Is god willing to prevent evil but not able to?

contango

...and you shall live...
Jul 9, 2010
3,853
1,324
Sometimes here, sometimes there
✟16,996.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
*passing torch off to evan if he so chooses*

Power knocked out via storm for almost 4 days. Lost urge to debate meaninglessly. Have fun! Your god ruined lots of food for 5000 people :'(. Wasteful.

So the God you don't believe in gets none of the credit for good stuff but all the blame for bad stuff?

If nothing else it's an interesting way of arguing a point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pilgrimgal
Upvote 0

EvanWilliams

Newbie
Aug 3, 2010
67
2
34
✟7,707.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
So the God you don't believe in gets none of the credit for good stuff but all the blame for bad stuff?

If nothing else it's an interesting way of arguing a point.

You Christians take the opposite stance; you credit all good things to God and all bad things are humanity's fault. Even if that is what DwarfJuggler is arguing, the Christian stance is no better.


 
Upvote 0

EvanWilliams

Newbie
Aug 3, 2010
67
2
34
✟7,707.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
R: I didn't say that at all. "Theology" is a word you won't find in the Bible. Nix the squad of theologians and start over, with the open heart you profess. The Pharisees of religiosity are the exact opposite of an open heart, and a little leaven leavens the whole lump. You probably won't be able to read a word of it for years. Maybe take up skiing this winter? The worship environment blows away stained glass windows ...

Okay... Where is your evidence that your way of reading and understanding the Bible is correct?

Children do not AT ALL lack critical thinking skills nor the ability to make rational inquiries!

If we define children as pre-pubescent humans, yes they do. Why else do you think children are so apt to believe in things like Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny?

Or do you wish to throw out everything we know of developmental psychology?


Definition of Faith, to someone who claims to know Scripture as you, is Hebrews 11:1. but just because you can read the words don't think you grasp their weight - -

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Very well then. Let us accept for the sake of argument that Hebrews 11:1 is the Biblical definition of faith.

"The evidence of things not seen"

Even so, faith is not evidence of anything. Rather, faith is belief in the absence of evidence, or at least as the word "faith" applies in the common vernacular, which is really the only definition that matters in a debate between two opposing worldviews. The Biblical definition of faith is entirely irrelevant to the argument I was making against knowledge and faith as defined in the common vernacular coexisting.


That blows much of your argument out of the water,

Erm... no... sorry, bare assertions and circular arguments using the Bible do absolutely nothing to prove me wrong.

and your obvious need for repentance would take care of the rest. No assumptions necessary Evan!

Again, you engage in question-begging by assuming that I need to repent for anything in your argument in spite of being called out on it before. In case you didn't know, assuming the conclusion in the premise of your argument is a logical fallacy.


Well, at this point I'm beginning to suspect that you pretty much epic fail at debate; all you're really doing is taking your interpretation of the Bible and superimposing it on this charade of a debate as absolutely 100% accurate without any supporting evidence. You consistently fail to address any of the actual points I made and simply assert that I am wrong and lack understanding, all without the slightest shred of support. I can only thus conclude that this discussion is an utter waste of time; you will not be convinced by logic and reason, and I will not be convinced by a circular and question-begging argument using a book I do not believe in to start with. Good day to you.

Peace,
-Evan Williams
 
Upvote 0

EvanWilliams

Newbie
Aug 3, 2010
67
2
34
✟7,707.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Bling, as you requested, here is my response to your post. Also, in the future, would you be so kind as to indent your paragraphs? Your post was a little hard to read.



First: Death is the way good people get to go home and the way bad people stop doing bad stuff.

Problem with that line of reasoning is that there a constant influx of new bad people to do new bad things.

God has power and is Love, but God quenches His own desires to provide the best opportunity for those that are just willing to fulfill their objective.

What are God's desires? You have no way of knowing what the desires of God are. Therefore, you also have no way of knowing how God chooses to act on those desires.

The objective is not to be sinless (we all sin so it is good that is not our objective). The objective is not to make this world heaven on earth, because it will never be that.

Wait what? You just said that the objective is not to be sinless... now you are saying it is not our objective... ???

Are you trying to say that is God's objective for us? If so, then allow me to point out a few problems.

