ForumsWEPR[redirected]If God created all things

1849 254362
DrCool1
offline
DrCool1
210 posts
Bard

Here is something to get the brain going. It's been said that God created ALL things. Also it's been said that God is 100 precent pure/good. So God created man and it was said that because of man's sinful actions bad/evil things were created. But if God created ALL things then God created bad/evil things, not man. So by God creating bad/evil things this does not make him 100 precent pure/good.

  • 1,849 Replies
adios194
offline
adios194
818 posts
Nomad

That isn't what I am saying. I'm saying that I've known and met people who are Christians and yet they lack many of the morals I adhere to. Why should they be saved when, regardless of what I do and do not believe, I am possibly a better person morally?

I've met many atheist that have lower moral than I do, yet I don't judge them based on their lack of religion. The second part is an opinion.
You know how stupid you sound, right?

You know how ignorant that spam is, right?
How is it any different? Adam and Eve did something and as a result ended up with the sin (something negative) which was then passed on to their descendants. The pregnant mother did drugs and became addicted (something negative) that addiction was then passed on to her child (her descendant

The baby also has an opportunity to break the addiction. Humanity has the opportunity to believe in God and live for him, breaking the addiction.
So God set us up to fail?

I do believe we learn from failure, and the aspect of life is the acquirement of knowledge. Right?
No. God did not create evil.

This may be right, in the beginning there was nothing but darkness and chaos.
He also said they were arguably weaker beings.

They are, God created humanity in his imagery. It really counts on the type of angel. There are nine orders of angels consisting of three spheres (levels) of angels in the Christian religion. There are the deathly ones, the guards of God's throne. Next are the heavenly governors. Then come the servants, messengers, and soldiers. Angels are sharp at mind, but can be quite subseptible. The angels who let evil into their spirit were sent with Lucifer, this again make heaven holy.
It means that god does know all,

God knew that with knowledge comes perception and evil. He didn't want Adam and Eve to be admitted to this, and he knew that they would eat from the tree. This gave him reasoning to kick them out of the garden, and start the florishing of civilization.
And will you not try to answer any of the questions I have raised?

I did, like usual. Congrats on 500 posts.
Just like how those battered wives need to be beat to know there place.

WTF!!!
thepossum
offline
thepossum
3,037 posts
Nomad

A frail arguement. You're also ignoring a huge flaw in this reasoning. God created suffering just so that man would follow god. In essence all god did was put man on earth to be his pets.


No. First, God did not create suffering, He simply allows it. Secondly, this suffering helps us learn from our mistakes.

However applying this to wolfs question, it would seem wolf is correct. God knows (or at least sees this is the most likely out come) they will do something wrong and will punish them for it.


Sort of like when you send a drug addict who has relapsed several times and made no progress back out on the streets, knowing you'll have to arrest them again.

We're talking about logical necessity. From our point of view of knowledge, we can't know that someone will do a particular action because they can conceivably do otherwise. We may have very very good reasons for believing that S will do x, but it's not knowledge on any account. Your example also ignores the hard cases. God has to know which side of the bed I'm going to get out of. God has to know which sock I'm going to put on first. And God's knowledge must be infallible. So logically, it would seem that I cannot choose to do otherwise (since my actions are necessary under God's conception of the world).
Without a unique theory of truth-makers and propositional knowledge, free will and divine omniscience are logically incompatible.


God has an intimate understanding of how your mind works. Therefore, God knows what you would do in any situation. God simply knows you even better than you know you.
Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,014 posts
Shepherd

The problem, above here...no being can be omnipotent, omni-benevolent, omniscient all at the same time while maintaining the current belief system. It is logically impossible.

thepossum
offline
thepossum
3,037 posts
Nomad

The problem, above here...no being can be omnipotent, omni-benevolent, omniscient all at the same time while maintaining the current belief system. It is logically impossible.


*Waits to hear why*
Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,014 posts
Shepherd

It's pretty straight-forward. I would say that my "why" was explained. But I'll break it down some more.

omnipotent (all-powerful)
omni-benevolent (all-loving)
omniscient (all-knowing)

Having the above qualities as the same time is not consistent with itself and the way the universe works. Specifically, there is no difference between "God" creating and allowing anything. It is one in the same.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer

WTF!!!


