Slightly different situation. God's rules still don't make sense.
uhm... I would say the mother most definately had a hand in making them... test tube science isn't THAT well developed yet... :)

Free Will, doofus.

Sorry for the insult, but if ever a post deserved it, that one did.

Yes but theres no way of knowing God is omnipotent if he doesnt show it.

Sorry about that spelling error there. Should be "chooses" not "choosed"


We don't know why. God refuses to tell us why. He wants us to trust him. But I feel that trust is to be earned. If God wants my trust, he has to first answer just a few of my questions.

What, just to clear a few things up before you decide to be believe in him? You think that God should have a little fireside chat with you? Sorry, but as far I know, God doesn't work like that.

He does help us but we have to accept that help and rejecting God is not accepting His help.
Read my post.

If we are as God's children, then use the story I posted as a springboard for a theoretical example:

A family is caught in a flood, and the children are swept out into the rushing water. One of the children sees his father clinging to the bank nearby, and cries out, "Save me, Dad!" So the father swims over and rescues the kid.

Another of the children is hanging on to some floating rubble, facing away from the bank. She doesn't see her father, and can't hear much of anything above the roaring of the water. She doesn't call out for Dad to save her because she has no idea he's there. Does her father let her drown because she failed to ask for help? Does he turn away from her because she did not acknowledge him?

The third child is frantically trying to save the family dog, who is caught on some wreckage and is being tugged under the water. The father comes over to try to save the child, and realizes that they're going to have to let the dog drown in order to survive. He pulls the kid away, and she begins to scream and rave at him, beating at him with her fists, calling him horrible names for letting her beloved pet die. She struggles against him with every ounce of strength. Does her father simply let her drown? She has rejected him, has screamed that she hates him, has made every effort to get away from him, so does he conclude that the right thing to do is to let her die?

Yes but theres no way of knowing God is omnipotent if he doesnt show it.


But why should he show it? It's YOUR choice whether to have faith or not, that's the whole point.

uhm... I would say the mother most definately had a hand in making him... test tube science isn't THAT well developed yet... and less directly, the grandmother had a hand in making him too, since she had to make the mother first :)

-_- You know what I meant. According to Christians, she didn't give him his soul. She didn't create gravity to which he is bound. She didn't create an atmosphere around a planet she stuck him on. She didn't supposedly throw down a book from the heavens and walk away without explaining anything.


And I agree, ComCat - he just needs to answer a few questions and we'd be all set. Even the Bush adminstration holds press conferences - granted, a lot of the questions they "Can't answer at this time", but at least they put forth an effort, y'know? God's almighty, he could have us all in a stadium at once with no more than the snap of his metaphorical fingers.

Sounds a bit like Pelagius, no? Wasn't Pelagius declared a heretic?

Not that there's anything wrong with being a heretic. I'm sure the church would label me one several times over. I'm just wondering if Corneliu knows that his views were declared as such long, long ago.

Not necessarily, no. It would mean that God has placed rules on what God will and will not do. Omnipotence does not mean doing all things - it just means that a being is able to do all things.

It's a lot like the difference between my fiance's mother and my own. My fiance's mother is going to help - whether you want/need her help or not. The woman practically throws money at us, is full of advice she will all-too-gladly share, etc. My mother, on the other hand, would gladly help if we asked. If we needed money/advice/etc., we could go to her and she would gladly give it. Is one better than the other? I tend to prefer my mother's tactic. *shrug*

I'm going to have to watch Corneliu... I'm supposed to be the heretic around here... ;)

I'm not sure about the idea of omnipotent beings with rules... even self-imposed. Surely - even if the rule IS self-imposed, if you 'can't do it', then you are less than omnipotent?

There's always that argument about 'with God, all things are possible', also - an omnipotent God should be able to set his own rules, and act against them... maybe?

The problem, as I see it... is:

If there IS a god - and just ONE, I really want to be on his team. But - for some reason, we are told that there IS one, but he only accepts belief-without-seeing.

I can't believe without seeing. Not because I don't WANT to... but just because I can't.

Therefore - if there is this one true god... I am damned, not for my choices, but for 'flaws in the design'.

It gives us power over God.

So then he ISNT omnipotent.

What, just to clear a few things up before you decide to be believe in him? You think that God should have a little fireside chat with you? Sorry, but as far I know, God doesn't work like that.


And hence my displeasure towards God and my choice not to be saved. Point is, God wants me to be saved. That's all he has to do for my salvation. But he obviously doesn't want it enough.

Free Will, doofus.

Sorry for the insult, but if ever a post deserved it, that one did.

Free will... what?

Belief isn't a matter of will.

Free Will, doofus.

Sorry for the insult, but if ever a post deserved it, that one did.
Exactly how would explaining things negate free will? How would God having an honest, open, clear discussion with human beings constitute a violation of their free will?

And I agree, ComCat - he just needs to answer a few questions and we'd be all set. Even the Bush adminstration holds press conferences - granted, a lot of the questions they "Can't answer at this time", but at least they put forth an effort, y'know? God's almighty, he could have us all in a stadium at once with no more than the snap of his metaphorical fingers.

I don't get this. God owes you nothing. He doesn't have to do anything for you.

But why should he show it? It's YOUR choice whether to have faith or not, that's the whole point.

I was saying if there is no way for god to show omnipotence then there is no way of knowing he is.

But why should he show it? It's YOUR choice whether to have faith or not, that's the whole point.

Then he might as well not even exist. It's a stupid point, and I expect better from an all-knowing, all-powerful entity which is supposed to have some big plan for us all. The culmination of that plan, I would hope, after all this pain and suffering and time gone by would be slightly more than us just lined up in heaven with him going "So all you had faith, hm? Cool. *sketches something on a notepad* You're free to go, thank you for participating."

So then he ISNT omnipotent.


He still is. He just choses to allow himself to be constrained.

She didn't supposedly throw down a book from the heavens and walk away without explaining anything.

Wow... which version of the Bible did you pick up that says the Bible was handed down as a completed article from the heavens?

Last I checked, the Bible was a composition of the diaries of a dozen men. Which is why they're so sorely lacking in consistency. As they say,
"There's always 3 sides to every story, yours, mine and the truth."

I don't get this. God owes you nothing. He doesn't have to do anything for you.

He owes me everything! He put me in this situation, and then -demands- things of me? Bullshit. He owes me an explanation of WHY I'm in this situation and WHY he demands these things from me. If he didn't want to explain to his creations their situation, he shouldn't have created them in the first place.

Wow... which version of the Bible did you pick up that says the Bible was handed down as a completed article from the heavens?

Last I checked, the Bible was a composition of the diaries of a dozen men. Which is why they're so sorely lacking in consistency. As they say,
"There's always 3 sides to every story, yours, mine and the truth."

I was using a paraphrased hyperbole for effectiveness. You know what I meant.

Then he might as well not even exist. It's a stupid point, and I expect better from an all-knowing, all-powerful entity which is supposed to have some big plan for us all. The culmination of that plan, I would hope, after all this pain and suffering and time gone by would be slightly more than us just lined up in heaven with him going "So all you had faith, hm? Cool. *sketches something on a notepad* You're free to go, thank you for participating."

He might as well not. Again, that's the whole point. You're just a little part of one big machine. No'one knows where anything is heading.

Wow... which version of the Bible did you pick up that says the Bible was handed down as a completed article from the heavens?

Last I checked, the Bible was a composition of the diaries of a dozen men. Which is why they're so sorely lacking in consistency. As they say,
"There's always 3 sides to every story, yours, mine and the truth."


The bible is supposedly divinely inspired. This creates a lot of questions about it's accuracy and truth.

I was using a paraphrased hyperbole for effectiveness. You know what I meant.
Oh ok, I thought you just mighta still been trying to pass King James version off as a valid source :)

He might as well not. Again, that's the whole point. You're just a little part of one big machine. No'one knows where anything is heading.

Exactly. Nobody knows. We're not sure what this machine does or if it's even working correctly.

There - is - no - point. We need to be given a goal if there is to be a point. We weren't. We were given a book by other parts of the machine, but we've yet to find an actual users manual written by the person that created us.

He owes me everything! He put me in this situation, and then -demands- things of me? Bullshit. He owes me an explanation of WHY I'm in this situation and WHY he demands these things from me. If he didn't want to explain to his creations their situation, he shouldn't have created them in the first place.

He owes you NOTHING. He (indirectly or not) created you, so who are you to demand things? What did you ever do for God? It's all up to you, don't believe or not, I don't care, it's entirely your choice.

He still is. He just choses to allow himself to be constrained.

If a human can show power over god, he is not omnipotent.

If god does not show his power, then humans cannot know he is omnipotent.

Oh ok, I thought you just mighta still been trying to pass King James version off as a valid source :)

No version of the bible has, is, or will ever be a valid source of anything except a fantasy.

He owes you NOTHING. He (indirectly or not) created you, so who are you to demand things? It's all up to you, don't believe or not, I don't care, it's entirely your choice.


If he left it at that, you're point would be sound. But God tries to pass himself off as compassinate, and good, and loving. It's because of these properties and the fact that god wants our faith that God owes us an explaination.

He owes you NOTHING. He (indirectly or not) created you, so who are you to demand things? What did you ever do for God? It's all up to you, don't believe or not, I don't care, it's entirely your choice.

I'm existing. That's what god created me to do, and I'm doing it. I didn't have a choice in the matter, but I'm doing it regardless. I'd like a little reason as to why I'm doing it. So much to ask?

