Is the problem of evil sufficient to disprove God?

ugh they themselves were not perfect, they had the oppurtunity to live in a utopia and walk side by side with God. he jus demanded one request and it would have stayed that way. to not eat of the tree of good and evil, thats all they had to do. God gave them a choice and a perfect being would have chosen the correct choice but since they were human they were tempted and hose what appealed to them. so what im saying is that they were human like u and me, they had the chance to stqy in the utopia forever, were tempted, chose the wrong path, and God cast tehm out of the garden. the bible says the only perfect being to ever walk the earth was jesus, or God himself. case and pointHotVchick

So they were imperfect? Make your mind up.

[QUOTE="HotVchick"]ugh they themselves were not perfect, they had the oppurtunity to live in a utopia and walk side by side with God. he jus demanded one request and it would have stayed that way. to not eat of the tree of good and evil, thats all they had to do. God gave them a choice and a perfect being would have chosen the correct choice but since they were human they were tempted and hose what appealed to them. so what im saying is that they were human like u and me, they had the chance to stqy in the utopia forever, were tempted, chose the wrong path, and God cast tehm out of the garden. the bible says the only perfect being to ever walk the earth was jesus, or God himself. case and pointFunky_Llama

So they were imperfect? Make your mind up.

yes they were. God is the only thing that is absolute truth and unflawed. God created all humanity to have a choice. when satan defied God and was banashed to hell, even the angels are imperfect we all have choices and decisions and we all sometimes choose the wrong path.

ugh they themselves were not perfect, they had the oppurtunity to live in a utopia and walk side by side with God. he jus demanded one request and it would have stayed that way. to not eat of the tree of good and evil, thats all they had to do. God gave them a choice and a perfect being would have chosen the correct choice but since they were human they were tempted and hose what appealed to them. so what im saying is that they were human like u and me, they had the chance to stqy in the utopia forever, were tempted, chose the wrong path, and God cast tehm out of the garden. the bible says the only perfect being to ever walk the earth was jesus, or God himself. case and pointHotVchick

though in all fairness God never told them what would happen if they broke that rule.

when satan defied God and was banashed to hell, HotVchick

[QUOTE="HotVchick"]ugh they themselves were not perfect, they had the oppurtunity to live in a utopia and walk side by side with God. he jus demanded one request and it would have stayed that way. to not eat of the tree of good and evil, thats all they had to do. God gave them a choice and a perfect being would have chosen the correct choice but since they were human they were tempted and hose what appealed to them. so what im saying is that they were human like u and me, they had the chance to stqy in the utopia forever, were tempted, chose the wrong path, and God cast tehm out of the garden. the bible says the only perfect being to ever walk the earth was jesus, or God himself. case and pointHewkii

though in all fairness God never told them what would happen if they broke that rule.

in genesis 3 god tells adam if he eats of this tree he will die. and what do ya know he did, not that second but he did die, he would have been alive forever but he threw that away.

[QUOTE="HotVchick"]when satan defied God and was banashed to hell, Harshvardhan666

satan was an angel of great power in heaven named lucifer, but he tried to take god's thrown and was cast down into hell. he is thr tuler of hell but he will one day be destroyed.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="HotVchick"]ugh they themselves were not perfect, they had the oppurtunity to live in a utopia and walk side by side with God. he jus demanded one request and it would have stayed that way. to not eat of the tree of good and evil, thats all they had to do. God gave them a choice and a perfect being would have chosen the correct choice but since they were human they were tempted and hose what appealed to them. so what im saying is that they were human like u and me, they had the chance to stqy in the utopia forever, were tempted, chose the wrong path, and God cast tehm out of the garden. the bible says the only perfect being to ever walk the earth was jesus, or God himself. case and pointHotVchick

So they were imperfect? Make your mind up.

yes they were. God is the only thing that is absolute truth and unflawed. God created all humanity to have a choice. when satan defied God and was banashed to hell, even the angels are imperfect we all have choices and decisions and we all sometimes choose the wrong path.

Why would God deliberately create a flawed creation?

in genesis 3 god tells adam if he eats of this tree he will die. and what do ya know he did, not that second but he did die, he would have been alive forever but he threw that away.

