A View On Homosexuality...

[Marz Blak]

*sigh* false logic

According to your argument God made murder as well. this simply is not true.

Naked assertion (assuming, of course, that there is a God). Please provide supporting evidence.

 

[Denshuu]

*sigh* false logic
According to your argument God made murder as well.

Exactly. If God created everything, and murder is a thing, then God created murder. The fact that this makes you uncomfortable says nothing to the validity of the argument.

 

[PatrickM]

Exactly. If God created everything, and murder is a thing, then God created murder. The fact that this makes you uncomfortable says nothing to the validity of the argument.

*sigh* Murder isn't a "thing". Can you touch "murder"? It is an action performed by free-will creations.

God created everything, but not every action. He created us as free-will creatures. He holds us responsible for our own actions, unless we repent and ask for forgiveness of such. Then God, through Christ, forgives us of our sinful actions (until we do it again ).

 

[Marz Blak]

*sigh* Murder isn't a "thing". Can you touch "murder"? It is an action performed by free-will creations.

God created everything, but not every action. He created us as free-will creatures. He holds us responsible for our own actions, unless we repent and ask for forgiveness of such. Then God, through Christ, forgives us of our sinful actions (until we do it again ).

I assumed that by 'everything' we meant not 'every tangible thing' but 'every aspect of reality' which, of course, includes events.

For the record, I don't believe there is such a thing as free will in the libertarian sense, but I'd be willing to hear your arguments on it. Even assuming that there is such a thing, though, is it your position that the ability to do murder is a requirement for free will? If so, then why stop there? I could argue that my free will is inhibited because I can't wish people dead; after all, I mightn't have a gun or knife to hand every time I wish to exercise my free will by killing someone.

I have two children. I want them to learn how to behave on their own--to exercise and develop their free wills, if you will. Should I therefore make certain sticks of dynamite are at hand, in case they want to blow something up like Wile E. Coyote? Am I limiting their free wills in not providing them such resources? And were I to provide them such resources, and one of them tragically use them, wouldn't at least some share of the responsibility for what happened be mine as well?

No, I would say that the free-will argument only takes you so far. Even if there is such a thing as free will, whatever free will we have has been limited by God by the way he structured the universe--natural laws, no magic powers, etc. And to the extent that that is true, it is reasonable to say that if God limited our free wills thusly, it is hard to see how such limitation isn't arbitrary, so that we might have still been able to exercise this mysterious thing called free will and been incapable of such harm to each other.

Then, too, that's only half of the argument. The free will argument has nothing to say whatsoever about gratuitous suffering, etc. But I'm sure you know that.

 

[PatrickM]

No, I would say that the free-will argument only takes you so far. Even if there is such a thing as free will, whatever free will we have has been limited by God by the way he structured the universe--natural laws, no magic powers, etc. And to the extent that that is true, it is reasonable to say that if God limited our free wills thusly, it is hard to see how such limitation isn't arbitrary, so that we might have still been able to exercise this mysterious thing called free will and been incapable of such harm to each other.

Then, too, that's only half of the argument. The free will argument has nothing to say whatsoever about gratuitous suffering, etc. But I'm sure you know that.

Actually, Marz, your synopsis of free-will in the above paragraph is very much my opinion. I agree to a limited free-will structure. However not arbitrarily, but according to God's omniscient and omnipotent will. This will cannot be fully understood by us, thus it has the appearance of arbitrary.

As for gratuitous suffering, well this is a whole another thing. Even limited free-will causes suffering, et al, but as you said, this is for another time.

Thank you for your your civility in this matter!

 

[Marz Blak]

Actually, Marz, your synopsis of free-will in the above paragraph is very much my opinion. I agree to a limited free-will structure. However not arbitrarily, but according to God's omniscient and omnipotent will. This will cannot be fully understood by us, thus it has the appearance of arbitrary.