It's like if I just pick up three ants from their home and put them down in the middle of the desert. What do I owe those ants? I gave them their current situation, I don't owe them anything. Right? Not.

Exactly. Nobody knows. We're not sure what this machine does or if it's even working correctly.

There - is - no - point. We need to be given a goal if there is to be a point. We weren't. We were given a book by other parts of the machine, but we've yet to find an actual users manual written by the person that created us.

Maybe so, and we'll probably never get one. It's all to do with faith. Are we being tested to destruction? Maybe.

He owes you NOTHING. He (indirectly or not) created you, so who are you to demand things? What did you ever do for God? It's all up to you, don't believe or not, I don't care, it's entirely your choice.

No... it really isn't.

One can chose to CLAIM belief... but one cannot choose to believe.

If I can't believe in this 'god'... then he did a pretty shitty job making me that way.


As to what 'he' would owe... when a parent has children, that parent 'owes' that child a lot of things... there are responsibilities to being a parent. You don't just get to set fire to your kids and excuse it 'because they were bad'.

Correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm not, but neither your mother or your mother-in-law are GOD.

No. But they are both parents. They both care about their children (and their children's SO's). They just have different ways of going about demonstrating that.

They didn't create you or the rules which you live by. Slightly different situation.

Analogies are always at least slightly different.

God's rules still don't make sense.

Why not? Should a parent keep their child from all trouble and make all their decisions for them? Or should a parent allow a child to grow into his own person - even if it means he rejects his parents or their values?

As to what 'he' would owe... when a parent has children, that parent 'owes' that child a lot of things... there are responsibilities to being a parent. You don't just get to set fire to your kids and excuse it 'because they were bad'.

Sadly enough, there are parents out there who actually do that...or other forms of abuse/punishment. Would be nice if the almighty would step in and stop that sort of thing.

If a human can show power over god, he is not omnipotent.

If god does not show his power, then humans cannot know he is omnipotent.


No. You're confusing power with absolute power. For example: A government has the power to deny a company a logging permit. But the company can bribe the government. The government has the absolute power. They can at any point not accept the bribe and deny the permit, but they allow themselves to be corrupted by money, giving power to the logging company.

We can't know anything about the nature of God for sure.

No... it really isn't.

One can chose to CLAIM belief... but one cannot choose to believe.

If I can't believe in this 'god'... then he did a pretty shitty job making me that way.


As to what 'he' would owe... when a parent has children, that parent 'owes' that child a lot of things... there are responsibilities to being a parent. You don't just get to set fire to your kids and excuse it 'because they were bad'.

Well if God reached down and set fire to you, maybe you'd have a point.

There's no evidence that anything like a God may exist.
My bet is no.

No version of the bible has, is, or will ever be a valid source of anything except a fantasy.

I'm not going to agree or disagree with this, because the point of the thread isn't to force people to follow your beliefs.

I'm not Christian, and I never will be, but that doesn't mean I'm going to sit here and tear down their beliefs with that kind of hostility either. There are versions of the Bible taken directly from the latin texts that are as accurate as the Bible _can_ be.

The Bible as a historical reference is actually rather useful and can be accurate on many non-religious things. So it is more than just fantasy. However, the religious background throughout the Bible, is better left to Christians.

No. You're confusing power with absolute power. For example: A government has the power to deny a company a logging permit. But the company can bribe the government. The government has the absolute power. They can at any point not accept the bribe and deny the permit, but they allow themselves to be corrupted by money, giving power to the logging company.

We can't know anything about the nature of God for sure.

Uh, omnipotence IS absolute power.

geez ruff, death sucks. it sucks big time. its not like you wont mourn every time someone you love dies no matter how or when.

some people go early, some live a long long time. in the end, everyone dies. my father in law told me that when his mother died at age 90 he was as sad as when his daughter died at age 6.

my point is that "god" wasnt being particularily cruel to your friend. she had a beautiful life for as long as she lived. she overcame adversity, she had a good family, she maintained her good spirits even as she was dying. she still inspires people even after she is gone. as the song on the radio says "thats a life you can hang your hat on".

god doesnt promise a life without pain. he doesnt say that if you believe in him and follow his commandments he'll make all your troubles go away.

he promises that if you ask, he'll help you get through it and that someday you will be brought to a more perfect existance where, in THAT life, there is no trouble and you will be reunited with those you have lost.

isnt that what your friend wanted for you?


A beautiful life? She had an abusive husband and breast cancer.

Uh, omnipotence IS absolute power.


That's the point. But us excersising power over God does not mean that God doesn't have absolute power. ie, exerting power over God does not imply that god is not omnipotent.

As to what 'he' would owe... when a parent has children, that parent 'owes' that child a lot of things... there are responsibilities to being a parent. You don't just get to set fire to your kids and excuse it 'because they were bad'.
No joke! Dude, we don't let human parents off the hook if they produce a baby and then leave it in a dumpster. We don't let neglectful or abusive human parents off the hook by saying that they don't owe their kids anything. Why the hell should we let an OMNIPOTENT GOD off the hook for that kind of crap?!

Sadly enough, there are parents out there who actually do that...or other forms of abuse/punishment. Would be nice if the almighty would step in and stop that sort of thing.

See - THAT would be enough to make me believe!

(Long time, no see. Always a pleasure, Peech). ;)

Well if God reached down and set fire to you, maybe you'd have a point.

I'm an Atheist. Next?

No joke! Dude, we don't let human parents off the hook if they produce a baby and then leave it in a dumpster. We don't let neglectful or abusive human parents off the hook by saying that they don't owe their kids anything. Why the hell should we let an OMNIPOTENT GOD off the hook for that kind of crap?!

You seem to think God personally sat down and made you be born. He didn't, that was your parents. Perhaps God has been meddling behind the scenes, but really, he hasn't overtly abused anyone, so why all the hostility? When I say he reated you, I mean the species as a whole. Anything else, we do to ourselves, or it's Nature or something.

We are and that is why it pains him when we reject God and his Son Jesus.
You avoid eveything people ask you.

I won't even try to ask you what your favorite color is. You'd probably quote the bible.

I'm an Atheist. Next?

Then why are you saying God owes you something if you don't belive in one?

You seem to think God personally sat down and made you be born. He didn't, that was your parents. Perhaps God has been meddling behind the scenes, but really, he hasn't overtly abused anyone, so why all the hostility? When I say he reated you, I mean the species as a whole. Anything else, we do to ourselves, or it's Nature or something.
Okay, clearly we need to define "God." Or, more precisely, YOU need to define God, since you're the one insisting He exists.

See - THAT would be enough to make me believe!

(Long time, no see. Always a pleasure, Peech). ;)


I guess that's my beef with God. People can say that we should be punished for our sins and all that, but children are innocent. They haven't broken any of God's laws. I cant see how a loving God would allow children to be raped, beaten, put in clothes dryers, suffer from cancer, starvation,etc. If he can part the sea, why cant he put his hand down and protect a child from these horrible things?

(likewise my dear :) )

You avoid eveything people ask you.

I won't even try to ask you what your favorite color is. You'd probably quote the bible.

Most irritating person i've ever met.

Okay, clearly we need to define "God." Or, more precisely, YOU need to define God, since you're the one insisting He exists.

Well I'm arguing about god as depicted in the Bible, obvious metaphors and allegories aside. i.e. creator of Earth, possibly with some big plan in mind - but possibly not.

I guess that's my beef with God. People can say that we should be punished for our sins and all that, but children are innocent. They haven't broken any of God's laws. I cant see how a loving God would allow children to be raped, beaten, put in clothes dryers, suffer from cancer, starvation,etc. If he can part the sea, why cant he put his hand down and protect a child from these horrible things?

(likewise my dear :) )

Maybe you should ask why people do this kind of stuff in the first place. They're the evil ones, don't blame god! free will etc

Well I'm arguing about god as depicted in the Bible, obvious metaphors and allegories aside. i.e. creator of Earth, possibly with some big plan in mind - but possibly not.


And we are assuming that the omnipotent, transcendant, etc, nature of God is true?

Then why are you saying God owes you something if you don't belive in one?

I'm not, really... it doesn't make any difference to ME.

But - if there WAS a god, and it was the god as described by Christians... then he created me flawed, and then punishes me for his own bad design.

The phrase 'petulant child' would spring instantly to mind.

Maybe you should ask why people do this kind of stuff in the first place. They're the evil ones, don't blame god! free will etc

If God was omnipotent - he could have created people that had free-will, but that were not evil.

Islam just copied all the Jewish texts and All the Bible translated it into there own words and only write 1 book really! and they called it the final word or summat like that ! so tell me is the Qu'ran write or why dont people ever say Do you have faith in Allah? or What is islam? rather then Who is God? What is God? is there a God? do you have faith in God? as in why do people take more of a Christian view ?

The qu'ran has all the characters in the Bible but says that Jesus is a Prophet of Allah. A Prophet with the Things he said ? i doubt that very much! walking on water? Moses may have parted the Red Sea but Jesus Walked on water? Muslim says the Bible has been translated so much that it's corrupt??? you cant add or take things away from the Bible but in the Koran your allowed to add things if your a Special leader or Teacher of Islam so the matter of my point is How can Muslims say the Bible is corrupt?

Well I'm arguing about god as depicted in the Bible, obvious metaphors and allegories aside. i.e. creator of Earth, possibly with some big plan in mind - but possibly not.
Is God omnipotent? All-knowing? All-good? Did God create humanity?