HotVchick

though since death is apparently a result of sin, Adam wouldn't know what death would be, no?

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

Gladly. Judges 22-26

22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, "Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him."

23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, "No, my friends, don't be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don't do this disgraceful thing. 24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing."

24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing."

25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go.

26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.

HotVchick

good job. but the bible is condeming these actions not teaching them. this passage is from judges right, judges is about how evil man was and God had to appoint a judge to turn the people around after letting his chosen people be captured and fester and rot in their own sin. so find another where u think the bible is teraching imoral acts

My bad.

How about this:

This one from Deuteronomy 21:18-21 says to kill your kid if they are disobedient :

"Suppose a man has a stubborn, rebellious son who will not obey his father or mother, even though they discipline him. In such cases, the father and mother must take the son before the leaders of the town. They must declare: 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious and refuses to obey. He is a worthless drunkard.' Then all the men of the town must stone him to death. In this way, you will cleanse this evil from among you, and all Israel will hear about it and be afraid."

[QUOTE="HotVchick"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="HotVchick"]ugh they themselves were not perfect, they had the oppurtunity to live in a utopia and walk side by side with God. he jus demanded one request and it would have stayed that way. to not eat of the tree of good and evil, thats all they had to do. God gave them a choice and a perfect being would have chosen the correct choice but since they were human they were tempted and hose what appealed to them. so what im saying is that they were human like u and me, they had the chance to stqy in the utopia forever, were tempted, chose the wrong path, and God cast tehm out of the garden. the bible says the only perfect being to ever walk the earth was jesus, or God himself. case and pointFunky_Llama

So they were imperfect? Make your mind up.

yes they were. God is the only thing that is absolute truth and unflawed. God created all humanity to have a choice. when satan defied God and was banashed to hell, even the angels are imperfect we all have choices and decisions and we all sometimes choose the wrong path.

he didnt make a flawed creation though, everything in it had its pupose, there was no sickness no pain, no sorrow, it was all a utopia, he made the world because he basically was lonely and he loved and still lovs his creation, he hates the sn in it but he loves all men, just not the sin in evey one of them. we screwed up he didnt

Why would God deliberately create a flawed creation?

[QUOTE="HotVchick"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

Gladly. Judges 22-26

22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, "Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him."

23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, "No, my friends, don't be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don't do this disgraceful thing. 24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing."

24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing."

25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go.

26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.

MetalGear_Ninty

good job. but the bible is condeming these actions not teaching them. this passage is from judges right, judges is about how evil man was and God had to appoint a judge to turn the people around after letting his chosen people be captured and fester and rot in their own sin. so find another where u think the bible is teraching imoral acts

My bad.

How about this:

This one from Deuteronomy 21:18-21 says to kill your kid if they are disobedient :

"Suppose a man has a stubborn, rebellious son who will not obey his father or mother, even though they discipline him. In such cases, the father and mother must take the son before the leaders of the town. They must declare: 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious and refuses to obey. He is a worthless drunkard.' Then all the men of the town must stone him to death. In this way, you will cleanse this evil from among you, and all Israel will hear about it and be afraid."

ok this one seems pretty tricky but not really. when israel as first becoming a nation they were centered on God and all that christianity stood for. and in order to keep their focus they had to obey his commandments.. honor thy father and mother was one. think about it. a natiion whos purpose is to serve and love God and he gives them a command straight from his mouth saying honor thy father and mother. well if a child. meaning above 14 does not by any means obey his parents. meaning he beats them he murders and steals and heads no warnings as it says in levitcus, then both parents and the entire community have to agree and they will stone him. not however all the young teen has to do is say sorry and change his ways, but if he still chooses his path and feels no remorse, and he accepts death then he will die. think abou it a kid who makes these awfull crimes and chooses to continueto make these crimes even if he dies, its a pretty messed up kid.

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="HotVchick"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

Gladly. Judges 22-26

22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, "Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him."

23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, "No, my friends, don't be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don't do this disgraceful thing. 24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing."

24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing."

25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go.

26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.

