Near perfect existence

[bhsmte]

So satan is able to do as he pleases to the world. Because he created us to do things he wanted or didn't want?

There are many things wrong with the Universe, all the dead planets seem to be a waste of time, except for banging into each other and killing any life on any planet it hits. The Earth has been hit many times. Then there are the natural disasters that kill so many, Earthquakes, Volcanoes, Hurricanes, drought, floods, temperature changes, plagues, etc.

giving us free will was the right thing to do, us using it is the wrong thing to do.

Thank you for clearing up what makes a perfect life.

Satan is just your typical fall guy.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

The earth in its current state was indirectly caused by God. You can thank satan for all the bad things you see in this current world because he directly caused them.

And God was either too lazy or powerless to stop him?

You're not being objective when you look at the current state of the world and try to shove a perfect God into it.

Isn't that what you do?

To be objective you need to start from a perfect Gods perspective which is that a perfect God would first create perfect beings with free will.

But he didn't. Boy this is really fragmented

 

[Freodin]

Isn't that what you do?

It's interesting, isn't it?

"Look at the world! All around, everything we see... we recognize God's handiwork! There must be a perfect God who made all this!"

"But it isn't quite so good, is it?"

"Ah, that it because Satan ruined all this perfect creation of God's! Except of course for all the things that are still perfect... but that sadly can't be seen in this fallen world!"


Or, a little more related to this thread:
- the creation of a conscious being of limited existence: definitly not perfect. No, cannot be perfect, no way. It must be eternal to be perfect.
- the creation of a conscious being of eternal existence who you know will wreck havoc on everything else and will lead to eternal torment for most of your creation: perfect.

 

[Chriliman]

Sorry...but I didn't see the passage in the bible that says Satan controls earthquakes. They happen because of how the earth was made...you're saying Satan has the power to change god's creations? Are you just making this stuff up?

Satan is the causer of death, God is not the causer of death, God is the creator of life. So the earth could have all the natural things like storms and earthquakes and whatever else and if they never caused death we wouldn't consider them natural disasters, we'd consider them just natural things that the earth does. Death is what makes something a disaster and satan caused death. Life is what makes something beautiful and God created life. I hope you can see the difference.

Why do you think earthquakes are "evil"? There's no intention or motive to them...the vast majority of them occur without any harm or damage. Again, they occur as a result of how the earth formed...tectonic plates and all that. Is Satan the cause of continental drift lol? Do you have any idea how silly that sounds? If such vast powers are at Satan's disposal, why doesn't he just destroy us all?

Earthquakes are only considered evil if they cause death. And you should know who I believe is the causer of death, which is satan. Earthquakes are natural things put in place by God in order to sustain life, they would never cause death if it weren't for satan.

Moreover...why didn't your "perfect god" create the earth in a way that earthquakes don't happen? Why did he leave this stuff out of the bible?

Edit- Also, does Satan control lightening strikes? Does he control all of them and just has really bad aim? Or does he just control the ones that hit people?

Again, storms are natural in that they are necessary to sustain life, we only consider them evil when they cause death. However, if you believe evil is real then you should know who is the real causer of evil, which is satan.

You have to understand that I legitimately believe a perfect God exists and that this God has a perfect plan to destroy all evil. Therefore, I legitimately believe that evil has no power over me because even when I die, I will live forever. My sole purpose in life is to help others understand this, which is why I enjoy talking to atheists because I feel its important to understand the mind of an atheists in order to help them understand my views. Its difficult though, because for some reason the topic of God can get really personal even with atheists.

If believers didn't pursue atheists then atheists would have no reason to call themselves atheists because it takes a believer in God to bring up the topic of God.

Imagine if there were no believers in God in the entire world, this would mean there would be no atheists either. (Someone has to believe in God in order for someone else to say they have non-belief in God) However, if there were no atheists in the entire world, that would mean everyone would be a believer in God. (The idea that there is a God must come before the idea that there is no God.)