So I think you're saying that God wants us to be sinless. However, he created us the way he did knowing full well beforehand that we would be sinful creatures. Therefore, God has set up a system with an impossible standard that would in any other situation be marked as patently unfair and sadistic. If that is God's "plan", he doesn't sound like something I particularly want to worship even if he does exist.

The objective is not to be “happy” this world is painfully tragic, but we can have joy in allowing God to work through us and share in His glory.

Why is it tragic? Why does it have to be that way? Refute my claim that your religion is founded upon a psychological defence mechanism to deal with the world being a tragic place.

I'm sorry, but I have to say that your view of life and the pursuit of happiness is profoundly disturbing o_O

God is not trying to get something, but is just trying to give us the most powerful force in all universes, a power that even controls God (Godly type Love). This is no ordinary love, but a compelling, thought-out, decision type of Love.

Perhaps I'm splitting hairs here, but if something controls God, doesn't that rule out his omnipotence?

Love by its very nature is not thought out or a decision. You do not "choose" to love somebody. You simply do.


Free will is not the gift or the great price, but just a little free will to make a very simple choice will enables us to obtain this huge power. So we do not have free will to do anything, but enough free will to mentally make the moral choice to accept God’s Love or reject His Love.

It's not exactly free will when making the wrong choice results in eternal torture. Ugh, this free will argument has been debunked so many times; why do you creationists persist in using it? That and as I explained before, God's omniscience precludes the possibility of free will. They are two fundamentally incompatible ideas.

You ask and everyone else has asked at different times and in different ways: “why a most powerful Loving God would not put us all in a Garden of Eden type situation.” (You do not have to believe the Eden story literally). God addresses that question very early on with the Garden story.

You just said that I don't have to believe a literal interpretation of the Eden story, and now you're saying that God's explanation lies in the Garden story. Maybe you're saying the story is allegorical?

Even if the story is allegorical, God still basically set us up for failure if he knows the future. Why did he allow the snake into the garden? Why did he put the Tree of Knowledge in the garden? Why did he set things up the way he did if he has infinite foresight to know beforehand that we would become Fallen?

The Garden type situation is a lousy place for humans to fulfill their objectives, while the tragic situation we are in today is the best.

So God created a universe where the only way for life to have any real objective or meaning is for millions to have horrible lives? Wow, nice job there God.

That, and you are ignoring the Christian perspective that the Garden of Eden was God's original plan. Supposedly, humans are the ones that went against God's plan. Your argument also falls apart in that regard. What you are basically saying is that it was God's plan all along for us to become fallen creatures so that we can live in a tragic world where life somehow automatically takes on meaning. If that is true, then your God is either not very bright or a sadistic monster. (Mods, note that I am not directly slandering God's character, but pointing out the implications of Bling's argument)

Peace,
-Evan Williams
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

contango

...and you shall live...
Jul 9, 2010
3,853
1,324
Sometimes here, sometimes there
✟16,996.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You Christians take the opposite stance; you credit all good things to God and all bad things are humanity's fault. Even if that is what DwarfJuggler is arguing, the Christian stance is no better.

Does lumping millions of people into a single sweeping generalisation help discussion go anywhere? I addressed what one individual said, and your retort was to paint Christians with an unfeasibly broad brush.

It doesn't even work as well as that though - to say that God is responsible for good while we are responsible for evil makes more sense than denying that God even exists but still seeking to blame him for things. Curiously nobody blames the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Russell's Teapot for the things that befall them.
 
Upvote 0

EvanWilliams

Newbie
Aug 3, 2010
67
2
34
✟7,707.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Does lumping millions of people into a single sweeping generalisation help discussion go anywhere? I addressed what one individual said, and your retort was to paint Christians with an unfeasibly broad brush.

I see your point, but it is a well-founded generalization, not a rash baseless one.

Christians generally respond to the problem of evil by saying that we are fallen and that is why bad things happen to us. Christians also generally thank God directly for the good things that happen to them. Thus it is not so rash to say that your religion thanks God for the good and blames humanity for the bad. There are two reasons why this doesn't make much sense either:

1. You most likely believe that God is omniscient; therefore, God knew that we would be fallen and that some of us would be going to a hell that he created as he was creating us, making him more evil than anyone that has ever existed if he does exist. Even if he does exist, I've no desire to worship him. Besides, what kind of egomaniac demands to be worshipped?