HotVchick

good job. but the bible is condeming these actions not teaching them. this passage is from judges right, judges is about how evil man was and God had to appoint a judge to turn the people around after letting his chosen people be captured and fester and rot in their own sin. so find another where u think the bible is teraching imoral acts

My bad.

How about this:

This one from Deuteronomy 21:18-21 says to kill your kid if they are disobedient :

"Suppose a man has a stubborn, rebellious son who will not obey his father or mother, even though they discipline him. In such cases, the father and mother must take the son before the leaders of the town. They must declare: 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious and refuses to obey. He is a worthless drunkard.' Then all the men of the town must stone him to death. In this way, you will cleanse this evil from among you, and all Israel will hear about it and be afraid."

ok this one seems pretty tricky but not really. when israel as first becoming a nation they were centered on God and all that christianity stood for. and in order to keep their focus they had to obey his commandments.. honor thy father and mother was one. think about it. a natiion whos purpose is to serve and love God and he gives them a command straight from his mouth saying honor thy father and mother. well if a child. meaning above 14 does not by any means obey his parents. meaning he beats them he murders and steals and heads no warnings as it says in levitcus, then both parents and the entire community have to agree and they will stone him. not however all the young teen has to do is say sorry and change his ways, but if he still chooses his path and feels no remorse, and he accepts death then he will die. think abou it a kid who makes these awfull crimes and chooses to continueto make these crimes even if he dies, its a pretty messed up kid.

Um I'm pretty sure christianity wasn't around then when Isreal started.

It disproves abrahamic gods anyway, you have to look at it as a logical proof.

God created everything and knows everything.

That means that upon creation, every event has been predetermined.

Meaning that all evil has been caused by god, directly or indirectly.

This directly contradicts the idea the bible puts forth of free will.

I think the problem of the problem of evil is this: What evil?

If you are an atheist, then you probably believe evil is one of two things: A cultural concept (evil changes with time and society), or a personal perception (evil is defined by the person experiencing it, also known as perspectivism). Either way, evil in the absolute sense does not exist -- evil is a conceptual meme that changes with the times and/or with the people.

Now, if evil does not exist in the absolute sense, why blame God for not stopping it? What's there to stop? If God were to wipe out an evil for one person, a new person would see evil, and then what is God to do here? Is He to spend eternity stopping evil?

But that is not what the problem of evil entails. The problem of evil is used under the assumption that God exists and is omnibenevolent. The problem of evil is not proof that no God exists (quite the contrary; the problem of evil is absolutely useless unless God of some form exists, meaning in order use it, a person has to temporarily become a theist), but rather is an attack on the character of the Christian God. In order to establish that God is somehow evil or at least not omnibenevolent, we have to assume evil is an absolute concept that applies to all humans at all times in all places. Since God is described in Christianity as omnibenevolent, the problem of evil becomes an attack on the existence of the Christian God.

Now we need to figure out what "evil" is. Evil is a concept, absolute or subjective. Evil is not a physical manifestation. Now we need to figure out how we know evil exists. It's in the thoughts of humans, the actions of humans, the emotions we feel.

In order to assume the problem of evil, we need to assume that evil exists and is an absolute concept.

Now that we've got an idea what is meant by "evil," we can move on. So why doesn't God stop evil if He's all-powerful, all-loving, and omnipresent?

By this description, God should be able to stop evil, right? Well, first we have to define one of God's characteristics: Omnipotence.

There are two main definitions of omnipotence:

1. God can do anything, logically impossible or possible. God can make a four-sided triangle. God can make 2+2=5.

2. God can do anything within logical reason. He cannot make 2+2=5. He cannot make a four-sided triangle.

Now, since we are assuming the Christian God exists, we must also assume His characteristics. While Descartes' view (the first one) is more common among laypeople, the accepted definition among Christianity is Saint Thomas Aquinas' (the second definition).

So, we can define God now: God is at every place at every time, God is all-loving, and God can do anything within logical possibility.

So, we get to the obvious question: Is it possible for God to remove evil?

Since we have determined that evil is a concept present in the minds of humans, determined to be actions, thoughts, emotions, etc., God could remove evil from the world. . . . . .but to do so, He would have to alter humanity so that we don't perceive evil, since He can't just snap His fingers and make evil *poof* away, as that isn't possible without altering humanity.