Seems to me that you're getting into the realm of special pleading or some Divine Purpose-type argument here. I have never accepted such lines of reasoning because they invariably as far as I have been able to see break down to naked premise='God is good, trust me' or some circularity. But I don't want to get into that now.

Thank you for your your civility in this matter!

And you too. It has been quite a pleasure. I'm sure we'll cross paths (swords?) again, and look forward to it.

 

[Denshuu]

*sigh* Murder isn't a "thing". Can you touch "murder"?

The fact that you can't touch it doesn't change the fact that it's a thing - It simply means that it's something abstract. Dreams, for example, are "things" that you can't touch. This argument is utterly irrelevant, however, because what you're trying to argue is that God didn't create gay people, whereas you certainly can touch gay people. By your own admission here, God created them.

 

[Smilin]

If you say so. But Mango's more of a lady than I am. I'm a little on the masculine side.

Michelle

LOL...shhhhhh!!!!! you're going to give away our grand deception
(and shave your mustache)

 

[Miss Shelby]

(and shave your mustache)

Never! And don't you ever lose that penchant of yours for wearing eye liner and rouge.

LOL...shhhhhh!!!!! you're going to give away our grand deception

OOOOPPPSSS!!! Too late.



Michelle

 

[Smilin]

Never! And don't you ever lose that penchant of yours for wearing eye liner and rouge.

OOOOPPPSSS!!! Too late.



Michelle

You tell them we're really lesbians and I'm gonna
tell them about your foot odor problem...

 

[Miss Shelby]

You tell them we're really lesbians

We? What's up, Chuck you gotta mouse in your pocket or something?

and I'm gonna
tell them about your foot odor problem...

That's fine. Just don't tell anyone that I like to wear men's tube socks. THAT would be embarrasing.

Michelle

 

[Zen_Woof]

The Bible also states that slaves should be happy in service to their masters. Does this mean that slavery should not have been abolished? IMHO, some of the Bible reflects the cultural context in which it was written. And some people use it as a matter of convenience to support their prejudices against something they don't like. But gays and lesbians are people too. They have feelings and want to live their lives in peace. I hope that some day we can stop having this discussion ...

With metta,
ZW

 

[Smilin]

We? What's up, Chuck you gotta mouse in your pocket or something?

Nope, that's a pickle. Always carry a pickle in your pocket (for good luck)

That's fine. Just don't tell anyone that I like to wear men's tube socks. THAT would be embarrasing.

Michelle

Not half as embarrasing that you prefer to wear briefs instead
of boxers...

 

[Outspoken]

Naked assertion (assuming, of course, that there is a God). Please provide supporting evidence.

God doesn't make evil because evil is not a created thing. Read Thomas aquantious' (sp)? Treadise on it. Saying You created a hole is not logical. You cannot create a space. you simply expose it when you remove things from it. Darkness is the ABSENCE of light.

 

[Marz Blak]

God doesn't make evil because evil is not a created thing. Read Thomas aquantious' (sp)? Treadise on it. Saying You created a hole is not logical. You cannot create a space. you simply expose it when you remove things from it. Darkness is the ABSENCE of light.

This is true, of course, in your analogy, because the space exists before the hole is 'created,' 'exposing' it.

But according to most theists, God created Everything. There was nothing before God. So the analogy doesn't quite work, do you see? Because before God created Everything, there wasn't darkness or lightness. (Well, actually, according to most theists there was no 'before God'; but you get my point, I'm sure.) There was no possibility of 'creating' a hole, because there was no space, even.

Is evil only the absence of good, as your analogy seems to suggest? Are you saying that in creating one--light or good--God was 'forced' to create the other (darkness/evil)?

If so, there are omnipotence AND benevolence implications to your argument which may or may not be overcome; but I which I think you need to think about and address.

Another question: if God didn't create evil--if evil is just the absence of good, in the manner that darkness is the absence of light, then wouldn't that imply that the default condition of the universe is evil, in the same way one must constantly apply energy (light) to banish darkness?

