A traditional defense against the problem of evil

Author: SethBrown

Posts

Total: 55
Topic's author
#31
SethBrown
SethBrown's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 102
0
1
7
SethBrown's avatar
SethBrown
0
1
7
-->
@Double_R
Imagine how much evil the world would be rid of with this one simple tweak, yet God chose not to create this world. I would ask why, but the answer is irrelevant because God is all powerful so there is nothing that could have forced his hand. This was a willing choice. That alone refutes that God is all loving.
What simple tweak could he do? 
He doesn't have to remove our free will to ensure we are protected from tragedy. If my toddler is running around the living room and I see a knife on the table, I'm not going to pretend I'm somehow interfering with their free will by removing it.
Well you completely ignored my response, he could allow it to happen & make good out of it in his omnipotence. That may be better than interfering

#32
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,516
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@hey-yo
Yeah I never got that argument. "God made us in His image," but we never read about how we are made exactly like Him.
We would be gods if we were. 
Haven't you heard of the ancient astronauts' theory?

"Then God said, 'Let us make mankind in our image,..' " genesis 1, 26. 

Why God speaks in plural? Is there the possibility that Jehova is not a God but a group of aliens? 


#33
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@IlDiavolo
Haven't you heard of the ancient astronauts' theory?

"Then God said, 'Let us make mankind in our image,..' " genesis 1, 26. 

Why God speaks in plural? Is there the possibility that Jehova is not a God but a group of aliens? 
I wrote 4 years ago: Encounters with god-men.  


So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak. But Jacob replied, I will not let you go unless you bless me.

The man asked him, what is your name? Jacob, he answered. Then the man said, your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.

Jacob said; please tell me your name. But he replied, why do you ask my name?  Then he blessed him there. So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, it is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”Genesis 32:24-30. NIV.

6 times!!! Jacob called this being a man. So unless we are going to contradict Jacob, call him a liar, say he was delusional, or accuse him of dreaming or simply making false claim  or not understanding what he had been wrestling with, then we have to take his word that he wrestled with a human that he simply called a "god"
 
It is all very human behaviour for anyone reading these verses. It appears very clear that these "gods" or at least this particular god was human in every way. He even used a dirty tactic to overcome his human opponent Jacob/ Is Ra El in this wrestling match.  But what is one to expect when it clearly explains to us in Genesis that we were created in the image of these very human "gods"-  plural. 

Genesis

18 The Lord appeared to Abraham near the large trees of Mamre. Abraham was sitting at the entrance to his tent. It was the hottest time of the day. 2 Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby. So he quickly left the entrance to his tent to greet them. He bowed low to the ground.
3 He said, “My lord, if you are pleased with me, don’t pass me by. 4 Let me get you some water. Then all of you can wash your feet and rest under this tree. 5 Let me get you something to eat to give you strength. Then you can go on your way. I want to do this for you now that you have come to me.”

8 Then he brought some butter and milk and the calf that had been prepared. He served them to the three men. While they ate, he stood near them under a tree.
16 The men got up to leave.
22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom.

I make that four times!!!  that Abraham clearly describes these lords as MEN. Why are you insisting that he couldn't tell the difference between a man and what you call a "god"?


One can not avoid the fact that these MEN  eat, drink, wash and sleep and  do everything that a human does. This is because they are men. And he addressed  these MEN by the title of "lord" just like in the days of Mesopotamia. Not a mention of a "god" at all. Surly, the great father of the hebrews would have known what these approaching  beings were?  And he did,  as soon as he set eyes on them, they were "men".

So we have two accounts where two biblical patriarchs no less, have described these beings clearly as men. 

 
Albeit  highly advanced type of men.
#34
hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
-->
@IlDiavolo
Uh not sure what direction this is going but that passage is used to justify the Trinity. God the father, God the son, God the Holy Ghost. Three persons in one being. 


#35
hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
-->
@Stephen
Im responding as simple as possible. 

In both passages given we can see issues. 

1. 
The first about Jacob. We can look at bellow response to how Jacob and God may wrestle give possible explanations that would solve the question in this thread; is Jacob wrestling a man?