You're going to have to provide a more concrete definition than, "God is this thing that kind of created some stuff, maybe for a reason but maybe not..."

I'm not, really... it doesn't make any difference to ME.

But - if there WAS a god, and it was the god as described by Christians... then he created me flawed, and then punishes me for his own bad design.

The phrase 'petulant child' would spring instantly to mind.

Yeah, but you don't believe he exists, so why are you even criticising him? It would be like me raving about the FSM's ugly appearance.

If God was omnipotent - he could have created people that had free-will, but that were not evil.


Exactly. That one line makes fall theology obsolete.

I guess that's my beef with God. People can say that we should be punished for our sins and all that, but children are innocent. They haven't broken any of God's laws. I cant see how a loving God would allow children to be raped, beaten, put in clothes dryers, suffer from cancer, starvation,etc. If he can part the sea, why cant he put his hand down and protect a child from these horrible things?

(likewise my dear :) )

Exactly - the non-believer is (allegedly) damned for being incapable of CHOOSING to believe. The abused child is a victim because God (allegedly) CHOOSES not to intervene.

If I could make myself believe in a god... I don't think it would be this one.

(Why you never around no more? *sad*)

If God was omnipotent - he could have created people that had free-will, but that were not evil.

No-one starts off evil. No evil gene, buddy.

And if you mean limit their capacity to be evil... that eliminates free will.

Maybe you should ask why people do this kind of stuff in the first place. They're the evil ones, don't blame god! free will etc


I'm sorry- If he can perform all these miracles back in the day, why can't he stop a rapist dead in his tracks?I wonder if he allows things like this so he will have something to punish the rapist for. Free will my ass. Who supposedly gave that power to us? I blame God the same way the Judicial system would blame me if I stood in my daughter's bedroom and watched her get gang raped.

Maybe I expect too much from him.

/bitter sarcasm

Is God omnipotent? All-knowing? All-good? Did God create humanity?

You're going to have to provide a more concrete definition than, "God is this thing that kind of created some stuff, maybe for a reason but maybe not..."

Hey, we believe what we believe. And that's pretty much it..

No-one starts off evil. No evil gene, buddy.

And if you mean limit their capacity to be evil... that eliminates free will.


But you're constraining Gods abilities within the realms of logic. God is omnipotent. He may exist and not exist at the same time. He can make 2 + 2 = fish, he can make a world in which there is free will but at the same time no evil.

No-one starts off evil. No evil gene, buddy.

And if you mean limit their capacity to be evil... that eliminates free will.
Totally and completely 100% false.

There are plenty of ways our capacity for evil is limited right now, yet you seem to think we currently possess free will. Limiting our capacity for evil, or our inclination to engage in it, does not automatically remove free will.

Give me omnipotence for one second and I bet you I can get rid of more than half of the human violence in the world right now, without removing free will. And I'm not an omnipotent Creator-being.

Yeah, but you don't believe he exists, so why are you even criticising him? It would be like me raving about the FSM's ugly appearance.

Just because I don't believe in your little god, doesn't mean I can't talk about him, right?

I didn't start this topic, did I? I'm just responding.

I'm sorry- If he can perform all these miracles back in the day, why can't he stop a rapist dead in his tracks?I wonder if he allows things like this so he will have something to punish the rapist for. Free will my ass. Who supposedly gave that power to us? I blame God the same way the Judicial system would blame me if I stood in my daughter's bedroom and watched her get gang raped.

Maybe I expect too much from him.

/bitter sarcasm

free will free will free will blah blah blah

if god was some kind of cosmic policeman there'd be no point to ANYTHING, not that there's neessarily a point anyway.

Hey, we believe what we believe. And that's pretty much it..
I'm asking you to define what you believe. Are you incapable of doing so, or simply unwilling?

But you're constraining Gods abilities within the realms of logic. God is omnipotent. He may exist and not exist at the same time. He can make 2 + 2 = fish, he can make a world in which there is free will but at the same time no evil.

Yeah, he probably COULD... but maybe he shouldn't. Maybe he wants us to work it out on our own. I can't presume his motives.

Totally and completely 100% false.

There are plenty of ways our capacity for evil is limited right now, yet you seem to think we currently possess free will. Limiting our capacity for evil, or our inclination to engage in it, does not automatically remove free will.

Give me omnipotence for one second and I bet you I can get rid of more than half of the human violence in the world right now. And I'm not an omnipotent Creator-being.

There are even ways in which you can stop a person from doing evil without affecting free will. If a person is going to kill another person, don't supply the world with guns or knives. God could have made an equally usefull but non-lethal tool for us. That way, the people still have the choice to do evil, they just don't have the means to do.

Totally and completely 100% false.

There are plenty of ways our capacity for evil is limited right now, yet you seem to think we currently possess free will. Limiting our capacity for evil, or our inclination to engage in it, does not automatically remove free will.

Give me omnipotence for one second and I bet you I can get rid of more than half of the human violence in the world right now, without removing free will. And I'm not an omnipotent Creator-being.

But if our capacity for evil was limited, something else would take the place of evil. Where would it end? Maybe the goalposts have already been shifted, and we just don't know about it.

God sets out rules dosnt he? as in The Ten Commandments? in Exodus and then theres other commandments he puts Forward Through Jesus? like you should Love, happiness joy all that? im sure it's in the Bible somewhere!

No-one starts off evil. No evil gene, buddy.

And if you mean limit their capacity to be evil... that eliminates free will.

Utterly irrelevent. It doesn't matter if it is genetic, and it isn't a matter of free-will.

Is it 'free will' that enables a fish to 'breathe' underwater? No - it's just the 'way they are made'.

Is it 'free will' that makes the Earth rotate on it's axis? No - it is just the 'way it is made'.


If your god CHOOSES to make people flawed, chooses to imbue them with the CAPACITY for evil, then forces them to be free-willed - then it is the design that is flawed...

Maybe that's why the Christian church INSISTS theirs is the only God? They don't want a God that would have to explain this kind of cock-up to his boss... he'd never work again.

Yeah, he probably COULD... but maybe he shouldn't. Maybe he wants us to work it out on our own. I can't presume his motives.


Perhaps. Maybe you can't. But the rest of us still want to try.

I'm asking you to define what you believe. Are you incapable of doing so, or simply unwilling?

You just pretty much defined it for me back there. I amcapable, and willing, just not into pointless repitition.

Perhaps. Maybe you can't. But the rest of us still want to try.

Go for it. Not gonna happen in your lifetime. Maybe after you die, but that's no guaruntee. Incidently, ever wondered what an ant's motive are? Yeah, like that, but in reverse. I'm sure you've heard it before.

But if our capacity for evil was limited, something else would take the place of evil. Where would it end? Maybe the goalposts have already been shifted, and we just don't know about it.
Huh?

So, are you saying that because human beings are not capable of ripping each other's spines out with our mental powers, this means that the very nature of "evil" is shifted? Are you saying that human beings cannot comprehend how ripping somebody's spine out with mind powers might be a bad thing, simply because we don't happen to have that ability?

Dude, have you ever watched the Alien movies? You know how the aliens will shoot acidy spit, and will rip people to pieces, and will burst out of chest cavities and stuff? Well, most people don't have much trouble recognizing that these fit under the general heading of "bad things." We don't have acid blood, and our offspring don't birth themselves by exploding out of people's ribcages, but we can all understand that even if we WERE able to do those things it would probably be better that we choose not to do them.

free will free will free will blah blah blah

if god was some kind of cosmic policeman there'd be no point to ANYTHING, not that there's neessarily a point anyway.

What a load of crap.

How about simple betterment of the world for all? If God was 'policing' our world, weeding out the evil... WE could actually focus on doing some GOOD.

There are even ways in which you can stop a person from doing evil without affecting free will. If a person is going to kill another person, don't supply the world with guns or knives. God could have made an equally usefull but non-lethal tool for us. That way, the people still have the choice to do evil, they just don't have the means to do.

Guns and knives were made by humanity. Interesting fact, we're one of the few animals to have no natural weaponary. Ever thought this might be for a reason?

Go for it. Not gonna happen in your lifetime. Maybe after you die, but that's no guaruntee. Incidently, ever wondered what an ant's motive are? Yeah, like that, but in reverse. I'm sure you've heard it before.


Haven't heard of it I'm afraid.

Guns and knives were made by humanity. Interesting fact, we're one of the few animals to have no natural weaponary. Ever thought this might be for a reason?

What are our fists, painted on?

1011 to 1008 in favour of "No"

Lookin' gooooooooood.

Utterly irrelevent. It doesn't matter if it is genetic, and it isn't a matter of free-will.

Is it 'free will' that enables a fish to 'breathe' underwater? No - it's just the 'way they are made'.

Is it 'free will' that makes the Earth rotate on it's axis? No - it is just the 'way it is made'.


If your god CHOOSES to make people flawed, chooses to imbue them with the CAPACITY for evil, then forces them to be free-willed - then it is the design that is flawed...

Maybe that's why the Christian church INSISTS theirs is the only God? They don't want a God that would have to explain this kind of cock-up to his boss... he'd never work again.

For "it's just the 'way they are made'.", read "It's genetic" or "it's the natural result of the formation of the universe". A bit different from removing evil from humanity. And if there was no capacity for evil, good would be a tiny bit insignifiant.

What a load of crap.

