(July 9, 2011 at 10:18 pm)Anymouse Wrote:

(June 24, 2011 at 4:57 pm)Godschild Wrote: God did not give man the ability to be violent, that is the direct result of the original sin. I do not question the existance of God as I stated in the above, I do question how the Bible might be translated or the way some scriptures are taught but not the existance of God and I do not question wither the Bible is God's word. I have at times questioned my salvation, I have always come to terms with that. To question is only human. Questioning can be a form of doubt or it can be an avenue to find the truth without doubting.

I guess everytime I see a variation in this thread of "God didn't create evil, Man did," I will have to keep responding with God's own word in the Bible that you're not reading, until you can answer it or concede. Also your non-sequiteur: You don't question the Bible is God's word but you question both how it is translated and how it is taught.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (KJV) - (So if the LORD creates evil, what are Satan's and Hell's purpose?)
(I have highlighted the relevant segment in colour too, I figured out how. A color command duh.)

If God did not have the capacity to create evil himself, he could not have created that capacity in us. And everything I read in Genesis (both mutually-exclusive creation stories) indicates Satan had nothing to do with creating anything in mankind. Perhaps, unlike Microsoft, which ofttimes views itself as a deity, God failed to issue Human Service Pack 1.

It was a snake that tempted Eve in the garden. Nowhere in Genesis does it say that snake is Satan. Eve could not have been tempted if God had not created the capacity of temptation and wrongdoing within both her and Adam. Your interpretation about evil is not supported by your own book. If you are going to base your religious faith on a book, you should want to know what's in the whole book, I would think.

I've read it, many times. And I fully understand the ancient modern English of the KJV, and the shifting of definitions of words and phrases. Do you?

Even if you are given the pass that the Bible counts as evidence, then it's the whole Bible, or none of it. And either it's the Word of God, or it's not. If it's the Word of God, you either believe it, or you do not. (Sorry, agnostics, knowing is not a requirement of believing. An agnostic can be either a theist, or a nontheist, but cannot sit on the fence between those two positions: there isn't a position of "I believe a little bit," or "I mostly don't believe" or "The Bible is correct about theology in some places but not in others."

And you still haven't answered my question on why you are an atheist on all religions, including mine, except your own. Why do you believe your version of Christianity over all others, over Hinduism, or Sikhism, or Jainism, or Wicca, or Shinto, or Discordia, or Bhuddism, or animism, or Islam, or Judaism, or Norse mythology, or Greek mythology, or Roman mythology, or. . . .

What makes yours more special than the others (evidence, not testimony)? And why aren't you demanding women keep their place and be silent about matters of faith, or giving away all your worldly things and going forth to preach, as commanded in the New Testament? Did God buy your computer?

Recap: Sorry. Atheists and folk like me already know where evil comes from. Don't need a God of Evil for that either. That's a Christian thing.
Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (KJV)

James. And if you harm none, do what you will. (The Wiccan Rede is a much better moral compass than the Golden Rule.)

If you have been reading my post you know that I use the New American Standard translation, the reason for this is the fact that it's the most accurate translation of all the different versions. The King James being the first translation into english is not as accurate simply for the reason during the time of the translation the translators did not know the meaning of all the old greek and hebrew and because most of the translation came from latin those translators did not know any more than the King James translators. So from a more accurate source this is the translation of Isaiah 45:7.
The One forming light and creating darkness,
Causing well being (or peace) and creating calamity;
I am the LORD who does all these.
Calamity as defined in Webster: 1) great distress or misfortune 2) an event causing great harm or loss and affliction :disaster
So the verse does not say that God created evil, it does say that He can and will bring great distress upon the nation of Israel, to understand why I say Israel you need to read the whole chapter. Again why want you use a modern translation that is more accurate than the King James, would you use a 15th century medical book to treat a person with? I hope not.
God did not create evil, that is against His nature and if you understood what scripture says you would know this. You are correct in saying Lucifer did not create evil in man, he is only an angel, so he has no powers to create anything. Lucifer does posess powers and he used them through a serpant with legs not a snake (again you should read carefully) to tempt Eve. God gave man freewill and with that comes the ability to reject God's law, so Eve and Adam both fail. The Bible does not say that the serpant became a snake, it says that God cursed the serpant and it would crawl on it's belly from then on. Once again I state there is only one creation story, as you stated one must completely believe or completely reject the Word of God and I've chosen to believe and in so doing see no reason why God would give two different accounts of creation, since He is the creator and was there when creation took place.
I believe only in the God of the Bible because I've seen the results of His work in my life and the lives of many others, I want go into detail because you will say I've given a testimony, actually if you look up the meaning of that word you will find it means evidence. Also I do not know about all the religions in the world, I do know that the God of christianity promises me an eternal life with Him that is full of wonder and treasure, what that treasure is I can not say, I do trust that it is good because the God who saved me is good. There is my reason whether you like it or not. Why should I reject women who serve the LORD, they have been given that right by God so who am I to question that. God never commanded that I give away my worldly things and there is no command to go and preach, the command is to go forth and make disciples and I have done such and hope to be able to do more. Now instead of telling me I do not know what's in the Bible, why don't you study it instead of just reading it and you might learn a thing or two and who knows you could even see .... well you know, I can not elaborate that would be preaching and that's against the rules.

---

Boris Wrote:Let's say you were an all-powerful deity--not necessarily the Christian God--and you had an interest in creating one of Plato's Forms: say apricotness. You couldn't really do such a thing without creating the ante-form, the lack of apricotness, could you?

This puts a limitation on God: he is not omnipotent as he cannot create one thing without it's anteform. Christian theology insists God is omnipotent, so in theory God could create "good" without creating "evil." However, Isaiah clearly states he creates evil, so the point is moot.