This, obviously, doesn't necessarily argue for or against the existence of the God of the Apologists*, but it is an interesting thought I've not had before. Why would a purely good God create a universe of inherent evil?

*God of the Apologists: omnieverything + purely good.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Always carry a pickle in your pocket (for good luck)

Fascinating information. I've heard of carrying 4 leaf clovers and rabbits feet for good luck, but never a pickle in your pocket. Does it ever come in handy in case of emergencies? And do you carry sweet or dill?

Not half as embarrasing that you prefer to wear briefs instead
of boxers...

Nah.. that's actually pretty common knowledge around here. But you did make me laugh today and that deserves a dose of satanic kiss medicine. You earned that one.

Michelle

 

[Outspoken]

This is true, of course, in your analogy, because the space exists before the hole is 'created,' 'exposing' it.

But according to most theists, God created Everything. There was nothing before God. So the analogy doesn't quite work, do you see? Because before God created Everything, there wasn't darkness or lightness. (Well, actually, according to most theists there was no 'before God'; but you get my point, I'm sure.) There was no possibility of 'creating' a hole, because there was no space, even.

Is evil only the absence of good, as your analogy seems to suggest? Are you saying that in creating one--light or good--God was 'forced' to create the other (darkness/evil)?

If so, there are omnipotence AND benevolence implications to your argument which may or may not be overcome; but I which I think you need to think about and address.

Another question: if God didn't create evil--if evil is just the absence of good, in the manner that darkness is the absence of light, then wouldn't that imply that the default condition of the universe is evil, in the same way one must constantly apply energy (light) to banish darkness?

This, obviously, doesn't necessarily argue for or against the existence of the God of the Apologists*, but it is an interesting thought I've not had before. Why would a purely good God create a universe of inherent evil?

*God of the Apologists: omnieverything + purely good.

Noooo..space is a lack of existance. Just as negative numbers are a lack of value. they do not in themselves exist. they are dependent on taking their existance based on a less then fullness state.

"There was no possibility of 'creating' a hole, because there was no space, even."

Correct, but when God created something other then himself then there was a possiblity left open for a less then perfect existance, ie free will.
Evil did not exist post creation until Man created it. He sinned.

"Is evil only the absence of good, as your analogy seems to suggest? Are you saying that in creating one--light or good--God was 'forced' to create the other (darkness/evil)?"

Upon creating free will God left that possiblity. that possiblity must exist for true free will to exist.

"then wouldn't that imply that the default condition of the universe is evil, in the same way one must constantly apply energy (light) to banish darkness? "

In what way? I would agree that now the universe is fallen but upon its creation it was not evil as you put it.

 

[Marz Blak]

Noooo..space is a lack of existance.

Sorry, but you're wrong here. Space exists. Even if there were no matter or energy whatsover in our universe, there would still be space.

[Marz Blak:]"There was no possibility of 'creating' a hole, because there was no space, even."

Correct, but when God created something other then himself then there was a possiblity left open for a less then perfect existance, ie free will.

You fail to show why this is necessarily so. Why could God not have created something other than Himself in a perfect way but still allowing for limited free will, i.e., like Heaven?

[We've gone around on this before, I think, and you thus know that I don't believe in free will, but for the sake of argument, why not? As I've argued before, it's not like, even assuming we do have free will, it isn't severely limited by the laws of reality (which were supposedly decreed/setup by God), i.e., I can't shoot thunderbolts out of my fingers or wish someone dead. So I guess the question is, how much free will did your God give us, and why did he pick that level? But that's another argument, I think.]

Evil did not exist post creation until Man created it. He sinned.

See above. If free will exists at all and came from a God, it is obviously limited; why couldn't God have just limited them to good/neutral, no evil? Is it because that wouldn't be 'free enough?' Still seems...arbitrary...to me.