How about simple betterment of the world for all? If God was 'policing' our world, weeding out the evil... WE could actually focus on doing some GOOD.

but they'd be NO POINT 'cos God would be doing it for us! Can you not see this? Is it literally ungraspable for you?

Guns and knives were made by humanity. Interesting fact, we're one of the few animals to have no natural weaponary. Ever thought this might be for a reason?

But the capacity for them can be removed by God. He can create a world in which it is physically impossible to have knives.

Yes. But it would be stupid to think that it was an intended purpose of a greater being. Ever read "The Salmon of Doubt" by Douglas Adams:

"It's rather like a puddle waking up one morning. I know they don't normally do this, but allow me, I'm a science fiction writer. A puddle wakes up one morning and thinks: "This is a very interesting world I find myself in. It fits me very neatly. In fact it fits me so neatly... I mean really precise isn't it?... It must have been made to have me in it."

But the puddle only exists because someone accidentally made a hole in the ground.

free will free will free will blah blah blah

if god was some kind of cosmic policeman there'd be no point to ANYTHING, not that there's neessarily a point anyway.


He claims to be much more than a cosmic policeman. If he's going to take credit for all of the beautiful things we have in this world(oceans, trees,sunsets,flowers, animals,people) then surely he wont mind someone calling him out on what I'm talking about. There is NO reason for an innocent child to fall victim to these atrocities. They havent broken any of the commandments or lived sinful lives. Tell me the point of their suffering.

What are our fists, painted on?

Try fightin any animal your size with your fists. And I don't mean animals domesticated by us. Try their wild counterparts. Leyt me know how that goes.

For "it's just the 'way they are made'.", read "It's genetic" or "it's the natural result of the formation of the universe". A bit different from removing evil from humanity. And if there was no capacity for evil, good would be a tiny bit insignifiant.

So - God is NOT omnipotent, then?

He couldn't make humans that were not evil?

As for the argument that good NEEDS evil to throw it into starker relief... it's a load of wank, I'm afraid. I'd be perfectly happy living in a world with no violent crimes, and I don't think I'd appreciate human kindness any LESS for the knowledge.

For "it's just the 'way they are made'.", read "It's genetic" or "it's the natural result of the formation of the universe". A bit different from removing evil from humanity. And if there was no capacity for evil, good would be a tiny bit insignifiant.

Then you just debunked your heaven as 'a tiny bit insignifiant' as you put it.

Guns and knives were made by humanity. Interesting fact, we're one of the few animals to have no natural weaponary. Ever thought this might be for a reason?

I've seen women with sharpened fingernails that can rip through flesh without a problem. Our teeth can do a fair amount of damage too. Then we've got fists, shoulders, knees, elbows, feet, foreheads... all can be used as weapons.

Also, one could argue that our brains are the greatest natural weapons of all.

He claims to be much more than a cosmic policeman. If he's going to take credit for all of the beautiful things we have in this world(oceans, trees,sunsets,flowers, animals,people) then surely he wont mind someone calling him out on what I'm talking about. There is NO reason for an innocent child to fall victim to these atrocities. They havent broken any of the commandments or lived sinful lives. Tell me the point of their suffering.

Try asking the person who caused that suffering. The abusive parent, or the failure of society. Not God. Why should he step in to every problem? He didn't make it happen.

Try fightin any animal your size with your fists. And I don't mean animals domesticated by us. Try their wild counterparts. Leyt me know how that goes.


You're not looking at this from an evolutionary point of view. Tree dwellers don't normally spend their day fighting with tigers and bears. And when we started making weapons out of stones, the necessity for a natural defence mechanism became zero.

but they'd be NO POINT 'cos God would be doing it for us! Can you not see this? Is it literally ungraspable for you?

How difficult is this?

If god removed the capacity for evil... there would be no point in US doing good?

How do you work THAT out?

Would god be 'doing it' for us? No - he'd just be stopping the evil.

I'm sure you realise that there is more to 'doing good' than a simple absence of 'evil'?

Try fightin any animal your size with your fists. And I don't mean animals domesticated by us. Try their wild counterparts. Leyt me know how that goes.

Irrelevent. You said we have no weapons. You were wrong.

Try asking the person who caused that suffering. The abusive parent, or the failure of society. Not God. Why should he step in to every problem? He didn't make it happen.


The problems cam about as a direct effect of creation. If the world didn't exist there wouldn't be the problems. Hence God is directly responsible for all pain and suffering. The onus is then on him to fix it.

I've seen women with sharpened fingernails that can rip through flesh without a problem. Our teeth can do a fair amount of damage too. Then we've got fists, shoulders, knees, elbows, feet, foreheads... all can be used as weapons.

Also, one could argue that our brains are the greatest natural weapons of all.

All those parts would stand no chance against any animal around at the time we would have relied upon them. And as for the brains, that was rather my point.

So - God is NOT omnipotent, then?

He couldn't make humans that were not evil?

As for the argument that good NEEDS evil to throw it into starker relief... it's a load of wank, I'm afraid. I'd be perfectly happy living in a world with no violent crimes, and I don't think I'd appreciate human kindness any LESS for the knowledge.

He can, but he obviously doesn't want it. I don't know why. Maybe he doesn't want people to not be able to appreciate true goodness. Which would happen, don't even try and deny it. You wouldn't even know what a violent crime IS.

All those parts would stand no chance against any animal around at the time we would have relied upon them. And as for the brains, that was rather my point.


That's irrelevant. You said no weapons. Not not 'effective' weapons.

Try asking the person who caused that suffering. The abusive parent, or the failure of society. Not God. Why should he step in to every problem? He didn't make it happen.

He did if you believe the Bible.

He made us 'this way', and forced free-will upon us.


Personally - since I am not superstitious - I believe some people do evil things because some people ARE evil things... I don't NEED supernatural stories to explain it.

But - if you are going to claim a supernatural story as true - you should be able to defend it against the harsh realities of life.

And the harsh reality is - if there IS a 'god', and he CHOOSES to let an infant be raped by her father, then 'god' is an asshole.

You're not looking at this from an evolutionary point of view. Tree dwellers don't normally spend their day fighting with tigers and bears. And when we started making weapons out of stones, the necessity for a natural defence mechanism became zero.

No, it's more snakes and panthers. And do you realise how long it took to develop stone weaponary?

He can, but he obviously doesn't want it. I don't know why. Maybe he doesn't want people to not be able to appreciate true goodness. Which would happen, don't even try and deny it. You wouldn't even know what a violent crime IS.
I'm sure there are plenty of forms of evil I've never heard of. Doesn't stop me from understanding the broad concept of evil. Again, human beings lack a specific term for the act of ripping another person's spine out with one's mind powers. That doesn't mean we cannot understand that such an act could be "evil."

He can, but he obviously doesn't want it. I don't know why. Maybe he doesn't want people to not be able to appreciate true goodness. Which would happen, don't even try and deny it. You wouldn't even know what a violent crime IS.

You say that like it would be a BAD thing.

If I never tasted ice-cream... would I still appreciate curry?

Of course - because our appreciation of one 'extreme' doesn't RELY on our experience of another extreme.

He can, but he obviously doesn't want it. I don't know why. Maybe he doesn't want people to not be able to appreciate true goodness. Which would happen, don't even try and deny it. You wouldn't even know what a violent crime IS.


If God wanted that he wouldn't have created us innocent and then got angry at us when we ate from the tree of knowledge.

And nobody knows why. But we all want to know why. And we will continue to be pissed off a God until we get some answers. Surely you can understand how it must feel?

Try asking the person who caused that suffering. The abusive parent, or the failure of society. Not God. Why should he step in to every problem? He didn't make it happen.


He didnt prevent it from happening either. I'm not lobbying for him to step in and handle every problem. My crusade is about children. Innocent children who arent able to fight off their attackers. Innocent children who die everyday from malnourishment, disease or abuse. Why should he turn his head and say "oh well you people have free will......I cant/wont stop that person from raping and killing that 5 year old child."

That's the stance of a loving just God? Please.

Irrelevent. You said we have no weapons. You were wrong.

But they're not weapons. They're just bits. Fists are an offshoot of evolving hands. Foreheads hold our brains in. Our teeth are for chewing. I mean NOTHING on us is specifically designed solely as a weapon. We have no claws, no poison, no fangs etc etc

That's irrelevant. You said no weapons. Not not 'effective' weapons.

Actually - our greatest weapon - greater even than our cunning little brains - is a VERY effective weapon.

And that weapon is - we are sociable.

No, it's more snakes and panthers. And do you realise how long it took to develop stone weaponary?

Panthers? Tree swinging panthers? I think not.

Yes I do realise how long it took. Do you realise how long evolution takes? Longer than it takes to develop a stone weapon.

The problems cam about as a direct effect of creation. If the world didn't exist there wouldn't be the problems. Hence God is directly responsible for all pain and suffering. The onus is then on him to fix it.

That's frankly pathetic. The worst line of reasoning I have ever heard in my entire life. Those girls who get raped in a dark alley, their fault for going in the dark alley? Their parents' fault for giving birth to them? Get real.

But they're not weapons. They're just bits. Fists are an offshoot of evolving hands. Foreheads hold our brains in. Our teeth are for chewing. I mean NOTHING on us is specifically designed solely as a weapon. We have no claws, no poison, no fangs etc etc
Well, then by your logic the common American tree slug also has no weapons. It has no poison, no claws, no fangs, no weapons of any kind. It's just kind of mooshy. Hell, it doesn't even have "bits" like fists and stuff.

