all you religous people out there answer this

Is god willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able but not willing?

Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?

Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing?

Then why call him God???



votre mentalement malade ami

quote:Originally posted by tater_tot:

all you religous people out there answer this

Is god willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able but not willing?

Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?

Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing?

Then why call him God???



votre mentalement malade ami

Thank fuckin hell that somebody finally agrees with me.

I've been trying to stress those very points to ppl, and it just does not seem to get through to them.

If He is indeed omnipotent, then He is evil. No pure creature could or would make a place like hell.

And if He's not evil He's a coward, because with all His abilities, it's obcious that He's doing nothing to stop or prevent evil.

If He's not a coward and He is omnipotent, then He has a plan, but He is not pure. Cause no pure creature could make Satan the way he's described.

Just like us, everything that is Satan came from God, and if he has evil in him, then God had to have evil in himself.

quote:Originally posted by Metalligod:

Just like us, everything that is Satan came from God, and if he has evil in him, then God had to have evil in himself.

God's just life. Do piranha's have evil in them, or do they just follow the principles of life?

God is life and its principles, we are the ones who decide if something is negative/evil/counter-productive/etc.

God doesn't decide any of this stuff. He doesn't give a shit, he just gets on with enjoying, and advises us to join along.

Are we gonna join, or bitch about not liking things?

quote:Originally posted by ---Beany---:

God's just life. Do piranha's have evil in them, or do they just follow the principles of life?

God is life and its principles, we are the ones who decide if something is negative/evil/counter-productive/etc.

God doesn't decide any of this stuff. He doesn't give a shit, he just gets on with enjoying, and advises us to join along.

Are we gonna join, or bitch about not liking things?

That's a highly stupid comparison.

Piranahs don't have FREE WILL. Piranahs aren't creatures who learn, they do what they're biologically programmed to do.

That comparison is like comparing the intelligence of man to a fly. Intellectually reprehensible! And a creature that would make such a comparison, lacks mind power.

I am one that believes, EVIL IS A POINT OF VIEW! However, the bible and followers of the religion that's written in it, don't believe this.

If God is real, you believe that He has no role in our personalities? That's stupid! He made the angels for distinct purposes, so obviously HE GAVE A SHIT!

Especially in a creature(AN ANGEL) that is made for His pleasure.

If your making a creature for your pleasure, then you are by the very crux of the sentence playing a major role in its behavior!

To say that He doesn't give a shit is without merrit, and dumb. The angels themselves admit that they know why they were made, which means they have a PURPOSE.

BTW: I know this post sounds like I'm being an ass, but it's not on purpose, it's natural 4me, so plz try an excuze it.

[This message has been edited by Metalligod (edited 04-12-2004).]

It's all about free will. God has no preference regarding our behavior.

Anyway, at the highest metaphysical level, "good" and "evil" are equally illusory terms, part of the dualistic fallacy.

Not that I expect you to be able to understand this.

Is it too much to hope people would have the slightest idea what the hell they're argueing about? Seriously. If you're referring to the Christian god, go read a damn bible. You still have questions, then come back.

quote:Originally posted by SurahAhriman:

Is it too much to hope people would have the slightest idea what the hell they're argueing about? Seriously. If you're referring to the Christian god, go read a damn bible. You still have questions, then come back.

And this is referred to?

Mostly the original poster, but it applies to alot of posts here, and in mad scientists. I just get annoyed by the multitude of posts proclaiming to have figured out how to go faster than light, or people thinking they've come up with a brilliant new refutation of Christianity, that is not merely not new, but neither valid, nor particulary intelligent. Posts like this are especially bad, because to really debate something like that, you have to specify which religion it's in relation to. I'm not certain Buddhists even believe in evil.

As I was raised Catholic, I'll answer his question in that reguard. God allows Satan to try to corrupt people. It's like a cosmic bet. Satan tries to prove that humans aren't worth saving, while God holds faith that we can.

On a more broad note. "Is he able but not willing?

Then he is malevolent."

There exists a difference between lack of benevolence, and malevolence. Also, freewill.

Metalligod, I made no reference to your post, if you thought I was questioning your knowledge. I hadn't even read any of the replies when I posted.

My point still stands though. Don't flaunt ignorance as enlightenment.

Metalligod you just didn't catch on to the meaning of my post.

The nice list of insults you gave me only apply to your lack of understanding.