[Marz Blak:] "Is evil only the absence of good, as your analogy seems to suggest? Are you saying that in creating one--light or good--God was 'forced' to create the other (darkness/evil)?"

Upon creating free will God left that possiblity. that possiblity must exist for true free will to exist.

Seems to me that you are saying that evil exists only as an absence of what God defines to be good, and it is in that sense both subjective and relative.

[Marz Blak:] "then wouldn't that imply that the default condition of the universe is evil, in the same way one must constantly apply energy (light) to banish darkness? "

In what way? I would agree that now the universe is fallen but upon its creation it was not evil as you put it.

Are you saying man created evil? Did evil exist before Adam ate from the tree? The tree was called, I think, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, not the Tree of the Creation of Good and Evil, which implies that evil existed before man, he just didn't know about it until he ate from the tree. And if it existed before Adam ate from the tree, then obviously it couldn't have come into existence with Adam's sin.

Besides, what about Lucifer? His rebellion was surely evil, and happened before God's creation of Adam, right? Hence the serpent wouldn't have been there to show up and tempt Adam? In which case, again, evil existed before man.

Am I misconstruing something?

BTW, before I get into the Adam thing, I suppose I should know whether or not you are a literalist as far as Genesis is concerned.

Oh, and BTW, here's a little syllogism on free will I just found. What do you think of it? (from http://home.earthlink.net/~kirby/xtianity/freewill.html)

1. God's knowledge cannot be wrong.
2. God knows that I will do A.
3. If I have free will, then (I can do A) and (I can do ~A).
4. If I can do ~A, then it is possibly true that I will do ~A.
5. If it is possibly true that I will do ~A, then God's 'knowledge' that I will do A is possibly false.
6. If God's knowledge that I will do A is possibly false, then God's
'knowledge' can be wrong.
7. Therefore, God's knowledge that I will do A is not possibly false.
8. Therefore, it is not possibly true that I will do ~A.
9. Therefore, I cannot do ~A.
10. Therefore, it is false that (I can do A) and (I can do ~A).
11. Therefore, I don't have free will.

 

[Outspoken]

Sorry, but you're wrong here. Space exists. Even if there were no matter or energy whatsover in our universe, there would still be space.


You fail to show why this is necessarily so. Why could God not have created something other than Himself in a perfect way but still allowing for limited free will, i.e., like Heaven?

[We've gone around on this before, I think, and you thus know that I don't believe in free will, but for the sake of argument, why not? As I've argued before, it's not like, even assuming we do have free will, it isn't severely limited by the laws of reality (which were supposedly decreed/setup by God), i.e., I can't shoot thunderbolts out of my fingers or wish someone dead. So I guess the question is, how much free will did your God give us, and why did he pick that level? But that's another argument, I think.]

See above. If free will exists at all and came from a God, it is obviously limited; why couldn't God have just limited them to good/neutral, no evil? Is it because that wouldn't be 'free enough?' Still seems...arbitrary...to me.

Seems to me that you are saying that evil exists only as an absence of what God defines to be good, and it is in that sense both subjective and relative.

Are you saying man created evil? Did evil exist before Adam ate from the tree? The tree was called, I think, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, not the Tree of the Creation of Good and Evil, And if it existed before Adam ate from the tree, then obviously it couldn't have come into existence with Adam's sin.

Besides, what about Lucifer? His rebellion was surely evil, and happened before God's creation of Adam, right? Hence the serpent wouldn't have been there to show up and tempt Adam? In which case, again, evil existed before man.

Am I misconstruing something?
which implies that evil existed before man, he just didn't know about it until he ate from the tree.
BTW, before I get into the Adam thing, I suppose I should know whether or not you are a literalist as far as Genesis is concerned.