2. God came up with the entire concept of evil as he was devising the workings of the universe if he does exist. Why does evil need to exist in God's eyes?

For that matter, why did God create anything? Taking action in any way whatsoever is at its base a response to a desire to correct some imperfection in the current state of affairs. You believe God to be a perfect being most likely. If he is perfect, why create? I admit this isn't a silver bullet argument for defeating the concept of God, but it is an interesting philosophical question to ponder.

Why would a perfect being need to create anything?

It doesn't even work as well as that though - to say that God is responsible for good while we are responsible for evil makes more sense than denying that God even exists but still seeking to blame him for things. Curiously nobody blames the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Russell's Teapot for the things that befall them.

Oh come on... you've got to be kidding me. You are failing to realize that DwarfJuggler and I were speaking hypothetically. We are not *actually* blaming God. What kind of dunce blames God for the bad while at the same time not believing he exists? To genuinely blame God for the bad is to be a maltheist, not an atheist. It was rhetorical. I really shouldn't have to explain that =/

Nobody blames the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Russell's Teapot because nobody holds a serious belief in them. We all know them to be rhetorical tools to point out what we perceive to be the problems in theism. The only group that seriously blames God for the bad are maltheists. Atheists point out the logical and philosophical problems in not blaming God for the bad just as much as the good if he were to exist. Again, actually believing that God is responsible for evil is a trait of maltheism, not atheism.

Peace,
-Evan Williams
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Mar 27, 2007
34,437
3,872
On the bus to Heaven
✟60,078.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I see your point, but it is a well-founded generalization, not a rash baseless one.

Christians generally respond to the problem of evil by saying that we are fallen and that is why bad things happen to us. Christians also generally thank God directly for the good things that happen to them. Thus it is not so rash to say that your religion thanks God for the good and blames humanity for the bad. There are two reasons why this doesn't make much sense either:

Yes, that is relatively accurate.

1. You most likely believe that God is omniscient; therefore, God knew that we would be fallen and that some of us would be going to a hell that he created as he was creating us, making him more evil than anyone that has ever existed if he does exist. Even if he does exist, I've no desire to worship him. Besides, what kind of egomaniac demands to be worshipped?

God is indeed omniscient. He knew before the foundation of the world all that would happen in the world, however, He had to create because that is His nature. Now, He could have created a world with no evil, but then there could not have been good since in order to be good there has to be evil by which to measure good against. The world that God created contains both. He is the vessel of good while mankind was seduced by the vessel of evil.

As far as your characterization of God, you are basing that on what moral bar exactly? Yours? Are you the moral giver by which other actions are judged by?

2. God came up with the entire concept of evil as he was devising the workings of the universe if he does exist. Why does evil need to exist in God's eyes?

I covered that above.
For that matter, why did God create anything?

Because He can.

Taking action in any way whatsoever is at its base a response to a desire to correct some imperfection in the current state of affairs. You believe God to be a perfect being most likely. If he is perfect, why create? I admit this isn't a silver bullet argument for defeating the concept of God, but it is an interesting philosophical question to ponder.

I agree with your assessment of your argument here.
Why would a perfect being need to create anything?

Because He can and did.
 
Upvote 0

EvanWilliams

Newbie
Aug 3, 2010
67
2
34
✟7,707.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
God is indeed omniscient. He knew before the foundation of the world all that would happen in the world, however, He had to create because that is His nature. Now, He could have created a world with no evil, but then there could not have been good since in order to be good there has to be evil by which to measure good against.

I call shenanigans. Take the Garden of Eden. That was God's original plan according to the Bible, an earthly paradise without evil. Take heaven as well, a place full of good, no evil.

The world that God created contains both. He is the vessel of good while mankind was seduced by the vessel of evil.

Okay, but he apparently knew beforehand that we would be seduced by the vessel of evil (I'm guessing you are referring to Satan). Why would he create Satan, or rather even let him in the Garden, knowing what would happen beforehand? You see, my problem with what you're saying is that no matter how you try to qualify the problem of evil, I can simply regress back to God's foreknowledge of the way things would turn out.

I'm not God obviously, but if I was, I would have to think that it makes more sense not to bother creating things the way he did than create this universe knowing very well that the majority of mankind was going to hell.


