But John, you're missing the point. God didn't need to create anyone. You're talking about a being that's described as having limitless traits of power and goodness and then giving him a completely human trait like the yearning for deep relationships. Then you're saying, he's willing to kill and torture for all eternity those of his creations who don't quite meet his expectations. Where's the goodness? Where's the understanding?

The cosmic first date idea doesn't matter; he's supposed to be entirely good. If he's entirely good, he can put up with a sub-optimal partner for all eternity. Don't forget that he made us sub-optimal.

The usual (apologetic) answer is that by eating a fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, sin entered into the world, which should (in their view anyways) explain why we have Evil in the world.

My usual contention is that Adam & Eve could not differentiate between good and evil before eating of the Tree of Knowledge, so their action couldn't have been what justifies god's actions by throwing them out of Eden. IOW: it was a setup by the get-go.

it was the world's first case of entrapment. God is omnimax, right? That means he knew what would happen when he put them in the garden of Eden. He could have not put the tree there, but he did. He could have not let the snake get at them, but he did. He knew all along that they would eat the apple, and that he would toss them out into the cold, cruel world. That is the act of an evil deity. That is where the evil came from. The boss himself. But these believers will always, no matter what, let him off the hook. They have to, they can't live without him. It's pitiful, actually. How is this still going on in the 21st Century? We should be beyond the need for imaginary friends, ffs

The argument fails because it refutes itself. The concepts of good and evil have no meaning without a moral order that transcends physical reality.

(May 21, 2013 at 3:13 pm)Minimalist Wrote: You really ought to read your own shit once in a while, Drippy.

Quote:King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Isa. 45,7

Yeah, I know...you in your borderline mystic wisdom have conned yourself into believing that it doesn't mean what it clearly says.

That's because you are a jackass.

Please Minnie show me how what I have said contradicts what Isa 45 says.

Oh for fuck's sake, Chad. The argument from morality as a response to the problem of evil? Ok, sure, let's do it.

If God holds that moral standard, then he knows the difference between good and evil. If he in turn creates evil, which scripture clearly says he does, then he has violated his own standard, and should suffer in hell with us.

---

(May 21, 2013 at 7:03 pm)Drich Wrote: Please Minnie show me how what I have said contradicts what Isa 45 says.

I don't think you've said anything that contradicts Isaiah, but I might add that putting a barrier between the definitions of "sin" and "evil" makes my case stronger. If sin came into the world at the fall, then God went ahead and did bad things in addition to it. If sin and evil is the same concept, then you may still be able to make the claim that the only time God does "evil" is as punishment for those who disobeyed.

(May 21, 2013 at 6:17 pm)Sal Wrote: My usual contention is that Adam & Eve could not differentiate between good and evil before eating of the Tree of Knowledge, so their action couldn't have been what justifies god's actions by throwing them out of Eden. IOW: it was a setup by the get-go.

This is a very valid point that I was too lazy to make . People who don't have the capacity to decide between two options cannot be held responsible for their actions, especially if there is coercion.

(May 21, 2013 at 3:55 pm)Praetorian Wrote: [quote='Drich' pid='447944' dateline='1369163155']
I argue (because the bible supports it)
Sin is an act or want to be outside of God's expressed will.
Evil is an intense desire or malicious act of/to sin.

Not all sin is evil but all evil is sin.

Quote:But if this is the case, then sin is arbitrary,

How so? Explain.

Quote: and the only reason we are destined for damnation is because God wills it.

Again how so?

Quote:If that is the case then we are like God's cosmic ant farm.

Uh, no. This realm this world is a proving ground apart from the knowledge of the Glory of God. So that 'we' may have the freedom to choose where we want to spend eternity without the influence of what God has to offer.

Quote:then he still has to answer for why: 1. He ever intervened,

Asked and answered in Scripture. God created because it Pleased Him to do so. His intervention was always apart of the plan.

Quote:and why when he did, he did so on a purely arbitrary basis (i.e. choosing the Hebrew people as "his people" as opposed to, say, the Egyptians)

Also answered in scripture. The jews were picked because He made a promise to Abraham, for being a righteous man.

Quote: and, 2. Why he created beings capable if evil if he, in fact, desires a relationship with those people.

Again answered in the bible.
If there is only God's expressed will then there is no other choice to be had but to be in the expressed will of God. The only 'choice there is, is to sin. As I outlined in my first response evil is the 'proof' of choice. The proof that we truly can stand outside the expressed will of God.

---

(May 21, 2013 at 3:59 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:I wouldn't say that, he's just telling us what he believes.

I've been down this road with him before. After a while you'll lose patience with him too. He thinks that he gets to re-write his book to make it say what he wants it to say.

It's a good trick if you can get away with it but I won't let him.

I'm a prick.

I haven't rewritten anything sport. The only thing I have done is forced you to look at context that you would otherwise ignore. Your last bit in Mat 5 is a perfect example. You chose to only look at the first part of the message, because it supported your weak argument, but when I looked at the whole contextual message, it changed the whole meaning of the passage you choose to misrepresent.

---

I can't post. My last three messages did not appear

I just saw this a minute ago.



Sounds apt..

(May 21, 2013 at 7:03 pm)Drich Wrote:

(May 21, 2013 at 3:13 pm)Minimalist Wrote: You really ought to read your own shit once in a while, Drippy.


Isa. 45,7

Yeah, I know...you in your borderline mystic wisdom have conned yourself into believing that it doesn't mean what it clearly says.

That's because you are a jackass.

Please Minnie show me how what I have said contradicts what Isa 45 says.

You have previously denied that your fucking god said he created all "evil." Do you wish to retract that silly statement?

(May 21, 2013 at 7:08 pm)Praetorian Wrote: If God holds that moral standard, then he knows the difference between good and evil. If he in turn creates evil, which scripture clearly says he does, then he has violated his own standard, and should suffer in hell with us.

If you refer to the Isaiah 45 quote mentioned then you must first distinguish between natural and moral evil. No Christian denies that the Lord created all the features of the natural world including earthquakes, hurricanes, and floods. The fact that natural disasters happen does not have moral implications.

I can already hear someone objecting,"yeah, but look how much death and suffering He allows to happen." I will remind that smarty pants that life is a gift. Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away. We wouldn't even be alive if not for God, so we don't have any right to complain that ours wasn't long enough.