The problem of evil is one of the most troublesome problems that faces anyone that believes that there exists an all-good, all-knowing, and all-powerful God who created the world we inhabit.

premise 1. An all good, all knowing, and all powerful God exists

2. There exists evil in the world

The existence of evil in the world does not logically exclude the existance of God, but such evil makes it extremely improbably that God exists. Statement (2) should be thought of as strong evidence against statement (1)

From this arguement many(I included) believe that it is quite unreasonable and illogical to believe in God as we know him.

But if anyone thinks that they can give a good objection to this arguement I would be quite interested, as would many others

oh boy here it comes. my bet is that truthseeker goes nutz!

shit wesmorris, that was an extremely fast reply

whos this truthseeker character?? a preacher????? cause they tend to make my ears bleed

That argument never really caught on with me.

I have seen it fairly competently refuted by theists and atheists alike, in several differnt ways.

Me, personally?
I think evil is not an absolute.
It is an abstract idea.
It is a comparative term.
Like light and dark.

Darkness is only, in effect, a degree of light.

Without darkness we wouldn't know what light is and vice versa.

(is this making sense to anyone but me?)

Therefore, evil is basically just a degree of good.

(I don't usually edit posts after someone has already replied, but I forgot to add that last sentence)

I think the general method of weaseling out of that argument is to play semantics with the definition of god. Every theist will have their own interpretation thereof and start up some weak argument to limit the scope of god's power due to some emotional insight they've had of god. ack.

**darts out from behind a bush**

Contradictions in the Nature of God (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11482)

**runs away**

Originally posted by MooseKnuckle
The problem of evil is one of the most troublesome problems that faces anyone that believes that there exists an all-good, all-knowing, and all-powerful God who created the world we inhabit.

premise 1. An all good, all knowing, and all powerful God exists

2. There exists evil in the world

The existence of evil in the world does not logically exclude the existance of God, but such evil makes it extremely improbably that God exists. Statement (2) should be thought of as strong evidence against statement (1)

From this arguement many(I included) believe that it is quite unreasonable and illogical to believe in God as we know him.

But if anyone thinks that they can give a good objection to this arguement I would be quite interested, as would many others

This is a material world, a phenomenal world, this means everything has a beginning and an end or at least everything is constantly changing. Evil is one side of the coin as is darkness, in relation to good or light, this is nature, i don't have to agree with you, nor you me, we have certain amount of freedom to draw our conclusions.
The All-Powerfull God, although integral to the creation, maintainence and destruction of this cosmic manifestation, plays a personal part in it, only when called on by His real devoted servants, otherwise it is left to what could be described as His universal government, who themselves are material, to govern as they see fit. God, in no scripture is described as being material, in all scripture it states that God has a form, but this form is not subject to the onslaught or the illusion of material nature, it is described as being eternal and spiritual (pure consciousness), and full of knowledge.
So regardless of whether you believe this or not, that is the description given to some degree or other, in all scriptures, and therefore you point is invalid, unless you can show me where GOD is mentioned as having a material body.
If you say. There is no evidence to support this, then your point is still invalid. :)

Love

Jan Ardena.

After following Nebula's link and reading Tiassa's response, I contend that there's a good deal of evidence to back up my assertion above about the weaseling and the business.

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
This is a material world, a phenomenal world, this means everything has a beginning and an end or at least everything is constantly changing. Evil is one side of the coin as is darkness, in relation to good or light, this is nature, i don't have to agree with you, nor you me, we have certain amount of freedom to draw our conclusions.

Okay, I can sort of buy that, at least I don't feel it neccesary to argue.
Originally posted by Jan Ardena

The All-Powerfull God, although integral to the creation, maintainence and destruction of this cosmic manifestation, plays a personal part in it, only when called on by His real devoted servants, otherwise it is left to what could be described as His universal government, who themselves are material, to govern as they see fit.

How convenient for his real devoted servants. Don't you think that sounds kind of uh.. well, retarded? I mean, what? I know there's no evidence to back up your claim so you just believe it? Okay "it seemed right" to you? Sure, whatever you have to tell yourself. How is it that you think your knowledge of "god" is superior to mine? Because of your "scripture"? Why not read a science book? I think my physics book is a much more important book than the bible, and would label it "scripture" if I felt like it at any given time... but your really boring old book is superior eh? Whatever.
Originally posted by Jan Ardena

God, in no scripture is described as being material, in all scripture it states that God has a form, but this form is not subject to the onslaught or the illusion of material nature, it is described as being eternal and spiritual (pure consciousness), and full of knowledge.

Uh-huh. Why is it that you think your "scripture" has any bearing on reality?
Originally posted by Jan Ardena

So regardless of whether you believe this or not, that is the description given to some degree or other, in all scriptures, and therefore you point is invalid, unless you can show me where GOD is mentioned as having a material body.

Why, if it said that somewhere.... would you believe it? Okay watch: "you are a pink fluffy bunny". Are you a pink fluffy bunny? I want in on some of this scripture writing action. Maybe I could get a bunch of chicks like that. It woudl be sweet. "You think wesley is good. Huge c**k. You like huge wesley c**k". You think I should try that? I doubt it would work. I must not have any scripture type skills.
Originally posted by Jan Ardena

If you say. There is no evidence to support this, then your point is still invalid. :)

Translation: "If you say I'm brainwashed I'll insist that I'm not." I'm sorry Jan, but that's simply ridiculous. You give your silly book and the words of those who continuously indoctrinate you into your cult (including yourself) too much credence. It's really quite silly you know.

I'll throw in my two cents.

God has an unimaginable wrath and he's not afraid to use it. He loves like a father. He has to punish sin. The old testement shares several instances where God lashed out on sin. But he has not revealed himself in anger in the past 2,000 years because his son has payed for sin. Our conviction and consequences are payment for our sin, but if this world was perfect and there was no evil then we probably wouldn't want to have anything to do with God. But God wants to be glorified and worshipped, he makes something for us to run from so that we have to humble ourselves in order to realize that he is our only hope.

Just my opinion.

Originally posted by Gomer
Just my opinion.

Sounds more like cult propaganda to me.

Why does God want to be glorified? is he not complete without our worshipping him? Sounds like an evil tyrant to me.

I think its important not to give a supreme being human like qualities. ex- the thirst for power. Why would a perfect being NEED worshipping or create a world where worshipping him would be a necessary element?

Sounds like an insecure being to me, more like another ill attempt by humans to justify an illogical belief. Basically a supreme being would not need to feed off of our praise, or have us praise in the first place

Wes,

How convenient for his real devoted servants. Don't you think that sounds kind of uh.. well, retarded? I mean, what? I know there's no evidence to back up your claim so you just believe it? Okay "it seemed right" to you? Sure, whatever you have to tell yourself. How is it that you think your knowledge of "god" is superior to mine? Because of your "scripture"? Why not read a science book? I think my physics book is a much more important book than the bible, and would label it "scripture" if I felt like it at any given time... but your really boring old book is superior eh? Whatever.

Wes, you have not understood my point. When we talk of an All-Powerfull God, we are talking about God who is described in the scriptures, are we not? It doesn’t matter whether you believe in Him or not, and I am not arguing as to whether He exists or not, or which religion is better or worse. The point is, His character is described in all scriptures. So, the argument that MooseKnuckle put foreward, included a description of God which is consistent in all religions, namely All-Powerfull, but the conclusion he came to, *“From this arguement many(I included) believe that it is quite unreasonable and illogical to believe in God as we know him.* was invalid, because he didn’t take into consideration, Gods Absolutness, which sets Him apart from material nature, as explained in varying degrees, in every scripture, it seems he describes God in the way he sees Him as opposed to the way He is described.
If we were to have a discussion about a “Star Wars” movie, wouldn’t you find it strange if I only talked about the things I want, and disregard the thing I don’t?

Uh-huh. Why is it that you think your "scripture" has any bearing on reality?

Read my post again, you will note that I said “all scripture”, and apart from that, your totally off the mark.

Why, if it said that somewhere.... would you believe it?

Try and understand, as far as my reply goes, belief is not the issue. Whether you believe or not, the character and attributes of God, be He real or unreal, are consistent in every scripture, so if we are to discuss the character of God, then we can only find such information in the scriptures, as the threadstarter didn’t do that, his conclusions are doomed before he even starts.

Love

Jan Ardena.

Originally posted by MooseKnuckle
Why does God want to be glorified? is he not complete without our worshipping him? Sounds like an evil tyrant to me.

I think its important not to give a supreme being human like qualities. ex- the thirst for power. Why would a perfect being NEED worshipping or create a world where worshipping him would be a necessary element?

Sounds like an insecure being to me, more like another ill attempt by humans to justify an illogical belief. Basically a supreme being would not need to feed off of our praise, or have us praise in the first place

Sounds like you've already made your mind up. One question though; why did you start this thread?

Love

Jan Ardena.

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
Try and understand, as far as my reply goes, belief is not the issue. Whether you believe or not, the character and attributes of God, be He real or unreal, are consistent in every scripture, so if we are to discuss the character of God, then we can only find such information in the scriptures, as the threadstarter didn’t do that, his conclusions are doomed before he even starts.
Love

Jan Ardena.

Don't you think you're changing the rules. He defined his "god". You redefined it did you not? Shouldn't you work with what he gave rather than what you think he should have given? His claim is consistent in and of itself, though it may not have any bearing on the scripture or religious interpretation of choice.

Originally posted by wesmorris
Don't you think you're changing the rules. He defined his "god". You redefined it did you not? Shouldn't you work with what he gave rather than what you think he should have given? His claim is consistent in and of itself, though it may not have any bearing on the scripture or religious interpretation of choice.

Then what's the point of a discussion, and what is his source for his explanation of God, is it just inside his head??? :rolleyes:

Love

Jan Ardena.

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
Then what's the point of a discussion, and what is his source for his explanation of God, is it just inside his head??? :rolleyes:

Love

Jan Ardena.

He gave a hypothetical scenario.

Oh, and where else does "god" exist.. rather than inside people's heads eh? You cannot demostrate otherwise, so why do you argue?