As far as your characterization of God, you are basing that on what moral bar exactly? Yours? Are you the moral giver by which other actions are judged by?

No, but at the same time I feel can confidently say that creating a sentient being knowing beforehand that you are going to damn it to an eternal hell is pretty evil. In my eyes, it isn't much different than having a baby planning beforehand to brutally murder it in X amount of years. At least the child eventually escapes through death; God's plan involves you being eternally tortured. Think about that for a moment. He created (remember I'm speaking hypothetically here) the majority of mankind *knowing* that the vast majority of them would be damned to an *eternal* hell. That's pretty sick.

Because He can.

Are you bloody serious? That isn't a good reason to do anything.

Peace,
-Evan Williams
 
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Mar 27, 2007
34,437
3,872
On the bus to Heaven
✟60,078.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I call shenanigans. Take the Garden of Eden. That was God's original plan according to the Bible, an earthly paradise without evil. Take heaven as well, a place full of good, no evil.

You can call it what you will. Right after God finished creating He called ALL of His creation good, however, Adam disobeyed God and both sin and death entered the world. There is your evil. As far as Heaven, evil started there with satan rebellion so there was evil in heaven.
The world that God created contains both. He is the vessel of good while mankind was seduced by the vessel of evil.

Okay, but he apparently knew beforehand that we would be seduced by the vessel of evil (I'm guessing you are referring to Satan). Why would he create Satan, or rather even let him in the Garden, knowing what would happen beforehand? You see, my problem with what you're saying is that no matter how you try to qualify the problem of evil, I can simply regress back to God's foreknowledge of the way things would turn out.

You can and you should. The issue of God's omniscience is irrelevant since He created the world, and satan, with the full knowledge that evil would exist. Evil is merely the absence of good. You can't have evil without good. Both are necessary for choice. Think about this for a minute, if there was no evil then there could not be love either since love is the answer to evil. If we didn't have a choice between good and evil then we could not choose to love either.
I'm not God obviously, but if I was, I would have to think that it makes more sense not to bother creating things the way he did than create this universe knowing very well that the majority of mankind was going to hell.

Well, that is certainly an emotive argument. I'm thankful that you are not God.


No, but at the same time I feel can confidently say that creating a sentient being knowing beforehand that you are going to damn it to an eternal hell is pretty evil.

Not at all. The choice is theirs. I know how you are going to answer this so please don't follow the atheist playbook and answer honestly.



Are you bloody serious? That isn't a good reason to do anything.

Sure it is. I own a 1968 Camaro that I restored and has a top speed of 156 mph. I can drive that speed because I can. God can create anything He wants because He is omnipotent so He can.
 
Upvote 0

EvanWilliams

Newbie
Aug 3, 2010
67
2
34
✟7,707.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
You can call it what you will. Right after God finished creating He called ALL of His creation good, however, Adam disobeyed God and both sin and death entered the world. There is your evil. As far as Heaven, evil started there with satan rebellion so there was evil in heaven.
The world that God created contains both. He is the vessel of good while mankind was seduced by the vessel of evil.

Yeah, except God still knew all of that would happen beforehand so his creation *wasn't* all that good was it?

You can and you should. The issue of God's omniscience is irrelevant since He created the world, and satan, with the full knowledge that evil would exist.

Um no, God's omniscience is entirely relevant, if not central, to the philosophical implications of the way he created the universe. Besides, how does God creating the world with foreknowledge of evil negate the importance of his omnipotence?

Evil is merely the absence of good. You can't have evil without good. Both are necessary for choice.

That is a debatable assertion. You are creating a false dichotomy, treating moral conditions as a black-and-white affair. You allow no middle ground.

Think about this for a minute, if there was no evil then there could not be love either since love is the answer to evil. If we didn't have a choice between good and evil then we could not choose to love either.

You're making a bare assertion by saying that love is the "answer to evil". Furthermore, love is not a choice. That is the beauty of love; it is not a conscious decision. You do not choose who you fall in love with; it simply happens whether you want it to or not.

Well, that is certainly an emotive argument. I'm thankful that you are not God.

It is not an emotive argument. I was saying that creating an entire race of people knowing that the majority will be eternally tortured doesn't make a whole lot of sense and smacks of sadism.

Not at all. The choice is theirs. I know how you are going to answer this so please don't follow the atheist playbook and answer honestly.