 

[Chriliman]

And God was either too lazy or powerless to stop him?



Isn't that what you do?



But he didn't. Boy this is really fragmented

You don't think humans have free will?

 

[Chriliman]

Satan is just your typical fall guy.

Exactly!

 

[Chriliman]

You assume that perfect existence can not include the cessation of existence. What honest objective observations do you base that one?

Why shouldn't I assume that perfect existence can not include the cessation of existence? It seems far more reasonable to assume perfect existence would be just perfect, no reason to cease. Again if you have a reason that perfect existence should cease, please explain it, otherwise I'm safe to assume you're wrong.

If you go back and read our conversation, this is the very first contradiction that you made and I pointed it out. You failed to address this contradiction in a way that made sense, thus giving me no reason to think your right in your reasoning. Now after that first contradiction that you made, we have created this mess of assumptions and who assumed what and why.

The only safe assumption I've made, was that an atheist would bring God into the conversation first and I was right to assume that because it did happen. Now in order to learn why, I must ask why, but if an answer isn't given, then I'm safe to assume someone is avoiding the honest answer.

 

[Chriliman]

I put a lot of thought into my responses to you guys, which takes time, so the more of you who are responding the harder it is for me to put the time in that I feel is needed to understand you and make myself clear. For that I am sorry, because I do think its very important to understand and be as clear as I can in order to avoid confusion. Unfortunately, this thread has become very confusing and I will take part of the blame for that which I've already admitted to in an early post, but I don't think its fair for me to take the entire blame because others have made some unfair and false assumptions.

Anyhow, it has become difficult for me to keep up with all the responses, but I'm sure we'll meet again in another forum.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

You don't think humans have free will?

Free will is an illusion. It's a state of being in control of our actions, the only thing that doesn't have free will is a victim of the zombie wasp and mind controlling parasites.

It's just a phrase.

 

[Freodin]

Why shouldn't I assume that perfect existence can not include the cessation of existence? It seems far more reasonable to assume perfect existence would be just perfect, no reason to cease. Again if you have a reason that perfect existence should cease, please explain it, otherwise I'm safe to assume you're wrong.

Changing your tune again?
Previously you stated:

I would consider assumptions that are not based on honest objective observation are false assumptions. These are the kinds of assumptions I never want to make.

Of course, you mean only the assumptions that are made by your opponents, don't you?

Because now and here, you claim that you can make a "safe" assumption - not by basing it on honest objective observations, but on not having been shown a reason to assume otherwise.

But consider: it seems far more reasonable to assume that perfect existence would not exclude the cessation of this existence. And if you don't have a reason that perfect existence should not cease, I am safe to assume that you are wrong and I am right. Following your current "logic" of course.

Say, do you really not see how much you are contradicting your own claims, just so that you don't have to admit an error?

If you go back and read our conversation, this is the very first contradiction that you made and I pointed it out. You failed to address this contradiction in a way that made sense, thus giving me no reason to think your right in your reasoning. Now after that first contradiction that you made, we have created this mess of assumptions and who assumed what and why.

There is no contradiction.
I called you out for your contradictions, because I was able to show where you first said one thing, then a contradicting thing, then something else... you keep doing it.
I havn't said anything here that contradicted another of my statements. The contradiction you perceive comes from your own views, not mine.
So the "very first contradiction" I made is that I contradict you. Well, that is something that can be safely assumed.

The only safe assumption I've made, was that an atheist would bring God into the conversation first and I was right to assume that because it did happen. Now in order to learn why, I must ask why, but if an answer isn't given, then I'm safe to assume someone is avoiding the honest answer.

You made another "safe assumption" just now in this thread... that, as long as I cannot disprove you, you are correct? When are you going to back that up with honest objective observations?`
Then, this "only safe assumption" you made wasn't that impressive. Debating as the sole Christian in a thread about perfection with atheists... the chance that an atheist would bring up God would be rather high. No big feat here... and even then it took over 60 posts until your trap caught something.
And finally: you got your answer. If you still claim that "an answer isn't given", you will have lost even the last remains of honesty.