Well my personal feelings on the whole good/bad issue is this:

If i act in an evil manner i end up burning in hell for eternity. Personally i think that's boring. If you need to endure something long enough it soon becomes pointless.

If i act all good and loving i get to spend an eternity playing the harp. After a very short perood of time that will become boring and pointless also.

Instead of living forever or burning forever i just prefer being a mortal and enjoying my life while i have it. Once i'm all done i can just sit in the ground as a skeleton, without thoughts, knowledge or anything else. I do not need to worship a 'possible' god, because frankly i dont want eternal life. Instead i just spend time appreciating all that i have and all that i can accomplish.

"Sounds like you've already made your mind up. One question though; why did you start this thread?"

Was I not responding to responses???? I was following up on someone else's suggestions, i dont see what the problem is here

"When we talk of an All-Powerfull God, we are talking about God who is described in the scriptures, are we not? It doesn’t matter whether you believe in Him or not, and I am not arguing as to whether He exists or not, or which religion is better or worse. The point is, His character is described in all scriptures"

Ok so here you say that I gave the description of a god who is described in the scriptures, (all-powerfull, etc) ok note taken..............

"so if we are to discuss the character of God, then we can only find such information in the scriptures, as the threadstarter didn’t do that, his conclusions are doomed before he even starts."

Now you blatantly contradict yourself

Good response Snake. I would like an eternal afterlife though, but I know that there is none, so I will join you in the decompositon process

hahahah, playing harp

I must say gentlemen, Moose and Snake, that it is wiser to realize that there is no knowledge of an afterlife, rather than "there is no afterlife". I do not believe there IS, I don't believe there isn't either. I believe that while more sensible, it is just as presumptuous to state that you "know there is no afterlife" as it is to say "you get 72 virgins and an infinite supply of cuban cigars". There is no convincing evidence either way since the nature of consciousness is not understood. Now, if you're just theorizing, that's different and more power to you.. but to say "I know this" about that which you cannot know is not a reasonable position.

I didnt say there wasnt.

Perhaps you missed the point of my post which was i don't actually want eternal life and i dont want to burn in hell. Frankly i consider the prospects of doing either as extremely pointless.

Consider this.....

You've been burning in hell for the past 10 millennium.... It wouldn't even be painful anymore and, in my opinion, just an excercise in futility.

The reverse side of the coin.....

You've been living it up with eternal life for the past 10 millennium. Everything that can be said has been said, everything that can be learnt has been learnt. All you can do now is..... well.... nothing. I guess you could rebel in which case you'd be sent to hell to burn for eternity, but eventually you end up in exactly the same position.

My point therefore is that if there is and i have the choice i'd rather just enjoy my life while i have it, then when i'm dead i'd just like to be dead. Do i have that choice or must it be eternal life/eternal damnation?

As you should now be able to see, i have not stated there is no afterlife, (apology accepted in advance), but have merely stated if there is i'd rather not subscribe to it.

First of all: Muhbad.

This was the point here:
Originally posted by SnakeLord

Frankly i consider the prospects of doing either as extremely pointless.

and I was being a bit presumptuous. Moose had said it and I was thinking you had too, my bad. I should only refute someone's claim when I've quoted it directly such that I don't think you said something you didn't.

Oh, and yeah, I got your point the first time, I just thought you'd said "and I know" blah blah. I was wrong, pardon and thanks for accepting the pardons ahead of time.

I mostly agree with you regarding your assessment of a potential afterlife, but I believe it pertinent to note that "time" in the sense that we know it as living people... wouldn't likely be the same in some kind of "afterlife".. which again I find no compelling evidence of, only warm and fuzzy theories of no real merit. The theory of "you're dead and gone...... buh-bye" certainly has merit, but is no fun if you're into the 7394 recyclable and perpetual virgins and all the cool drugs in the afterlife and whatnot...... :)

*giggle*

You know......... you've just completely and totally changed my stance on things.

*Praise the Lord*

Bring on the afterlife!! :D

You're cracking me up man. Hehe. LOL. Stop it, I'm trying to talk down to the theists here and you're cracking me all up!!!!!!

Oh fuck, dude. Okay. Back to bashing theism.

The only problem i can drag from this scenario are Gods rules on certain things.

Im pretty sure if we all sat down getting wildly screwed, smoking pot and watching old episodes of the simpsons we'd be sent to hell pretty swiftly.

As such our only real alternative in our eternal life is to make musical atrocities with our harps, fly about and play frisbee with our halos.

As such i concur that i'd rather just be dead.

Originally posted by SnakeLord
Im pretty sure if we all sat down getting wildly screwed, smoking pot and watching old episodes of the simpsons we'd be sent to hell pretty swiftly.


SHIT!!!!
There goes my Saturday night!

Actually, that would be my version of Heaven.

Oh.... sorry One_Raven but you've been a sinner. As such God has a much worse eternal life for you....He asked me to tell you so here goes:

You have been sentenced to an eternity of reading posts made by The Visitor.

Man that's worse than burning forever in my opinion :D

Originally posted by one_raven
SHIT!!!!
There goes my Saturday night!

Actually, that would be my version of Heaven.

What the hell, I'm in. :) Does one of you guys have a pool table?

Originally posted by wesmorris
What the hell, I'm in. :) Does one of you guys have a pool table?

Sorry, man.
But the "getting wildly screwed" part leaves you out of my plans.
You can come by for weed and The Simpsons afterwards, though.
I have the first season on DVD and I just picked up a quarter ounce of some really prime Hydro a few days ago.

Sorry, no pool table.
Left it at my old house.
I do have a grill and some Italian sauages (both hot and sweet) to bat down those munchies.

Originally posted by SnakeLord
Oh.... sorry One_Raven but you've been a sinner. As such God has a much worse eternal life for you....He asked me to tell you so here goes:

You have been sentenced to an eternity of reading posts made by The Visitor.

Man that's worse than burning forever in my opinion :D

When is his "visit" going to be over, anyway?
Isn't it time to go back home yet? :D

Now i think about it It would have been better to say that i think there is none(afterlife), sorry, i was not conciously thinking about that as much as i should have at the time.

Restate- I believe there is no afterlife, I admit I do not KNOW. Sorry for that

Did any of you see that simpsons episode where god speaks to him??

I saw, heard, experienced and witnessed God so i guess that makes it irrefutable fact because it was on the simpsons?

I don't see how anyone can say no to that....

Ok, it's merely based on the ideas of a writer but so is everything else religious folk regard as undeniable fact!!

GOD EXISTS! Bow your heads you incompetent fools! :D

“The existence of evil in the world does not logically exclude the existance of God, but such evil makes it extremely improbably that God exists.”

Ok, lets look at this from another angle, what do you mean the evil in the world does not exclude the existence of God?

In the bible it states that God breathed life into a constructed body, and the body became a living soul. The living soul was instructed by God, as to how to conduct his life, properly, without sin or unlawful behavior. This is clearly Gods involvement, from there on we know that the living soul broke the law, not because of Gods involvement, because HE, ADAM, decided there could be no possible harm in wanting to be on the same level as God. In other words Adam became selfish, and was tempted to envy the knowledge of his maker, and thus wanted the same knowledge, which would mean he didn’t need God. This act includes envy, lust and greed, ignorance, and it is these traits that cause evil to manifest in this world.
So how is God included in evil, from the statement of the bible(or any other scripture).

From this arguement many(I included) believe that it is quite unreasonable and illogical to believe in God as we know him.

I believe that you used the term, all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good, to demonstrate the idea that God cannot be these things, if there is evil in the world, as opposed to Him actually having these attributes. That’s fair enough, it’s yours and others opinion, but can you tell me what it means to be, all-powerful, all-good and all-knowing, do you have a model of that. If you cannot, then what is the use of your above belief. If you were searching to buy a car, would you buy one purley on the basis that is was all-good, or would you be curious as to what all-good means.

You say it is , “illogical to believe in God as we know him”, who is “we”, don’t you mean you, what do you know about God, that you have come to this conclusion.

Love

Jan Ardena.

hmmm. Now if God doesnt have those attributes, then can he(it) be considered God?

I was working off the definition of God that has been given throughout history.

How can you argue this? do you not see the point being made? why dont you stop trying to belittle my arguement and instead try to reply with a proper arguement, honestly i would like to hear what you have to say, especially if it is an honest attempt to answer the question and not beat around the bush by trying to redefine God and make it look as thought somehow I am mistaken for actually listing the attributes that define the concept of God, realistically I can not cover everyone's notion of a supreme being, but if it does not have the capacity for being all powerfull then can we still call it God??

I am not trying to twist around the idea of God, I am instead asking questions that relate directly to the perceived attributes that a God, by definition would need to possess.

Originally posted by MooseKnuckle
hmmm. Now if God doesnt have those attributes, then can he(it) be considered God?

I was working off the definition of God that has been given throughout history. I am not trying to twist around the idea of God, I am instead asking questions that relate directly to the perceived attributes that a God, by definition would need to possess.

If you really are asking about the attributes of god, then you'll find them all in the Quran. They are 99 attributes. The site below gives the attribute, the meaning, and the verse of the Quran were the word was found.

http://www.pearls.org/names/99names.html

Thanks for the site, those are basically the attributes that i would believe to be held by a supreme being. It is quite obvious that I could not list them all so I sumed them up by describing God as all powerfull, all knowing.....etc

Originally posted by MooseKnuckle
[quote]do you not see the point being made?
Yes, it is that God existing as All-powerful, knowledgeable and good, cannot logically exist, because evil exists.
…why dont you stop trying to belittle my arguement and instead try to reply with a proper arguement, honestly i would like to hear what you have to say, especially if it is an honest attempt to answer the question

You said quote, “The existence of evil in the world does not logically exclude the existance of God, but such evil makes it extremely improbably that God exists. Statement”
How have you come to this conclusion?
….and make it look as thought somehow I am mistaken for actually listing the attributes that define the concept of God,
The fact that you have listed the attributes, and then come to the above conclusion, under the guise of logic, can only mean you haven’t looked properly into your claim
….realistically I can not cover everyone's notion of a supreme being, but if it does not have the capacity for being all powerful then can we still call it God??
It has nothing to do with peoples notions of a Supreme Being, but what a Supreme Being is, and whether such an entity could exist and be excluded from evil, simoulneosly. To do this you have to go to the sources of all information, which also is the fuel behind everyones notion, to come to your conclusion, and as far as I can tell, you haven’t.
I am not trying to twist around the idea of God, I am instead asking questions that relate directly to the perceived attributes that a God, by definition would need to possess.
What is/are the source(s) for your definition?

