Religion

[Nalaris]

I never truly understood the concept of other Christian religions wandering in darkness until just now. I don't mean to sound arrogant, but so many of the things you've talked about God has corrected, including the mistranslations of the Bible (anytime a mistranslation occurred which distorted the gospel, God, through Joesph Smith, corrected it, however many spiritually irrelevant mistakes remain).

Lucifer was on the high council in the pre-Earth life, and when God asked for someone to be the savior, Jesus agreed. Lucifer, however, tried to amend God's plan by forcing everyone to do what was right. At this time, what was called the 'war in heaven' occurred, and Lucifer and one third of the angels (Lucifers supporters) were cast out to be mankinds test. If there was no evil, there would be no opposition and thus Earth would have no reason to exist. As it is, there is opposition, and thus there can be judgment.

I realize very few of you are going to believe that, but to be frank because most if not all of you are working with pre-determined conclusions I don't really care.

[Hannibal The Imbecile 15]

To go back to earlier stuff. The Romans didn't (I repeat) DID NOT pick what books went into the bible. The pope picked them at the council of Nicea. True, it was commisioned by the Romans, but the pope picked which books went in and which were deemed psuedipigrapha.

[saztronic]

I don't know why I keep posting here, really. I suppose I'm just a little silly, so feel free to ignore.

But the problem of evil can't be dismissed as easily as it was on the previous page. It also hasn't been defined as well as it might be.

The problem is this: If God is all-knowing, He knows about evil. If God is all-powerful, he can do something about it. If God is all-benevolent, then he wants to do something about it. So, why doesn't he?

This is a difficult question, and Elros' answer is the same C.S. Lewis makes persuasively in Mere Christianity -- that without free will, we would be nothing more than automatons, and therefore creation in that sense requires evil.

But that puts aside a vital corollary to the problem of evil -- that God, being all-knowing, would know that it woudl be impossible to have a meaningful creation without evil; and being all-benevolent, would thus have simply left the universe uncreated. In other words, better to leave well enough alone than to create a world were terrible suffering and evil were inevitable. Unless God is a cosmic sadist.

Hate to bring up Dostoyevsky again, but he's just too good at reducing such things to their simplest form. In The Brothers Karamazov, he famously puts the question this way: If there could be a world in which all things were good, all people were blessed, and all life was glorious, but it had to be based on one condition -- namely, the suffering and torture of just one child; just one; then would such a world be just? In other words, what kind of "good" could justify that kind of "evil"?

He doesn't answer the question. Can you?

[Nakranoth]

Alright, so God allowed Evil to give us a choice... then he tailored us to his exact specifications, and we go out and do our own thing... However, what we do in a given situation will always be the same, ie. If I'm offered heroine, I will always reject and leave the situation. That means I really have no choice in what I do, as I will always do what is my nature. If "good" is my entire nature than "good" is all I will do reguardless of the "possibility" of "evil". Now, when you add an "evil" component, then in any situation it would be in your nature to do "evil" you would, while in any situation that it is your nature to do "good" you will. So, we are as free as our natures. We can change our nature in respect to "good" and "evil" but only if it's in our nature to do so. Free will is thus artificial anyway. So, what's it matter if we sometimes do "evil" things if it's in our nature to do so? God made us, and established our natures. True free will? It exists. But it doesn't matter, because our wills are what we are. "Evil" serves no purpose beyond "evil". This in mind, why does God allow "evil"? And Elros, I'm rather sure it's in your nature to argue this point, so let me ask you this, do you really have a choice in weather or not you reply to this?

[Hannibal The Imbecile 15]

When you guys post... are you doped up? Where do you get this stuff. Frankly who gives a rats @%% if some people have "GOD." Time has always been and always will be. There is what I think.

[deadboy]

When you guys post... are you doped up? Where do you get this stuff. Frankly who gives a rats @%% if some people have "GOD." Time has always been and always will be. There is what I think.

Just one little point I'd like to pick up on . If you read earlier in the thread you can see that it is an impossibility that time always existed, whether you consider the creation to be something scientific (Again, I urge you to read around page 70, as we went into the big bang in great detail - to me it sounds alot like it and religion have the same sort of views anyway) or a divine intervention, time still had a point where it began to exist.