Now, why does God not alter humanity to make us no longer perceive evil? This brings into question the origin of evil: What causes evil to exist that we perceive it? If evil is judged by the actions or thoughts of other humans, what causes those actions or thoughts?

And now we get into the free-will defense. If actions and thoughts are chosen, then it is our free will that, ultimately, is a source of evil. Which means, in order for God to get rid of evil, He would be forced to get rid of free will, since God cannot do the logically impossible (which here would be keeping free will without evil.)

That leaves two final questions: Is our free will worth the evil that results from it? Would the world be better if we were forced to think and behave in one specific way?

That's up to the one positing the problem of evil to decide. If he says "yes" to the first question, the problem of evil falls apart, as he cannot rationally blame God for the existence of evil if God cannot do anything about it. If he says "no" to the second, then the problem of evil falls apart, because then he'd just be blaming God for what would be; he'd make a new evil out of the good.

But there is yet another possibility: free will does not exist at all. In this case, the Problem of Evil is meaningless; evil doesn't exist under this worldview; it's just a concept we are born with and raised into, nothing more.

I hope this all makes some sense.

2. God can do anything within logical reason. He cannot make 2+2=5. He cannot make a four-sided triangle.Theokhoth

you mean logical within the Universe. God is, by definition, not part of the Universe and thus not subject to the laws.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

2. God can do anything within logical reason. He cannot make 2+2=5. He cannot make a four-sided triangle.Hewkii

you mean logical within the Universe. God is, by definition, not part of the Universe and thus not subject to the laws.

Is logic a part of the universe? Can logical absurdities exist?

I think the problem of the problem of evil is this: What evil?

If you are an atheist, then you probably believe evil is one of two things: A cultural concept (evil changes with time and society), or a personal perception (evil is defined by the person experiencing it, also known as perspectivism). Either way, evil in the absolute sense does not exist -- evil is a conceptual meme that changes with the times and/or with the people.

Now, if evil does not exist in the absolute sense, why blame God for not stopping it? What's there to stop? If God were to wipe out an evil for one person, a new person would see evil, and then what is God to do here? Is He to spend eternity stopping evil?

But that is not what the problem of evil entails. The problem of evil is used under the assumption that God exists and is omnibenevolent. The problem of evil is not proof that no God exists (quite the contrary; the problem of evil is absolutely useless unless God of some form exists, meaning in order use it, a person has to temporarily become a theist), but rather is an attack on the character of the Christian God. In order to establish that God is somehow evil or at least not omnibenevolent, we have to assume evil is an absolute concept that applies to all humans at all times in all places. Since God is described in Christianity as omnibenevolent, the problem of evil becomes an attack on the existence of the Christian God.

Now we need to figure out what "evil" is. Evil is a concept, absolute or subjective. Evil is not a physical manifestation. Now we need to figure out how we know evil exists. It's in the thoughts of humans, the actions of humans, the emotions we feel.

In order to assume the problem of evil, we need to assume that evil exists and is an absolute concept.

Now that we've got an idea what is meant by "evil," we can move on. So why doesn't God stop evil if He's all-powerful, all-loving, and omnipresent?

By this description, God should be able to stop evil, right? Well, first we have to define one of God's characteristics: Omnipotence.

There are two main definitions of omnipotence:

1. God can do anything, logically impossible or possible. God can make a four-sided triangle. God can make 2+2=5.

2. God can do anything within logical reason. He cannot make 2+2=5. He cannot make a four-sided triangle.

Now, since we are assuming the Christian God exists, we must also assume His characteristics. While Descartes' view (the first one) is more common among laypeople, the accepted definition among Christianity is Saint Thomas Aquinas' (the second definition).

So, we can define God now: God is at every place at every time, God is all-loving, and God can do anything within logical possibility.

So, we get to the obvious question: Is it possible for God to remove evil?

Since we have determined that evil is a concept present in the minds of humans, determined to be actions, thoughts, emotions, etc., God could remove evil from the world. . . . . .but to do so, He would have to alter humanity so that we don't perceive evil, since He can't just snap His fingers and make evil *poof* away, as that isn't possible without altering humanity.