 

[paulm50]

Satan is the causer of death, God is not the causer of death, God is the creator of life. So the earth could have all the natural things like storms and earthquakes and whatever else and if they never caused death we wouldn't consider them natural disasters, we'd consider them just natural things that the earth does. Death is what makes something a disaster and satan caused death. Life is what makes something beautiful and God created life. I hope you can see the difference.

Does god allow satan to do these things, or unable to stop him?

Earthquakes are only considered evil if they cause death. And you should know who I believe is the causer of death, which is satan. Earthquakes are natural things put in place by God in order to sustain life, they would never cause death if it weren't for satan.

So we could have all these narural disasters and no one would die, if satan was stopped.

Again, storms are natural in that they are necessary to sustain life, we only consider them evil when they cause death. However, if you believe evil is real then you should know who is the real causer of evil, which is satan.

Does god allow satan to do these things, or unable to stop him?

You have to understand that I legitimately believe a perfect God exists and that this God has a perfect plan to destroy all evil. Therefore, I legitimately believe that evil has no power over me because even when I die, I will live forever. My sole purpose in life is to help others understand this, which is why I enjoy talking to atheists because I feel its important to understand the mind of an atheists in order to help them understand my views. Its difficult though, because for some reason the topic of God can get really personal even with atheists.

so this is your belief. Can you prove it?

If believers didn't pursue atheists then atheists would have no reason to call themselves atheists because it takes a believer in God to bring up the topic of God.

Imagine if there were no believers in God in the entire world, this would mean there would be no atheists either. (Someone has to believe in God in order for someone else to say they have non-belief in God) However, if there were no atheists in the entire world, that would mean everyone would be a believer in God. (The idea that there is a God must come before the idea that there is no God.)

So Jews and Muslims are good because they believe in the same god as you.

How about Hindus, Sikhs, and all the other religions that have a god or god like figure, and can we include all branches of the Christian religion?

You make a lot of statements, and no proof. A perfect god is something that would never make a mistake. Think on that. Because if I tell you the truth, it will get this thread closed. If you want to discuss proof in a private conversation, let's do it.

 

[bhsmte]

Changing your tune again?
Previously you stated:

Of course, you mean only the assumptions that are made by your opponents, don't you?

Because now and here, you claim that you can make a "safe" assumption - not by basing it on honest objective observations, but on not having been shown a reason to assume otherwise.

But consider: it seems far more reasonable to assume that perfect existence would not exclude the cessation of this existence. And if you don't have a reason that perfect existence should not cease, I am safe to assume that you are wrong and I am right. Following your current "logic" of course.

Say, do you really not see how much you are contradicting your own claims, just so that you don't have to admit an error?


There is no contradiction.
I called you out for your contradictions, because I was able to show where you first said one thing, then a contradicting thing, then something else... you keep doing it.
I havn't said anything here that contradicted another of my statements. The contradiction you perceive comes from your own views, not mine.
So the "very first contradiction" I made is that I contradict you. Well, that is something that can be safely assumed.


You made another "safe assumption" just now in this thread... that, as long as I cannot disprove you, you are correct? When are you going to back that up with honest objective observations?`
Then, this "only safe assumption" you made wasn't that impressive. Debating as the sole Christian in a thread about perfection with atheists... the chance that an atheist would bring up God would be rather high. No big feat here... and even then it took over 60 posts until your trap caught something.
And finally: you got your answer. If you still claim that "an answer isn't given", you will have lost even the last remains of honesty.

Watch the deployment of psychological gymnastics to deny the self contradictions, I have seen it many times.

 

[paulm50]

Lol you would...but you're asking the wrong question

The question to ask them is, "If you were all powerful, could you make the world better than it is now?"

Once they tell you the things that they would improve, ask them, "Assuming god exists for a moment...does the fact that there are so many ways the world could be better show that god isn't perfect?"

