Is the problem of evil sufficient to disprove God?

first of God's creation was perfect but not humans since that would defy God's nature. Only God is perfect. Humans later brought further imperfection into the world.

The_Nintendawg

[QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]

first of God's creation was perfect but not humans since that would defy God's nature. Only God is perfect. Humans later brought further imperfection into the world.

Harshvardhan666

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] How can free will ruin perfection?Isn't being unflawed perfect?If so,then god giving humans free will was a flaw.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]

first of God's creation was perfect but not humans since that would defy God's nature. Only God is perfect. Humans later brought further imperfection into the world.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] How can free will ruin perfection?Isn't being unflawed perfect?If so,then god giving humans free will was a flaw.Harshvardhan666

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] How can free will ruin perfection?Isn't being unflawed perfect?If so,then god giving humans free will was a flaw.LJS9502_basic

What about physiological issues? For example, the fact that our eyes are, y'know, unnessecarily upside down, and our knees and backs are weak, and several nerves take huge, circuitous detours? A perfect designer would not design such an unnessacarily flawed creation.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] How can free will ruin perfection?Isn't being unflawed perfect?If so,then god giving humans free will was a flaw.Funky_Llama

What about physiological issues? For example, the fact that our eyes are, y'know, unnessecarily upside down, and our knees and backs are weak, and several nerves take huge, circuitous detours? A perfect designer would not design such an unnessacarily flawed creation.

And there's also unneccesary body parts on there, like the coccyx, uvula, appendix, and others. Did God get extra parts in his Human Kit or something, because that doesn't exactly sound perfect.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]

first of God's creation was perfect but not humans since that would defy God's nature. Only God is perfect. Humans later brought further imperfection into the world.

Harshvardhan666

Humans are not perfect only God can be, becuz that's part of his nature

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] How can free will ruin perfection?Isn't being unflawed perfect?If so,then god giving humans free will was a flaw.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] How can free will ruin perfection?Isn't being unflawed perfect?If so,then god giving humans free will was a flaw.Video_Game_King

What about physiological issues? For example, the fact that our eyes are, y'know, unnessecarily upside down, and our knees and backs are weak, and several nerves take huge, circuitous detours? A perfect designer would not design such an unnessacarily flawed creation.

And there's also unneccesary body parts on there, like the coccyx, uvula, appendix, and others. Did God get extra parts in his Human Kit or something, because that doesn't exactly sound perfect.

I do.We can think.They have to follow a program until programmed different.But what does this have to do with anything?You will say that we have free will.So?To not have free will someone must have the power to control our wills in the first place.Harshvardhan666

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]

first of God's creation was perfect but not humans since that would defy God's nature. Only God is perfect. Humans later brought further imperfection into the world.

The_Nintendawg

Humans are not perfect only God can be, becuz that's part of his nature

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] How can free will ruin perfection?Isn't being unflawed perfect?If so,then god giving humans free will was a flaw.LJS9502_basic

I don't see why God couldn't create us to be perfectly moral beings and give us free will. We could, theoretically, do evil, but we would choose not to because of our morality. As it is, humans are only moral to an extent.

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] I do.We can think.They have to follow a program until programmed different.But what does this have to do with anything?You will say that we have free will.So?To not have free will someone must have the power to control our wills in the first place.LJS9502_basic

That's when you look at free will and sin.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] I do.We can think.They have to follow a program until programmed different.But what does this have to do with anything?You will say that we have free will.So?To not have free will someone must have the power to control our wills in the first place.Harshvardhan666

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] I do.We can think.They have to follow a program until programmed different.But what does this have to do with anything?You will say that we have free will.So?To not have free will someone must have the power to control our wills in the first place.LJS9502_basic

Free will doesn't necessarily mean evil thinking is included.Let me take the 7 sins for example.They are all human emotions and are normal to have.Yet the church says that having these emotions is a sin.What happened to free will there?Isn't the church some sort of authority on christianty?yet they compromise the free will of man? The reply I think you will give is that it is to prevent them from damnation in hell.But since free will is present,isn't it upon the person to commit these things or not?Harshvardhan666

First...for good to exist so must evil. As well...for free will to exist one must have the ability to make good and evil choices. They both must be present.

The 7 deadly sins are actually the extremes of the emotions....not the emotions themselves.

First...for good to exist so must evil. As well...for free will to exist one must have the ability to make good and evil choices. They both must be present.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Video_Game_King"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"] How can free will ruin perfection?Isn't being unflawed perfect?If so,then god giving humans free will was a flaw.LJS9502_basic

What about physiological issues? For example, the fact that our eyes are, y'know, unnessecarily upside down, and our knees and backs are weak, and several nerves take huge, circuitous detours? A perfect designer would not design such an unnessacarily flawed creation.

And there's also unneccesary body parts on there, like the coccyx, uvula, appendix, and others. Did God get extra parts in his Human Kit or something, because that doesn't exactly sound perfect.