Likewise we should recognize a common depiction in christian literature. Our visions of God and personal revelations take on different forms. Even in fiction, our depiction of God as "man" is something not literal. 

A great movie for this thread, THE SHACK depicts God as a woman. However, neither the character in the story, the story itself, or the authors declare God to be a literal woman. 


Here is the movie trailer. The novel version is a swell read as main character is conflicted by the question of evil. 

2. Context and consistency. 
Point 1 can account for both passages.  lets consider the points being made. 

Stephen is using a literal interpretation that Abraham and Jacob use the word man to describe God. 

Abraham also communes with God whilst God is a burning bush & cloud thunder and lightning (on top the mountain to make 10 commandments). Why are we not considering these forms to be literal embodiment of God? 

#36
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Only, the trouble you have with issue 1& 2 is the fact that it is written in scripture and not a movie script.

 And the problem you have with the burning bush, cloud thunder and lightning is that it wasn't Abraham, it was Moses.

Come back when you have actually read these  BIBLICAL stories that you think you understand but haven't read.

Stephen is using a literal interpretation that Abraham and Jacob use the word man to describe God. 

Are you saying the patriarchs didn't know the difference or that you  that these eye witnesses  didn't know what they were witnessing and were  illiterate and  stupid..

And yes, Jacob AND Abraham  describe these "gods" of men, because they were men. 
#37
hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
-->
@Stephen
Lol. Deflection to the worst. 

I only reference Literature (and movie script) based on christian theology, that God can present Himself as He wishes. 

I see no direct rebuttle to this or the link provided. Concede then?

Yes I put  Abraham instead of Moses.  Now that we established you are aware of the content you intentially left out. Why are we to believe you only for representations that say men instead of the other represenations? 

Are you saying the patriarchs didn't know...
Im saying you do not know. That's ok. We can't know everything. Only unfortunate when we do know something and then lie about it. 

For these patriachs, their description is of men but what they witness is not man. Otherwise they would not have used the word god. 

3. Something I may add. 
The word lord is a title that, in the time of writting the english translations, was used to describe men of royalty or nobility. Such a usage to any man does not declare that man as god. 

We need to better understand context to the words used.  A neutral "not knowing" is satifactory. Then we can research and learn. 
#38
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@hey-yo
Lol. Deflection to the worst. 
 There is/was nothing to deflect from. 
The scripture makes it perfectly clear that these gods are clearly described as men. 

Other places they are simply referred to as lords and or gods. Angels too are often described as "men".. There is absolutely nothing supernatural about these beings other than they seem to be of some higher status than the average human being.

And as Abraham clearly attests, the MEN that came to his tent did eat, drink, wash and sleep and  do everything that a human does. 

As does the bible attest many, many times that there were many gods no matter how many times you attempt to rewrite and reinterpret scripture. 


But you see the bible even tells us that those outside of the Hebrew/Israelite family recognised multiple gods.“ let US go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” Genesis 11:7 

 “You shall have no other gods before me”.Exodus.20:3 

 Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people which are round about you; Deuteronomy 6:14-16 
 

God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.....  Psalm 82

I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."The Lord is a great God, and a great King aboveall gods"  . Ps.95:3.
 

 For the Lord is a great God, and a great King above all gods. Psalm 95:3 
Psalm 135:5
For I know that the Lord is great, and that our Lord is above all gods.
 
 
The Jewish list of commandments simply says:
 
“You shall not recognize the gods of others in My presence".(Sh’mot 20:1-5).
 
 
"Woe Unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues in the wilderness" (1 Sam. 4:8).
 
Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged to Daniel that "your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings,..."(Dan. 2:47).
 
He spoke of Daniel as one "in whom is the spirit of the holy gods" and told Daniel "I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee"(Dan. 4:8-9, 18)
 
His queen also spoke of Daniel as one" in whom is the spirit of the holy gods" and said that he had "wisdom like the wisdom of the gods"(Dan. 5:11). 
 
"Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people" (Ex. 22:10)

Joshua exclaimed, "The LORD God of gods, the LORD God of gods, he knoweth, "(Josh. 22:22;see 22:5)
 
"The house which I build is great: for great is our God above all gods" (2 Chron. 2:5).