God put us here and punished us to teach us where are place is and to learn we need him.

An abusive husband beats his wife to teach her where her place is and makes her think she needs him.

No. First, God did not create suffering, He simply allows it. Secondly, this suffering helps us learn from our mistakes.


"If God is able but not willing, he is malevolent" - Epicurus

Sort of like when you send a drug addict who has relapsed several times and made no progress back out on the streets, knowing you'll have to arrest them again.


Indicating a very flawed system.

God has an intimate understanding of how your mind works. Therefore, God knows what you would do in any situation. God simply knows you even better than you know you.


Doesn't really matter the argument still stands.
adios194
offline
adios194
818 posts
Nomad

God put us here and punished us to teach us where are place is and to learn we need him.
An abusive husband beats his wife to teach her where her place is and makes her think she needs him.

This is another flaw in the ignorant reasoning that you are eximplifying. Why would an abused wife feel like she is needed if she is being beaten? Why would she want to be a human punching bag? I thought you were smart, but if you believe this reasoning you are as ignorant as the man who beats his wife. If you beat your wife/girl or whatever, then your a'' should be filled with cotton balls, and you should be put in an electric chair so you can cry the blood of the innocent beaten women. (Do the Ted Bundy on Ya)
"If God is able but not willing, he is malevolent" - Epicurus

As you can tell Epicurus was a Greek Philosopher whose works are rarely heard of. This leads one to believe he wasn't that great of one due to the large amount of significance observed from Greek philosophers.
adios194
offline
adios194
818 posts
Nomad

wtf, look above.

wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,440 posts
Farmer

I did, like usual. Congrats on 500 posts.


Thanks!

No. First, God did not create suffering, He simply allows it. Secondly, this suffering helps us learn from our mistakes.


If there was no suffering before man kind and God creates man who suffers, then who is ultimately responsible for the suffering? Also, how is allowing suffering any better?
thepossum
offline
thepossum
3,037 posts
Nomad

Also, how is allowing suffering any better?


Everybody allows suffering> We all have the ability to stop some form of suffering somewhere in the world, but is not stopping it in any way the same as causing it? No.
wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,440 posts
Farmer

Everybody allows suffering> We all have the ability to stop some form of suffering somewhere in the world, but is not stopping it in any way the same as causing it? No.


But to allow it, is to be just as guilty. And since God created suffering he is ultimately responsible for ALL suffering.

Let me give you a legal example. Let's say two men kill a woman. One shoots the woman while the other one stands by and watches. According to the law both men may be charged with murder. Even the man who did not do anything.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer

Everybody allows suffering> We all have the ability to stop some form of suffering somewhere in the world, but is not stopping it in any way the same as causing it? No.


Even if so, shouldn't a being that is suppose to be perfect and all loving be held at a higher standard then to what we would do?

But then again in terms of morals your God seems to have trouble reaching even human standards of compassion let alone those you would think a perfect being would have.
thepossum
offline
thepossum
3,037 posts
Nomad

But then again in terms of morals your God seems to have trouble reaching even human standards of compassion let alone those you would think a perfect being would have.


Whatever do you mean? Without such things as the Ten Commandments and other things concerning Christianity, the morals we have nowadays would be very horrible indeed.
wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,440 posts
Farmer

Whatever do you mean? Without such things as the Ten Commandments and other things concerning Christianity, the morals we have nowadays would be very horrible indeed.


A completely unfounded statement and arguement. You have nothing but blind faith and arrogance to support this.

Also Mage means your god does a hoorible job following his own laws. "Thou shall not kill" and then god kills people. Also god seems rather tyranical and sociopathic.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer

Whatever do you mean? Without such things as the Ten Commandments and other things concerning Christianity, the morals we have nowadays would be very horrible indeed.


Cultures that had no contact with Christianity seemed to manage to come up with similar moral codes all on there own.
Showing 1771-1785 of 1849