Now, I'd like to give my two cents on evil in the world. Primarily, I think that it is stupid to even theoreticise that evil could not exist, as evil is merely a section of codes that we have deemed socially unacceptable, and for one thing they change. In the times of the romans and greeks it was thought honourable to challenge someone to a duel and kill them, now it would be an evil act of murder. Ethics is in the eye of the beholder and the world could not possibly have no evil as for one we do not know what it actually is, and for two how are you going to stop people from commiting those socially unacceptable acts? By physically stopping their body every time they attempt to? This is a ridiculous notion

[Nakranoth]

Exactly. Evil is a manmade concept. It does not exist in a trancendent form, as it does in fact change.

[Nalaris]

I'm not going to get into whether or not evil is a manmade concept, because that all boils down to whether or not God exists, and mankind has known for a long, long time that proving or disproving God's existence is possible.

However, assuming evil is set in stone by God, changing only according to certain circumstances(the ultimate endof good is maintained, but the means may change), then it obviously exists because without evil there can be no good. It would not be an eternally blessed world: it would be static, no matter how good the life. Just like how room temperature feels warm only if you've been in less than room temperature area's. If there's evil, if there's adversity, if there's pain, then there's also good, there's triumph, and there's happiness.

[Mafia Salad]

The problem is this: If God is all-knowing, He knows about evil. If God is all-powerful, he can do something about it. If God is all-benevolent, then he wants to do something about it. So, why doesn't he?

This is just the point that Christianity makes, it’s the heart of it, the gospel message. He did do something about it.

This is a difficult question, and Elros' answer is the same C.S. Lewis makes persuasively in Mere Christianity -- that without free will, we would be nothing more than automatons, and therefore creation in that sense requires evil.

I would argue that creation does not require evil, there was no evil in creation before the fall of Satan. And we can have free will while still completely agreeing with the will of God. Jesus set that example for us by making his will God’s will to the point of bearing all the sins of the world as a sacrifice to bring us back into the will of God.

You can have the possibility to choose evil without actual evil, and the possibility of evil is not evil in itself.

But that puts aside a vital corollary to the problem of evil -- that God, being all-knowing, would know that it woudl be impossible to have a meaningful creation without evil; and being all-benevolent, would thus have simply left the universe uncreated. In other words, better to leave well enough alone than to create a world were terrible suffering and evil were inevitable. Unless God is a cosmic sadist.

You are making the assumption that benevolence is completely opposite and opposed to evil. Can’t someone show kindness to a criminal? If you had a son and a daughter, and your son starts arguing with his sister. The fight escalates to a point where it gets physical and in rage he kills her. Was it your fault that your daughter died? No it was your sons fault. Would you stop loving your son? I wouldn’t and I don’t thing an all-loving God would either. Would that son have to serve his time in prison? Yes. And an all-just God would conclude the same thing. Punishment must be served.

Before creation God knew that evil would happen, people would start acting contrary to his will. (that is what I would define evil as, actions contrary to the will of God.) But he still went through with creation because he loved us despite knowing that we were going to fall.

Exactly. Evil is a manmade concept. It does not exist in a trancendent form, as it does in fact change.

Mankind’s concept of evil can change, but just because we don’t think something is evil doesn’t mean it isn’t. If God, who is the ultimate authority of creation, declares something as evil, then our opinions of right and wrong won’t change that. If you think something that the Romans did was evil, than for you it is evil. If God thinks something you or the Romans did is evil, then for God it is evil, and he sets the standards of the universe so it is ultimately evil. A court of law upholds your governments idea of right and wrong and deals out the punishments it sees fit, you can agree or disagree with them but the authority is theirs not yours. God also sets standards that apply to us whether we agree or not and we will be judged by those standards.

[Hannibal The Imbecile 15]

If you read earlier in the thread you can see that it is an impossibility that time always existed

It is impossible to prove that something is false. It is only possible to prove truths. Just think about it. Oh, and how did you prove time always existed again???