When Elyon divided the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam,he established the borders of the nations according to the number of the sons of the gods.Y ahweh’s portion was his people, [Israel]his allotted inheritance. (Deut. 32:8–9)

 
Do not follow other gods, the gods of the peoples around you (Deut. 6:14)
But you must not turn away from all the commandments I am giving you today, to either the right or left, nor pursue other gods and worship them (Deut. 28:14–15).
 
When Moses and the children of Israel sang praises to the LORD they sang, "Who is like unto thee, 0 LORD, among the gods? who is like thee, glorious in holiness fearful in praises, doing wonders?" (Ex. 15:11).

Moses also spoke' of, "The LORD your God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great god, a mighty, . . ." (Deut. 10:17).
 
"Woe Unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues in the wilderness" (1 Sam. 4:8).
 
Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged to Daniel that "your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings,..." (Dan. 2:47).
 
He spoke of Daniel as one "in whom is the spirit of the holy gods" and told Daniel "I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee" (Dan. 4:8-9, 18)
 
His queen also spoke of Daniel as one "in whom is the spirit of the holy gods" and said that he had "wisdom like the wisdom of the gods" (Dan. 5:11). 

"Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people" (Ex. 22:10)
 
REVILE! That Is to say not to  criticize in an abusive or angrily insulting manner.

AGAIN how could anyone "revile" these other gods if - according to you - they didn't even exist?

And this Hebrew god amongst gods also commanded,
 
"In all things that I have said unto you be circumspect: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it he heard out of thy mouth" (Ex.23:13).

#39
hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
-->
@Stephen
Nothing to deflect from but the most important question is dismissed. Contradictions not answered. 

You say angels are described as men. Yes some are. Some are not. 


Abraham shares details. Moses shares details. Man or burning bush? 

Which are we to believe? 

Even the context about other gods is inaccurate. Im not suprised as you have a history in doing so. Just like other threads. But this is our thread to focus on. 

The passages does not attest to other gods (beings) existing. 
#40
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@hey-yo
Which are we to believe? 

With your limited knowledge of the scriptures, that is probably the best question that you will ever get to ask.
Why should we not accept the eyewitness accounts of the patriarchs have to say themselves rather than some interpretation delivered by a 21st century Christian?

But considering that Christians seem to want to deny the existence of other lords even though their own scriptures mentions them, alludes to them and speaks about them on many , many occasions, they will believe what they have been told and taught to believe,, while also ignoring the fact that Jesus was a Jew and had come only to the lost sheep of Israel  ie JEWS, and the word Christian nor Christianity doesn't appear at all in any of the four gospels.






The passages does not attest to other gods existing. 

But they do exactly that. 

The god of the Hebrews Confessed that he was jealous of other gods. If there were no other gods what had he to be jealous of?
Moses was told strictly not to  make images of other gods or to worship any other god, if there are no other gods how could anyone make an image of other gods?


"Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people" (Ex. 22:10)
 
REVILE! That Is to say not to  criticize in an abusive or angrily insulting manner.

AGAIN how could anyone "revile" these other gods if - according to you - they didn't even exist?

Even the gods Jupiter and Mercury get a mention in the bible!



#41
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,266
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@SethBrown
What simple tweak could he do? 
Allow everyone to die of old age.

Well you completely ignored my response, he could allow it to happen & make good out of it in his omnipotence.
The claim is that he's all loving. If he's choosing to allow bad then that definitionally refutes that claim.

As far as the charge that I'm ignoring your response, let's look at a few specific things you said...

Now similarly, I think god must allow people to make their own choices to be good, he must allow them free-will.
Free will and allowing evil are not tied together. That was the point of my toddler analogy. We can be evil all we want, being able to actualize tragedy is a power chose to give to us, which directly contradicts the idea that he's all good.

Now some of god's creatures went wrong in this exercise of freedom
For something to go wrong is a direct contradiction to the claim that he is all powerful and omnicient.

But God can still make great things from bad things
He can also just make good things, but he chooses to use the bad things to do it.