Love

Jan Ardena.

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
Yes, it is that God existing as All-powerful, knowledgeable and good, cannot logically exist, because evil exists.


Jan, there is not contradiction in the coexistance of evil and all powerfull. It's a good questions though.

You see, evil existance is not a permanent state. The god of respite and patience allows for some time for evil to exist to give it a chance to rehabilitate and come in terms with it's good. If god didn't allow evil to exist by either condemning it right away then he would loose the attribute of being mercifull and compassionate.

At the end though all scores will make perfect sense and everyone will get what they deserve and they are not going to cry, we didn't get a second chance.

Originally posted by one_raven
Sorry, man.
But the "getting wildly screwed" part leaves you out of my plans.
You can come by for weed and The Simpsons afterwards, though.
I have the first season on DVD and I just picked up a quarter ounce of some really prime Hydro a few days ago.

Sorry, no pool table.
Left it at my old house.
I do have a grill and some Italian sauages (both hot and sweet) to bat down those munchies.

I was thinking the "wildly screwed" part was about how fucked up we'd get from all the pot and alchohol...

I got little punkins, so what will be my pool table / bar room is now filled with toys. Okay, well I've got an X-box I can bring, but I got no games worth mentioning cuz as far as I can tell Halo is the only reason I bought the damn thing. :)

I'm putting the party plans on hold until my youngest is 5 at least. :)

Originally posted by SnakeLord
The only problem i can drag from this scenario are Gods rules on certain things.

Im pretty sure if we all sat down getting wildly screwed, smoking pot and watching old episodes of the simpsons we'd be sent to hell pretty swiftly.

As such our only real alternative in our eternal life is to make musical atrocities with our harps, fly about and play frisbee with our halos.

As such i concur that i'd rather just be dead.

First, if you accept the possibiltiy of an afterlife, why does it automatically have to been a lame version. How do you know what's evil here isn't just to contrast good. Once you've demonstrated you can resist sex, drugs, gluttonous foods, fighting, and stealing, you get absolute freedom to do as you please without the consequences. If there is not such thing as pain, then alot of things that were wrong here wouldn't mean squatt there (go ahead and play russian rollete with your brother...best of three wins!) Even if your christian, heavan does not have to be "harps and crappy music." I figure if God is to reward someone for there time here on earth it would be just that, a reward. And with his infinite wisdom and power i figure he can think of an infinite ways to entertain, boredom would not be an option. Which also means hell wouldn't have to become an exercise infutilety if he didn't want it to. If there is a heavan i'd definetely want to go.

Resist sex?? Are you mad or just young? Sex is wonderful and something pretty much every living thing on this planet engages in. If im not allowed access to heaven cause i have sex or if im not allowed to have sex once im in heaven then i concur i'd rather just stay dead when i am dead.

Ok, ok there's some wonderful moral teachings- dont steal, fight, do drugs yada yada but how could anyone include sex on that list? Explain to me the harm in having sex? Jesus works through me so it's actually him getting laid, not me :D

[i]Originally posted by heflores
Jan, there is not contradiction in the coexistance of evil and all powerfull. It's a good questions though.
Hi heflores,

Correct me if I misunderstand Moose, he says the existence of evil in this world, does not exclude the existence of God, but because there is evil, then it is extremely improbable that God exists. Maybe I don’t quite understand the “does not logically exclude the existence of God bit.
Then he concludes that it is quite unreasonable to believe in God as we know Him, based on the above evidence, ok thus far?
Is he not saying that God could not possibly exist, because there is evil in the world?
I may be wrong, but that is how it sounds to me. :D
You see, evil existance is not a permanent state. The god of respite and patience allows for some time for evil to exist to give it a chance to rehabilitate and come in terms with it's good. If god didn't allow evil to exist by either condemning it right away then he would loose the attribute of being mercifull and compassionate.
That is understandable.
At the end though all scores will make perfect sense and everyone will get what they deserve and they are not going to cry, we didn't get a second chance.
That is understandable, every religion says the same thing, in different degrees. This is what I mean about seriously discussing God, there must be a bona-fide source, such as Qur’an, Bible, Gita, otherwise it is just willy-nilly talk. :)

Love

Jan Ardena.

Oh.... we must use bone-fide sources? In which case i wonder why you never refer to Sumerian texts- (the original works of so many younger translated texts like the bible etc).

If you haven't studied Sumerian texts who are you to call the bible bone-fide?

Originally posted by SnakeLord
Resist sex?? Are you mad or just young? Sex is wonderful and something pretty much every living thing on this planet engages in. If im not allowed access to heaven cause i have sex or if im not allowed to have sex once im in heaven then i concur i'd rather just stay dead when i am dead.

Ok, ok there's some wonderful moral teachings- dont steal, fight, do drugs yada yada but how could anyone include sex on that list? Explain to me the harm in having sex? Jesus works through me so it's actually him getting laid, not me :D

I'm not saying the act of having sex is wrong or right. I'm saying that their are times when it is better to not have sex than to have to have sex.

Ex. 1 You know you have HIV and a fetish for 14-year old girls. I can't see any reason why it would be right to have sex with the young girls in this scencario.

Ex. 2. You've made a commitment to have sex with one woman for the rest of your life (wife) but your hot secartary keeps giving you the "i want to have a 3 hour sex-a-thon on your boss's desk" look. The fact that your wife would be devastated by your actions should be enough of an reason to turn down the sex-a-thon. Now if she doesn't mind....that's another scenario.

The ability to control your actions (not in the context of religious values, or societal values) may be the key to a heavanly reward...if their is a GOD.

Originally posted by SnakeLord
Oh.... we must use bone-fide sources? In which case i wonder why you never refer to Sumerian texts- (the original works of so many younger translated texts like the bible etc).

If you haven't studied Sumerian texts who are you to call the bible bone-fide?

Oh, so you're talking to me now? :rolleyes: :D

I am not fully aware of those texts, however, if they are from God, then add them to the list.

Love

Jan Ardena.

When was i not talking to you? If you refer to the discussion of 'love' etc i'd be more than willing to continue. I actually have my response in a notepad file on my desktop but had to rush out so left it half done. Now i dont even know what post it belonged in so i'ts sat on my desktop gathering dust :D

And yes the Sumerian writing is of the same nature of all holy texts.... i wasn't sure if it counted cause Visitor told me it was garbage although he admitted he had never even heard of it. go figure... :D

Originally posted by SnakeLord
When was i not talking to you? If you refer to the discussion of 'love' etc i'd be more than willing to continue. I actually have my response in a notepad file on my desktop but had to rush out so left it half done. Now i dont even know what post it belonged in so i'ts sat on my desktop gathering dust :D

And yes the Sumerian writing is of the same nature of all holy texts.... i wasn't sure if it counted cause Visitor told me it was garbage although he admitted he had never even heard of it. go figure... :D

I get the feeling there is some hostility toward me, from you, why?

Love

Jan Ardena.

Jan

"Is he not saying that God could not possibly exist, because there is evil in the world?"

just before you made this statement you said.........

Correct me if I misunderstand Moose, he says the existence of evil in this world, does not exclude the existence of God, but because there is evil, then it is extremely improbable that God exists."

I guess you did misunderstand, cause I never said he could not possibly exist because there is evil but his existance is improbable. Next time please try not to misconstrue my words to fit your liking.

I like this arguement because I feel that it should make theists think about their beliefs and if they do have a proper response then go ahead and list it, understand that it was not I who came up with this arguement, I am just restating it, so I am not to blame for the fact that you dont like it. I think everyone can agree that it is a very thought provoking arguement that deserves to be answered.

Please do not try to disgress from this topic and try to focus the attention on another irrelevant topic, running will not make the problem dissapear

Originally posted by MooseKnuckle
Jan,

"Is he not saying that God could not possibly exist, because there is evil in the world?"

just before you made this statement you said.........

Correct me if I misunderstand Moose, he says the existence of evil in this world, does not exclude the existence of God, but because there is evil, then it is extremely improbable that God exists."

I guess you did misunderstand, cause I never said he could not possibly exist because there is evil but his existance is improbable. Next time please try not to misconstrue my words to fit your liking.

Don’t forget the word “extremely” which preceded the word “improbable,” and your addition of “should be thought of as strong evidence against statement,” a little further on. I fail to see how, from that position, there could be any possibility in your mind that God could exist, and even if I did exaggerate, I don’t think I was that far off.

[quote]I like this arguement because I feel that it should make theists think about their beliefs

Firstly, there is no argument, as you fail to answer my questions, and secondly, what makes you think theists don’t think about their beliefs, have you spoken to them?

understand that it was not I who came up with this arguement, I am just restating it,

Then what does this mean?

But if anyone thinks that they can give a good objection to this argument…

You have clearly come up with this argument, my objection is the source or lack thereof, of your analyses and conclusion.

so I am not to blame for the fact that you dont like it.

Nice try, but I have not expressed any emotion, I’m merley interested in how far you have gone to come to your conclusion.

I think everyone can agree that it is a very thought provoking arguement that deserves to be answered.[/quoteI]

If you want in depth answers, then elaborate on your first post, or answer the questions I put foreward, otherwise it will be the usual “God cannot be omniscient, if we have freewill argument”, which has been covered countless times on this forum, only to come to no avail. If you want thought provoking, then lets open this up. :)

[quote]Please do not try to disgress from this topic and try to focus the attention on another irrelevant topic, running will not make the problem dissapear

Look, you’ve come to a conclusion, the conclusion is basically that God does not exist. I’m asking why? Where is that irrelevant? At least try and answer my questions, if I have misunderstood you, it shall become clear, and I will hold up my hand. :)

Love

Jan Ardena.