Now, why does God not alter humanity to make us no longer perceive evil? This brings into question the origin of evil: What causes evil to exist that we perceive it? If evil is judged by the actions or thoughts of other humans, what causes those actions or thoughts?

And now we get into the free-will defense. If actions and thoughts are chosen, then it is our free will that, ultimately, is a source of evil. Which means, in order for God to get rid of evil, He would be forced to get rid of free will, since God cannot do the logically impossible (which here would be keeping free will without evil.)

That leaves two final questions: Is our free will worth the evil that results from it? Would the world be better if we were forced to think and behave in one specific way?

That's up to the one positing the problem of evil to decide. If he says "yes" to the first question, the problem of evil falls apart, as he cannot rationally blame God for the existence of evil if God cannot do anything about it. If he says "no" to the second, then the problem of evil falls apart, because then he'd just be blaming God for what would be; he'd make a new evil out of the good.

But there is yet another possibility: free will does not exist at all. In this case, the Problem of Evil is meaningless; evil doesn't exist under this worldview; it's just a concept we are born with and raised into, nothing more.

I hope this all makes some sense.

Theokhoth

I really do feel that the argument about 'why does God let evil happen' to be an inept way of arguing against the existence of God, there are far greater methods.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

I think the problem of the problem of evil is this: What evil?

If you are an atheist, then you probably believe evil is one of two things: A cultural concept (evil changes with time and society), or a personal perception (evil is defined by the person experiencing it, also known as perspectivism). Either way, evil in the absolute sense does not exist -- evil is a conceptual meme that changes with the times and/or with the people.

Now, if evil does not exist in the absolute sense, why blame God for not stopping it? What's there to stop? If God were to wipe out an evil for one person, a new person would see evil, and then what is God to do here? Is He to spend eternity stopping evil?

But that is not what the problem of evil entails. The problem of evil is used under the assumption that God exists and is omnibenevolent. The problem of evil is not proof that no God exists (quite the contrary; the problem of evil is absolutely useless unless God of some form exists, meaning in order use it, a person has to temporarily become a theist), but rather is an attack on the character of the Christian God. In order to establish that God is somehow evil or at least not omnibenevolent, we have to assume evil is an absolute concept that applies to all humans at all times in all places. Since God is described in Christianity as omnibenevolent, the problem of evil becomes an attack on the existence of the Christian God.

Now we need to figure out what "evil" is. Evil is a concept, absolute or subjective. Evil is not a physical manifestation. Now we need to figure out how we know evil exists. It's in the thoughts of humans, the actions of humans, the emotions we feel.

In order to assume the problem of evil, we need to assume that evil exists and is an absolute concept.

Now that we've got an idea what is meant by "evil," we can move on. So why doesn't God stop evil if He's all-powerful, all-loving, and omnipresent?

By this description, God should be able to stop evil, right? Well, first we have to define one of God's characteristics: Omnipotence.

There are two main definitions of omnipotence:

1. God can do anything, logically impossible or possible. God can make a four-sided triangle. God can make 2+2=5.

2. God can do anything within logical reason. He cannot make 2+2=5. He cannot make a four-sided triangle.

Now, since we are assuming the Christian God exists, we must also assume His characteristics. While Descartes' view (the first one) is more common among laypeople, the accepted definition among Christianity is Saint Thomas Aquinas' (the second definition).

So, we can define God now: God is at every place at every time, God is all-loving, and God can do anything within logical possibility.

So, we get to the obvious question: Is it possible for God to remove evil?

Since we have determined that evil is a concept present in the minds of humans, determined to be actions, thoughts, emotions, etc., God could remove evil from the world. . . . . .but to do so, He would have to alter humanity so that we don't perceive evil, since He can't just snap His fingers and make evil *poof* away, as that isn't possible without altering humanity.

Now, why does God not alter humanity to make us no longer perceive evil? This brings into question the origin of evil: What causes evil to exist that we perceive it? If evil is judged by the actions or thoughts of other humans, what causes those actions or thoughts?