Topic's author
#42
SethBrown
SethBrown's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 102
0
1
7
SethBrown's avatar
SethBrown
0
1
7
-->
@Double_R
Allow everyone to die of old age.
Do you think he cant bring good from someone dying from non-natural causes? 
The claim is that he's all loving. If he's choosing to allow bad then that definitionally refutes that claim.
How is he bad if he allows someone to do bad, yet tells them not to? Same as our law does, doesn't just lock everyone up so it's impossible for bad, but still tells people not to do bad.
Free will and allowing evil are not tied together. That was the point of my toddler analogy. We can be evil all we want, being able to actualize tragedy is a power chose to give to us, which directly contradicts the idea that he's all good.
What's the point of allowing free-will then not allowing someone to do even a smidge of something bad? If god stopped us from doing all bad things, then we would all just be robots following him pretty munch, since we wouldnt truly have the choice to do something we may actually want.
For something to go wrong is a direct contradiction to the claim that he is all powerful and omnicient.
Do you think god determined where people would end up? No, he created them & they end up where they end up, he didnt choose the outcome, they did.
He can also just make good things, but he chooses to use the bad things to do it.
If he created good things then there may only be 3 or so people on the face of the planet, and does he create good things or does he create the possibility for bad & good? Similar to the doctor analogy, by giving a child a shot he risks giving the child an allergic reaction, that could be deadly. He created the possibility for good & the possibility for bad.
#43
hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
-->
@Stephen
that is probably the best question that you will ever get to ask.

I already asked that question earlier. 
Why are we not considering these forms to be literal embodiment of God? 
still no satisfying response. 

Why should we not accept the eyewitness accounts of the patriarchs 
Why should we accept your interpretations? 
1. Patriarchs include Moses. An eye witness to seeing & talking with God. T'was a burning bush. Why are we not accepting this eyewitness account? 

2. some interpretation delivered by a 21st century Christian? There are several documents through out history that lay out consistent christian theology that is continued today. All aligned with what is in the bible. Including this thread's topic. 

 If anything why should we believe a random internet dude's interpretation? 
Because its right there written in the book...
This circular reasoning. 


But considering that Christians seem to want to deny the existence of other lords 

The word lord is a title that, in the time of writting the english translations, was used to describe men of royalty or nobility. Such a usage to any man does not declare that man as god. Nor prooves their existence. 

 also ignoring the fact that Jesus was a Jew and had come only to the lost sheep of Israel  ie JEWS, and the word Christian nor Christianity doesn't appear at all in any of the four gospels.
No need to have the word there. 
The word christian was coined after Jesus' death, during roman persecution. Gospels depict Jesus's life and death. Makes sense that we would not see it. 

There are parts in bible that depict Jesus and salvation to being for all mankind. Not just Jews. 

This is really just more deflection and redirection. 

But they do exactly that. 
No they do not. Disbelief. 
Because context indicates something else. 

The god of the Hebrews Confessed that he was jealous of other gods. If there were no other gods what had he to be jealous of?
Moses was told strictly not to  make images of other gods or to worship any other god, if there are no other gods how could anyone make an image of other gods?
Sounds like you are talking about the ten commandments. 


Where does it say God is jealous? (Rhetorical) 

Baal is refered to in bible as well. This only points to who people in a region worship. That does not depict an actual existing being. 
.......

This is getting too far away from o.p. topic. I will not reply anymore. 

My main points have still gone unanswered. You present contradictions with unsupported premises to a false conclusion. 


#44
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@hey-yo
. You present contradictions with unsupported premises to a false conclusion. 


Example.  

I have quoted the bible. It is you that has contradicted that which the bible explicitly states. 

"Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people" (Ex. 22:10)
 
REVILE! That Is to say not to  criticize in an abusive or angrily insulting manner.

AGAIN how could anyone "revile" these other gods if - according to you - they didn't even exist?





 also ignoring the fact that Jesus was a Jew and had come only to the lost sheep of Israel  ie JEWS, and the word Christian nor Christianity doesn't appear at all in any of the four gospels.
No need to have the word there. 

But it is there ,isn't it. Again. I have quoted  the bible. Jesus was sent to the lost sheep of Israel "only". Matthew 15:24


Why should we not accept the eyewitness accounts of the patriarchs 
Why should we accept your interpretations? 