So, clearly, humans are not the only animals who lack weapons.

He can, but he obviously doesn't want it. I don't know why. Maybe he doesn't want people to not be able to appreciate true goodness. Which would happen, don't even try and deny it. You wouldn't even know what a violent crime IS.


Now how in the hell do you know who does and does not know what a violent crime is? How do you know who has been a victim of a violent crime or has a loved one who has been a victim? Dont tell me you're omnipotent/omniscient too!

You say that like it would be a BAD thing.

If I never tasted ice-cream... would I still appreciate curry?

Of course - because our appreciation of one 'extreme' doesn't RELY on our experience of another extreme.

OK, there is only good and evil, right? Differing extremes of each, but no word for "in betweens". If there was only ice-cream and urry, and you only had curry.. you wouldn't think it was particularly hot.

But they're not weapons. They're just bits. Fists are an offshoot of evolving hands. Foreheads hold our brains in. Our teeth are for chewing. I mean NOTHING on us is specifically designed solely as a weapon. We have no claws, no poison, no fangs etc etc

Claws are an offshoot of evolving paws. Poison fangs are an offshoot of evolving jaws.

The problem is - you are so tightly wound into your 'god made us in his image' (or whatever) focus, that you can't see something that should be plainly obvious.

We don't have claws, or big teeth... because we are the RABBIT, not the WOLF.

It's why we are social creatures. It's why our ancestors were tree-dwellers. We are prey, not predator.

That's frankly pathetic. The worst line of reasoning I have ever heard in my entire life. Those girls who get raped in a dark alley, their fault for going in the dark alley? Their parents' fault for giving birth to them? Get real.
No, it's more like saying that a frat boy who stands by and watches his brothers gang-rape a passed out drunk girl is at fault because he could have done something and didn't. Only this particular frat boy is Superman.

That's frankly pathetic. The worst line of reasoning I have ever heard in my entire life. Those girls who get raped in a dark alley, their fault for going in the dark alley? Their parents' fault for giving birth to them? Get real.


Because naturally they have the same amount of control over their way home, and their parents have the same amount of control over the future, as God has over the entire bloody universe.:rolleyes:

God deliberately introduced evil. It wouldn't exist had he not done it. He was the only one who had control over it. And that makes him a prick.

I'm sure you realise that there is more to 'doing good' than a simple absence of 'evil'?
What more?

Actually - our greatest weapon - greater even than our cunning little brains - is a VERY effective weapon.

And that weapon is - we are sociable.

You call that a weapon? Prairie dogs are sociable, but they're hardly the terror of the plains.

No, it's more like saying that a frat boy who stands by and watches his brothers gang-rape a passed out drunk girl is at fault because he could have done something and didn't. Only this particular frat boy is Superman.


:D

You call that a weapon? Prairie dogs are sociable, but they're hardly the terror of the plains.


Praire Dogs don't have governments that wage war on each other. Nowhere near as socially advanced as we are :rolleyes:

OK, there is only good and evil, right? Differing extremes of each, but no word for "in betweens". If there was only ice-cream and urry, and you only had curry.. you wouldn't think it was particularly hot.

Interesting parallel... you are saying we would 'get used' to good...?

And?

How is that bad? So - we develop a pallette for 'good'... I see no downside.

We certainly don't NEED the ice-cream to appreciate the curry, do we?

What more?

Well.... the 'absence of evil' gets rid of a lot of problems, but it doesn't house the homeless or feed the hungry.

Claws are an offshoot of evolving paws. Poison fangs are an offshoot of evolving jaws.

The problem is - you are so tightly wound into your 'god made us in his image' (or whatever) focus, that you can't see something that should be plainly obvious.

We don't have claws, or big teeth... because we are the RABBIT, not the WOLF.

It's why we are social creatures. It's why our ancestors were tree-dwellers. We are prey, not predator.

But claws and poison fangs are SPECIFICALLY weapons. they have no other purpose. fists are a necessity of having fingers. And we're too big for the "rabbit" ananlogy. No other creature our size (other than those domesticated ones) is lacking in natural weaponary.

Interesting parallel... you are saying we would 'get used' to good...?

And?

How is that bad? So - we develop a pallette for 'good'... I see no downside.

We certainly don't NEED the ice-cream to appreciate the curry, do we?

To appreciate it's flavour and heat, yes we would. You live in a mansion all your life, you take it for granted.

Well.... the 'absence of evil' gets rid of a lot of problems, but it doesn't house the homeless or feed the hungry.


Suffering constitutes evil in my book.

You call that a weapon? Prairie dogs are sociable, but they're hardly the terror of the plains.

Prairie dogs are irrelevent - they took a different path.

We are sociable, and we protect each other.

Mountain Lion versus one person... mountain lion gets person for lunch.

Mountain Lion versus 100 people... mountain lion IS lunch.

Apart from that I follow logic strictly, thus: without proof of Him, I cannot believe there is a 'Him'.

Obviosly the argument to that is "so maybe 50 years ago there were no atoms?" and then I say "give me solid proof of God and I'll believe in Him".

Having said that, I somewhat have a kinda debt to God, if that can exist, he did be a favour (whether it was coincidence or not I don't know) and so well, I try to be good... but not a good Christien. Hmmm, that's a bit confusing on reflexation, what I mean is I'm good INCASE he does exist.

However, I have nothing against people being Christian, unless there litralists or use religion as an excuse for there own bigotry and unjustifiable "morals". Christians are great!! :D 'cause there not Christian's... there people!! :p

But claws and poison fangs are SPECIFICALLY weapons. they have no other purpose. fists are a necessity of having fingers. And we're too big for the "rabbit" ananlogy. No other creature our size (other than those domesticated ones) is lacking in natural weaponary.
There are creatures significantly larger than us that lack the kind of weaponry you describe. Numerous species of fish come to mind. Many large herbivores have no "weapon" other than their size. And, of course, countless species of ape have no weapon other than hands and teeth (just like us).

Because naturally they have the same amount of control over their way home, and their parents have the same amount of control over the future, as God has over the entire bloody universe.:rolleyes:

God deliberately introduced evil. It wouldn't exist had he not done it. He was the only one who had control over it. And that makes him a prick.

But god keeps out of it. Yes, he chooses to have the same amount of control as the way home, and parents - perhaps even less. so go roll some eyes back at yourself Mr. Commie "I Blame The Birth Of The Universe For My Jobless History" Catholics.

But claws and poison fangs are SPECIFICALLY weapons. they have no other purpose. fists are a necessity of having fingers. And we're too big for the "rabbit" ananlogy. No other creature our size (other than those domesticated ones) is lacking in natural weaponary.

You talk rubbish.

What natural weapons does an orangutan have? Or a gorilla?

Panthers? Tree swinging panthers? I think not.
Panthers are tree-dwellers.

Suffering constitutes evil in my book.
But let's make the distinction about what we're talking about:

Even if God eliminated all the conscious wickedness that human beings deliberately inflict upon one another, there would still be bad things happening in the world. People would still experience suffering due to accidents and misfortune, even if we were all perfect angels in our behavior. I don't think it's right to say that it is "evil" when a child falls off her bike and breaks her arm, even though she certainly does suffer from the experience.

To appreciate it's flavour and heat, yes we would. You live in a mansion all your life, you take it for granted.


Same line of reasoning was used by Thomas Aquinus.

But God would be acting imorrally by introducing evil. It would reach a good end, but so would euthanasia, abortion, etc. And for those issues it is often said that "the ends don't justify the means". So by God introducing evil, god becomes a sinner and evil. Not allowed. So God wont introduce evil for any reason.

Prairie dogs are irrelevent - they took a different path.

We are sociable, and we protect each other.

Mountain Lion versus one person... mountain lion gets person for lunch.

Mountain Lion versus 100 people... mountain lion IS lunch.

Not if they only had fists. The lion would just run straight through them. And prairie dog's aren't irrelevant, they just show how sociability in itslef is not a weapon. It's just a benefit but no way could it be classed as "a weapon".

To appreciate it's flavour and heat, yes we would. You live in a mansion all your life, you take it for granted.

'Take for granted' is not the same as 'do not appreciate'.

I see a sunrise every morning - I don't 'appreciate' it any less for there never being any mornings where the sun DOESN'T rise.

Suffering constitutes evil in my book.

I'd agree... but our god being superman, is fighting active evils... which would leave the 'passive evil' to us.

Or - if he wants to clean that up, too... writing poetry for children would be 'good', and doesn't require an 'evil' counterbalance.

But god keeps out of it. Yes, he chooses to have the same amount of control as the way home, and parents - perhaps even less. so go roll some eyes back at yourself Mr. Commie "I Blame The Birth Of The Universe For My Jobless History" Catholics.


You seem to be missing the point. I have no problem with evil in the world. I have a problem with God punishing evil doesr when it is Gods fault that the evil is happening.

There are creatures significantly larger than us that lack the kind of weaponry you describe. Numerous species of fish come to mind. Many large herbivores have no "weapon" other than their size. And, of course, countless species of ape have no weapon other than hands and teeth (just like us).

Haha, like what - and no cows or horses, they were domesticated by us. Your know what wild pigs look like? Wouldn't want to mess with those tusks. Don't forget, we barely even class as herbivores. We were never designed do grave. Gorillas have massive strength, and a chimp is, pound-for-pound stronger than a human. and they have sharp fangs.

Indeed, but how do we know God, when all his teachings come from man? I could never understand that.