Oh, and BTW, here's a little syllogism on free will I just found. What do you think of it? (from http://home.earthlink.net/~kirby/xtianity/freewill.html)

1. God's knowledge cannot be wrong.
2. God knows that I will do A.
3. If I have free will, then (I can do A) and (I can do ~A).
4. If I can do ~A, then it is possibly true that I will do ~A.
5. If it is possibly true that I will do ~A, then God's 'knowledge' that I will do A is possibly false.
6. If God's knowledge that I will do A is possibly false, then God's
'knowledge' can be wrong.
7. Therefore, God's knowledge that I will do A is not possibly false.
8. Therefore, it is not possibly true that I will do ~A.
9. Therefore, I cannot do ~A.
10. Therefore, it is false that (I can do A) and (I can do ~A).
11. Therefore, I don't have free will.

"Space exists. "

okay, so lets go with the darkness analogy then. I'm not going to argue over an analogy since its JUST an anaolgy, not a direct linkage.

"Why could God not have created something other than Himself in a perfect way but still allowing for limited free will, i.e., like Heaven? "

I don't have to prove it. I don't see why you ask me to. Its logically impossible and with free will there is always the choice to sin. That's what free will is. What you're advocating is not free will by definition.

"which implies that evil existed before man, he just didn't know about it until he ate from the tree."

Yes, it did exist before, for satan rebeled. Man allowed it to come into our existance, thus the fall.

"And if it existed before Adam ate from the tree, then obviously it couldn't have come into existence with Adam's sin."

romans has your answer.

"I suppose I should know whether or not you are a literalist as far as Genesis is concerned."

Yup, can't be a bible believing christian if you're not, though others would disagree, though they can't show where nonliteralism stops thus the problem.

"If it is possibly true that I will do ~A, then God's 'knowledge' that I will do A is possibly false."

Philosphically you cannot make that jump. Nessisity does not imply no choice.

 

[PatrickM]

Oh, and BTW, here's a little syllogism on free will I just found. What do you think of it? (from http://home.earthlink.net/~kirby/xtianity/freewill.html)

1. God's knowledge cannot be wrong.
2. God knows that I will do A.
3. If I have free will, then (I can do A) and (I can do ~A).
4. If I can do ~A, then it is possibly true that I will do ~A.
5. If it is possibly true that I will do ~A, then God's 'knowledge' that I will do A is possibly false.
6. If God's knowledge that I will do A is possibly false, then God's
'knowledge' can be wrong.
7. Therefore, God's knowledge that I will do A is not possibly false.
8. Therefore, it is not possibly true that I will do ~A.
9. Therefore, I cannot do ~A.
10. Therefore, it is false that (I can do A) and (I can do ~A).
11. Therefore, I don't have free will.

Hello, Marz!
Couldn't resist dropping in here. I believe there is possibly a fallacy in this syllogy.

God's knowledge is not limited to one aspect. He has both causal knowledge, as when He created all things, and "middle knowledge", which is neutral in it's effect.

A Catholic monk, Louis de Molina, caused quite a stir in the Church in the 17th century when he deducted this middle knowledge. Being protestant, I rather concur with his conclusion, although not as an antagonist of the Church, per se.

God lives outside the realm of time, we are limited by it. God's middle knowledge of events is non-causal, but true. At time T, when we are to make choice A or ~A, we have free-will. Yet, God has knowledge of T+, so, though He knew at T+ what we were to chose, at T, the event in time was still at our discretion. Free-will is a time-constrained event, God's knowledge is from beginning to end.

Kinda like watching a child trying to carry too many toys. We can see at a certain point, some toys will fall. But when they do, it was not because we caused them to fall, merely because we could ascertain the event would take place.

In the retrospect of events, of course all events that took place can be considered predestined, in that since they did happen, there is, after the fact, no way they could not have happened. But this is not necessarily saying God caused them to happen.

This does not contradict God's onmipotence. I believe He has "potential" onmipotence, but does not exercise it at all times, concerning His creation. However, all events are subject to His "approval", if you will.