I haven't made any interpretations. The BIBLE is clear, and on many, many occasions it unequivocally states that their many other gods.


Where does it say God is jealous?

In the bible. Try reading it.


 I will not reply anymore. 

I'm not surprised.  The bible and god contradict what it is you believe.
#45
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,266
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@SethBrown
Do you think he cant bring good from someone dying from non-natural causes? 
Of course he can bring good out of bad, he could have also brought that good without the bad but he chose not to. He chose the bad. Choosing bad is not good. This is really simple stuff.

How is he bad if he allows someone to do bad, yet tells them not to?
He's not a substitute teacher, he's the all powerful creator of the universe. When you are all powerful you don't just tell people not to do things and shrug your shoulders when they do. If God wanted different he would have it. Instead he chooses this. He chooses a world where tragedy occurs every single day. That's not an all loving being.

What's the point of allowing free-will then not allowing someone to do even a smidge of something bad? If god stopped us from doing all bad things, then we would all just be robots following him pretty munch
Again, if your toddler is roaming free throughout the living room and you see a knife on the table do you take it or leave it there in the name of free will?

You continue to pretend that the ability to choose one's own actions and the capability to carry out a tragedy are tied together, they're not. Taking away the kife doesn't stop the toddler from making their own choices, it just removes a threat to their safety. God could have easily created a world with that idea in mind where one person's free will wasn't a literal threat to the life and safety of everyone around them. He chose not to create that world.

I'm curious, do you believe in heaven, and if so, do you believe we get to have free will there?

Do you think god determined where people would end up? No, he created them & they end up where they end up, he didnt choose the outcome, they did.
Actually, this is sightly off the topic but if you believe God is omnipotent and omnicient, it is not logically possible for us to have free will.

If he is omnipotent then there is no outcome that would have been beyond his control. If he is omnicient then there is no outcome in which he wasn't fully aware would be the case as he made his decision. So when he created this universe he had plenty of other options, he could have chosen a universe where I would end up a theist and you the atheist or even a universe in which we would never have been born. But instead this is the universe he created and he did so knowing full well how it would turn out. He made this choice, that's not free will.

He created the possibility for good & the possibility for bad.
Exactly, which directly contradicts that he's all good.

#46
hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
There is another approach to the problem of evil. 

Evil, An Argument for God
In fact, rather than disproving God’s existence, the reality of evil actually points to it, in an indirect way. If evil exists, then it follows that morality exists. If morality exists, then it follows that God exists.
Moral laws point to a moral law-giver. It’s only within a moral framework that the sufferings of this life can have any meaning. It may be a mystery why an all-good God allows suffering and evil to take place, but at least on this view there is meaning and purpose, and God can ultimately bring about justice and draw good out of the sufferings of this life.

#47
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Stephen


Stephen,

How many times have you heart this phrase form me, which is; "here we go again with Miss Tradesecret's outright Bible STUPIDITY?!"

MISS TRADESECRETS BLATANT BIBLE STUPID QUOTE:  "This I think is one of (not the only one) the best evidences that evil doesn't spring from God." 

WTF!  Of course EVIL springs from Jesus as God since He created EVIL in the first place, H-E-L-L-O?   JESUS AS GOD SAID:  "I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create EVIL; I am the Lord, who does all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)



MISS TRADESECRETS BIBLE STUPID QUOTE AGAIN!:  "The Christian says God created all things.  Evil of course is not a thing. It is an action or lack of action."

Miss Tradesecret falls flat upon her face AGAIN with her Bible Stupid inference above when Jesus' inspired words state; "For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him." (Colossians 1:16)  Therefore, her statement of "Evil is not a thing," falls under my serial killer Jesus as God positing in the passage above, "visible and invisible" where this proposition cancels her notion that our God DID CREATE EVIL EVEN THOUGH IT IS AN "INVISIBLE THING!"

Stephen, when will Miss Tradesecrets outright Bible Stupidisms®️ ever end in front of the membership?

.

#48
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Stephen,

How many times have you head this phrase ffrom me, which is; "here we go again with Miss Tradesecret's outright Bible STUPIDITY?!"

BILLIONS! Brother D.

