IF GOD EXISTS, THEN HE CERTAINLY DOES NOT CARE FOR YOU AT ALL

[clemdog14]

What if I reject your givens? What if God does not want to desire evil?

What if God sees everything as a "good?" For instance, God sees the anthill and thinks it is good. He sees the ants and they are good.

In my view of God, it would be paradoxical for him to commit evil. It's not that he desires or wants to do evil, rather, it would be impossible for him to commit evil.

In other words, declaring that God could commit evil would be equivalent in saying something on the lines of God can exist and not exist at the same time. It is not logically possible by definition.

[SpecUVdust]

What if I reject your givens? What if God does not want to desire evil?

If you reject it, then you reject it. You have overlooked some things I think. If god, does not desire evil, it would not exist.

What if God sees everything as a "good?" For instance, God sees the anthill and thinks it is good. He sees the ants and they are good.

Well then, he would see no difference between good and evil. We can. This means we have an ability that god does not have. Secondly, isn't god supposed to KNOW? Not THINK? But he doesn't see the ants as good does he? Your bibles god tried to fix humanity how many times? And still says he will be "fixing" us again.An all powerful god would KNOW that you do not fix that which is not broke.

In my view of God, it would be paradoxical for him to commit evil. It's not that he desires or wants to do evil, rather, it would be impossible for him to commit evil.

View view mother fucking view!!!!! Why is it always a view!
But anyways, this is a mere statement of opinion. No proof for your VIEW, and no PROOF of the god itself. Your bible agrees with you though. It would tell you that god would simply send an "angel of death" (his finger) to deliver evil acts. But his finger is HIM. Check out the thread " the evolution of satan in the bible" he's got a good video in the op.

In other words, declaring that God could commit evil would be equivalent in saying something on the lines of God can exist and not exist at the same time. It is not logically possible by definition.

I absolutely agree, since god, let alone anything he can or can't do, has no proof to back it up, both have the same gargantuan improbability. You're god's existence hasn't been proven, yet you're more interested in deciding what he can and can't do. You see no irony here?
But just for kicks:
You say it can't commit evil. To create evil would be an evil act. Therefore I ask you, did you're god create evil???

[clemdog14]

What if I reject your givens? What if God does not want to desire evil?

If you reject it, then you reject it. You have overlooked some things I think. If god, does not desire evil, it would not exist.

Perhaps God does not desire evil, however, by giving us free will, he gives us the option to commit evil acts. This does not mean that he desires for us to commit evil. I would think that he would want us to do good instead.

What if God sees everything as a "good?" For instance, God sees the anthill and thinks it is good. He sees the ants and they are good.

Well then, he would see no difference between good and evil. We can. This means we have an ability that god does not have. Secondly, isn't god supposed to KNOW? Not THINK? But he doesn't see the ants as good does he? Your bibles god tried to fix humanity how many times? And still says he will be "fixing" us again.An all powerful god would KNOW that you do not fix that which is not broke.

Why would God not see any difference between good and evil if he only saw things as goods in themselves?

Your right about God trying to help humanity throughout the ages. It's interesting that he tries to fix us and that he is patient. Question: are you implying that we are not broken?

In my view of God, it would be paradoxical for him to commit evil. It's not that he desires or wants to do evil, rather, it would be impossible for him to commit evil.

View view mother fucking view!!!!! Why is it always a view!
But anyways, this is a mere statement of opinion. No proof for your VIEW, and no PROOF of the god itself. Your bible agrees with you though. It would tell you that god would simply send an "angel of death" (his finger) to deliver evil acts. But his finger is HIM. Check out the thread " the evolution of satan in the bible" he's got a good video in the op.

Interesting. Question: If God sent an "angel of death" and he is by definition good, would that be evil per se? I do agree that there is no proof to my view or to my God. It is based on faith.

In other words, declaring that God could commit evil would be equivalent in saying something on the lines of God can exist and not exist at the same time. It is not logically possible by definition.

I absolutely agree, since god, let alone anything he can or can't do, has no proof to back it up, both have the same gargantuan improbability. You're god's existence hasn't been proven, yet you're more interested in deciding what he can and can't do. You see no irony here?
But just for kicks:
You say it can't commit evil. To create evil would be an evil act. Therefore I ask you, did you're god create evil???

Interesting. Maybe God created the capacity to do evil. Then again, it depends on how you define good. In my view (yes view ;D), evil is simply the privation of good. In other words, there is no such thing as evil per se, rather, evil is the absence of good (kind of like how darkness is the absence of light).

Good conversation.

[KichigaiNeko]

Interesting. Maybe God created the capacity to do evil. Then again, it depends on how you define good. In my view (yes view ;D), evil is simply the privation of good. In other words, there is no such thing as evil per se, rather, evil is the absence of good (kind of like how darkness is the absence of light).

I think you had better go back to your bible clem. I am not able to quote chapter and verse but many here can which states that your abrahamic deity did IN FACT create evil.