Actually you've just demonstrated the truth that I hoped would be demonstrated.

In any objective discussion about perfection, where both sides are trying to be as objective as possible the side that does not believe in God, will always bring God into the discussion first. What this means is that the side that does not believe in God, cannot discuss the topic of perfection objectively because they falsely assume that God cannot be perfect.

So I would challenge any theist and even atheists to start discussions about perfect societies and try to remain objective and see who brings God into the conversation first. The demonstration I've done here has shown that an atheist will bring God into the discussion first, but only because they falsely assume God is not perfect.

A theist will rightly assume God is perfect.

We fell into his trap, so he could start preaching to us.

So as not to get this closed, I sent you a private message. Please reply.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Satan is the causer of death, God is not the causer of death, God is the creator of life. So the earth could have all the natural things like storms and earthquakes and whatever else and if they never caused death we wouldn't consider them natural disasters, we'd consider them just natural things that the earth does. Death is what makes something a disaster and satan caused death. Life is what makes something beautiful and God created life. I hope you can see the difference.



Earthquakes are only considered evil if they cause death. And you should know who I believe is the causer of death, which is satan. Earthquakes are natural things put in place by God in order to sustain life, they would never cause death if it weren't for satan.





Again, storms are natural in that they are necessary to sustain life, we only consider them evil when they cause death. However, if you believe evil is real then you should know who is the real causer of evil, which is satan.

You have to understand that I legitimately believe a perfect God exists and that this God has a perfect plan to destroy all evil. Therefore, I legitimately believe that evil has no power over me because even when I die, I will live forever. My sole purpose in life is to help others understand this, which is why I enjoy talking to atheists because I feel its important to understand the mind of an atheists in order to help them understand my views. Its difficult though, because for some reason the topic of God can get really personal even with atheists.

If believers didn't pursue atheists then atheists would have no reason to call themselves atheists because it takes a believer in God to bring up the topic of God.

Imagine if there were no believers in God in the entire world, this would mean there would be no atheists either. (Someone has to believe in God in order for someone else to say they have non-belief in God) However, if there were no atheists in the entire world, that would mean everyone would be a believer in God. (The idea that there is a God must come before the idea that there is no God.)

So when lightening causes death....it's Satan's fault? But when it's just lightening that harms no one...it's not? That's the story you're going with?

I guess my next question (which is really just a previous question that you skipped) would be...Why didn't your "perfect" god create the earth in a way that earthquakes can't happen? You know...that way Satan wouldn't be able to use them to kill people. Also, if Satan has such abilities....why doesn't he just use them to destroy the world? It seems like he's far more preoccupied with possessing the bodies of middle-aged midwestern women.

Edit-btw, belief in god doesn't need to exist for atheists to exist. All we need is the idea of a god...that's all you really need to not believe in god.

 

[Chriliman]

So when lightening causes death....it's Satan's fault? But when it's just lightening that harms no one...it's not? That's the story you're going with?

All death is directly caused by satan.

I guess my next question (which is really just a previous question that you skipped) would be...Why didn't your "perfect" god create the earth in a way that earthquakes can't happen?

Why do you assume earthquakes are bad things? Humans label them as bad when they kill humans, but this does not mean they were designed to be bad.

From a perfect God's perspective you have to start with truth, meaning this perfect God is truth. From this perfect God's perspective everything happens in 0 time as well as eternity because He is timeless, meaning He can't make choices like we do because He is Truth. Anything created from pure truth, will not inherently be truth itself, meaning there is room for error in creation. This room for error comes in the form of free will or the ability to choose. So God can't choose like we do because He is truth and He is timeless, perfect created beings can choose because they have free will, this is where evil was directly caused. If you can be objective enough to understand this then you would realize that a conflict between a perfect God and a perfect created being might cause a catastrophic BANG (BIG BANG). So this would mean our current reality was directly caused by the conflict between God and satan. God has a perfect plan of restoring His creation back to perfection by destroying satan through what Jesus willingly did on the cross. This theology does make sense if your objective enough to understand it.