Atheist playbook? Answer honestly? What in the world are you on about?

Hmm, follow a celestial tyrant for which there is no empirical evidence here on earth and spend eternity worshipping him, or be burned forever in a lake of fire? What a wonderful choice! Worship God... or else... so loving, he is.

Sure it is. I own a 1968 Camaro that I restored and has a top speed of 156 mph. I can drive that speed because I can. God can create anything He wants because He is omnipotent so He can.

You say you're glad I'm not God. I have often thought about how I would design the universe if I were God, but that is another description for another day.

Now allow me to retort; I'm glad my little sister won't be learning to drive this October in the same area as you. The profound stupidity of what you said belies the fact that you have little regard for others and probably are fine with the doctrine of hell.

Personally, I could never truly enjoy your heaven knowing that there are billions of souls writhing and screaming in hell forever. But perhaps you're comfortable ignoring that implication of your frankly heartless concept of reality.

Peace,
-Evan Williams
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Mar 27, 2007
34,437
3,872
On the bus to Heaven
✟60,078.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Yeah, except God still knew all of that would happen beforehand so his creation *wasn't* all that good was it?

It was and God did know before hand.



Um no, God's omniscience is entirely relevant, if not central, to the philosophical implications of the way he created the universe. Besides, how does God creating the world with foreknowledge of evil negate the importance of his omnipotence?

Let me repeat, He created the world, and satan, with the full knowledge that evil would exist.


That is a debatable assertion. You are creating a false dichotomy, treating moral conditions as a black-and-white affair. You allow no middle ground.

When one does not have a moral bar, those without God, then one allows for all kinds of middle ground, however, when one has a moral bar, God in my case, then the bar is set. No dichotomy.

Evil is the absence of good just as cold is the absence of heat and darkness is the absence of light. Evil has no existence of its own.

You're making a bare assertion by saying that love is the "answer to evil". Furthermore, love is not a choice. That is the beauty of love; it is not a conscious decision. You do not choose who you fall in love with; it simply happens whether you want it to or not.

Nah, love is a choice and a conscious decision. I am not talking about teen age puppy love here.


It is not an emotive argument. I was saying that creating an entire race of people knowing that the majority will be eternally tortured doesn't make a whole lot of sense and smacks of sadism.

It is an emotive argument. Again, you are merely judging by your ever shifting moral bar. God created a world where people can choose between good and evil. The problem is that many choose evil.


Atheist playbook? Answer honestly? What in the world are you on about?

Hmm, follow a celestial tyrant for which there is no empirical evidence here on earth and spend eternity worshipping him, or be burned forever in a lake of fire? What a wonderful choice! Worship God... or else... so loving, he is.

More emotive arguments. Please if you are not willing to at least study the material then you should not be arguing this.


You say you're glad I'm not God. I have often thought about how I would design the universe if I were God, but that is another description for another day.

Would love to hear it one day.
Now allow me to retort; I'm glad my little sister won't be learning to drive this October in the same area as you. The profound stupidity of what you said belies the fact that you have little regard for others and probably are fine with the doctrine of hell.

How so? When I drive my camaro above the speed limit I go to a track not to far from my house that is designed for that purpose. You don't know me but you have taken my comments and twisted them to form your own assumption of who I am and what I believe. Stereotype much?

BTW- Calling names is not allowed in this site.

Personally, I could never truly enjoy your heaven knowing that there are billions of souls writhing and screaming in hell forever. But perhaps you're comfortable ignoring that implication of your frankly heartless concept of reality.

LOL!!! And so now I'm heartless. More assumptions on your part? Have I ever met you and done something bad to you? Or do you just naturally stereotype those that believe in God?
 
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
E: Okay... Where is your evidence that your way of reading and understanding the Bible is correct?

R: It's called being filled with the Holy Ghost. Just like G-d accepted Able's sacrifice, and rejected Cain's, you've tried to do no less than kill me spiritually with your words here, and they're recorded. You'll notice you've failed in your attempt? I'm a tough SOB to kill. Lots meaner than you have tried. (And yes I do mean physically. Ever read the Cross and the Switchblade?)

R: Children do not AT ALL lack critical thinking skills nor the ability to make rational inquiries!