And now we get into the free-will defense. If actions and thoughts are chosen, then it is our free will that, ultimately, is a source of evil. Which means, in order for God to get rid of evil, He would be forced to get rid of free will, since God cannot do the logically impossible (which here would be keeping free will without evil.)

That leaves two final questions: Is our free will worth the evil that results from it? Would the world be better if we were forced to think and behave in one specific way?

That's up to the one positing the problem of evil to decide. If he says "yes" to the first question, the problem of evil falls apart, as he cannot rationally blame God for the existence of evil if God cannot do anything about it. If he says "no" to the second, then the problem of evil falls apart, because then he'd just be blaming God for what would be; he'd make a new evil out of the good.

But there is yet another possibility: free will does not exist at all. In this case, the Problem of Evil is meaningless; evil doesn't exist under this worldview; it's just a concept we are born with and raised into, nothing more.

I hope this all makes some sense.

MetalGear_Ninty

I really do feel that the argument about 'why does God let evil happen' to be an inept way of arguing against the existence of God, there are far greater methods.

Yes. One good argument is the Euthyphro Dilemma.

[QUOTE="Hewkii"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

2. God can do anything within logical reason. He cannot make 2+2=5. He cannot make a four-sided triangle.Theokhoth

you mean logical within the Universe. God is, by definition, not part of the Universe and thus not subject to the laws.

Is logic a part of the universe? Can logical absurdities exist?

Logic has always been a part of the universe and there can be rare or no absurdities.

Is logic a part of the universe? Can logical absurdities exist?

Theokhoth

logic is built on assumptions, such as the assumption that you can't float in the air. but that relies on basic laws which are part of our universe, and which are not guaranteed to be present outside of the universe.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Is logic a part of the universe? Can logical absurdities exist?

Hewkii

logic is built on assumptions, such as the assumption that you can't float in the air. but that relies on basic laws which are part of our universe, and which are not guaranteed to be present outside of the universe.

Good! Now that we have that down, my argument stands.

If God were to interfere in this universe, then God would be bound by the rule of logic. In Christianity, God is described as unable to do certain things, because it would defy logic. Saint Aquinas recognized this, and it makes perfect sense.

But I disagree with one thing: I don't think logic is rooted in what is physically possible in the universe.

If God were to interfere in this universe, then God would be bound by the rule of logic. In Christianity, God is described as unable to do certain things, because it would defy logic. Saint Aquinas recognized this, and it makes perfect sense.

But I disagree with one thing: I don't think logic is rooted in what is physically possible in the universe.

Theokhoth

but if God is rooted in logic, how are miracles explained? how are people turned to salt? how is water turned to wine?

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

If God were to interfere in this universe, then God would be bound by the rule of logic. In Christianity, God is described as unable to do certain things, because it would defy logic. Saint Aquinas recognized this, and it makes perfect sense.

But I disagree with one thing: I don't think logic is rooted in what is physically possible in the universe.

Hewkii

but if God is rooted in logic, how are miracles explained? how are people turned to salt? how is water turned to wine?

Like I said, I don't think logic is rooted in what is physically possible in the universe. I think logic is a process; a means that is used to determine what makes sense and what doesn't. Now, the end conclusion could be right or wrong, in terms of physics, but the way we get to that conclusion, if done right, can be perfectly logical.

The one and only exception is mathematics.

but if God was is and has always been then isnt it fair to think that he created us to think logically and he created logic himself.HotVchick

I don't understand what you mean by that. . .

i like how he brought up the miracles thing. think about the three loaves and two fish. logically that should not add up to feed 5,000, and on the case that God created the world knowing it was evil, no he created it knwing that we would choose to let evil in, he is all knowing and he knows exactly what we will pick, but he leaves the option of eternal life and that utopia on the table am i right? idk anymore this is all so confusing now

It's a confusing subject.:P

Did you read my long post on the last page?

Just jumping in here...excuse me..."Theists" probably wasn't the right word, but I think he's absolutely correct...and for the reason you stated. Why would non-religious people say their morality would not exist without religion?! It's 1000% the other way around -- religious people OFTEN claim (loudly, I might add) that people who don't share their beliefs are immoral.