Originally posted by wesmorris
I must say gentlemen, Moose and Snake, that it is wiser to realize that there is no knowledge of an afterlife, rather than "there is no afterlife". I do not believe there IS, I don't believe there isn't either. I believe that while more sensible, it is just as presumptuous to state that you "know there is no afterlife" as it is to say "you get 72 virgins and an infinite supply of cuban cigars". There is no convincing evidence either way since the nature of consciousness is not understood. Now, if you're just theorizing, that's different and more power to you.. but to say "I know this" about that which you cannot know is not a reasonable position.

Excellent. I would have alot more posts if you did make them before I even read the thread(and some of these are loooooong threads).

I agree with you, but...some don't. What say to a certain Susan Blackmore? She claims to have proven there is no afterlife, or at least she feels her data convict the concept enough to rule out afterlives in her mind. And I do find very few...well, no proofs for the afterlife that don't come with their own set of blind-faith dogmas. There's an afterlife because Jesus died for us/God is benevolent/karma is a cycle, etc.

Originally posted by SnakeLord
You've been living it up with eternal life for the past 10 millennium. Everything that can be said has been said, everything that can be learnt has been learnt. All you can do now is..... well.... nothing. I guess you could rebel in which case you'd be sent to hell to burn for eternity, but eventually you end up in exactly the same position.

OK, fair enough, but only given the most childish, unsophisticated of Christian cosmologies. If we are having fun conjecturing about random, unknowable afterlives, let's, well, "live it up," shall we?

Suppose personal physical limits i.e. body, thought capacity, ect. By the time you're learned half of eternity, the other half is long gone. Learn it again! Do all the shit you forgot you did! If you live long enough on earth, that's how life here will be. Except your back eventually goes out. We'll not suppose this personal limit in the afterlife.

Next. Suppose no personal or physical limitation at all. Cosmic Consciousness and all such. Can't understand it now, but who knows. I assume boredom ceases to exist in Nirvana. (P.S. I dislike this afterlife. Too boring.)

Third and final. Suppose infinite mental capacity and some personal/corporal limits but throw in some "unlimited willpower." Once you've learned a certain quota, will your self to forget it but retain the desire to go learn it again. Seems ridiculous, but who said the afterlife had to be reasonable. Life here sure isn't.

Oh, the Heart of God is but Glorious Madness! Ahahaha! Hey, that's a good cult idea. I bet I could make hella dough.

Originally posted by wesmorris
I mostly agree with you regarding your assessment of a potential afterlife, but I believe it pertinent to note that "time" in the sense that we know it as living people... wouldn't likely be the same in some kind of "afterlife".. which again I find no compelling evidence of, only warm and fuzzy theories of no real merit. The theory of "you're dead and gone...... buh-bye" certainly has merit, but is no fun if you're into the 7394 recyclable and perpetual virgins and all the cool drugs in the afterlife and whatnot...... :)

*giggle*

Ever notice how no one who goes to Sylvia Browne or John Edwards gets this answer, "Well, I'm getting sulfur and screams, was Uncle Slappy a pedophile or a murderer by chance, oh yes, now I see him. Engulfed in living, black flame. Hi Uncle Slappy."

I'm surprized no Christian radio minister has picked up on this as evidence of hell-denying blasphemy. Or maybe one has.

Why are all afterlife concepts ultimately deemed "good." Christians have their hell and all, but which of them beliesv THEY are personally bound for it? NOne of them unless they're severely depressed or being manipulated by others. Religion has all the smackings of a brand name clothing rack: "For us, by us."

Jan-

I simply restated the arguement from Philosophical Problems and Arguements I wanted responses to this arguement, and with responses I would then throw my two cents in. But understand that it was not my original arguement, I was merely posting it to illicit debate, Not to be blamed for the author's position and to how he arrived at it.

I wanted some replys and with those replys people can start taking sides on the arguement and decide to write down intelligent ideas, i did not want a stalmate to occur regarding the intial question's semantic appeal.

Please dont be so much on "attack mode" and instead take a deep breath and relax, after lowering your blood pressure decide to allow the newly freed blood to flow through your brain and with this energy let it be focused on the issue at hand. Sorry if this was in a codescending context, but the message still stands.........relax

Originally posted by MooseKnuckle
[quote]Please dont be so much on "attack mode" and instead take a deep breath and relax, after lowering your blood pressure decide to allow the newly freed blood to flow through your brain and with this energy let it be focused on the issue at hand

Thanks for your concern Moose, I’m sure it was meant with the best of intentions, for my well-being, my blood pressure is fine thank you, and the blood is flowing very nicely thank you very much. As I was not in attack mode, I am now beginning to understand that this line of questioning must be quite difficult for you to fully comprehend, as it has not been covered on any of the “how to answer religionists/christians” sections, on forums such as atheism.org, or the like.

. Sorry if this was in a codescending context, but the message still stands.........relax

Yes, it was a bit condescending, but most of us who believe in God, have become accustomed to such childish prittle- prattle, from non-believers, be it direct or indirect. I believe your number was got, when you said; “whos this truthseeker character?? a preacher????? cause they tend to make my ears bleed.”
However for the sake of any further delays, I have received your message loud and clear, and would now apreciate it, very much, if you would at least try and answer some of the questions I posed. ;)

Thank you very much, a now, much more relaxed and centered.
Jan Ardena. :cool:
:m:

First of all, I'm sure you have some conception of what "god" is. I believe the most pertinent question regarding this type of debate is as follows (paraphrased from ConsequentAthiest): By what methodology do you choose YOUR conception of "god" over others?

By the way...
I meant to mention before.. to all those who are listening:

Religion is a stupid thing based on faith IMO. I really don't care if you have to believe it, but I will continue to scoff at you and riducule you if you continue to attempt to debate your point.

Do you understand your fopa? (how do you spell that?). Faith? You have faith it some seemingly random thing and then try to debate why other people don't believe the same stupid shit you do. YOU CANNOT REASONABLY ASSERT FAITH REGARDING A RELIGION. It is literally impossible by definition. If you were a smart religious person (like many I know) you'd know better than to even discuss it outside of those who feel similarly.. because there's really no way to validly defend your stupid shit. You can be into whatever stupid shit you want, but if you had half a freakin clue, you'd learn not to argue about it... especially with someone who is versed in logic and reason. You don't understand how stupid it is. It's like me betting up on the pulpit and trying to explain religion to you and not understanding it at all. You'd look at me like I was a crackhead. That is why you get ridiculed here, I'm simply better at this than you are, like you are better at me at quoting scripture. Stay with your churchies, quote your scripture. I'll stay here and continue using my brain.

Originally posted by wesmorris
By what methodology do you choose YOUR conception of "god" over others?

Others? What are you talking about?
And by what methodology does anyone choose anything?

Love

Jan Ardena.

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
Others? What are you talking about?
And by what methodology does anyone choose anything?

Love

Jan Ardena.

By others I belive he meant "other religious/mythological systems." If his record holds, he'll be by to clarify pretty soon.

By what methods do we choose anything? This is an excessively open, rhetorical question. It's a diversion. I see where you might go...we choose things not only for reason but from passion or aesthetic. Still, I could see it argued that what we choose is always based on our senses. God, if extant, is beyond this perameter.

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
Others?

Ganesha, Thor, Allah, Zues... etc.

Further, everyone on the planet has their own conception of god. Not all of them can be right, right? I mean, Zues and you conception of "god" couldn't really exist at the same time could they? I don't mean in your head... I mean in reality... the objective world.

There are a lot of people who claim to have an accurate depiction of "god" right? You seem to be one. Thusly I reiterate: How do you choose your god? Why is YOUR god a more feasible solution to the problem "is there are god?" than "Zues" or whatever? Does there exist some methodology by which you can lead me to the same decision in a manner that I cannot refute? No, there isn't. Thusly, all succesive arguments fail.

Jan Ardena and me share the same god and I'm muslim and she's christian. The jews also share the same god. We say, god is the creator of human beings and everything in the universe. The three religions of Christianity, Islam, and judiasm are iteration of the same message by the same god. Zues is not a god under our religion. Those were pagan beliefs that attributed seen things to god, like god for sea, god for land, god for sex, ect. Since then, we evolved.

Jan-

Let me try to answer some of your questions

Firstly, there is no argument, as you fail to answer my questions, and secondly, what makes you think theists don’t think about their beliefs, have you spoken to them?

Yes I have spoken to many theists in my time, I was raised a catholic- went to church, went to CCD and completed all the required ceremonies. I think one of the biggest contributors to my being able to come up with my own beliefs is the fact that my parents did not push Catholicism on me, any more so than simply being exposed to it, I never had to hear propanganda being issued by my parents, which I believe would have a bigger influence on my beliefs than just the church individually. I started to ask questions simply because I wanted to know some answers regarding the beliefs I was being taught. I would ask my CCD teachers and sometimes priests hard to answer questions and It always turned out to be some incomplete answer or "God works in mysterious ways"

Theists need to take into account that it is very hard for ex-theists to break away from beliefs that have been drilled into their heads by constant sermons, teachings and years of upbringing. It takes a lot of courage to reach inside of your capacities to question something that sounds so promising. I was looking for the truth in an honest attempt, I did not just accept something so blindly, there were so many unanswered questions, maybe other ideas had better answers than just "it is because I say so"

Presently I make a conscious effort not to discuss religious ideas with either my peers or friends. I only result to arguementation when someone has said they have found the truth, insulted me, or have not looked into other alternatives.

I do not look at this issue as a you vs me type of thing. I expect theists to answer some essential questions instead of referring one to the bible for the answer, the bible is only good for people that believe, otherwise it needs proof as to why it is the truth. What you need to understand is that theists claim to have all the answers, so a proper response is the least we can ask, Atheists on the other hand dont believe, and why should they believe? I dont remember any undeniably evidence for the belief in god, they are still on the quest for the answer.........Does anyone have a problem with that??????

