(October 14, 2026 at 8:06 am)Silas Vane Wrote:

(October 12, 2026 at 8:22 am)Deesse23 Wrote: An omnipotent and perfectly good god could do without, per defintion.

What makes preventing evil an obligation for God, rather than a choice He has the power to make?

Quote:[quote pid='2259461' dateline='1791979581']
Silas Vane Wrote:

As a Christian, if someone survives despite an operation going badly, I can thank God for their survival 

Quote:Silas Vane Wrote:

Nothing happens outside God's sovereign knowledge and permission. 

[/quote]

So if you consider the outcome good, the deity you imagine gets the praise, but if it's bad it just gets a shrug of the shoulders, even though nothing bad can happen without this deity permitting it first. That sounds less like a cogent rationale, and more like confirmation bias to me. Of course you are free to set any subjective moral standard you wish, it's just an absurd contradiction to then insist this deity is morally perfect.

Nothing obligates god to do anything, but a god who is said to be good but not prevent evil can't really be said to be good and a god who is in charge of everything but chooses to allow evil can only be said to be the cause of said evil due to it's lack of opposition to it. 

(October 12, 2026 at 6:56 am)Silas Vane Wrote: You referred to Israel's "post-exilic monarchies" supposedly corrupting the biblical accounts.

I have no idea where you're getting "corrupting" from. It's their mythology.

Quote:You're reaching back centuries before the birth of Jesus Christ, yet somehow presenting this as an explanation for the origins of Christianity.

It's called the Old Testament. Who do you think made up Yahweh? Not Christians, obviously.

Quote:Which monarchies are you referring to, what exactly did they corrupt, and where is your historical evidence?

Again, where are you getting this confused notion of "corruption"? They're just making up stories and eventually scribbling them down. It's why the OT is little more than a litany of God whining that the Israelites don't love him enough and generally acting like a jilted lover.

Quote:For someone so confident in his ridicule, you seem remarkably stupid in your knowledge of history.

And you seem shockingly gormless about the origins of your own scriptures.

(October 14, 2026 at 10:09 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote:

(October 14, 2026 at 8:06 am)Silas Vane Wrote: What makes preventing evil an obligation for God, rather than a choice He has the power to make?

Well, it's an obligation for us.  Do you believe in a god that is unaccountable to basic moral standards of the kind that we humans are subject to?  If you saw someone being murdered...or even just in trouble... and you could help, but didn't, that would be a moral failure, right?  We have cops and firemen and first responders...all of these folks exist, and we support those systems with our taxes, so that we can help reduce some amount of death and misery.  On a more intimate level our familial bonds are expressed in terms of overlapping webs of obligations and care.  If you permitted evil...that would be a moral failure, no?  We don't say "John watches the kids kick the dog when he's not molesting them, but he's a good provider and it can't be helped".  It does seem a bit strange to throw all of that out the window when we think about a god that is alleged to be or supposed to be a moral exemplar.

I've gotta say....if this whole god business is like that, it would only be a sideline to me whether it existed or not.  I don't see the point in worshipping a moral failure in heaven, and if I wanted to worship a moral failure there's plenty right here on earth.  OFC, the whole idea of gods as moral exemplars may be false.  Maybe they do exist and they're just like us in that regard.  Limited, flawed, compromised.   Maybe gods can't help with this or that thing.  Maybe gods fail to recognize this or that evil.  Maybe they do bad things and allow bad things and ask others to do bad things for them when they have some personal goal in mind, some need or desire.  That'd be a shame, a tragic waste of ability and potential, don't you think?

You argue that humans have a moral obligation to prevent evil.

Does that obligation begin with preventing ourselves from committing evil?

And if individuals are responsible for their own actions, on what grounds do you hold God responsible for the evil they choose to commit?

You argue that humans have a moral obligation to prevent evil.

Doesn't that responsibility begin with controlling our own actions?

Yet you appear to expect Jesus to intervene whenever humans choose to commit evil.

Are you arguing that human beings cannot be trusted to govern their own conduct and therefore require Jesus to supervise and prevent their wrongdoing?

And if so, where does individual responsibility begin and God's responsibility end?

Let me guess, when humans commit evil, it's Jesus' fault?

What's next, “The devil made me do it”?

At what point do human beings become responsible for their own actions?