There WAS a reason (digest grass), but now there isn't (grass-free diet). And isn't it usually religion's place to boldly reject science due to it going against scripture? If God created us and that was it, that means there was this crap from the beginning. Since it has no use and was there from the beginning, why have it?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

First...for good to exist so must evil. As well...for free will to exist one must have the ability to make good and evil choices. They both must be present.

Harshvardhan666

When you acknowledge the existence of evil, you also admit the existence of good. There is a moral law that differentiates these two concepts. There must be a person that puts forth the moral law, and that person is God.

There WAS a reason (digest grass), but now there isn't (grass-free diet). And isn't it usually religion's place to boldly reject science due to it going against scripture? If God created us and that was it, that means there was this crap from the beginning. Since it has no use and was there from the beginning, why have it?

Video_Game_King

The 7 deadly sins are actually the extremes of the emotions....not the emotions themselves.

LJS9502_basic

For some, yes. Others, no. Pride isn't an extreme, but pure arrogance is the extreme of pride. Wrath is an extreme, and lust/greed/gluttony are extremes of desire, but that's about it. What's sloth an extreme of? If we consider it in medieval terms, I guess grief, but in today's meaning, there is no base feeling. Envy is the base feeling, while pure jealousy is the extreme. They realy need to rethink this crap instead of making commandments for DRIVING (this is true, I saw the story).

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

The 7 deadly sins are actually the extremes of the emotions....not the emotions themselves.

Video_Game_King

For some, yes. Others, no. Pride isn't an extreme, but pure arrogance is the extreme of pride. Wrath is an extreme, and lust/greed/gluttony are extremes of desire, but that's about it. What's sloth an extreme of? If we consider it in medieval terms, I guess grief, but in today's meaning, there is no base feeling. Envy is the base feeling, while pure jealousy is the extreme. They realy need to rethink this crap instead of making commandments for DRIVING (this is true, I saw the story).

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

First...for good to exist so must evil. As well...for free will to exist one must have the ability to make good and evil choices. They both must be present.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Video_Game_King"]

There WAS a reason (digest grass), but now there isn't (grass-free diet). And isn't it usually religion's place to boldly reject science due to it going against scripture? If God created us and that was it, that means there was this crap from the beginning. Since it has no use and was there from the beginning, why have it?

LJS9502_basic

Huh? Really? Damnit, why didn't I hear about this crap? And history kinda supports this. Remember when Copernicus and Galileo were finding out that the Earth isn't the center of the universe? One of them got sentenced to house arrest for life.

You read the wrong story then. That isn't what was decided. Sloth is the extreme of lazy.;)LJS9502_basic

Sloth and lazy are the same thing. And may I cite my source?

Huh? Really? Damnit, why didn't I hear about this crap? And history kinda supports this. Remember when Copernicus and Galileo were finding out that the Earth isn't the center of the universe? One of them got sentenced to house arrest for life.

Video_Game_King

Murder,stealing and other stuff was said to be evil and has now become a standard in society.Harshvardhan666

What!? Standard? I think its been around for quite some time, like teen sex. It didn't just arise in the past 50 years or something. And when was it standard? I assume by that, you mean morally acceptable. Still not acceptable.

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"]Murder,stealing and other stuff was said to be evil and has now become a standard in society.Video_Game_King

What!? Standard? I think its been around for quite some time, like teen sex. It didn't just arise in the past 50 years or something. And when was it standard? I assume by that, you mean morally acceptable. Still not acceptable.

[QUOTE="Video_Game_King"]

Huh? Really? Damnit, why didn't I hear about this crap? And history kinda supports this. Remember when Copernicus and Galileo were finding out that the Earth isn't the center of the universe? One of them got sentenced to house arrest for life.

LJS9502_basic

Science was new? I think it existed long before that. I know it's existed at least since Greece, probably dating back to Egypt. When are you dating your science, exactly? And yea, I think he was able to prove it using certain aspects of Venus. Those aspects showed it was a meteorological impossibility for the sun to be rotating around the Earth.

[QUOTE="Video_Game_King"]

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"]Murder,stealing and other stuff was said to be evil and has now become a standard in society.Harshvardhan666

What!? Standard? I think its been around for quite some time, like teen sex. It didn't just arise in the past 50 years or something. And when was it standard? I assume by that, you mean morally acceptable. Still not acceptable.

]Ok..then you agree that people in general have a consensus on what denotes evil.LJS9502_basic

When you acknowledge the existence of evil, you also admit the existence of good. There is a moral law that differentiates these two concepts. There must be a person that puts forth the moral law, and that person is God.

The_Nintendawg

My morality doesn't stem from a superior being, but rather my own humanity -- I hope that you disagree with murder because you know it is bad, and not because you think that is what God said is bad.

So if God didn't condemn murder in the bible, would you still consder it to be bad?

Science was new? I think it existed long before that. I know it's existed at least since Greece, probably dating back to Egypt. When are you dating your science, exactly? And yea, I think he was able to prove it using certain aspects of Venus. Those aspects showed it was a meteorological impossibility for the sun to be rotating around the Earth.