To sum this issue up- Act with some respect when you argue with an atheist or agnostic, because they have taken the road less traveled and this road happens to not lead into the infinite sunset. This should at least show to many that the quest for truth may lead people into some harsh realizations, but if one is to say they are searching for the truth then you cannot say "well I dont like that idea.....it makes me sad:( ," therefore i will ignore it and stick to what I like best"

I still am open minded, I do not cut off my mind to different beliefs, but so far I am sticking with the trend that gives me the best answers for the truth( best being described as what works, not as what makes me feel better) So why should one yell at the atheist for believing for what they believe, it is only logical that they are skeptical when religious beliefs are not backed up with any conclusive or quality explanation.

Originally posted by wesmorris
Ganesha, Thor, Allah, Zues... etc.

Further, everyone on the planet has their own conception of god. Not all of them can be right, right? I mean, Zues and you conception of "god" couldn't really exist at the same time could they? I don't mean in your head... I mean in reality... the objective world.

There are a lot of people who claim to have an accurate depiction of "god" right? You seem to be one. Thusly I reiterate: How do you choose your god? Why is YOUR god a more feasible solution to the problem "is there are god?" than "Zues" or whatever? Does there exist some methodology by which you can lead me to the same decision in a manner that I cannot refute? No, there isn't. Thusly, all succesive arguments fail.

Well wes, this appears to be a somewhat reasonable line of questioning, so i am going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and try an answer your questions.

A concept is simply an idea, every human being has the ability to construct ideas. You are right when you say, everyone can't be right, because ultimately there can only be one right.
God has many names, i believe heflores pointed you to a website where there were 99 different names, just for the one God, Allah. Each name depicts a certain attribute of God, eg.

The name “God” is of germanic origin, it translates, “The Good one.”
Elohim is hebrew, and sometimes it is broken further down to El, I’m sure you know, this means, mighty, strong or prominent when translated.
In the language of aramaic, Jesus reffered to a more loving side of God, “Awoon”, which means Universal Father.
The name Allah, is as you know, an arabic term for God, many islamic sholars have translated it to mean, One Who Gives Life.
Vishnu, is sanskrit term for God, is translated as, All-pervading.
Krishna, also sanskrit, is translated as, All Attractive.
Those are just a few.
Zues, according to Greek mythology, was the son of God, named Adonai, Ganesha, is the son of Lord Shiva, whom a large portion of people believe to be God.
All these different names are different aspects of His character and personality, the difference with God is that every single aspect of Him is personified, and the personifications are both different and the same, this is the Omnipotent, Absoluteness of God, this is how He is described.
God is described perfectly, in every scripture, to some degree or other, so unless the descriptions match what is in the scripture, how can they be right?
The confusion comes when, lets say, the muslims say that there is one God, Allah, it says so in the Qur'an, so all other gods are nonsense, then the christians say, Jesus says, i am the light, the truth and the way, you only get to God through me. But if you read and try and understand each scripture, you can easily recognise the one God, who is dealing with different sets of people at different times.


How do I choose my god?
The answer is, attraction, I am attracted to God.

There is no methodology, other than personal experience, that would lead you to the point where you cannot refute, this applies in all aspects of life. We are all different in our personalities, desires, ambitions and so on, if you do not want to accept that God exists, then God will give you the opportunity to live that life.

My question to you is, why do you torment yourself so much, why don’t you just accept that you don’t believe in God, and leave it at that?

Love

Jan Ardena.

Jan-

Why dont you try to stick with answering questions, for I do not confess to having all the answers.

Why do you think I am the one to have to defend the notion of God, you know im sorry if people have high standards for a supreme being, but it comes with the territory of being a supreme being.

My question to you is, why do you torment yourself so much, why don’t you just accept that you don’t believe in God, and leave it at that?

How sorry a question, I must say.
No truth will ever be reached by accepting an answer one currently holds and never questioning it. Philosophy would be dead by now if we had that mentality.

Jan Ardena and me share the same god and I'm muslim and she's christian. The jews also share the same god. We say, god is the creator of human beings and everything in the universe.

\Respectfully, that's a crock. First of all, all humans have their OWN conception of god even if based upon what you claim above.

The three religions of Christianity, Islam, and judiasm are iteration of the same message by the same god.

\THAT, is another crock. How can you say that? Ack. Okay, whatever.. let's just say it's true (though it sounds like another complete crock to me given that I would imagine the 99 blah blah's of god that you quoted would piss off a lot of christians or jews.. as a matter of fact, aren't you as a muslim, supposed to shun jews?) Islam is based on the teaching of Mohammed or whatever, and then jews and christians argue about which part of the bible is right, correct? The quran and bible are significantly different documents right? I'm not particularly familiar with either of them.. just know the basics. Regardless, you choose the quran and she chooses the bible. WHY? They say completely different things, but both talk of some "all powerfull guy who told me to write this shit down". Based on that premise, you say "we share the same god."? If so, you aren't much of a thinker regarding this topic IMO.

Zues is not a god under our religion. Those were pagan beliefs that attributed seen things to god, like god for sea, god for land, god for sex, ect. Since then, we evolved.

\Exactly my point. But yet you think YOUR god is better because you've "evolved"? STOP RIGHT THERE. Do you understand what you just said? Oh man, you need to think about that long and hard and realize how stupid that is, how presumptuous and how really, you just invalidated your entire perspective on religion. You basically said that "if it were a thousand years ago, I would have done the zues thing because that's as 'evolved' as

Since then, we evolved.


Not hardly, mankind has - devolved - not evolved.

We were created perfect, and like a copy made of a copy have gotten dumber and weaker every generation since.

Why have were been allowed to accumulate this much knowledge this time around, is stead of destoying ourselves and our enemies. because the Holy Spirit has been anointing mankind for the last two milliniea, and protected us from ourselves.

The just and un-just receive the same rain.
But guess what ....the rains about to stop.
Remember Noah? preaching "the rains coming , the rains coming, it's going to destroy the world.
Nobody believed Him though he peached for 120 years while building the ark.

The messages the opposite this time.......the rains(Holy Spirit) about to stop. And when god removes His protective hand from mankind................you'll see just how "Evolved" they've become.

Since then, we evolved.


Not hardly, mankind has - devolved - not evolved.

We were created perfect, and like a copy made of a copy have gotten dumber and weaker every generation since.

Why have were been allowed to accumulate this much knowledge this time around, instead of destoying ourselves and our enemies, as soon as we invented the bow or gunpowder....?. Because the Holy Spirit has been anointing mankind for the last two milliniea, and protected us from ourselves.

The just and un-just receive the same rain.
But guess what ....the rains about to stop.
Remember Noah? preaching "the rains coming , the rains coming, it's going to destroy the world. See.... there had never been rain fall on the earth it, was watered from a dew that came up from within....Like the way Man was watered from the inside...before the fall.
Nobody believed Him though he peached for 120 years while building the ark.

The messages the opposite this time.......the rains(Holy Spirit) about to stop. And when God removes His protective hand from mankind................all hell's going to break lose.

Power without character is Satanic, and all the knowledge man has accumulated during two thousand years of Holy Spirit anointing, when that Spirit is removed that knowledge and power (the lethality of the tree of Good and Evil) is going to be left in the hands of those without the charcter to use it.

You're about to see just how "Evolved" they've become.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Since then, we evolved.


Not hardly, mankind has - devolved - not evolved.

We were created perfect, and like a copy made of a copy have gotten dumber and weaker every generation since.

Why have were been allowed to accumulate this much knowledge this time around, is stead of destoying ourselves and our enemies. because the Holy Spirit has been anointing mankind for the last two milliniea, and protected us from ourselves.



So instead of accepting that knowledge is the truth, the light and the way, you think it's a dead guy and invisible sadist in the sky. Typical of a theist (IMO) to blame his feable mind... and thus the minds of his human brethren on his own inept belief system.

It still kills me that you people ask for proof not to believe. OMFG, that is just typical of a lesser brain.
Originally posted by TheVisitor

The messages the opposite this time.......the rains(Holy Spirit) about to stop. And when god removes His protective hand from mankind................you'll see just how "Evolved" they've become.

Blah blah blah. You're stupid and you want everyone else to seem that way to you can have a leg up. You are insecure and your ego commands that you compensate.

As a brief and informative post i will apply this:

Jan Ardena is not stupid. he/she/it is fully aware and understanding of what you ask. It's a case of answering questions with a question in order to avoid the original question. that's all very well and good but it's actually easier just to type: "i dont know".

It is fully possible Jan is from a foreign 'disposition' and doesn't understand or pick up on the subtleties of the English language. Perhaps it would be better by us to speak in a simpleton tongue.

Jan.... the pretentiousness and apparent lack of understanding you promote is rare and bizarre. I concur that you are in fact smart enough to understand what is being said and asked but choose to avoid it as if it were the plague. In my opinion it's better to just answer the questions than to avoid them as if you are incapable.

I notice this attitude from you on many post throughout this forum, stooping to not answer a question 'cause wesmorris made a typo and so on. If you can't answer a question, don't- there's no need to act like you're incompetent.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Since then, we evolved.


Not hardly, mankind has - devolved - not evolved.

We were created perfect, and like a copy made of a copy have gotten dumber and weaker every generation since.

Why have were been allowed to accumulate this much knowledge this time around, is stead of destoying ourselves and our enemies. because the Holy Spirit has been anointing mankind for the last two milliniea, and protected us from ourselves.

The just and un-just receive the same rain.
But guess what ....the rains about to stop.
Remember Noah? preaching "the rains coming , the rains coming, it's going to destroy the world.
Nobody believed Him though he peached for 120 years while building the ark.

The messages the opposite this time.......the rains(Holy Spirit) about to stop. And when god removes His protective hand from mankind................you'll see just how "Evolved" they've become.

And this is all substantiated by...? Gospels? I refute this. The Pali Text of the Northern Buddhist Schools are inspired by The True God, literally and infallably. So are the Shinto Text. I believe in these with a heart of blind faith because they are true. Therefore, the Bible is wrong. The end.

Are you beginning to understand the futility of circular reasoning yet?

God? Let me tell you about God: The God you are all arguing about is a myth. The God of classical theism doesn't exist, has never existed and will never exist. The God so many of you adore is nothing but a careless Creator. Like the scientist who grew the bacterium in his pathetic petri dish, he hatched us and then left us to rot. He is not good, or all loving. He's not even that clever! Given a few centuries, we could create an inhabited planet as 'good' as he has!
Evil is not his problem - it is ours. We do what we can to survive, and inevitably it has caused us to become ruthless and unforgiving in nature.