E: If we define children as pre-pubescent humans, yes they do. Why else do you think children are so apt to believe in things like Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny?

R: Please explain to me how I had a reading comprehension level of a HS graduate in 2nd grade, asked questions teachers couldn't answer, and solved math problems showing work they couldn't fathom. Then explain to me how my oldest son could speak at 2 months old, and do 1000 piece jigsaw puzzles before he turned 3. I simply do not fall for your sin induced falsely imposed limitations.


E: Or do you wish to throw out everything we know of developmental psychology?

R: Um, my Sister happens to be one of the top PhD's in the Country, in her specialized area of psychology. You don't know squat, son.


E: Very well then. Let us accept for the sake of argument that Hebrews 11:1 is the Biblical definition of faith.

"The evidence of things not seen"

Even so, faith is not evidence of anything. Rather, faith is belief in the absence of evidence, or at least as the word "faith" applies in the common vernacular, which is really the only definition that matters in a debate between two opposing worldviews.

R: In other words, you absolutely refuse to "accept for the sake of argument" what you profess to engage. Are you always as spineless as a jellyfish, or just on this particular occasion? I have steadfastly refused to debate you, and do not acknowledge your puny little non-knowing grasping-at-straws definition. You may spin your wheels at will.

E: In case you didn't know, assuming the conclusion in the premise of your argument is a logical fallacy.

R: No assumption necessary, no premise, and no argument. Just statement of obvious fact, which you refuse to accept.


E: you will not be convinced by logic and reason

R: I most certainly AM convinced by such, you just haven't presented any.
 
Upvote 0

AdamKane

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2008
888
62
36
✟1,316.00
Marital Status
Private
and I will not be convinced by a circular and question-begging argument using a book I do not believe in to start with. Good day to you.
Peace,
-Evan Williams

Then, why did you ask someone who believes the book? Why even give them the time of day?

Blessed Be,
-AdamKane
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,160
1,805
✟794,653.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

Evan Williams said:poblem with that line of reasoning is that there a constant influx of new bad people to do new bad things.


Actually it is not a problem, people are created for the potentially good ones that will become like God with Godly type Love, sadly the others just provide opportunities for good people to provide unconditional Love to demonstrate that Love.


Evan Williams said:
What are God's desires? You have no way of knowing what the desires of God are. Therefore, you also have no way of knowing how God chooses to act on those desires.
God defines Godly Love in Christ and we know Christ does not “desire” the innocent to suffer. The story of the Garden tells us where God would desire us to be. And God has told us some things in scripture He desires.

Evan Williams said:
Wait what? You just said that the objective is not to be sinless... now you are saying it is not our objective...
Are you trying to say that is God's objective for us? If so, then allow me to point out a few problems.

So I think you're saying that God wants us to be sinless. However, he created us the way he did knowing full well beforehand that we would be sinful creatures. Therefore, God has set up a system with an impossible standard that would in any other situation be marked as patently unfair and sadistic. If that is God's "plan", he doesn't sound like something I particularly want to worship even if he does exist.
“So I think you're saying that God wants us to be sinless”How did you get that??? It is not possible for a mature adult to never sin, sin has purpose. Love is the objective and sin can help us obtain that Love.
Sin is not the problem (unforgiven sin can be a huge problem).

Evan Williams said

Why is it tragic? Why does it have to be that way? Refute my claim that your religion is founded upon a psychological defence mechanism to deal with the world being a tragic place

I'm sorry, but I have to say that your view of life and the pursuit of happiness is profoundly disturbing o_O


Perhaps I'm splitting hairs here, but if something controls God, doesn't that rule out his omnipotence?

Love by its very nature is not thought out or a decision. You do not "choose" to love somebody. You simply do.
I will take both these comments since they are connected. You have to keep the human objective in mind and the issues with fulfilling that objective.

Actually Love is controlling God and God is Love.

God’s Love compelled Him to create beings that could Love like He Loves. This Love is defined by Christ in his words and deeds (you can look at 1 Cor. 13 and 1 John 4, but read at least one gospel for the Love definition.).