And, btw, since you stated it as a fact, how can you prove that the bible was "spoken before it was written"?

fartgorilla

Historically book were not as common as they are now...so most people would have been taught word of mouth.

No because without evil there would be no good.MgamerBD

Without evil, good would have less meaning, but it would still exist.

However, without good, there would be no evil, for two reasons: we would have nothing to compare the evil to, and evil is nothing more than perverted goodness.

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"]No because without evil there would be no good.Theokhoth

Without evil, good would have less meaning, but it would still exist.

However, without good, there would be no evil, for two reasons: we would have nothing to compare the evil to, and evil is nothing more than perverted goodness.

U just said what i said backwards.

[QUOTE="fartgorilla"]

Just jumping in here...excuse me..."Theists" probably wasn't the right word, but I think he's absolutely correct...and for the reason you stated. Why would non-religious people say their morality would not exist without religion?! It's 1000% the other way around -- religious people OFTEN claim (loudly, I might add) that people who don't share their beliefs are immoral.

And, btw, since you stated it as a fact, how can you prove that the bible was "spoken before it was written"?

LJS9502_basic

Historically book were not as common as they are now...so most people would have been taught word of mouth.

I just proved it; I said that morality existed in hinduism, and Ancient Egyptian civilisation, which is years before the Bible was written.

You cannot prove that Biblical morality was taught as far back as the early Egyptian period; that is conjecture, and has no basis in fact.

I don't mind a thread that has some thought put into it. They don't come along very often, however...

LJS9502_basic

Why don't you stop complaing, and make one then... :roll:

Complains about no good threads but posts 60,000 times in all of them... :roll:

You seem to feel a God would need to create a robot. That is not what He wished.LJS9502_basic

Then why does he get mad when me make mistakes, and even threaten eternal torture for NOT being robotic (adhering to a strict standard of living)?

If you make a creature that can think.....you run the risk of the creature making mistakes. That's how it works. Otherwise, the creature has no free will. It's a simple concept really.LJS9502_basic

Oh really? Tell god that's how it works, because again, he shouldn't be getting upset if we "make a mistake" and somehow not "choose to follow him". He should understand that's just an undesirable side effect of the free will he gave us, and should simply forgive us, since his very design made that mistake possible to begin with. Simple concept really. :)

I just proved it; I said that morality existed in hinduism, and Ancient Egyptian civilisation, which is years before the Bible was written.

You cannot prove that Biblical morality was taught as far back as the early Egyptian period; that is conjecture, and has no basis in fact.

MetalGear_Ninty

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

I don't mind a thread that has some thought put into it. They don't come along very often, however...

Deity_Slapper

Why don't you stop complaing, and make one then... :roll:

Complains about no good threads but posts 60,000 times in all of them... :roll:

You seem to feel a God would need to create a robot. That is not what He wished.LJS9502_basic

Then why does he get mad when me make mistakes, and even threaten eternal torture for NOT being robotic (adhering to a strict standard of living)?

If you make a creature that can think.....you run the risk of the creature making mistakes. That's how it works. Otherwise, the creature has no free will. It's a simple concept really.LJS9502_basic

Oh really? Tell god that's how it works, because again, he shouldn't be getting upset if we "make a mistake" and somehow not "choose to follow him". He should understand that's just an undesirable side effect of the free will he gave us, and should simply forgive us, since his very design made that mistake possible to begin with. Simple concept really. :)

Who said He gets mad? Can you provide a link to His mind?

See what I just posted above. You are incorrect on both accounts and are assuming in both.

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

I just proved it; I said that morality existed in hinduism, and Ancient Egyptian civilisation, which is years before the Bible was written.

You cannot prove that Biblical morality was taught as far back as the early Egyptian period; that is conjecture, and has no basis in fact.

LJS9502_basic

As you are a christian, you believe in the morality taught in the bible, therefore, I was just proving that morality can exist without religion -- you don't really think that the Egyptian gods really exist do you, so therefore you don't believe they received morality from a superior being -- so therefore you most believe that there morality was born from them and not their religion.