Well, the whole "creating Satan makes God evil", idea, is sorta stupid; mainly because Satan was a being created with free-will... therefore his actions are his own choice, just like ours (allegedly), and not subject to God being blamed (Unless you call the creation of autonomous freethinking and acting beings, an evil act).

If free will doesn't exist, then yeah, God's a bastard... but that idea doesn't make sense, because God wouldn't speak of judgement if free-will didn't exist, because we can't be judged for our actions if they are preordained to come to pass due to some big cosmic plan.

Now therein lies the answer to Tater-tot's often professed theory about God being a bastard for allowing "bad", to come to pass. Imo, free-will is given, and through that, when people choose a bad action over a good action, evil comes into the world... but these actions must be allowed to come to pass for people to be able to be judged for the afterlife. Earth is basically a nice big obstacle course.

Now, imo, when people talk of "being made in God's image", I tend to think people have been supposedly imbued with divine essence, allowing them to undertake moral actions, independent of God's foresight (Because if God could foresee our actions, then there would be no point in the staging ground). In this way, God can't be blamed for immoral actions or "bad", results, restulting from the actions of free-willed beings he created.

The main problem I find with this whole God thing is... Why did he even feel the need to create other beings in the first place?

The entire Bible can be shot down with a single word; Dinosaurs.

Thank you. Goodnight.

Ummm. Outpatient... there are a lot of Christian groups that see Dinosaurs as having existed, and see the notion of Creationism and Adam and Eve to be more a metaphorical example of God's omnipotence...

Yeah...

quote:Originally posted by Durell:

Ummm. Outpatient... there are a lot of Christian groups that see Dinosaurs as having existed, and see the notion of Creationism and Adam and Eve to be more a metaphorical example of God's omnipotence...

Yeah...

if so, then could it not be said that ALL of the bible is a metaphorical example of 'God's' omnipotence.

you cant say that only some of it is THE ABSOLUTE WORD OF GOD and some of it is just a pretty story.

yeah...

Yeah, it probably could be said that the whole Bible is a metaphorical example of God's ominpotence... it would just be wrong. Some biblical claims, such as Jesus' existence, Pontius Pilate and the work of a number of the apostles post Jesus' death (E.g. Peter establishing the Church), are factually documented accounts, firmly entrenched in history.

Also, assuming it is a metaphor of God's omnipotence... you're working on the assumption that there is an omnipotent God... who, if he existed, would have been purely and... acording to you, accurately, fabricated by the writers themselves. Afterall, no divine input occurred... it was all a metaphor. Unless you're also saying that God himself did inspire the Bible, but chose to have a metaphorical work created in his name... the factual bits and all (You know. Cause they're metaphor too, I guess).

As for "The Absolute Word of God". That would likely come under headings where God is actually doing some speaking. E.g. Ten Commandments, or in the New Testament, Jesus' "Golden rule", of loving one another. Something like "The STORY of Creation", is accepted by, as I said, many Chritian groups, as being a metaphor. It was never listed as being a direct explanation from God on how creation occurred. However, accounts of God speaking directly to prophets, and such... aren't considered metaphor. Cause they're not supposed to be symbolic. E.g. The Ark of the Covenant (Ten commandments (Isn't history fun?)).

Just for your sake, Gremlin.

Metaphor

1. A figure of speech in which a word or phrase that ordinarily designates one thing is used to designate another, thus making an implicit comparison, as in “a sea of troubles” or “All the world's a stage”

2. One thing conceived as representing another; a symbol (It's this one btw)

God did not create satan nor hell.

Satan/Lucifer, was, if I my memory serves well, an archangel (he may have had different rank but I'm pretty sure it was archangel).