Video_Game_King

All they knew was that the sun came up in the morning...and set in the evening. Because that is what they saw. Now...we know otherwise....but if that couldn't be proven....are you so sure you'd believe it? After all...one sees the sun come and go. Again.....you have to backtrack your thinking and look at the possibilities in a more limited way.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]]Ok..then you agree that people in general have a consensus on what denotes evil.Harshvardhan666

Exactly, and as a result of that, views on morality/good & evil change over time. Hell, at least 150 years ago, people said slavery was moral because of the story of Ham (or was it book? Can't remember). Is it still moral? Very few people believe that.

[QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]

When you acknowledge the existence of evil, you also admit the existence of good. There is a moral law that differentiates these two concepts. There must be a person that puts forth the moral law, and that person is God.

MetalGear_Ninty

My morality doesn't stem from a superior being, but rather my own humanity -- I hope that you disagree with murder because you know it is bad, and not because you think that is what God said is bad.

So if God didn't condemn murder in the bible, would you still consder it to be bad?

[QUOTE="Video_Game_King"]

Science was new? I think it existed long before that. I know it's existed at least since Greece, probably dating back to Egypt. When are you dating your science, exactly? And yea, I think he was able to prove it using certain aspects of Venus. Those aspects showed it was a meteorological impossibility for the sun to be rotating around the Earth.

LJS9502_basic

All they knew was that the sun came up in the morning...and set in the evening. Because that is what they saw. Now...we know otherwise....but if that couldn't be proven....are you so sure you'd believe it? After all...one sees the sun come and go. Again.....you have to backtrack your thinking and look at the possibilities in a more limited way.

Isn't string theory a counterpoint to that, meeting one criteria but not the other? And Galileo had the proof. He wrote crap down, looked at the night sky, added everything up, and people still didn't believe him.

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]]Ok..then you agree that people in general have a consensus on what denotes evil.Video_Game_King

Exactly, and as a result of that, views on morality/good & evil change over time. Hell, at least 150 years ago, people said slavery was moral because of the story of Ham (or was it book? Can't remember). Is it still moral? Very few people believe that.

Isn't string theory a counterpoint to that, meeting one criteria but not the other? And Galileo had the proof. He wrote crap down, looked at the night sky, added everything up, and people still didn't believe him.

Video_Game_King

[QUOTE="Video_Game_King"]

[QUOTE="Harshvardhan666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]]Ok..then you agree that people in general have a consensus on what denotes evil.LJS9502_basic

Exactly, and as a result of that, views on morality/good & evil change over time. Hell, at least 150 years ago, people said slavery was moral because of the story of Ham (or was it book? Can't remember). Is it still moral? Very few people believe that.

People were claiming slavery was immoral. Slavery supporters countered with the story/book of Ham. What would the counterpoint be? "Slavery is not immoral." What is not immoral? What is moral is not immoral. Therefore, they were saying slavery is moral. And the Bible was and still is taken as a book of moral guidelines, so what the hell do you call that?

it's the part of the definition of a God, one that is all-everything, everything He does is perfect. God cannot make mistakes or that would go against His nature.

The_Nintendawg

but who defined God?

People were claiming slavery was immoral. Slavery supporters countered with the story/book of Ham. What would the counterpoint be? "Slavery is not immoral." What is not immoral? What is moral is not immoral. Therefore, they were saying slavery is moral. And the Bible was and still is taken as a book of moral guidelines, so what the hell do you call that?

Video_Game_King

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]

When you acknowledge the existence of evil, you also admit the existence of good. There is a moral law that differentiates these two concepts. There must be a person that puts forth the moral law, and that person is God.

LJS9502_basic

My morality doesn't stem from a superior being, but rather my own humanity -- I hope that you disagree with murder because you know it is bad, and not because you think that is what God said is bad.

So if God didn't condemn murder in the bible, would you still consder it to be bad?

I know that murder is wrong becuase it means the the unnecessary death of an innocent human being -- that's all i need to know.

We can get all post-modernist and ultimately determine that there is no such thing as right and wrong, but I think that's besides the point.

Anyways, if you derive your whole morality from God, then you are not very moral at all, because you are acting on those morals perhaps not because you believe in them but because somebody has told you to believe in them. From what Nintedawg said, he is not acting on those morals for his compassion for humanity, but rather that is what he was told.

Theistic morality is robotic.

I'm fine with using religion as a source of morality, however implieing that morality can only be derived from theism is nihilistic.

[QUOTE="Video_Game_King"]

People were claiming slavery was immoral. Slavery supporters countered with the story/book of Ham. What would the counterpoint be? "Slavery is not immoral." What is not immoral? What is moral is not immoral. Therefore, they were saying slavery is moral. And the Bible was and still is taken as a book of moral guidelines, so what the hell do you call that?

LJS9502_basic

I'm in the 1840's, America. Or around that time, give or take a few decades. And morality had to have entered it. How could it not?

I'm in the 1840's, America. Or around that time, give or take a few decades. And morality had to have entered it. How could it not?

Video_Game_King