Therfore morality existed before the morality taught in the Bible.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

I just proved it; I said that morality existed in hinduism, and Ancient Egyptian civilisation, which is years before the Bible was written.

You cannot prove that Biblical morality was taught as far back as the early Egyptian period; that is conjecture, and has no basis in fact.

MetalGear_Ninty

As you are a christian, you believe in the morality taught in the bible, therefore, I was just proving that morality can exist without religion -- you don't really think that the Egyptian gods really exist do you, so therefore you don't believe they received morality from a superior being -- so therefore you most believe that there morality was born from them and not their religion.

Therfore morality existed before the morality taught in the Bible.

And thus you can only SPECULATE....but not know. It doesn't matter what I believe. And actually I believe it was an imperfect understanding...not that it can't be correlated to other beliefs.

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

I just proved it; I said that morality existed in hinduism, and Ancient Egyptian civilisation, which is years before the Bible was written.

You cannot prove that Biblical morality was taught as far back as the early Egyptian period; that is conjecture, and has no basis in fact.

LJS9502_basic

As you are a christian, you believe in the morality taught in the bible, therefore, I was just proving that morality can exist without religion -- you don't really think that the Egyptian gods really exist do you, so therefore you don't believe they received morality from a superior being -- so therefore you most believe that there morality was born from them and not their religion.

Therfore morality existed before the morality taught in the Bible.

And thus you can only SPECULATE....but not know. It doesn't matter what I believe. And actually I believe it was an imperfect understanding...not that it can't be correlated to other beliefs.

But in your few, the Egyptian religion was a false religion anyway, with No word from God, therefore that morality is just as innate, in your perception as an atheist morality.

I don't understand how Egyptian morality is any less innate than a atheistic morality, unless you believe in Ancient Egyptian religion.

But in your few, the Egyptian religion was a false religion anyway, with No word from God, therefore that morality is just as innate, in your perception as an atheist morality.

I don't understand how Egyptian morality is any less innate than a atheistic morality, unless you believe in Ancient Egyptian religion.

MetalGear_Ninty

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

But in your few, the Egyptian religion was a false religion anyway, with No word from God, therefore that morality is just as innate, in your perception as an atheist morality.

I don't understand how Egyptian morality is any less innate than a atheistic morality, unless you believe in Ancient Egyptian religion.

LJS9502_basic

I'm sorry you said specifically: 'Morals are not innate'

Thus, in your view, you believe that morality can only come from God; soare you sying that God spoke to the Egyptians?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

But in your few, the Egyptian religion was a false religion anyway, with No word from God, therefore that morality is just as innate, in your perception as an atheist morality.

I don't understand how Egyptian morality is any less innate than a atheistic morality, unless you believe in Ancient Egyptian religion.

MetalGear_Ninty

I'm sorry you said specifically: 'Morals are not innate'

Thus, in your view, you believe that morality can only come from God; soare you sying that God spoke to the Egyptians?

Although I can't really find a flaw in it the argument from evil doesn't particularly convince me. Don't know why.

As for LJ and metalgear's debate I will just add that the morality of Egyptian religion is not quite analagous to atheistic morality. The Egyptian God's may be false but the people still acted as they did on account of their belief and religion. Atheists on the other hand act knowingly in reference to a Godless world. Both were acting without the guidance of a real God but the Egyptians were still effectively under the influence ofa God.

Oh and I would say that morals stem from innate knowledge but are fleshed out almost entirely through learned behaviour like LJ was saying. Religion just happens to be one way to propegate that learning.

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

But in your few, the Egyptian religion was a false religion anyway, with No word from God, therefore that morality is just as innate, in your perception as an atheist morality.

I don't understand how Egyptian morality is any less innate than a atheistic morality, unless you believe in Ancient Egyptian religion.

LJS9502_basic

I'm sorry you said specifically: 'Morals are not innate'

Thus, in your view, you believe that morality can only come from God; soare you sying that God spoke to the Egyptians?

Trying to change the subject, dodging questions, huh?

No babies aren't born with morals, we garner morals from our intellect, and from others around us, as we grow.

'Good' and 'bad' occur when people act on their selfish desires, it is as simple as that.