One thing that always bothered me about this argument:

No one seems willing or able to define "evil." The abstract is so vague, like God, that it could mean nearly anything to anyone. Do we mean suffering? Suffering is impersonal, a result of some phenomenal interactions. It could be used to refute the existence of a benevolent deity.

Not necessarily human action. Do we mean cruelty on the part of man? This is at best a weak argument against a deity. It's also more easily controled. Or maybe it's not. It persists.

Do we mean mere limitation and separation? Kabbalists figured this out centuries ago. Refer to them if you already believe in all that religious stuff.

Aside from the more elegant of these Judaeo-Mystical speculations, I find all religious attempts at removing the problem of evil ridiculous and full of gaping, weeping holes.

Hellenistic Gnosticism: God made/accidentally allowed the Demiurge, a devil-like creator who causes suffering. OK, why'd he do that?

Primitive Judaism: God is good and bad. He allows suffering. The world is meaningless aside from harsh, impersonal lives within a community context. Why is this omnipotent being swayed by either "good" or "evil?"

Later, cultic Judaism: Some angels rebelled and created evil. Why did God make rebellious angels? Or for that matter, why did God make angels? Why did he place such arbitrary limits on them and, as he apparently did according to the myths, give them desires for rebellion?

Christianity: If we only believed in Jesus... Well, yes, if everyone followed Christ's mandates, or some of the basic ones, we'd be fine in terms of human cruelty. Bored, hungry, soon to be dead, but we'd lack human evil. We'd increase our suffering, unless we became so Christlike that we abandoned ALL our worldly cares that we ceased to be concerned with our own pain. This is suicide.

A side note on the above - No amount of Golden Ruling will cure childhood cancer. Formal Morality doesn't touch some of the worst, most horrific accounts of human suffering.

Hinduism: Karma, hell, I don't even want to go into the philisophical/logistical problems inherint to the Karma idea.

Classical Buddhism: We suffer. That's it. No further explanation. Very unsatisfying and it gets us nowhere in terms of understanding. As for the method for the removal of suffering, see Christianity.

Classical Manichaean Gnosticism/Zoroastrianism: Two Gods, one bad, one good. Why? Where'd they come from? How can either be The Real God? Neither is obviously omnipotent, since neither can kill the other. Taking these two as abstracts, as the Tao and Kabbalah do, I can see the vague beginnings of a decent philosophy, but we could dispense with the theistic aesthetics.

Almost all religious philosophies ignore the intrinsic and exponential complexities of the universe, earthly world, and human society. Certainly ALL dogmatic systems do. They fail at everything they attempt to undertake at a below-surface level. I'm beginning to honestly belive they only survive because the majority of humans are basically simple minded and merely survival-oriented.

wesmorris,

oh boy here it comes. my bet is that truthseeker goes nutz!
I have just found this thread, and I'm not "going nuts"... :D
A reply soon...

MooseKnuckle,

The problem of evil is one of the most troublesome problems that faces anyone that believes that there exists an all-good, all-knowing, and all-powerful God who created the world we inhabit.
Indeed. I do have some problems with that (only personal, though)... but...

The existence of evil in the world does not logically exclude the existance of God, but such evil makes it extremely improbably that God exists. Statement (2) should be thought of as strong evidence against statement (1)
...that's not really a problem because the key here is free will. We can do evil if we want, and that's why there is so much evil in the world.

The only real problem I have with that is that I have to deal with evil in my everyday life, and that kinda sucks. But as I grow and mature spiritually, evil will have less and less influence in the way I feel. The same for everybody.

Posted by TheVisitor: The messages the opposite this time.......the rains(Holy Spirit) about to stop. And when god removes His protective hand from mankind................you'll see just how "Evolved" they've become.
Hehe... "evolved"...:D:D

Truthseeker-

What about natural evil?

The immense suffering resulting from natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods, droughts, hurricanes, and the like, which are not the causal result of any moral agent in the world.

Well wes, this appears to be a somewhat reasonable line of questioning, so i am going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and try an answer your questions.

\thanks.

A concept is simply an idea, every human being has the ability to construct ideas. You are right when you say, everyone can't be right, because ultimately there can only be one right.

\Of course.

God has many names, i believe heflores pointed you to a website where there were 99 different names, just for the one God, Allah. Each name depicts a certain attribute of God, eg.

\Yeah, but that's kind of BS. You're talking about completely different religions and saying "oh, well.. since they all talk about one god, it must be the same one". That's like saying "since I took a road to get to work, it must be the same road I took to get to st. louis." Just because you've all adapted the word and say "must have created the universe" or whatever, doesn't mean that you're talking about the same thing.

The name “God” is of germanic origin, it translates, “The Good one.”
Elohim is hebrew, and sometimes it is broken further down to El, I’m sure you know, this means, mighty, strong or prominent when translated.
In the language of aramaic, Jesus reffered to a more loving side of God, “Awoon”, which means Universal Father.
The name Allah, is as you know, an arabic term for God, many islamic sholars have translated it to mean, One Who Gives Life.
Vishnu, is sanskrit term for God, is translated as, All-pervading.
Krishna, also sanskrit, is translated as, All Attractive.
Those are just a few.

\While somewhat interesting, I fail to see how it supports your assertion that your religion is reasonable choice of perspective on the creation of the universe. You're talking about a bunch of independent incarnations of properties that different people think that the creator of the universe must have had. Silly.

Zues, according to Greek mythology, was the son of God, named Adonai, Ganesha, is the son of Lord Shiva, whom a large portion of people believe to be God.

\I didn't know that. Take me to school baby, that's what I'm talkin bout.

All these different names are different aspects of His character and personality, the difference with God is that every single aspect of Him is personified, and the personifications are both different and the same, this is the Omnipotent, Absoluteness of God, this is how He is described.

\That is a ridiculous theory created to support your poor assumptions. It's as if all I have to do is come up with a word you might interpret as good.. and you'll say "yes, that is an attribute of god".. in that manner you shall always reach the same conclusion.

God is described perfectly, in every scripture, to some degree or other, so unless the descriptions match what is in the scripture, how can they be right?

\Who are you to qualify what is "perfect" regarding god? GOD IS NOT YOUR CONCEPTION. IF GOD EXISTS, THEN GOD IS GOD, NOT SOME RIDICULOUS ABSTRACT. Don't you see? You are in the grips of a cult mind set. You say "described perfectly". That is not possible... we are human right? We cannot perfectly describe our asses let alone the "ultimate being". Your argument is moot due to that invalid assumption, as is the tendency of all of your arguments on this topic.

The confusion comes when, lets say, the muslims say that there is one God, Allah, it says so in the Qur'an, so all other gods are nonsense, then the christians say, Jesus says, i am the light, the truth and the way, you only get to God through me. But if you read and try and understand each scripture, you can easily recognise the one God, who is dealing with different sets of people at different times.

\Blah blah dogma dogma. What bearing does your scripture have on reality? It has an undetermined amount of historical value based on a anthropological interpretation and analysis of motives behind the authors. You have to think about it, just "accepting it as the word of god because it moves you" would be the same as you accepting ME as god because you were moved by my earnest plea of reason...


How do I choose my god?
The answer is, attraction, I am attracted to God.

\Hehe, I'll reserve comment because you seem nice. :)

There is no methodology, other than personal experience, that would lead you to the point where you cannot refute, this applies in all aspects of life.

\Then I find your method of discerning the correct flavor of religion somewhat stark if a tad bit of critical thinking is applied. For instance, not all religions are correct right? According to most of them you'll go to hell if you're not a member of it right? I mean, you may just go to pergatory or whatever depending on the level of "touchy feely" interpretation you've been exposed to, or done your self... but you're definately wrong if you're not a member.. unless you are going to come up with some bullshit about how that's wrong.. which would have an inkling of truth but would have to be mostly founded on pure conjecture... I digress. Well, what if you're going to hell because you chose the wrong one? Spectacular spiritual bummer and waste of time for you. Okay, tell me how it's "no, you're not bad if you're not in my religion, you're just ignorant" or the line of denial "we are tolerant of all other religions" (which I'm sure some of the members are, but the nature of bueracracy betrays religion by insisting that this attitude is instilled somewhere throughout the structure of the religion.. but that just me reasoning on the fly.. pardon). Okay I'll drop it.

We are all different in our personalities, desires, ambitions and so on, if you do not want to accept that God exists, then God will give you the opportunity to live that life.

\Certainly, but you just agreed that only one can ACTUALLY EXIST, okay, IF that's true.. WHY THE HELL does the bible have any bearing on it? What's the correlation between god and the bible? Not, is he in it... but what if people just LIED and said he wrote it.. or were INSANE and THOUGHT he said it and wrote it down and it is really just people making up crazy stories based on their interpretations of what happened to them or people they knew in their time of limited understanding of their context in nature/the universe/all that. *sigh*

My question to you is, why do you torment yourself so much, why don’t you just accept that you don’t believe in God, and leave it at that?

\You don't understand... I'm not tormented, I'm enthralled with the quest, I'm into it man. I love the nogginflexin. I think I'm very very good at it (hey, gimme a break, I wouldn't do it if NOBODY cheered for me, I might as well!). I need this stimulation, oh man.. I wish I could explain it to you as you likely wish you could explain your religious experience junk to me. I'll just leave it with this: I'm not tormented by this, you can believe it. I'm just gifted in that I can see through the bullshit and I feel I have to open the eyes of whoever I can... which is likely nobody.. but I'll try anyway just for the excercise of the brain and love of the quest for understanding.

tired now, hope I wasn't toooo offensive or stupid. not sure if my head is on exactly straight at the moment... kind of spaced out and tired.

Originally posted by TruthSeeker
...that's not really a problem because the key here is free will. We can do evil if we want, and that's why there is so much evil in the world.

The only real problem I have with that is that I have to deal with evil in my everyday life, and that kinda sucks. But as I grow and mature spiritually, evil will have less and less influence in the way I feel. The same for everybody.