Or rather, how can we do his bidding?

Not if they only had fists. The lion would just run straight through them.

I think you are wrong.

By which, of course, I mean even MORE wrong than you have been on every other point.

Panthers are tree-dwellers.


Well thank you for your input, but I fail to see the point. Panthers can't grab onto a branch and swing from tree to tree. So the monkey ancester won't need a defence mechanism for panthers because it can just avoid them by swinging to a different tree.

You seem to be missing the point. I have no problem with evil in the world. I have a problem with God punishing evil doesr when it is Gods fault that the evil is happening.

But it's not Gods fault... just cause he made the world doesn't mean every little thin that appens is specificlly his fault. Why not blame your great-great-grandfather for your boyfriend dumping you?

Gorillas have massive strength, and a chimp is, pound-for-pound stronger than a human. and they have sharp fangs.

We also have sharp fangs...

And 'strength' is... what dd you call it... an 'offshoot' of their evolved form, rather than a weapon?

OK, there is only good and evil, right? Differing extremes of each, but no word for "in betweens". If there was only ice-cream and urry, and you only had curry.. you wouldn't think it was particularly hot.
Interesting parallel... you are saying we would 'get used' to good...?

And?

How is that bad? So - we develop a pallette for 'good'... I see no downside.

We certainly don't NEED the ice-cream to appreciate the curry, do we?
He is saying that the quality of 'hot' in the icecream is what is contrasted by the two flavours, not the flavour itself. He is pointing at the immaterial, the non-literal.

But it's not Gods fault... just cause he made the world doesn't mean every little thin that appens is specificlly his fault. Why not blame your great-great-grandfather for your boyfriend dumping you?
Then why did God create us when the largest proportion of our lives is pain?

But it's not Gods fault... just cause he made the world doesn't mean every little thin that appens is specificlly his fault. Why not blame your great-great-grandfather for your boyfriend dumping you?

Because my great-great-grandfather isn't supposed to be omnipotent?

Because there aren't huge groups of people running around intruding in my life because they think my great-great-grandfather made the world?

I think you are wrong.

By which, of course, I mean even MORE wrong than you have been on every other point.

Who would win, 100 cavemen or a mountain lion? Sound a bit like Spiderman v Batman. I say on this totally off topic point, we agree to disagree. Deal?

Well.... the 'absence of evil' gets rid of a lot of problems, but it doesn't house the homeless or feed the hungry.
Is it 'evil' that there are homeless, that there are hungry?

Why do we need to house them if it's not?

But it's not Gods fault... just cause he made the world doesn't mean every little thin that appens is specificlly his fault. Why not blame your great-great-grandfather for your boyfriend dumping you?


I happen to be a straight male, FYI.

It is his fault if he DELIBERATELY made evil in the world. I have no control over evil. He does and he DELIBERATELY allows evel to happen to me. He may not be pulling the trigger but he is loading the gun.

He is saying that the quality of 'hot' in the icecream is what is contrasted by the two flavours, not the flavour itself. He is pointing at the immaterial, the non-literal.

But, even so... you can get used to the 'heat' of a curry, but still 'appreciate' it... without NEEDING the 'different heat' of the ice-cream.

We also have sharp fangs...

And 'strength' is... what dd you call it... an 'offshoot' of their evolved form, rather than a weapon?

Sharp fangs? No we don't. Not like a chimp's. And they evolved to be strong as a weapon. What other use would being strong have to a chimp? We didn't evolve strength. We evolved brainpower instead. Not really a weapon, but a definite improvement.

Who would win, 100 cavemen or a mountain lion? Sound a bit like Spiderman v Batman. I say on this totally off topic point, we agree to disagree. Deal?

100 cavemen. No contest.

Haven't you ever seen apes chasing off 'big cats'? It doesn't take anything LIKE 100.

Agree to disagree? No. You are totally, TOTALLY, wrong.

Is it 'evil' that there are homeless, that there are hungry?

Why do we need to house them if it's not?

Because those would be 'good' things we could do, even if 'god' was mopping up the 'evil doers'.

I happen to be a straight male, FYI.

It is his fault if he DELIBERATELY made evil in the world. I have no control over evil. He does and he DELIBERATELY allows evel to happen to me. He may not be pulling the trigger but he is loading the gun.

How about the person who actually fires te gun? Don't you think he's a bit more responsibe? The the "boyfriend" comment was just an example, not necessarilliy relating to you. And maybe god created evil, but that doesn't mean we have to follow it through. People don't have to pull that trigger, to use your clumsy analogy.

Sharp fangs? No we don't. Not like a chimp's. And they evolved to be strong as a weapon. What other use would being strong have to a chimp? We didn't evolve strength. We evolved brainpower instead. Not really a weapon, but a definite improvement.

And 'strength' is a definite improvement, not really a weapon.

Backed into a corner. Stop flailing, you'll just hurt yourself.

Well, I should be leaving. I'll get maybe an hours sleep before the Brazil game. Then I have to do an Economic assignment due today.:(

100 cavemen. No contest.

Haven't you ever seen apes chasing off 'big cats'? It doesn't take anything LIKE 100.

Agree to disagree? No. You are totally, TOTALLY, wrong.

Yeah, but they don't kill it, do they? It just escapes. And the same would happen to our poor cavemen. No lunch for them. Maybe if they had been born with the claws of a bear they could have ambushed it and tore it to shreds.

How about the person who actually fires te gun? Don't you think he's a bit more responsibe? The the "boyfriend" comment was just an example, not necessarilliy relating to you. And maybe god created evil, but that doesn't mean we have to follow it through. People don't have to pull that trigger, to use your clumsy analogy.


The person loading the gun had the power to stop it. They're just as responsible as the person pulling the trigger. It's equally immoral. But a direct affect of the evil is people hating God. God doesn't want that to happen. God wants us to love him.

But, even so... you can get used to the 'heat' of a curry, but still 'appreciate' it... without NEEDING the 'different heat' of the ice-cream.

Maybe, but only because hot food is entirely empirical... taste buds, anyone? Good/evil, on the other hand, which is (you guessed it) completely subjective...

Yeah, but they don't kill it, do they? It just escapes. And the same would happen to our poor cavemen. No lunch for them. Maybe if they had been born with the claws of a bear they could have ambushed it and tore it to shreds.

Have you ever been to the real world?

I've seen apes kill big cats. The big cat would be best served by trying to get away... and our little humans might let it.. or they might be having mountain lion fricassee.

The person loading the gun had the power to stop it. They're just as responsible as the person pulling the trigger. It's equally immoral. But a direct affect of the evil is people hating God. God doesn't want that to happen. God wants us to love him.

No way. I've loaded the gun by having a penknife in my drawer. But i'm not going to "fire" it by jamming it in someone's eyeball. The means and the action are no-where near equally as immoral.

Have you ever been to the real world?

I've seen apes kill big cats. The big cat would be best served by trying to get away... and our little humans might let it.. or they might be having mountain lion fricassee.

Oh, are they going to chase it are they? With those not-yet-domesticated wild dogs? Or maybe throw there not-yet-invented spears? Apes may stand a chance, due to previously-mentioned SHARP FANGS and GREAT STRENGTH.

Maybe, but only because hot food is entirely empirical... taste buds, anyone? Good/evil, on the other hand, which is (you guessed it) completely subjective...

In which case - your argument about us 'needing the evil' to 'appreciate the good' is ALSO, entirely subjective... If it IS subjective - then the LESSER evil of 'bad poetry', would be enough to 'appreciate' the 'good' of a violent-crime-free world.

Perhaps you don't WANT it to make sense?

God 'offers' us help, but he can ONLY 'help' us IF we let him?

He offers help but it is up to us if we want to accept it or not. If we do not accept his help then we are responsible for the consequences of said action.

No way. I've loaded the gun by having a penknife in my drawer. But i'm not going to "fire" it by jamming it in someone's eyeball. The means and the action are no-where near equally as immoral.

But you're not omnipotent and omniscient, are you?

People don't reject the help. People want the help. Some people though just don't have the capacity to obtain the help. If God really wanted us to be in heaven with him he would have made it easy for ALL people to achieve salvation, not just the ones that are willing to throw common sense out the window.

It is easy to achieve salvation. We have stated how to achieve salvation. Belief in his Son Jesus Christ.

It is easy to achieve salvation. We have stated how to achieve salvation. Belief in his Son Jesus Christ.
Yeah, but that guy over there says that salvation is acheived by combatting Xenu. How do I know he's wrong, and you're right?

In which case - your argument about us 'needing the evil' to 'appreciate the good' is ALSO, entirely subjective... If it IS subjective - then the LESSER evil of 'bad poetry', would be enough to 'appreciate' the 'good' of a violent-crime-free world.

What I mean is we would have no conception of good without the capacity for evil. And yes, they are subjective - as is wealth (Man living in mansion who doesn't know how lucky he is), status etc - yet we all know what wealth and status are, don't we? But without the ontext of an OPPOSITE, these words would mean nothing.

But you're not omnipotent and omniscient, are you?

Who says god is working to the best of his abilities?

Correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm not, but neither your mother or your mother-in-law are GOD. They didn't create you or the rules which you live by. Slightly different situation. God's rules still don't make sense.

Not necessarily true. Obviously Dem's mother help make him and then laid down rules for Dem to follow while growing up.

