Do you recognize that God gains pleasure in creating evil?

[Greatest I am]

When did evil become a thing that needed to be created? (i'm asking for book Chapter and verse, not you personal philosphy)

Evil is an allowance by God. Evil is also the 'proof' of free will, and yes God takes pleasure in allowing us 'free will.'

For if righteousness is without sin, then evil is the allowance to be intently/maliciously outside the expressed will of God.

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.

If we are to exercise our free will as you say to please God, then tell us why he threw such a hissy fit on A & E the first time they exercised their free will to do other than God's will.

Or is his hissy fit how he shows his pleasure?

Regards
DL

[Drich]

Tell me what part of this gives you the most trouble?

The context of the rest of the chapter. God isn't talking about the general creation of Evil as you have suggested.

What is being discussed here is the the support God has for Cyrus and the confusion and destruction He will create for his enemys. This becomes appearent if you can be bothered to read any on either side of your selected passage.

You have taken a message out of it's context to support your baseless assertion. So I ask again for book Chapter and verse where Evil Needs to be created.

[The Grand Nudger]

I say it is, and I also say that you're ignoring the "context" of the verse in favor of some other part of the narrative in order to make it conform to what you believe. You see, the "context" excuse is a double edged sword.

But since you've invoked it, why does your god have so much trouble saying what it means and meaning what it says? I mean I get it, lonely all the way back into eternity, probably doesn't have much practice communicating it's ideas to others, but ffs, throw us a bone! Every time you open your mouth to make an excuse for your god you end up inadvertently making your god look like an even bigger dumbass than he did the moment before.

Perhaps, and I'm just throwing this out there, you should let him go ahead and handle his own excuses? He might be better at it. He doesn't have to get to it today, I can wait. He knows the day of my death so he's got a handle on my availability.

[Greatest I am]

God get's pleasure from evil? Sounds kinky in a fucked up kind of way.

God must be the greatest pervert in the universe.

He must be if omnipotent.
No choice. LOL.

Regards
DL

[Drich]

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

Free will does not assign blame nor does it absolve one from culpablity. It is just the ablity to choose.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

There are only two choices God's expressed will or our own. To be outside of God's expressed will is sin, to intentionally or maliciously seek to be outside of God's will is evil. What makes Evil Evil is the lengths man will go to be outside of God's will. The Gift of true Choice doesn't post blame on God nor does it free Him from it. That is why there is attonement to be found through God in Christ's sacerfice.

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.

Now keep going your alomst there. So since no one can, live a life and not sin how is it that God doesn't simply send us all straight to Hell? Why would He go through the trouble of offering the ultimate sin sacerfice? Why give us choice and take away said consenquences of all of the sinful choices we were destined to make?

The short answer is if all of the sin consenquences are removed then only one decision/question remains to be answered. Meaning if all things are equal (and they were made equal through the sacerfice of Christ) Then the reason we were put on this earth was to decide in our hearts where we wished to spend eternity.

For we could not truly make said choice without a true options. One being God's expressed will (which was that man live along side of him in the garden) and our own or 'free will' and the choices/consenquences it spawns. To make said choice we must have a proper venue apart from the glory and magesty of God. A place where doubt allows for the plausablity to alternitives to God to reign. For is there was undenyable proof of God or if He corrected our bad/sinful choices, then what 'choice' would we have? Reason would demand that we believe God. as made manifest in all of his person by person intercessions and undenyable evidences. This life has been given over to you to choose where you wish to spend eternity. You can only do this apart from God. Being seperated from God makes one subject to the evil of his peers.

If we are to exercise our free will as you say to please God, then tell us why he threw such a hissy fit on A & E the first time they exercised their free will to do other than God's will.

What fit? Nothing that happened to them wasn't fore told.

[Norfolk And Chance]

It's only a book Drich, it's pretend.

[Drich]

I say it is, and I also say that you're ignoring the "context" of the verse in favor of some other part of the narrative in order to make it conform to what you believe. You see, the "context" excuse is a double edged sword.