OK, as MK pointed out, you still must contend with what he terms "natural evil." On the same, you failed to respond to my earlier, identical criticism. For argument, a paraphrasal readdressment; All the believing and moralizing in the world won't keep childhood cancers at bay.

How exactly would you explain miscarriages and spontaneous natural abortion? What, God decided he didn't like that one? Don't tell "I don't know. I have faith." That's a glaring escape route. I suspect it doesn't impress anyone and only makes your case weaker and weaker still.

I have yet to hear a reasonable Christian answer to this question. Ever. I'm sure you'll be no different. If your and other believers' track records hold up, you'll either ignore this post or you'll respond to it as if it were a wholley different question, with some ridiculous but forgettable non sequitur.

Originally posted by wesmorris
[quote]Yeah, but that's kind of BS.
Yeah, but that's kind of your opinion.
While somewhat interesting, I fail to see how it supports your assertion that your religion is reasonable choice
I don't recall telling you what my religion is.
Who are you to qualify what is "perfect" regarding god?
It is not that I am qualifying any perfection regarding God, but i am qualifying that the description of God is in all scriptures, that is a fact.
GOD IS NOT YOUR CONCEPTION. IF GOD EXISTS, THEN GOD IS GOD, NOT SOME RIDICULOUS ABSTRACT. Don't you see?
I see that this is your opinion.
You are in the grips of a cult mind set.
This assumption is your opinion.
Your argument is moot due to that invalid assumption, as is the tendency of all of your arguments on this topic.
This is an assumption based on your opinion. :rolleyes:
What bearing does your scripture have on reality?
Read them for yourself and see.
It has an undetermined amount of historical value based on a anthropological interpretation and analysis of motives behind the authors. You have to think about it, just "accepting it as the word of god because it moves you" would be the same as you accepting ME as god because you were moved by my earnest plea of reason...
This is your opinion, therefore it doesn't really matter what i say.
Hehe, I'll reserve comment because you seem nice.
Somehow or other, your hidden sentiments come shinging through, but that is only my opinion. :rolleyes:
Then I find your method of discerning the correct flavor of religion somewhat stark if a tad bit of critical thinking is applied.
That's fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion.
According to most of them you'll go to hell if you're not a member of it right?
An example?
but you're definately wrong if you're not a member..
An example?
ell me how it's "no, you're not bad if you're not in my religion, you're just ignorant" or the line of denial "we are tolerant of all other religions"
I have not come across anything in any scripture that resembles this or anything (for that manner), that you said. You seem to be arguing from the point of veiw "he said and she said".
ly, but you just agreed that only one can ACTUALLY EXIST, okay, IF that's true.. WHY THE HELL does the bible have any bearing on it? What's the correlation between god and the bible? Not, is he in it... but what if people just LIED and said he wrote it.. or were INSANE and THOUGHT he said it and wrote it down and it is really just people making up crazy stories based on their interpretations of what happened to them or people they knew in their time of limited understanding of their context in nature/the universe/all that.
But what if you're wrong and it is all true?
I wish I could explain it to you as you likely wish you could explain your religious experience junk to me.
Why do you feel the need to debase religion so much, it is not good conduct, I hope Cris will do something about this kind of behaviour, because it is totally unnecessary.
I'm just gifted in that I can see through the bullshit and I feel I have to open the eyes of whoever I can...
You mean you are proseletyzing.
tired now, hope I wasn't toooo offensive or stupid. not sure if my head is on exactly straight at the moment... kind of spaced out and tired.
Probably not too offensive, but definitely unnecessarily offensive.

Love

Jan Ardena.

It is not that I am qualifying any perfection regarding God, but i am qualifying that the description of God is in all scriptures, that is a fact.

But the description varies geatly. So who's right, if anyone?

Also....

According to most of them you'll go to hell if you're not a member of it right?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


An example?


See what i meant about answering a question with a question? I'm sure you understand the meaning of wes' question.... can't you just answer it? A simple yes, no or maybe would probably have sufficed :)

Don't blind yourself with your problems with religion Snakelord. It has been a convenient scapegoat until now, but sometime you will have to come out from under that convenient shelter.

You have to either admit there is a God or there isn't - could be is not good enough - since it means you want God to come down to you and "prove himself", and that you don't believe He might already have done that. God would not let people have to believe in Him based on myths, or even truths - He gives us knowledge, experience and wisdom, so that we can talk about Him.

How exactly do the descriptions of God vary, any more than the descriptions of any one person would vary?

If a religion says you are going to hell if you don't belong to them, stay away. If a religion says God will know if you don't belong to Him, well... it's up to God then isn't it? No person or group can send you to hell - nobody has that authority.

I think God stays rationally "elusive" to you because you refuse to anything that has any bearing on Him. If an angel came down to you and told you God exists, you would believe in angels but still doubt God's existence. Do you really expect God to personally come down and convince everyone on earth that they have no choice but to believe in Him? If you weren't given a choice, would believe? Would you even want to, since who wants to serve a God who gives you no choice?

If I understand things at all, this is exactly the kind of split which will happen when Jesus returns. OK, this is theology, so I don't expect you to relate at all. Some people will feel compelled to oppose him (based on their knowledge or lack of knowledge of "God"), and others will follow him naturally.

Originally posted by Jenyar

You have to either admit there is a God or there isn't - could be is not good enough - since it means you want God to come down to you and "prove himself", and that you don't believe He might already have done that. God would not let people have to believe in Him based on myths, or even truths - He gives us knowledge, experience and wisdom, so that we can talk about Him.


Jenyar is right. Wanting to see god to really believe is the same as Atheism, It's like asking for death right away. It's not possible. If god wanted to show himself to us in bright light, then all respite would end, and judgement time would be here. God hides behind a veil when dealing with humans....Some of us have lighter veils than others. Jesus and all the prophets had a very light veil, still couldn't see god's face. For some it's more comfortable to stay in darkness, because that justifies the type of life that they love so much.

Don't blind yourself with your problems with religion Snakelord. It has been a convenient scapegoat until now, but sometime you will have to come out from under that convenient shelter.

I'm far from blind. My only problem with religion is the faithful acceptance without proof. There's thousands upon thousands of religions.... Everyone is in the happy position of being right- their truth is the truth. Everyone has a scapegoat... It's called 'faith', 'belief'. I am in a bizarrely annoying position where blind faith isn't good enough. I require facts and proof.. sue me.

Convenient shelter? Think about your own position.

You have to either admit there is a God or there isn't

No i don't. If i stole a bread loaf from the shop i could admit that or not because i know the truth of the matter. I am not as presumptuous to say 'i know the truth' when i don't, and as such do not have the position to admit to anything.

could be is not good enough

Well i prefer 'might or might not'. That good enough?

since it means you want God to come down to you and "prove himself"

No no, God can do whatever he wants to do... it really doesn't affect me in the slightest. But it is paramount to truth.

God would not let people have to believe in Him based on myths, or even truths - He gives us knowledge, experience and wisdom, so that we can talk about Him.

And thus some just accept on faith, but some of us require more. I do require more..... I guess it aint my fault though, i'm just human.

How exactly do the descriptions of God vary, any more than the descriptions of any one person would vary?

Seek and ye shall find. But the descriptions of God vary to such extreme degree it leaves questions that we must ask. One description states god as an invisible entity, another description states god as non existant. How much more diverse than that can it get?

If a religion says you are going to hell if you don't belong to them, stay away. If a religion says God will know if you don't belong to Him, well... it's up to God then isn't it? No person or group can send you to hell - nobody has that authority.

And if there is no god? Thus begins the problem....

I think God stays rationally "elusive" to you because you refuse to anything that has any bearing on Him.

I dont refuse, i debate. My human mind considers that important. It considers the need for truth as paramount. You think god stays... I don't want to accept a life of 'think', i want to be able to answer the questions. It's an impossibly high aim i understand that, but i can't just accept, i can't do it any other way than to find the facts.

If an angel came down to you and told you God exists, you would believe in angels but still doubt God's existence. Do you really expect God to personally come down and convince everyone on earth that they have no choice but to believe in Him?

Guess so.. But.... saying 'have no choice but to believe in him' is faulty in its approach. You see... if i knew for fact he was there i wouldn't 'believe' anything i'd know. Thus i wouldn't have a problem with the whole thing cause i'd know the facts. I'd then wanna sit down with him over lunch and ask how he came to be, why he made us, if he made anyone else and so on. Until that time it's all 'mights or might nots'.

If I understand things at all, this is exactly the kind of split which will happen when Jesus returns.

You sound positive he will. Is that absolute undeniable fact? oops... there's my exact problem.

OK, this is theology, so I don't expect you to relate at all.

ya got me there... :bugeye:

Some people will feel compelled to oppose him

Oppose? Or maybe some people dont see the need to just throw blind faith into something that might not be true. It's always an open possibility, same as everything else, but it is nothing more than that.

(based on their knowledge or lack of knowledge of "God")

......... It's supposition, not knowledge.

As an extra.....

Why do people fall from faith? I know a girl who has been an extremely devoted Christian her entire life. There was absolutely no doubt to anything and she would have claimed to have known the truth as much as any devout believer.

Now she says otherwise.....

Why would someone do that?

Don't try plam it off as 'false christian' or some other highly obnoxious statement to protect your faith.

Like i said..... she was as religious as they come.

If i was to find a fact.... For instance: I have 2 feet. There is absolutely no chance i'd sit down one day and think otherwise.

Thus i concur: none of this is fact- as such you just accept. I for the millionth time- cannot just 'accept'.

Originally posted by SnakeLord
I'm far from blind. My only problem with religion is the faithful acceptance without proof. There's thousands upon thousands of religions.... Everyone is in the happy position of being right- their truth is the truth. Everyone has a scapegoat... It's called 'faith', 'belief'. I am in a bizarrely annoying position where blind faith isn't good enough. I require facts and proof.. sue me.

Convenient shelter? Think about your own position.



SnakeLord, just for the sake of discussion, can you mention to me some proofs that will be viewed as satisfactory to you in believing that you and the universe were created by one creator that we call god. Now imagine yourself as a 0.000001mm bacteria that is deaf blind cell....What do you exactly wanna the bacteria to see to convince it that humans exist, and on the same notion, what do you want to see to convince you that god exist.

well..... He could sit down with me and have lunch, (i hear he likes roast lamb).