Holy fuck, half this forum has “faith” in a poorly developed fictional character? I thought the people on this thread were more enlightened than that. I mean, what the fuck? This place really is going to the conservatives. Corn used to be the only one of you misguided nimrods who posted on here regularly, but now I count at least six. Not to mention all the lurkers that this pool obviously proves exists.

Oh, are they going to chase it are they? With those not-yet-domesticated wild dogs? Or maybe throw there not-yet-invented spears? Apes may stand a chance, due to previously-mentioned SHARP FANGS and GREAT STRENGTH.

It's your scenario... argue it how you like.

I have seen apes kill big cats. I didn't see much biting, but I did see a lot of pounding... and we can do that.

Why are we talking about chasing? Like I say - you engineer the scenario to suit you, I think. I don't know that humans would actively go AFTER a big cat, unless they were really hungry.. other prey would be easier. But - if they were confronted by the pointy-toothed devil, and were close enough that it was a risk... it seems likely they'd also be close enough to be a risk, themselves, if they had the advantage of superior numbers.

Another thought just occurred to me. I once saw a man stun a cow with a bare-hand blow to the base of it's skull.

It doesn't HAVE to be 'GREAT STRENGTH'... it just has to be applied correctly.

What I mean is we would have no conception of good without the capacity for evil.
A very good friend of mine was hit by a car during our senior year in high school, and was completely paralyzed. He retains the movement of his eyeballs and some of his mouth muscles, but that's about it. He is not physically capable of raping, robbing, beating, or otherwise physically committing an act of direct evil. Does this mean he is less able to understand why those actions are wrong? Does his inability to commit an evil act make him incapable of understanding why it might be evil?

What about somebody paralyzed from birth, who has NEVER been capable of such acts? Are they less capable of understanding evil?

You keep ignoring my kick-ass example of ripping out a spine with one's mind. You can't do that, yet you can (hopefully) grasp why it would be wrong to do it. You LACK THE CAPACITY for that evil, yet you quite clearly still have a concept of good versus evil regarding the ripping out of a person's spine.

Yes but theres no way of knowing God is omnipotent if he doesnt show it.

He has shown it in the past. It is documented in the torah and the bible.

He offers help but it is up to us if we want to accept it or not. If we do not accept his help then we are responsible for the consequences of said action.

No - it isn't up to us... no matter how many times you say it.

I can't CHOOSE to believe.

Who says god is working to the best of his abilities?
Anybody who states God is all-good. Like, you know, the Christians.

I'm going to have to watch Corneliu... I'm supposed to be the heretic around here... ;)

What the heck is this supposed to mean?

What I mean is we would have no conception of good without the capacity for evil. And yes, they are subjective - as is wealth (Man living in mansion who doesn't know how lucky he is), status etc - yet we all know what wealth and status are, don't we? But without the ontext of an OPPOSITE, these words would mean nothing.

A man living in a mansion is still glad he's not outside when it rains.

You claim that these things NEED opposites to make them tangible to us, but they really don't.

I don't get this. God owes you nothing. He doesn't have to do anything for you.

That's a true statement. He doesn't but he does because he loves us.

He still is. He just choses to allow himself to be constrained.

First smart thing you have said.

He has shown it in the past. It is documented in the torah and the bible.

Neither SHOWS him as omnipotent... they just SAY he is.

And, other holy books, are equally glowing about other 'gods'.

I am an atheist.

He might as well not. Again, that's the whole point. You're just a little part of one big machine. No'one knows where anything is heading.

Actually we do. It is heading towards the end of the world when our Lord reappears in the heavens.

A man living in a mansion is still glad he's not outside when it rains.

You claim that these things NEED opposites to make them tangible to us, but they really don't.
A frightening thought occurs: maybe, for some people, that's exactly how it works. Maybe they can only understand good if there is a diametrically-opposed evil with which to contrast it.

*Shudder*

I thought I'd post this again - see if it gets an answer this time from the believers.....

What about siblings?

If Jesus did exist (and there is evidence from the Roman history of the region that he, as a human being, did) then are we to really believe that Mary and Joseph never consummated their relationship, and had a thirty year marriage with Mary remaining a virgin?

The odds are pretty low that after the birth of Jesus the two of them did not have further issue. It also follows that these bothers and sisters of the man called Jesus would most likely have descendants.

Consider this proposition:

In the Kingdom of Heaven, God created his Angels. Creatures without free will.

Chief among his Angels, at God's right hand, was the angel named Lucifer Morningstar, The Light Of The Morning, The Light-Bearer. (Lucifer is from the Latin lux (light; genitive lucis) and ferre (to bear, to bring) lit light bringer).

God's creation of his most favoured creatures, man, with free will caused jealousy among the Angels. Led by Lucifer, the Angels revolted against God in Heaven. A battle occured and ultimately, Lucifer and his followers were cast-down to hell.

Right - now the questions.

1a. If God created the Angels without free-will:
1b. If God is omnicognisent and omnipresent:
how did the Angels manage to a. plot to revolt against God and b. plot to revolt against God without his knowing especially in his backyard - Heaven?

2. If God is omnipotent why did it take a battle in the Kingdom of Heaven for him to cast down Lucifer and his cronies?

Actually we do. It is heading towards the end of the world when our Lord reappears in the heavens.

Or... like, alternatively... not.

He owes you NOTHING. He (indirectly or not) created you, so who are you to demand things? What did you ever do for God? It's all up to you, don't believe or not, I don't care, it's entirely your choice.

Well said Massmurder.

Another thought just occurred to me. I once saw a man stun a cow with a bare-hand blow to the base of it's skull.

It doesn't HAVE to be 'GREAT STRENGTH'... it just has to be applied correctly.

The only relevant point here, which I will address:

A wild mountain lion is unlikely to stand still absently chewing a lump of grass while 100 cavemen deduce where exactly to hit it to knock it out cold. Unarmed men have no chance against a lion, no matter how many there are. It's just too fast and strong. That's why spears were invented. Now can we please get back on topic?

Actually we do. It is heading towards the end of the world when our Lord reappears in the heavens.


They really need an animated smiley face where the finger is going in a circle around the ear for this kind of inane nonsense.

A frightening thought occurs: maybe, for some people, that's exactly how it works. Maybe they can only understand good if there is a diametrically-opposed evil with which to contrast it.

*Shudder*

I guess THAT would explain why some people seem to NEED 'religion'... a way to measure where they belong in the world.

I find THAT idea pretty scary... and I'd have to hope such people really ARE the minority of religious people. Given the conversations I've had with Dem, Jocabia, etc... I think it MUST be.

A frightening thought occurs: maybe, for some people, that's exactly how it works. Maybe they can only understand good if there is a diametrically-opposed evil with which to contrast it.

*Shudder*

If you spent your whole life in a paradise of happiness and civil community, you don't think you'd be a little shocked when you experience the outside world? You don't think you'd count your blessings? You would certainly realise how good you'd had it so far.

I'm not going to agree or disagree with this, because the point of the thread isn't to force people to follow your beliefs.

I'm not Christian, and I never will be, but that doesn't mean I'm going to sit here and tear down their beliefs with that kind of hostility either. There are versions of the Bible taken directly from the latin texts that are as accurate as the Bible _can_ be.

The Bible as a historical reference is actually rather useful and can be accurate on many non-religious things. So it is more than just fantasy. However, the religious background throughout the Bible, is better left to Christians.

You have earned my respect Sensible.

You avoid eveything people ask you.

I won't even try to ask you what your favorite color is. You'd probably quote the bible.

Green.

Most irritating person i've ever met.

Since you never met me how can I be the most irritating person you have met?

Is God omnipotent? All-knowing? All-good? Did God create humanity?

1) yes
2) Yes
3) Yes
4) Yes

Well thank you for your input, but I fail to see the point. Panthers can't grab onto a branch and swing from tree to tree. So the monkey ancester won't need a defence mechanism for panthers because it can just avoid them by swinging to a different tree.
No, they just step from tree to tree. The rainforest trees are so snug together that they can do that.

A very good friend of mine was hit by a car during our senior year in high school, and was completely paralyzed. He retains the movement of his eyeballs and some of his mouth muscles, but that's about it. He is not physically capable of raping, robbing, beating, or otherwise physically committing an act of direct evil. Does this mean he is less able to understand why those actions are wrong? Does his inability to commit an evil act make him incapable of understanding why it might be evil?

What about somebody paralyzed from birth, who has NEVER been capable of such acts? Are they less capable of understanding evil?

You keep ignoring my kick-ass example of ripping out a spine with one's mind. You can't do that, yet you can (hopefully) grasp why it would be wrong to do it. You LACK THE CAPACITY for that evil, yet you quite clearly still have a concept of good versus evil regarding the ripping out of a person's spine.

OK, re: ripping out someone's spine with mind powers:

You may lack the capacity but you're limited by physical impossibilty in this way. It's a bit different from contemplating rape or whatever. Which is perfectly possible. "Lacking the capacity" in a real sense would mean literally having no ability to imagine such a scenario. Being physically unable to commit any evil whatsoever - but still to imagine them - would just probably drive everybody clinically insane.

But you're constraining Gods abilities within the realms of logic. God is omnipotent. He may exist and not exist at the same time. He can make 2 + 2 = fish, he can make a world in which there is free will but at the same time no evil.

He did create the world without evil. Man screwed it up because of.....

Free Will.

1011 to 1008 in favour of "No"

Lookin' gooooooooood.

Give it a few more hours and the Yes side will be back on top.