MISS TRADESECRETS BLATANT BIBLE STUPID QUOTE:  "This I think is one of (not the only one) the best evidences that evil doesn't spring from God." 

WTF!  Of course EVIL springs from Jesus as God since He created EVIL in the first place, H-E-L-L-O?   JESUS AS GOD SAID:  "I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create EVIL; I am the Lord, who does all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)
Yes, as is the norm. Completely denying that which comes from the mouth of god himself. Are we to expect anything different from the Reverend Tradsecret ,
Brother D. ?


MISS TRADESECRETS BIBLE STUPID QUOTE AGAIN!:  "The Christian says God created all things.  Evil of course is not a thing. It is an action or lack of action."

Miss Tradesecret falls flat upon her face AGAIN with her Bible Stupid inference above when Jesus' inspired words state; "For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him." (Colossians 1:16)  Therefore, her statement of "Evil is not a thing," falls under my serial killer Jesus as God positing in the passage above, "visible and invisible" where this proposition cancels her notion that our God DID CREATE EVIL EVEN THOUGH IT IS AN "INVISIBLE THING!"
Again Brother.  The Reverend Tradsecret in his desperation to show us all his amazing ability of being able to  "memorise the bible backward and forward from a very early age and in many ancient languages" , s/he forgot that the creator of all things created that which cannot be seen.  


Stephen, when will Miss Tradesecrets outright Bible Stupidisms®️ ever end in front of the membership?

Never.  
Topic's author
#49
SethBrown
SethBrown's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 102
0
1
7
SethBrown's avatar
SethBrown
0
1
7
-->
@Double_R
Of course he can bring good out of bad, he could have also brought that good without the bad but he chose not to. He chose the bad. Choosing bad is not good. This is really simple stuff.
Okay and given there is free-will in the universe, would he be evil if he made good from bad? You have a situation that happened without you & yet you try to make it better.

He's not a substitute teacher, he's the all powerful creator of the universe. When you are all powerful you don't just tell people not to do things and shrug your shoulders when they do. If God wanted different he would have it. Instead he chooses this. He chooses a world where tragedy occurs every single day. That's not an all loving being.
He also created a world where many great things happen a day, he created us with free-will under the intent for us to do good
Again, if your toddler is roaming free throughout the living room and you see a knife on the table do you take it or leave it there in the name of free will?
Did you give your toddler free-will? Can you make good from your toddler doing something bad? It’s a dis analogy

You continue to pretend that the ability to choose one's own actions and the capability to carry out a tragedy are tied together, they're not. Taking away the kife doesn't stop the toddler from making their own choices, it just removes a threat to their safety. God could have easily created a world with that idea in mind where one person's free will wasn't a literal threat to the life and safety of everyone around them. He chose not to create that world.
I don’t think they are tied together (free-will to potency distinction) but if you create people that can only do good then you still have zombies since they can’t even think of a bad thing, thinking of doing a bad thing is bad as well.
I'm curious, do you believe in heaven, and if so, do you believe we get to have free will there?
I don’t think you will, the main difference is all the bad thoughts are removed, god won’t do that in this world since he wants us to have the choice to be separated from him

Actually, this is sightly off the topic but if you believe God is omnipotent and omnicient, it is not logically possible for us to have free will.
I don’t see a good reason to believe this is true, he just knows the decisions we are going to freely choose, there isn’t a contradiction there.

If he is omnipotent then there is no outcome that would have been beyond his control. If he is omnicient then there is no outcome in which he wasn't fully aware would be the case as he made his decision. So when he created this universe he had plenty of other options, he could have chosen a universe where I would end up a theist and you the atheist or even a universe in which we would never have been born. But instead this is the universe he created and he did so knowing full well how it would turn out. He made this choice, that's not free will.
Just because your omnipotent doesn’t mean you must control everything, it’d be contradictory to say a omnipotent being can’t not control everything, since that’s limiting his ability. And where do you get the notion he chooses the universe? He created people & let the system run, he didn’t choose it, they did since there is free-will.
Exactly, which directly contradicts that he's all good.
It’d be cruel to not give them the option to choose bad, if you do so then there is a ton of things that can’t happen, there can’t be love without free-will.