He however, rebelled against god and paradise, and he, and several of his followers, were cast away to earth, to the desert. It was here that he created another dimension and he and his fellows resided there. This dimension is known as hell, where the fallen angels (devils) rule, and the highest devil is lucifer, who is the commander of the commanders of legions. When the "watchers" became fallen watchers, aka were cast down to earth, they had intercourse with human women and gave birth to NIPHALITES. They had six fingers and six toes and were six cubits high (they were giants). They had remarkable knowledge and extrodinary psychic powers, in all areas of psychic phenomanon. They were demonic. These were in the days before the great flood that banished the niphalites and those with niphaite DNA, and after they died their spirits were condemned to eternal death and to never enter a body again (their souls were being reincarnated into bodies in the pre flood days), their spirits are what are known as demons, whose main aim is to find a body again, and will use all sorts of nasty manipulation and intervention to acheive possesion. It is also beleived that the fallen watchers had intercourse with animals, and the result was animals with the NIPHALITE DNA, (one could say minator and pegasus were two examples of animals that fallen watchers bread with, and, even if not, such were examples of what the offspring of the fallen watchers and the beasts they had intercourse with would have looked like). As for the person who said the whole bible can be shot down with the word dinasaurs, from a biblical point of veiw dinasaurs were an example of offspring of fallen watchers and beasts. (these "beast niphilites" if you will, would have also suffered the same fate as the niphilites and would have become demons after death, interestingly the dinasours were all destroyed simultaenously by a still undetermined natural disaster).

As far as I know, I'm not really sure about the "cosmic bet" idea between god and satan, but I am pretty sure satan just basically aims to make god seem bad to humans; to turn people away from god and cast them into times of darkness, most probably because in this way, they will eventually resort to lives of dark worship or sin, thus their souls are sold to satan and they are bound for hell when the physical body deceases.

God gave all of his their bodies, and everything in and about their bodies, their brains, housing their minds, and thus god's creations have free will. The will of humans cannot be controlled; however satan, fallen angels and demons (basically satan in the outcome) can intervene and attack humans, and as thus influence their free will.

If everyone were loyal to god then when these interventions of satan came, the victims would cry for deliverence and plea for the blood of the lamb of god and be delivered. However not everyone is loyal to god and thus the free will of many is tainted, and this is where human evil stems from.

So ultimatley, god can easily banish evil. All forces of darkness; all demons, quiver, tremble and flee in the presence of god, so when one is under the demonic intervention of the satan, when one is in times of darkness, they can cry out in the name of god and the evil (where it be demonic or just conseqeuncial) will dissolve. It will dissolve; the evil which plunges people into times of darkness, which causes them sin and darkens their free will. However not all ask for the deliverance the lord offers as a free gift, and thus they end up with their dark free wills which they will carry out; they will kill and rape, thigns they would not to if they had only asked for god to chase away the evil before it had gotten to them.

So in short, god can grab evil by the roots and squeeze the life out of it! but one has free will, and one must use his free will to ask god to banish the evil when it comes initially, other wise the evil, whether just consequencial evil ie suffering, or whether it be demonic intervention, will suceed, and ones free will will become dark, and he will do sin.



God can banish the evil and suffering which causes people to commit evil acts. However, one must ask god to banish this evil and if everyone did, then there would be no evil acts, because there'd be no times of darkness for people.

[This message has been edited by shuu (edited 04-14-2004).]

[This message has been edited by shuu (edited 04-14-2004).]

Can I buy some weed off you, Shuu; or whatever it is that you're on?

quote:Originally posted by ---Beany---:

Metalligod you just didn't catch on to the meaning of my post.

The nice list of insults you gave me only apply to your lack of understanding.

Ok well help me out.

I think your point was, God doesn't care about whar choices we make. We do that on our own.

If you are not refering to the Christian god, then I have highly misunderstood your post.

However if you weren't then I have understood it correctly, and you were wrong.

I gave if and then scenarios, I only once insalted you. I said things such as: If God is real, you believe that He has no role in our personalities? That's stupid!

But I mean this only if you are reffering to the Christian god. It was an insalt of instances.

You might not agree, but a person who would compare a persons' behavior to that of a piranah, has some serious thinking issues. In any instance. The natural reaction in humans in the instance of someone annoying you, whether it be because they're not doing what you want, or trying to tease you.

Is to hit them, this does not make it right. It's also natural to want to kill others, and I'm sure in primative times it was done alot, this does not make it right.

Comparing the behavior to piranahs', to humans, is not a very good comparison.

The point is(encase it got lost in the instances), that just because something is natural, does not mean it is right.

Piranahs have the natural tendacy to rip anything to shreds, this doesn't make it good, or right. Humans have the natural tendacy to want to harm those who annoy them. This does not make it right, just because it's natural.

Piranahs don't have evil in them. Piranahs don't have the mental compasity of man, this was all that I meant. So it is dumb to compare the behaniors of the two.