But, even so... you can get used to the 'heat' of a curry, but still 'appreciate' it... without NEEDING the 'different heat' of the ice-cream.
Not if you tasted only 'heat' all your life (remember, the condition was there is only curry and ice cream).

If you spent your whole life in a paradise of happiness and civil community, you don't think you'd be a little shocked when you experience the outside world? You don't think you'd count your blessings? You would certainly realise how good you'd had it so far.
What does that have to do with our discussion?

To be frank, I pretty much DID grow up in a near-paradise. It wasn't perfect, but my parents are some of the greatest human ever to walk the Earth, and they gave me a childhood that I'd say probably ranks among the best anybody could possibly ask for.

Of course I counted myself lucky, and I still do. I definitely appreciate how much better I had it than other people do. But that doesn't mean I didn't understand evil until I saw it. I understood that rape is horrible and wrong, even before I met a rape victim or talked to a rapist. I knew that it is wrong to hurt other people, even before I encountered people who went out of their way to harm me. I have never stolen a car, nor have I had my car stolen, yet I understand that stealing cars is wrong.

Hell, let's just use a very simple example: I knew I didn't like going without food long before I understood the word "starving." I knew that starving was bad long before I knew there were people in the world who starve.

writing poetry for children would be 'good', and doesn't require an 'evil' counterbalance.
Writing poetry for children is only 'good' because some children lack the benefit of this marvelous thing.

Because those would be 'good' things we could do, even if 'god' was mopping up the 'evil doers'.
But it is only 'good' to feed the hungry or house the homeless because they lack these marvelous things.

OK, re: ripping out someone's spine with mind powers:

You may lack the capacity but you're limited by physical impossibilty in this way. It's a bit different from contemplating rape or whatever. Which is perfectly possible. "Lacking the capacity" in a real sense would mean literally having no ability to imagine such a scenario. Being physically unable to commit any evil whatsoever - but still to imagine them - would just probably drive everybody clinically insane.
My paralyzed buddy is quite capable of imagining stabbing somebody, as much as you or I are capable of doing so. He just doesn't have the capacity to act on his thoughts, the way you or I might have. So, does my friend lack free will, or not?

If my friend retains his free will despite being incapable of stabbing somebody, then it is possible to have a human being who cannot stab anybody but who still has free will. Therefore, God could make humans incapable of stabbing each other without removing free will.

Maybe, but only because hot food is entirely empirical... taste buds, anyone? Good/evil, on the other hand, which is (you guessed it) completely subjective...
Well, now you just shot your own argument in the foot...

What does that have to do with our discussion?

To be frank, I pretty much DID grow up in a near-paradise. It wasn't perfect, but my parents are some of the greatest human ever to walk the Earth, and they gave me a childhood that I'd say probably ranks among the best anybody could possibly ask for.

Of course I counted myself lucky, and I still do. I definitely appreciate how much better I had it than other people do. But that doesn't mean I didn't understand evil until I saw it. I understood that rape is horrible and wrong, even before I met a rape victim or talked to a rapist. I knew that it is wrong to hurt other people, even before I encountered people who went out of their way to harm me. I have never stolen a car, nor have I had my car stolen, yet I understand that stealing cars is wrong.

Hell, let's just use a very simple example: I knew I didn't like going without food long before I understood the word "starving." I knew that starving was bad long before I knew there were people in the world who starve.

Yeah, but you knew what rape WAS. You knew what it was to go without food. You knew what stealing was. I'm talking about if you had literally NO conept of any evil WHATSOEVER you wouldn't appreciategoodness nearly as much as if you did. It's just desensitisation, basically. You need a reference point.

Well, I should be leaving. I'll get maybe an hours sleep before the Brazil game. Then I have to do an Economic assignment due today.:(

Tsk tsk. Arguing on the computer and not doing school work. tsk tsk.

Priorities man. School before arguing on the computer.

Yeah, but that guy over there says that salvation is acheived by combatting Xenu. How do I know he's wrong, and you're right?

Because I have the Word of the Savior himself.

Holy fuck, half this forum has “faith” in a poorly developed fictional character? I thought the people on this thread were more enlightened than that. I mean, what the fuck? This place really is going to the conservatives. Corn used to be the only one of you misguided nimrods who posted on here regularly, but now I count at least six. Not to mention all the lurkers that this pool obviously proves exists.

It really isn't polite to call names.

The only relevant point here, which I will address:

A wild mountain lion is unlikely to stand still absently chewing a lump of grass while 100 cavemen deduce where exactly to hit it to knock it out cold. Unarmed men have no chance against a lion, no matter how many there are. It's just too fast and strong. That's why spears were invented. Now can we please get back on topic?

It wasn't the "only relevent point"... you just choose to drop argument after argument when they go against you.

But, that's cool with me. If your arguments are THAT weak, I don't need to waste my time destroying them.


Just have to ask you a question... are you actually a Christian? Have you read the scripture?

No - it isn't up to us... no matter how many times you say it.

I can't CHOOSE to believe.

Yes you CAN CHOOSE to believe.

My paralyzed buddy is quite capable of imagining stabbing somebody, as much as you or I are capable of doing so. He just doesn't have the capacity to act on his thoughts, the way you or I might have. So, does my friend lack free will, or not?

If my friend retains his free will despite being incapable of stabbing somebody, then it is possible to have a human being who cannot stab anybody but who still has free will. Therefore, God could make humans incapable of stabbing each other without removing free will.

But if we couldn't stab eachother, but could imagine it, even desire it... Well... then we wouldn't have the free will to stab someone.

Holy fuck, half this forum has “faith” in a poorly developed fictional character? I thought the people on this thread were more enlightened than that. I mean, what the fuck? This place really is going to the conservatives. Corn used to be the only one of you misguided nimrods who posted on here regularly, but now I count at least six. Not to mention all the lurkers that this pool obviously proves exists.
I resent that insult!

...I'm no conservative.

:D

If you spent your whole life in a paradise of happiness and civil community, you don't think you'd be a little shocked when you experience the outside world? You don't think you'd count your blessings? You would certainly realise how good you'd had it so far.

Which doesn't mean you would not have appreciated while you were still in there...

I thought I'd post this again - see if it gets an answer this time from the believers.....

What about siblings?

I answered this part. He did have siblings.

1a. If God created the Angels without free-will:
1b. If God is omnicognisent and omnipresent:
how did the Angels manage to a. plot to revolt against God and b. plot to revolt against God without his knowing especially in his backyard - Heaven?

Prove that it happened without God knowing about it?

He did create the world without evil. Man screwed it up because of.....

Free Will.

Really? I think you are wrong...

There was a magic tree in that garden, right?

Well - two actually...

What were they?

It wasn't the "only relevent point"... you just choose to drop argument after argument when they go against you.

But, that's cool with me. If your arguments are THAT weak, I don't need to waste my time destroying them.


Just have to ask you a question... are you actually a Christian? Have you read the scripture?

Way to acuse me of dropping arguments.. and then don't even address the argument I just made in the post you quoted. Thanks for that.

And no, I'm not really a christian. I've read the odd bit, but can't quote it or anything. And I fail to see what that has to do with anything. This is "Do You Believe In God?" Does it have to be te christian god?

Or... like, alternatively... not.

Then have fun with the consequences. God does love us and it saddens Him that you have rejected his love.

Not if you tasted only 'heat' all your life (remember, the condition was there is only curry and ice cream).

You would become familiar with it... it would seem to be less spicy, I'm not sure how that equates allegorically.

But the times were you were eating curry, just contrasted to the times when you were eating nothing, would be a reference point for the 'heat' of the curry.

Which doesn't mean you would not have appreciated while you were still in there...

Yes it does, it means you have no context with which to judge it. How can you say, "Phew, I'm glad there's no burglary here!" if you didn't know what burgalry even was?

Writing poetry for children is only 'good' because some children lack the benefit of this marvelous thing.

But it is only 'good' to feed the hungry or house the homeless because they lack these marvelous things.

Yes?

That would still be doing 'good', without the actual requirement for an 'evil' to be done as a contrast.

Really? I think you are wrong...

There was a magic tree in that garden, right?

Well - two actually...

What were they?

Tree of LIFE and the Tree of Knowledge.

Instructed not to eat from the tree of knowledge and eve did it anyway.

Because I have the Word of the Savior himself.

No - you read about it.

Yes you CAN CHOOSE to believe.

No. You can't.

Any more than you could 'choose' to disbelieve.

One believes, or one doesn't. You don't get to choose.

You would become familiar with it... it would seem to be less spicy, I'm not sure how that equates allegorically.

But the times were you were eating curry, just contrasted to the times when you were eating nothing, would be a reference point for the 'heat' of the curry.

OK, i think the curry analogy just fell apart. There is either good or evil. No lack of either. Even if you're just sat about, that's good because you're not hurting anyone. Or maybe you're evil because you're skiving work. Sometimes they overlap. It's like you only know and appreciate being happy if you know what it is to be sad.

Way to acuse me of dropping arguments.. and then don't even address the argument I just made in the post you quoted. Thanks for that.

And no, I'm not really a christian. I've read the odd bit, but can't quote it or anything. And I fail to see what that has to do with anything. This is "Do You Believe In God?" Does it have to be te christian god?

You just seemed to be arguing the Christian side.

I have read about unarmed people killing big cats... a Tsavo African (called Mahini, I think), who strangled a lion to death... and was later eaten by lions, being one example.

The reason I asked about the Christian scripture thing... is that the book of Judges actually describes an unarmed human killing a lion...