Aside from that i guess i can just find out the truth when i die and god greets me with open arms and love in his heart. I would cry, knowing i had finally found my long lost daddy and as we walked off into the eternal sunset together the Home and Away tune would play in the background, (Harp version- rev 1.2). Satan could play a mighty fine rendition of Robert Johnsons 'Hell hounds on my trail', Jesus could perform tricks to please the audience and we'd all be eternally happy.

I was hoping you stay serious in the discussion, but I guess, you already have a preconceived idea of religion that you think is right and is too lazy to really think about religion in any serious educated manner.

By the way, god is not a human and he doesn't sit with people to sip coffee and have lunch. Seeing him, would make you piss in your pants and disintegrate into nothingness. Not every soul is fit to see god.

I was hoping you stay serious in the discussion, but I guess, you already have a preconceived idea of religion that you think is right and is too lazy to really think about religion in any serious educated manner.

I was being serious. What would you like me to have said? Ok, i said it in humorous manner but i don't know what else you could want from me... I need proof. A feeling in my heart or a voice in my head is not proof to anything.

Michael Chrichton, The guy who wrote Jurassic Park, once had a tree speak to him. He wanted to hear the tree and it spoke. Want is irrelevant dont you think? It's all people say around here day in, day out. You must want..... That's very flimsy in my opinion. Did Michael Crichton hear a tree? hear the christian god? Hear his own mind? Is he delusional? Insane? Well?

By the way, god is not a human and he doesn't sit with people to sip coffee and have lunch.

How do you know? What about Jesus? Surely then the 'new age' Jesus could come and have coffee with me at the very least?

Seeing him, would make you piss in your pants and disintegrate into nothingness.

How do you know?

Not every soul is fit to see god

How do you know?

In summary:

There are several questions for you to now ponder--- 3 'How do you know's and is Michael Chrichton mad?

But it sounds very much to me like you have a 'preconceived idea of religion that you think is right'. A belief in something that nobody else can debate because you say it's true.

Originally posted by SnakeLord
But it sounds very much to me like you have a 'preconceived idea of religion that you think is right'. A belief in something that nobody else can debate because you say it's true.

Not at all, I may be wrong about many of things in life and my understanding of religion, that does not make my creator wrong though in any way. I also understand your itch of wanting to see proof to believe.....A proof other than if the egg exist, then a chicken must have existed kindda sublte proof. But.....

You must first understand the meaning of life and purpose of creation to understand your relationship with your creator. If you don't understand your purpose in life SnakeLord, then you're prematurely investigating god, because you'll never understand god clearly.

I always question over and over again when I look at life,
why is it of such finest beauty, What is the secret of its undividedness, and the bond of its unity; and the source of its perfections; and in regard to art and nature, look at the miraculous reality which makes the tiniest creature like a universe;

I think that life is a transformation-machine in the vast workshop of the universe, which continuously cleanses everywhere, purifies, allows progress, and illuminates. And living bodies, the dwellings of life, are guest-houses, schools, for instructing and illuminating the caravans of particles, enabling them to perform their duties. Quite simply the Ever-Living Self-Subsistent One (God) makes subtle this dark, transient, lowly world, illuminates it and gives it a sort of permanence, preparing it to go to another, everlasting world;

Originally posted by SnakeLord
[quote]Perhaps it would be better by us to speak in a simpleton tongue.
That is so condescending. :D
But the description varies greatly. So who's right, if anyone?
Before I begin, I would just like to point that you have answered a question with a question, so hopefully, you will understand why I sometimes do it, and refrain from your lead weight put-downs.
The descriptions vary according to the particular scripture, because people are different, as I mentioned earlier. A good example is state education, lets take a subject like math. There are different standards of math for different people who are of differing levels, but the subject is one thing, math. Similarly, God is one, but people see Him according to their particular levels of consciousness.

According to most of them you'll go to hell if you're not a member of it right?

An example?

See what i meant about answering a question with a question? I'm sure you understand the meaning of wes' question.... can't you just answer it? A simple yes, no or maybe would probably have sufficed
That is a fair question, I have never come across a scripture where it says that you go to hell if you’re not a member. But to be fair, I have not read all scriptures, and may have missed this deal in the ones that I have read, so I want wes to give me an example, a scriptoral reference, so I can see for myself.
If that is alright with you, that is. :rolleyes:
Remember, this man boasts that he is a gifted brainy guy, and operates on a level of logic and reason, so I expect he must have shed-loads of proof to back up his statement.

A member! :D

Love

Jan Ardena.

Truth Seeker:

Good point about "Free Will"

Wes

"fopa" is correctly spelled "faux pas" which means false step.

Olaus:

I am having difficulty understanding "natural evil". Is the fact that living orgnisms can be injured and destroyed evil? How about non living things?

Certainly from an athiestic percpective the concept of "evil" must be just as illogical as the concept of "God".

Originally posted by MShark
Certainly from an athiestic percpective the concept of "evil" must be just as illogical as the concept of "God".

Why? To an extent you're correct, but it's a good word to describe "the dark side" of human behavior. The word still works it just doesn't have the "satanic" or "fallen angel" component... it IS a little hoaky, but not any more than "good" really. Both somewhat ignore the variety of agendas and values set forth by every person. (good, is not neccesarily the same thing to me as it is to you)

Thanks for the spelling, now that you put it out there it looks familiar.

Jan,

You are being evasive and ignoring my questions and observations. I would argue that most of what I said is a reasonable argument which you ignore and say "it's your opinion". That's lame. If you don't want to debate that's fine, but you're acting somewhat childish with your "well that's your opinion" shit. I won't bother refuting you, it's not worth my time. You are apparently commited to wallowing in your cultish crap, so as far as I'm concerned.. have fun. I'll be willing to talk when you actually contemplate what I'm saying and realize I say it with good will, rather than scoffing at me because my exceptional reasoning skills and logical approach don't please your religious palette.

Bye.

Wes:

The way I would define good, bad, and evil:
Somthing is good if it is benificial to organisim, or group,
it is bad if it is detrimental to the organisim or group, and
evil is when a separate group or entity deliberatly goes against the desires of the first group or entity.

GOD IS NOT YOUR CONCEPTION.

You are absolutely correct.

Who are you to qualify what is "perfect" regarding god?

I used perfect in the sense of... God is described in all scriptures and this is perfectly known, do you see?

GOD IS NOT YOUR CONCEPTION. IF GOD EXISTS, THEN GOD IS GOD, NOT SOME RIDICULOUS ABSTRACT. Don't you see?

Hopefully you will see that this is irrelevant in light of my meaning.

You are in the grips of a cult mind set.

You have to understand that this is your opinion, I know me, and you are attempting to describe my mindset, to me, based on our discussion.

You say "described perfectly". That is not possible..

A simple misunderstanding, right? ;)

We cannot perfectly describe our asses let alone the "ultimate being".

He is described in all scriptures, if you do not agree, there is nothing I can do or say.

Your argument is moot due to that invalid assumption,

My so-called assumption, was, again, for the record, a misunderstanding.

as is the tendency of all of your arguments on this topic.

This is an unreasonable statement, because everything I have said can be backed up. You, on the other hand have only made wild, disrespectful assumptions, based on negative emotion.

You are in the grips of a cult mind set.

Why do you assume this?

It has an undetermined amount of historical value based on a anthropological interpretation and analysis of motives behind the authors.

What do you want me to say to this, it is not a question, you are not arguing, you are telling me, so it is your opinion, and I for one wish you the best matey.

You have to think about it, just "accepting it as the word of god because it moves you"

Well, I have thought about it, can’t you tell. But I do prefer when it moves me, because then, I know its real. Maybe that is what you need, your views are dull, predictable and uniformed, I can predict 9 times out of 10 how you are going to respond, because that is how you are trained. It is sad, but it is fact, just read your own posts and see how miserable you are. :D

Yeah baby, I liked to be moved. :p

Then I find your method of discerning the correct flavor of religion somewhat stark

Of course you do, I don’t believe you can think any other way, because of the way your mind has been trained.

Love

Jan Ardena.

Not at all, I may be wrong about many of things in life and my understanding of religion, that does not make my creator wrong though in any way.

It does not instantly make your creator right either. Thus my point.

I also understand your itch of wanting to see proof to believe.....A proof other than if the egg exist, then a chicken must have existed kindda sublte proof.

Glad you see my 'itch'.

You must first understand the meaning of life and purpose of creation to understand your relationship with your creator.

Meaning of life differs from person to person- nobody is inherently wrong, nobody is ultimately right. As for purpose of creation..... There's nothing to prove we were 'created' so all talk of needing to understand relationships with 'my'? creator are pure speculation and supposition. They hold no more weight than a lonely drifting feather.

If you don't understand your purpose in life SnakeLord

My personal purpose in life is to find answers and never to just accept something on faith. I understand that perfectly.

I always question over and over again when I look at life

Why question if you already have your answer? Or... more to the point why think you are asking questions? If you already have the answer those questions are mere time fillers.

Quite simply the Ever-Living Self-Subsistent One (God) makes subtle this dark, transient, lowly world, illuminates it and gives it a sort of permanence, preparing it to go to another, everlasting world;

Speculation, supposition, guess work.

Life might be amazing, might be wonderful and incredible to us. That still doesn't have to point a finger at an 'ever living self subsistent being'.

That is so condescending.

True true, but im only human.

Before I begin, I would just like to point that you have answered a question with a question

Well....... I actually put my answer to the question then asked a question as 'return fire' :D That's what keeps debates alive!! What i mean by this is, in response to wes question you could have said: "Not to my knowledge, no. However have you got any examples to show me?" ;)

so hopefully, you will understand why I sometimes do it, and refrain from your lead weight put-downs.

Lead weight put downs? Ah dont take it that way. I was 'speculating' that you did in fact know exactly what he was talking about... The meaning might have been subtle but im sure you got the point. Let me ask for one answer as solid as can be given: If i 'deny' God my whole life and contin