[Nosajimiki]

Nalaris

I realize very few of you are going to believe that, but to be frank because most if not all of you are working with pre-determined conclusions I don't really care.

I dont believe in it cus I dont believe in God, but I have heard this version before and find it to be the more plausable one.

If you read earlier in the thread you can see that it is an impossibility that time always existed

Not impossable, everyone just likes to convienently ignore bowl theory(if our understanding of blackholes is correct) or the possibility of multiple bangs (the default of what would logiclly happen should it be wrong.)

If you want proff the universe is infanantly self-sufficiant, E=MC^2 does an awefully nice job of it.

The problem is this: If God is all-knowing, He knows about evil. If God is all-powerful, he can do something about it. If God is all-benevolent, then he wants to do something about it. So, why doesn't he?

This is just the point that Christianity makes, it’s the heart of it, the gospel message. He did do something about it.

The world is no better off now than it was before. You might believe you have a better shot at Heaven because of it, but he did not fix the evil and suffering in the world.

But that puts aside a vital corollary to the problem of evil -- that God, being all-knowing, would know that it woudl be impossible to have a meaningful creation without evil; and being all-benevolent, would thus have simply left the universe uncreated. In other words, better to leave well enough alone than to create a world were terrible suffering and evil were inevitable. Unless God is a cosmic sadist

You are making the assumption that benevolence is completely opposite and opposed to evil. Can’t someone show kindness to a criminal? If you had a son and a daughter, and your son starts arguing with his sister. The fight escalates to a point where it gets physical and in rage he kills her. Was it your fault that your daughter died? No it was your sons fault. Would you stop loving your son? I wouldn’t and I don’t thing an all-loving God would either. Would that son have to serve his time in prison? Yes. And an all-just God would conclude the same thing. Punishment must be served.

Before creation God knew that evil would happen, people would start acting contrary to his will. (that is what I would define evil as, actions contrary to the will of God.) But he still went through with creation because he loved us despite knowing that we were going to fall.

This is a bad analogy becasue you are ignoring God's ominpotence. A Father can not chose weather his son will have short enough of a tempor to kill someone. God made us to exact specifications. If a loving father could chose to have a moral son or a violent son, he would chose to make the one that would best serve the child, which is clearly the moral one. I'm not saying he would make a child without free will, but one that would be inclined to always try to do what is right within his scope of desires

[Nakranoth]

This is a bad analogy becasue you are ignoring God's ominpotence. A Father can not chose weather his son will have short enough of a tempor to kill someone. God made us to exact specifications. If a loving father could chose to have a moral son or a violent son, he would chose to make the one that would best serve the child, which is clearly the moral one. I'm not saying he would make a child without free will, but one that would be inclined to always try to do what is right within his scope of desires

Which goes right back to my point that Evil and God (as christiandom depicts it) cannot both exist at the same time. If God is omipotent, and we suffer, then God wants us to suffer. If God is Benevolent, than God doesn't want us to suffer. It's really that simple.

[formerly known as hf]

Where's the magic roundabout reached whilst I've been away?

Someone's been fighting the atheist corner in my abscence, right?

[Dee]

God doesn't end all the evilness in the world, because that's exactly why he gave us free will in the first place. Without evilness in the world, there would be no heaven nor hell. People have to do what's right in order to go to heaven, and in order for those people to be right, there has to be wrong in the world. God wants people to end the evilness themselves, or else how would He make them go to heaven?

[Mafia Salad]

This is a bad analogy becasue you are ignoring God's ominpotence. A Father can not chose weather his son will have short enough of a tempor to kill someone. God made us to exact specifications. If a loving father could chose to have a moral son or a violent son, he would chose to make the one that would best serve the child, which is clearly the moral one. I'm not saying he would make a child without free will, but one that would be inclined to always try to do what is right within his scope of desires.

No, it’s not a bad analogy because God does not set our morals. The fact that we have some control in our choices and how our character shapes out sets us apart from the rest of nature. We’re not entirely driven by instinct, we play a big part in determining who we are.