But since you've invoked it, why does your god have so much trouble saying what it means and meaning what it says? I mean I get it, lonely all the way back into eternity, probably doesn't have much practice communicating it's ideas to others, but ffs, throw us a bone! Every time you open your mouth to make an excuse for your god you end up inadvertently making your god look like an even bigger dumbass than he did the moment before.

Perhaps, and I'm just throwing this out there, you should let him go ahead and handle his own excuses? He might be better at it. He doesn't have to get to it today, I can wait. He knows the day of my death so he's got a handle on my availability.

Problem is not with God, it is with the people who pick and choose what they need to create an image of God after their own hearts. For the words are there, and concise. where you all seem to get hung up is in the numbers that denote Chapter and verse. Understand these numbers were not apart of the orginal texts, and the do not denote complete thoughts.

They are a study guides for students of the bible to find and mark passages and nothing else.

---

It's only a book Drich, it's pretend.

does this mean you putting me on 'ignore' was pretend too? If so I would agree on your assessment of 'pretend.'

[Norfolk And Chance]

What are you talking about? I don't recall putting you on ignore.

[The Grand Nudger]

Problem is not with God, it is with the people who pick and choose what they need to create an image of God after their own hearts.

As you are doing with this verse that doesn't sit right with you...huh?

For the words are there, and concise.

Except when they aren't, and you're the arbitrator of such situations, aren't you? I too think that the words are there, and that they are concise, the words stating that god created evil are there, and the meaning of those words is concise.

where you all seem to get hung up is in the numbers that denote Chapter and verse. Understand these numbers were not apart of the orginal texts, and the do not denote complete thoughts.

Didn't realize that anyone was hung up on this at all, actually I don't think I've ever complained about how any given verse was numbered, here I am talking about exactly what the text says and you think my problem is with the fucking dewel decimels attached? No, I call bullshit, you're attempting to mount a diversion...again.

They are a study guides for students of the bible to find and mark passages and nothing else.

And? See the above. Complete fucking bullshit, as usual.

[Drich]

Problem is not with God, it is with the people who pick and choose what they need to create an image of God after their own hearts.

As you are doing with this verse that doesn't sit right with you...huh?

For the words are there, and concise.

Except when they aren't, and you're the arbitrator of such situations, aren't you? I too think that the words are there, and that they are concise, the words stating that god created evil are there, and the meaning of those words is concise.

where you all seem to get hung up is in the numbers that denote Chapter and verse. Understand these numbers were not apart of the orginal texts, and the do not denote complete thoughts.

Didn't realize that anyone was hung up on this at all, actually I don't think I've ever complained about how any given verse was numbered, here I am talking about exactly what the text says and you think my problem is with the fucking dewel decimels attached? No, I call bullshit, you're attempting to mount a diversion...again.

They are a study guides for students of the bible to find and mark passages and nothing else.

And?

I have noticed in the beginning of our discussions you often addressed my points with actual counter points asking and challenging reference material. Now it seems more and more, all you can do is try and trivialize what is said and move to dismiss without even addressing what was said.

Probably because you have noticed that most of your efforts go unchallenged. My question to you is how is this a discussion at this point? I make a statement and either offer to or simply list out proper reference material and you respond like this:" See the above. Complete fucking bullshit, as usual." This is a cut and paste of some of your better work. (Recently) Is this now your best offering? Is this all you can do? If it is, why do you feel so threatened by what i have to say to even type this drivel out? what's the point? Why not let me assume that this is your response (or one like it) and only pipe up when you have something different to offer?

Because to be honest when I see your smiling dog avatar it's a coin toss on whether or not I am going to read what you have to say, because more or less it is the same crap ad nauseam... Seriously can't you write something that does not appeal to my pride or vanity for a response? How about this, try and address the topic at hand or i stop reading what you have to say for a few weeks to give you a chance to gather your thoughts and construct a decent reply. I know it's work, but know I am not asking anything more of you, than what I am will to provide for you.