The English word “love” has many meanings, when I talk of Godly Love I try to capitalize the “L”, it is sometimes refer to as “agape” and there are many books written on Godly type Love or Agape you can read. Instinctive Loves can be extremely strong (spousal love, parent for child love, love of country, love of friend and even sexual love.) Godly type Love includes all emotions, but it also includes Love of your enemy (those that might have murdered your friends and family). There is really no logic behind Godly Love, so it is something you decide to do in spite of the person and expect nothing positive back (unconditional). Read the prodigal son story Luke: 15:11-32 because that is not a normal father. Jesus washed Judas’ feet.

Here is the problem and God’s solution:

God is trying to give us Godly type Love, but in order to “give” it to us and truly be “ours”, we have to “accept” the gift as it was given (as Charity=unconditionally and undeserving). If God gives us this “Love” instinctively then it is robotic love and if God forces us to take the Love (Love or I torture you) that is not Godly Love or is it Loving of God to force a mature free will agent to do something against its will.

Humans do not like to humble themselves to the point of accepting charity from a giver that paid a huge price for the gift. Humility goes against our human: egos, survival instinct, and self awareness. Egos and survival instincts are good and needed to make us human, but work against the objective.

Look, everyone including you will ask at some time in their lives: “How could a Loving God allow______ to happen?” They feel and think that God should place them in a situation without any tragedies (the Garden before sinning). God addresses this question in the first story of man. You do not have to believe the Garden story was real to understand the message. God has to show Adam and Eve and all of us why a Garden type situation does not work.

Remember we have the opportunity to be like God with the most powerful force in all universes (Love), but the only way it can be given and received as a free unconditional and undeserving gift (Charity).
In the Garden Adam and Eve are being Loved by God with Godly Love, but since they have done no wrong there is no need to humble one’s self to accept charity, so Adam and Eve are accepting God’s Love as a wonderful parent’s love for obedient children. (Love is need to obey and they do not obey). It is hard to see Godly type Love (selfless, sacrificial, unconditional and undeserving), since everything being done can be explained as a wonderful creative parent’s love. With sin, death, limited resources, needy people, hard times and God moving perceivably away, there is the need for faith, hope and experience God’s Love in forgiveness.

Tragedies are opportunities for good people to show, experience, see, give and receive Godly type Love. Good People do not always cease these opportunities, so the tragedy is wasted.

From your definition of “love”, I am not sure you have ever seen Godly type Love?

Most people want a selfish type of love and would not desire to Love unconditionally, but that maybe due to inexperience or is it refusal to see?

As far as religions trying to explain reality, yes, they try to do just that. I find most including many that call themselves “Christian” doing a poor job. Understanding the objectives explains everything that happens.

Evan Williams said

It's not exactly free will when making the wrong choice results in eternal torture. Ugh, this free will argument has been debunked so many times; why do you creationists persist in using it? That and as I explained before, God's omniscience precludes the possibility of free will. They are two fundamentally incompatible ideas.
You are assuming a particular sequencing of events (time). God may be outside of our time. The free will decision can be ours that God knows historically we made. God is allowing us to make our own decision and then have knowledge of that decision.

It is like time is a dimension (part of the space/time continuum) where there are wormholes and information is sent back to God from God in two different human times. We know God could know all that is knowable, but we do not know what is not knowable or what God might decide not to know.


Evan Williams said

You just said that I don't have to believe a literal interpretation of the Eden story, and now you're saying that God's explanation lies in the Garden story. Maybe you're saying the story is allegorical?

Even if the story is allegorical, God still basically set us up for failure if he knows the future. Why did he allow the snake into the garden? Why did he put the Tree of Knowledge in the garden? Why did he set things up the way he did if he has infinite foresight to know beforehand that we would become Fallen?

Evan Williams said

So God created a universe where the only way for life to have any real objective or meaning is for millions to have horrible lives? Wow, nice job there God.

That, and you are ignoring the Christian perspective that the Garden of Eden was God's original plan. Supposedly, humans are the ones that went against God's plan. Your argument also falls apart in that regard. What you are basically saying is that it was God's plan all along for us to become fallen creatures so that we can live in a tragic world where life somehow automatically takes on meaning. If that is true, then your God is either not very bright or a sadistic monster. (Mods, note that I am not directly slandering God's character, but pointing out the implications of Bling's argument)[/
We are only in this world for a very short period of time, to allow willing individuals to obtain Godly type Love and grow that Love through use.

