So evil then, is an example of something that exists that god is not responsible for, that he did not create. In at least this arena, god is not the source? Congratulations, ever closer to the light. What else can we excuse god for, what else did he not create?

I don't have an ounce of hebrew blood, perhaps he didn't create me?

(Have you posted this link before, or is it the current go to link? I've seen it more than once in the last month.)

(August 4, 2011 at 5:37 pm)Rhythm Wrote: So evil then, is an example of something that exists that god is not responsible for, that he did not create. In at least this arena, god is not the source? Congratulations, ever closer to the light. What else can we excuse god for, what else did he not create?

I don't have an ounce of hebrew blood, perhaps he didn't create me?

(Have you posted this link before, or is it the current go to link? I've seen it more than once in the last month.)

The God of Darkness/God of Light dualism is a feature of the early Gnostic Christian sects. I know the poster probably wasn't referring to it, but I couldn't resist.

In my very first post, I suggested that evil was the necessary corollary to good. In that sense, God "created" good and evil, in that without evil, good could not exist. Someone almost immediately claimed this violated God's omnipotency, not being able to create one and not the other, but one or two pointed out that God's inability to do something illogical or impossible does not make Him any less omnipotent, either because we're incapable of properly articulating what it is we believe He can't do, or because omnipotence cannot really refer to things that are absolutely impossible (forbidden by the same laws by which they are defined).

And if it sounds like apologists are excusing God, well, that's because they are excusing--but excusing rather humans for misrepresenting God. Hebrew blood has nothing to do with it; rather matter does.

What link?

NP Spacek, you get back to me when you have the definitive proof that your god exists, and then we can start having a discussion about how he was misrepresented (and by whom).

The only sure-fire way to avoid misrepresenting god is to keep ones mouth shut.

(August 4, 2011 at 7:35 pm)Rhythm Wrote: NP Spacek, you get back to me when you have the definitive proof that your god exists, and then we can start having a discussion about how he was misrepresented (and by whom).

The only sure-fire way to avoid misrepresenting god is to keep ones mouth shut.

Yes, I regret using the word "misrepresent" in talking to you.

(August 4, 2011 at 7:30 pm)Boris Spacek Wrote: In my very first post, I suggested that evil was the necessary corollary to good. In that sense, God "created" good and evil, in that without evil, good could not exist.

What we humans have deemed good could definitely exist without evil. The only thing evil would be necessary for is for us to understand the conept of good. If good cannot exist without evil, then there must be evil in heaven.