1. If god grants us the ability to make choices he is responsible for all choices . 
2. If a perfectly good being allows us to commit evil how is that being good ?
You can’t have it both ways—if God is in charge of everything and causes everything, including free will, then God bears all the blame for everything, including all choices and if god prevent evil then he is also responsible for the evil he refuses to prevent. Obligation or no.  

(October 16, 2026 at 10:37 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(October 12, 2026 at 6:56 am)Silas Vane Wrote: You referred to Israel's "post-exilic monarchies" supposedly corrupting the biblical accounts.

I have no idea where you're getting "corrupting" from. It's their mythology.

Quote:You're reaching back centuries before the birth of Jesus Christ, yet somehow presenting this as an explanation for the origins of Christianity.

It's called the Old Testament. Who do you think made up Yahweh? Not Christians, obviously.

Quote:Which monarchies are you referring to, what exactly did they corrupt, and where is your historical evidence?

Again, where are you getting this confused notion of "corruption"? They're just making up stories and eventually scribbling them down. It's why the OT is little more than a litany of God whining that the Israelites don't love him enough and generally acting like a jilted lover.

Quote:For someone so confident in his ridicule, you seem remarkably stupid in your knowledge of history.

And you seem shockingly gormless about the origins of your own scriptures.

You claim the Israelites invented Yahweh and simply made up stories about Him. Yet you've offered no historical evidence establishing either accusation.

Calling the Old Testament mythology doesn't prove it's fiction. You're merely disguising your conclusion as an established fact.

The Hebrew Scriptures contain historically verifiable people, places and events. They also contain passages written centuries before Jesus Christ that the New Testament identifies as prophecies fulfilled in Him.

So let's establish the historical foundation of your argument. What evidence proves the Israelites invented Yahweh, and what evidence establishes that their accounts were fabricated?

If you're going to dismiss the biblical record, demonstrate where it fails historically. Ridicule isn't evidence, and repeating your conclusion isn't an argument.

"Gormless"? Interesting accusation from someone who mistakes his own assumptions for historical evidence.

If I'm ignorant, demonstrate it. Otherwise, you're just advertising your inability to defend your claims.

Spider-Man comics feature real people, events, and places... lol

(October 17, 2026 at 8:43 am)The Architect Of Fate Wrote: 1. If god grants us the ability to make choices he is responsible for all choices . 
2. If a perfectly good being allows us to commit evil how is that being good ?
You can’t have it both ways—if God is in charge of everything and causes everything, including free will, then God bears all the blame for everything, including all choices and if god prevent evil then he is also responsible for the evil he refuses to prevent. Obligation or no.  

So, according to your reasoning, we're all puppets with no autonomy, and nothing we've ever done was actually of our own free will?

If God is responsible for every choice, then are you saying humans bear no responsibility for their own conduct?

Jesus Christ is King! But His authority over mankind does not mean He personally makes every decision for mankind.

The Govt rests on His shoulders, and He establishes laws and holds his subjects accountable. When a subject disobeys, that doesn't mean the king caused the disobedience.

Are you arguing that being sovereign means controlling every decision, or can you see the difference between having authority over people and allowing them to make their own decisions and take their own actions?

(October 16, 2026 at 4:21 am)The Architect Of Fate Wrote: Nothing obligates god to do anything, but a god who is said to be good but not prevent evil can't really be said to be good and a god who is in charge of everything but chooses to allow evil can only be said to be the cause of said evil due to it's lack of opposition to it. 

What exactly is your understanding of God's goodness, and by what standard are you judging Him?
You assume that perfect goodness requires God to intervene whenever humans choose to commit evil.
But why couldn't perfect goodness also include allowing human beings to exercise their freedom, make their own decisions, and face the consequences of their actions?
Jesus Christ is King. His sovereignty establishes His authority over mankind, not an obligation to control every decision His subjects make.
Why must God's goodness be measured by His intervention rather than His willingness to allow human beings to exercise their autonomy?
You haven't established that allowing evil is the same as causing it, or refusing to intervene makes God morally responsible for another person's wrongdoing.

If God created free will, then any decisions made as a result of it are ultimately God's responsibility for granting the ability to choose the first place, and He did so by His own choice. It’s even worse when you realize that we don’t have to include the option for evil. Sorry, but God doesn’t get to complain about the choices He freely gave, leading to evil. If the only reason the subject was able to disobey in the first place is because he created preconditions to allow disobedience, it's still on him. In theism freewill was an imposition on humanity, not a choice, and evil wasn't even a needed result of freewill.