Questions for "Our Role(s) as Christians on Atheist Forums"

[Edwardo Piet]

Allowing us humans to have free will and allowing this world to be a natural world, as a whole, will have a net good as far as the big picture goes, yes.

A net good over child rape and animal cruelty and all the worst things in the world? I definitely disagree.

This does not mean that each individual bad thing that happens or bad thing a person does, happens for a good reason or is "worth it." There is no good that comes from a child being raped. Ever.

We agree on that but you seem to think that God allows this for a good reason. You seem to think that if God intervened to prevent it then that wouldn't be a better thing for him to do than to sit back and allow it to happen.

---

Even if I were a theist I would not let the idea of God's motives being mysterious or the excuse of "free will" excuse such things as child rape.

We cannot give a better answer than the one provided by Holy Scripture.

Indeed you cannot. And that's why this 'Holy scripture' is so immoral. It should be called unholy scripture as you're basically glorifying the idea of a deity that simply does not care at best and is outright sadistic at worst.

Joseph was kidnapped and left for dead in the desert only to later become the chief adviser to Pharaoh. And years later, he showed mercy on his brothers saying, "You meant it for evil but God turned it into good." I do not believe this is a logical conundrum. It merely reveals how someone chooses to respond to Divine Providence: either with incredulity as an excuse to not believe or reject God or by accepting the authority of God while drawing closer to the Savior in our distress.

This has got nothing to do with belief or unbelief in God. So the idea of it being incredulity as an excuse to not believe is absurd. This has everything to do with if God exists He's clearly a moral monster.

---

You did say that from God's point of view child rape must be worth it in the long run and we must just not understand his point of view. You said that in the end there will be a net good.

I absolutely did NOT say that. Please don't fall into doing the same thing Khem does that we both hate.

I am not doing the same thing Khem does I'm talking about what your position entails.

You said that God must allow it for a good reason and that there will be a net good in the long run... yes? Do I have to go back and quote your post and put parts of it in bold to show that I am not misrepresenting what you said?

The whole point of my question was that God is perfectly capable of preventing it if he exists but he chooses not to.