To be able to feel remorse, means that you know what is right and wrong. To be able to feel remorseful but still be malevolent, is to be evil.

shuu- First, you're an idiot. "NIPHALITE"'s are from a single text that was called blasphemous and eradicated before the Protestant Reformation. No branch of Christianity believes that. As far as your bullshit about dinosaurs and minotaurs... idiot. Thats all that really has to be said. If you can't understand how inane that is, I'm not going to explain it to you. Yeah, the Morning Star was kicked out of heaven, but he was banished to hell. Go read Genesis, and hit puberty while you're at it.

quote:Originally posted by Metalligod:

Ok well help me out.



Naa, I have no time for the type of person you are.

But I will say that I wasn't talking about the xian god, and you can compair anything to anything depending on what your trying to show with the comparison. You did't understand what I was trying to say, but instead you jumped to your own ill thought out conclusions. That's the problem with this forum.

srry durrel im not on drugs just really fuct up

"shuu- First, you're an idiot. "NIPHALITE"'s are from a single text that was called blasphemous and eradicated before the Protestant Reformation. No branch of Christianity believes that. As far as your bullshit about dinosaurs and minotaurs... idiot. Thats all that really has to be said. If you can't understand how inane that is, I'm not going to explain it to you. Yeah, the Morning Star was kicked out of heaven, but he was banished to hell. Go read Genesis, and hit puberty while you're at it."

yeh shut up

You are correct in saying that the word "NIPHALITE" is of a single text that was considered erroneous and banished before the protestant reformation. The single text is called the book of enoch by the prophet enoch, and it is of questoinable authenticity, soley because of the fact it was erradicated before the protestant reformation. In this way it could have just been apocryphal, and word that it actually existant but was erradicated could have just been pure bs. However history is on the side of the claim that the book of enoch did exist but was erradicated. It also talks of the niphillium in genesis, but just not in much detail. You are also correct in saying that no branch of christianity beleives that, but heaps of individuals/ministers/authority who belong to christinaity do.

Anyway: what is your point? did I ever say that christianity did beleive the book of enoch? no. All I said was what is in the book of enoch. I never said it was in the bible, I never said anything like that, I just said what the book of enoch details, so shut up you dumb little fuck, you're ten points behind the rest of them if you think I didn't say what is in my post for any reason other then the fact that I am expressing my opinion based off biblical text, and YES the book of enoch is biblical text even if it was excluded from the bible before the protestant reformation, if it originated in the bible, then it is a biblical text. There are heapos of editions of the bible that now have reincluded the book of enoch so shut the fuck up.

You said that satan was banished to hell...satan effectivley created hell. He was indeed banished to a dry, baron desert firstly, like i said. what humors me is you tell me to "go read genesis" when the story of satan the fallen angel isn't in genesis at all.

Note also I said "one could say" when I adressed the issue of dinasours and mythalogical creatures like the minatour...these doesn't neccesarily mean it is what I beleive...it has been speculated by others though, so I am just throwing it in as a part of the discussion. You could have at least just said "well I think that that speculation in particular is not very credible..." but now you had to jump in and assume that it was my beleif despite the clear indications that it was just part of the discussion and not my beleif and approach it in an agressive manor, personally attacking me.

And what the fuck does puberty have to do with this? shut up and fuck off.

You can just fuck right off boy

[This message has been edited by shuu (edited 04-16-2004).]

quote:Originally posted by SurahAhriman:

Mostly the original poster, but it applies to alot of posts here, and in mad scientists. I just get annoyed by the multitude of posts proclaiming to have figured out how to go faster than light, or people thinking they've come up with a brilliant new refutation of Christianity, that is not merely not new, but neither valid, nor particulary intelligent. Posts like this are especially bad, because to really debate something like that, you have to specify which religion it's in relation to. I'm not certain Buddhists even believe in evil.

As I was raised Catholic, I'll answer his question in that reguard. God allows Satan to try to corrupt people. It's like a cosmic bet. Satan tries to prove that humans aren't worth saving, while God holds faith that we can.

On a more broad note. "Is he able but not willing?

Then he is malevolent."

There exists a difference between lack of benevolence, and malevolence. Also, freewill.

Metalligod, I made no reference to your post, if you thought I was questioning your knowledge. I hadn't even read any of the replies when I posted.

My point still stands though. Don't flaunt ignorance as enlightenment.



Haha so then god is like Pete Rose. Will the humans make it?