Sounds like you are just doing the creationist mind apologistic jerk.

[Cato]

Interesting. Maybe God created the capacity to do evil. Then again, it depends on how you define good. In my view (yes view ;D), evil is simply the privation of good. In other words, there is no such thing as evil per se, rather, evil is the absence of good (kind of like how darkness is the absence of light).

Good conversation.

The 'privation of good' argument is still just an 'out' for your god. To make this argument you must admit that your god is incapable of controlling outcomes. God creates the capacity to do evil, evil happens; therefore god doesn't or is incapable of intervening. Which is it? God is incapable (so much for omnipotence) or is unwilling (so much for omnibenevolence).

If, when faced with obvious contradiction, you start to strip god of his 'omni' powers; why then call him god?

[clemdog14]

Interesting. Maybe God created the capacity to do evil. Then again, it depends on how you define good. In my view (yes view ;D), evil is simply the privation of good. In other words, there is no such thing as evil per se, rather, evil is the absence of good (kind of like how darkness is the absence of light).

Good conversation.

The 'privation of good' argument is still just an 'out' for your god. To make this argument you must admit that your god is incapable of controlling outcomes. God creates the capacity to do evil, evil happens; therefore god doesn't or is incapable of intervening. Which is it? God is incapable (so much for omnipotence) or is unwilling (so much for omnibenevolence).

If, when faced with obvious contradiction, you start to strip god of his 'omni' powers; why then call him god?

For Cato:

What if I reject your conclusion?

Why accept that God has to control all the outcomes? Even if he does not control all the outcomes does not necessarily mean that it limits his power in any way nor does it mean that he is incapable or cannot intervene.

I have a question, why must I choose between the either/or statement when there are other possibilities concerning the incapability or unwillingness?

For Neko:
I understand that you are mentioning Isaiah, Amos, and Lamentations.

[KichigaiNeko]

The 'privation of good' argument is still just an 'out' for your god. To make this argument you must admit that your god is incapable of controlling outcomes. God creates the capacity to do evil, evil happens; therefore god doesn't or is incapable of intervening. Which is it? God is incapable (so much for omnipotence) or is unwilling (so much for omnibenevolence).

If, when faced with obvious contradiction, you start to strip god of his 'omni' powers; why then call him god?

For Cato:

What if I reject your conclusion?

Why accept that God has to control all the outcomes? Even if he does not control all the outcomes does not necessarily mean that it limits his power in any way nor does it mean that he is incapable or cannot intervene.

I have a question, why must I choose between the either/or statement when there are other possibilities concerning the incapability or unwillingness?

For Neko:
I understand that you are mentioning Isaiah, Amos, and Lamentations.

Please stop using BOLD

[clemdog14]

Sorry sir. I'm trying to learn forum etiquette. My apologies.

[SpecUVdust]

Perhaps God does not desire evil, however, by giving us free will, he gives us the option to commit evil acts. This does not mean that he desires for us to commit evil.I would think that he would want us to do good instead.

Again, if he did not desire it he would not have created it. Evil is its own thing altogether. You can read genesis to understand that Evil is knowledge, awareness, and other attributes "common" to humans. So if you're right, "good" would be the lack of those things. Furthermore, by giving us free will, he gives us the option to commit evil which he created in the first place. With this knowledge, don't you think that at the least, he should not condemn us in the way that he PROMISES in retaliation to our evilness?? Since after all, he gave us evilness.

Question: are you implying that we are not broken?

absolutely as something that is constantly upgraded, is not broken. Evolution is no myth.

Interesting. Maybe God created the capacity to do evil. Then again, it depends on how you define good. In my view (yes view ;D), evil is simply the privation of good. In other words, there is no such thing as evil per se, rather, evil is the absence of good (kind of like how darkness is the absence of light).

Eh, this is only views and a comparison of evil and good as they pertain to a dictionary. We are talking about their theological references are we not?

[clemdog14]

With this knowledge, don't you think that at the least, he should not condemn us in the way that he PROMISES in retaliation to our evilness?? Since after all, he gave us evilness.

I understand. If we were given evil to begin with, then we would be blameless before him. He would not be able to condemn us.

From my understanding however, God did not create evil. He created everything and called it "good." It was only when the good was misused that it became "evil." I see that God created it as the "capacity" for evil to exist.

For instance, I have the opportunity to do an evil. I can go and punch a baby. If I do it, I have done an evil, however, before doing so I had the capacity to create this evil. The evil did not exist per se before I punched the baby, however, there was still the capacity to do this evil.

Maybe it is the same way with God. God does not create evil, rather, he gives us free will and when we wish to commit evil God grants this capacity because if he did not allow this capacity, he would be violating our free will.

How would he be doing this? If he did not grant this opportunity, he would be restraining our free will. Therefore, God allows evil because of our free will.

Evolution is no myth.

I think that evolution could have happened.