Edit-btw, belief in god doesn't need to exist for atheists to exist. All we need is the idea of a god...that's all you really need to not believe in god.

Do you really think all the different people involved in writing the Bible could have coordinated such a precise theology that I've described above that actually explains the current state of our universe so well without actually having a connection to something that is actually perfect and that knows vastly more than all humans combined? A perfect idea of God was developed across generations that could not have possibly communicated with each other(they had to have been connected by one Spirit) well before you decided to not believe in God. You just haven't been fully informed about this perfect God yet, in time you will be.

 

[Ana the Ist]

All death is directly caused by satan.



Why do you assume earthquakes are bad things? Humans label them as bad when they kill humans, but this does not mean they were designed to be bad.

I removed everything that didn't have anything to do with my question. I think maybe you got into preaching mode and forgot to answer the question.

I'm calling earthquakes "bad" because they don't benefit mankind in any way...they only hurt mankind.

So again, why didn't your "perfect" god create the world in a way that earthquakes aren't possible? If he had done this, then Satan couldn't use them to cause death. Seems if your god was perfect, he would've done this.

 

[paulm50]

All death is directly caused by satan.

Why does god allow satan to do this?

Why do you assume earthquakes are bad things? Humans label them as bad when they kill humans, but this does not mean they were designed to be bad.

Why do you assume they are not bad?

From a perfect God's perspective you have to start with truth, meaning this perfect God is truth. From this perfect God's perspective everything happens in 0 time as well as eternity because He is timeless, meaning He can't make choices like we do because He is Truth. Anything created from pure truth, will not inherently be truth itself, meaning there is room for error in creation. This room for error comes in the form of free will or the ability to choose. So God can't choose like we do because He is truth and He is timeless, perfect created beings can choose because they have free will, this is where evil was directly caused. If you can be objective enough to understand this then you would realize that a conflict between a perfect God and a perfect created being might cause a catastrophic BANG (BIG BANG). So this would mean our current reality was directly caused by the conflict between God and satan. God has a perfect plan of restoring His creation back to perfection by destroying satan through what Jesus willingly did on the cross. This theology does make sense if your objective enough to understand it.

Which version of god is perfect?
So we are pure truth. What does that mean, other than we are here?
Why did god give us free will?

Do you really think all the different people involved in writing the Bible could have coordinated such a precise theology that I've described above that actually explains the current state of our universe so well without actually having a connection to something that is actually perfect and that knows vastly more than all humans combined? A perfect idea of God was developed across generations that could not have possibly communicated with each other(they had to have been connected by one Spirit) well before you decided to not believe in God. You just haven't been fully informed about this perfect God yet, in time you will be.

Which version of which bible are we talking about?
As for it coordinating itself, it doesn't.

As for being true, why do you think so much evidence points in the opposite way?

Your problem is dealing with all the different versions of gods. With culture came a form of gods, be it Druid type gods worshipping nature Sun Gods, Greek style gods, Hindu gods, Polytheistic, Shinto, Buddhism, Confucianism, God Kings and all the rest of them.

Even within the Christian religion there are many contradictory versions. It seems starting a religion and getting followers to believe, isn't hard. Proving your one is the right one, becomes impossible.

You never answered my private message, so I can see you don't want to discuss the truth, as the evidence shows.

 

[paulm50]

So again, why didn't your "perfect" god create the world in a way that earthquakes aren't possible? If he had done this, then Satan couldn't use them to cause death. Seems if your god was perfect, he would've done this.

If god were perfect, why allow satan in the first place.

If I allow my dog to run wild in a shop and he damages something. It's my fault. And he's a dog who knows no better, because I gave him the free will to run wild. Satan's job is to be bad, which god allows.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

All death is directly caused by satan.

???????????????????

What about the people God smites? (like the first born children)

 

[Eudaimonist]

All death is directly caused by satan.

Satan is the Grim Reaper?


eudaimonia,

Mark