#50
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,266
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@SethBrown
Okay and given there is free-will in the universe, would he be evil if he made good from bad? You have a situation that happened without you & yet you try to make it better.
He's omnipresent, there is no situation that happens without him.

You miss the point yet again, the problem is that that he made good from bad, the problem is that there was bad there in the first place.

He also created a world where many great things happen a day
So what? We're not disagreeing on whether God (if he were to exist) is good at all, we're disagreeing on whether he's all good. There is a big difference between those two things.

Did you give your toddler free-will? Can you make good from your toddler doing something bad? It’s a dis analogy
It's not a disalalogy. Again, controlling someone's mind and/or decision making is not the same thing as limiting ones capabilities. Throwing someone in prison stops one from being able to carry out a terrorist attack, it does not remove their free will.

The toddler analogy is perfectly reasonable here. Imagine if I allowed my toddler to cross the street by themself in heavy traffic and they died as a result, then I tried to justify my decision on the basis that what I did was good because I have them free will. Any individual with an IQ above room temperature would instantly recognize the absurdity of that defense. Yet this is the same defense theists use to justify why God allows evil in the world. 'God loves us so much that he gave us the gift of being able to slaughter each other'. You can't possibly tell me that makes sense.

I'm curious, do you believe in heaven, and if so, do you believe we get to have free will there?
I don’t think you will, the main difference is all the bad thoughts are removed, god won’t do that in this world since he wants us to have the choice to be separated from him
I'm taking this to mean there is no free will in heaven, is that what you are saying?

And where do you get the notion he chooses the universe? He created people & let the system run, he didn’t choose it, they did since there is free-will.
Let me try this again.

If he is omnipotent then nothing is beyond his choice. You cannot therefore argue under any circumstance that he is not ultimately in control of anything that happens regardless of his involvement.

If he is omnicient then he knows everything that will happen. He doesn't have the ability to find out what will happen because that by definition would l make him not omnicient.

So let's put these two things together. God is the creator of the universe. The possibilities here are endless so we'll just simplify this to Universe A and Universe B.

In Universe A, you are a theist.

In universe B, you are an atheist.

Because God is omnicient, it is not possible for him to have created the universe without knowing whether it would turn out to be Universe A or Universe B.

Because God is omnipotent, he could have chosen either.

God therefore had the choice between A and B, and he chose A.

Because God chose A (where you are a theist), God therefore made that choice for you along with every other choice you think you have made.

Therefore you do not have free will, everything that will happen was already foreseen by God and this is the universe he chose to create.
#51
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Best.Korea
Why did you become Christian? You are not a virgin.

According to Bible, only 144000 men will enter heaven, and they will all be virgin men. The rest go to burn.

I am a virgin, so even as satanist I have better chance of going to heaven than you!
Curiously enough, I was a virgin when Christ saved me.  I was around about 8. 

The Bible doesn't say that only 144,000 men enter heaven. And the rest burn.  That is not true. I assume you are referring to a specific passage in Revelation. Why don't you quote it in context? 

Are you a virgin?  I suppose given your language, which is of a teenage boy with hormones, that might sound true. Although, in your case, you are simply an immature 40-year-old Indian who lives in Canada. And if you are a virgin, it is not through choice,  but rather rejection.  

Satanists won't go to heaven unless they are saved by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. 
#52
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,670
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Tradesecret
Are you a virgin?  I suppose given your language, which is of a teenage boy with hormones, that might sound true
Thanks for believing me.

Although, in your case, you are simply an immature 40-year-old Indian who lives in Canada. 
☹

#53
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Best.Korea
And didn't you love the results of the World Cup last evening? As they say, the cream rises to the top.  
#54
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,670
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Tradesecret
Yay Cream
#55
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
Tradesecretwrote: Curiouslyenough, I was a virgin when Christ saved me.  I was around about8.  #51
"8 years old"!  What an absolute contradictory lying clown the Reverend Tradesecret is!

Well he didn’t stay “saved” for long did he.

What about all that “sexual deviancy and sexual experimentation you tell us all about? How old was you then 7!!!!

I have the receipts, Reverend, would you like to see them?