The Garden was to show us (something we all ask) that a non tragic world situation does not help or even provide a way for humans to fulfill their earthly objective. It also gives us hope of heaven, since God placed man in a heaven on earth situation to begin with (without satan, sexual bodies and the tree).

I do not think the “Garden was God’s original plan”; it was part of the information God provided about the one objective. Adam and Eve could now repent, trust God’s Love, accept God’s Love in the form of forgiveness (which they can realize they need) and hope/trust for a better place (heaven) since they experienced the Garden.

It is not so much a “fall” since they did not have Godly type Love before or right after, it is a transition from one scenario to a better situation for obtaining Godly type Love.

I have tried to think of; “How God could have done it better for humans to obtain Godly type Love.” And everything I see as not working. You seem upset and think God could do better so could you give me a better plan and I will evaluate it?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Cosmicteapot

Atheist
Sep 9, 2010
38
1
Australia
✟15,163.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
AU-Greens
Gooo paradoxes!...Can God make a boulder so heavy they he himself cannot lift it?

Is God technically still good when he creates good and Evil?

If God knew all along with his all-knowingness that our names were written in the book of life and that we were going to turn out bad and end up in hell anyway, why would he doom someones life before it started...I thought he gave us free-will? but he is already aware of our fate so why create a life mis-used? That's just cruel...but god is all loving and good so it's not!!?! ARRRRGGHH

You can see why I never bought into religion ever lol
 
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Is God technically still good when he creates good and Evil?

He did not make evil. It seems you fail to perceive the difference between creating and making?

If God knew all along that we were going to turn out bad and end up in hell anyway, why would he doom someones life before it started...I thought he gave us free-will? but he is already aware of our fate so why create a life mis-used? l

That's not a paradox. Some people paint it out to be that way, but we have no reason to think it's True. No Scully, the Truth is NOT "out there." It's much closer than that; within your reach!
 
Upvote 0

Cosmicteapot

Atheist
Sep 9, 2010
38
1
Australia
✟15,163.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
AU-Greens
He did not make evil. It seems you fail to perceive the difference between creating and making?

That's why my original statement said create and not make...

Isaiah 45:7 This passages clearly states God created evil, but how can an all loving, good and kind creator create evil? it comes to a paradox in much the same way as an unmoveable object meeting an unstoppable force.

The other problem I see is the free-will that God supposedly gave us.

God knows our thoughts, created us to think but we are required not think for ourselves; we must follow the doctorine without questioning it.
God loves us, offers us free-will, but will throw you away in Hell if you exercise that free-will and choose the wrong religion.

I find that if you have an all-knowing and all-powerful mind reader there is no free-will.
In fact the term free-will becomes more like a dictatorship than a given right.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Interesting points, to be sure.

Isaiah 45:7 This passages clearly states God created evil, but how can an all loving, good and kind creator create evil? it comes to a paradox in much the same way as an unmoveable object meeting an unstoppable force.

Only if you hold to the yin-yang concept of the 2. The oldest book of the Bible begins by blasting that out of the water, so there's no paradox here. You can't place any Scriptures to this effect? It's an important point. Genesis has that, addressing Cain.


The other problem I see is the free-will that God supposedly gave us.

God knows our thoughts, created us to think but we are required not think for ourselves; we must follow the doctorine without questioning it.

Nonsense! Whoever told you that? It doesn't jibe w/ reality, or Scripture. It must be dismissed. (That would be an unresolvable paradox though)

God loves us, offers us free-will, but will throw you away in Hell if you exercise that free-will and choose the wrong religion.

Hhmmm, we're going to have to define some terms. Religion? Can we dispose of that term? There's nothing good in it. G-d desires a relationship, w/ each and every one of us. There is ample room for variance in every one of those unique relationships, and all the necessary allowance(s) for our personalities. He actually LOVES us! It's a mind-boggling concept.

I find that if you have an all-knowing and all-powerful mind reader there is no free-will.
In fact the term free-will becomes more like a dictatorship than a given right.

Well if you're saying He dictated that we have a free will then you're right. Again, you're going to have to define these terms "free will," all-knowing, and all-powerful too. I suggest not pursuing that, because these are all man-made concepts anyway. I think you're getting tripped up on stuff that doesn't deserve the time of day. Try looking at it from His angle instead! Things make much more sense that way.
 
Upvote 0