I am aware that there is a lot of hate towards Christians here so don't turn this into a flame thread. I'm not here to attempt to change your religion (if you have one), this thread exists for people to ask me questions about Christianity or the like.

Here are some commonly asked questions I've pre-done:

How could God permit all the pain and suffering in this world?

A loving parent would not permit his child to suffer. Or would they? A parent who would not permit his child to suffer would never deprive his offspring of any want, nor would he discipline the child. What then, do we mean by 'suffer'? If we limit the definition of suffering to physical pain, then we have to acknowledge that loving parents permit their children to suffer pain, at least to some degree, when they allow them to have immunization shots, or undergo chemotherapy or teach them how to ride a bike, knowing that the chances of them falling and getting hurt are probable. Therefore, a loving parent does permit his child to suffer physically, if he considers the suffering to be insignificant and for a greater good.

But would a loving parent permit their child to suffer significant pain for a greater good? As humans, we have a corporeal concern; no matter how strong our faith in God, this material and physical world is the only world of which we are aware. Therefore, we consider any significantly painful infliction as harmful to our bodies and our existence.

The difference between man and God is that God is fully aware of man's spiritual reality in addition to his physical reality. God knows that physical suffering cannot harm our eternal souls. God knows that our physical destruction is not an end to our existence. Of what significance is an hour of physical suffering compared to eternity? Of what significance is a lifetime of suffering compared to eternity? We can conclude that from God's perspective, our physical suffering is relatively insignificant. This is not to say that He is unsympathetic or oblivious to our pain; loving parents feel empathy when their child receives a shot, knowing full well that the pain is inconsequential.

But what greater good can be derived from our suffering? Is there a greater good involved? What would justify God sending us to live in a physical world with physical dangers? Why didn't God let us stay in the Garden of Eden?

According to the Bible, man was removed from the Garden of Eden in order to be born again so that one day, he could eat of the Tree of Life and be forever in God's company as a holy people. If men were made to live forever in their natural, sinful state, they would be eternally hellish creatures. God sees the greater good being accomplished in the transformation that will allow us to live eternally in heaven, a transformation that can only take place in the physical world. Spiritual lessons can’t take place in the garden; they have to take place in a desert.

It isn't that God wills us to experience misfortune, but that these misfortunes are merely the consequence of living in a physical world within our physical bodies. Every day, loving people make the decision to bring children into this world, knowing that it is a world filled with risk and injury. God is no less loving for having created the world in which we all live. But one may ask, "Why doesn't God do what He can to prevent these injuries, as any good parent would?

Does God inflict or arrange the pain that is coming? Did he give me cancer?, etc

Does evil exist? There are people being killed and raped everyday, every hour, every second. I'm going to ask a few questions and answer them before your read the answer.

* Does cold exist?

Cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat; all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat.

* Does darkness exist?

Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in reality the absence of light. Light we can study, but not darkness. In fact we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wavelengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present.

* Does evil exist?

Evil does not exist, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.

Do Christians believe the world is only 6,000 years old?

In a word, no.

This subject is very interesting because some Christian I talk to say "I don't believe in dinosaurs because they weren't mentioned in the Bible". These Christians infuriates me because these type of Christians make the rest of us look like idiots.

In the Bible it mentions that the Earth used to be satins kingdom and he used to rule over it. For the dinosaur argument, dinosaurs could have very well existed in the "satins kingdom" era. It doesn't specify how long Adam and Eve were in the garden of Eden for and dinosaurs might have existed outside of the garden, as well. So just like scientists say, the Earth is hundreds of millions (billions?) years old.


Ok, well that covers it for the common questions. If you have questions you would like cleared or you need clarity in something I have said, just ask me. Comments of what I have wrote as well are welcome as I would like to know what you think.


If I don't reply for a while don't assume that I cannot answer a question. I live in Australia (Timezone AEDST) so I could be either asleep or at work so please give me some time.

Evil is simply the absence of God.

Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart.

Could you clarify this ^

Surely you wouldn't categorize a person (without God) who exhibits kindness, thoughtfulness, love, empathy and otherwise positive behavior as "evil", would you?

That word has such negative connotations.

Could you clarify this ^

Surely you wouldn't categorize a person (without God) who exhibits kindness, thoughtfulness, love, empathy and otherwise positive behavior as "evil", would you?

That word has such negative connotations.

Obviously kindness, thoughtfulness, love, empathy isn't "evil" and it doesn't make you "evil". However, do you think it is enough to make you not evil?

Hypothetically, if you displayed all of the above characteristics but you rape 100 people a day and eat babies, which rules the other out?

Remember the definition I'm using of the word evil is "the absence of God"... Living by exhibiting kindness, thoughtfulness, love, empathy and positive behavior doesn't make you not "evil".


If I don't seem to make sense in this (or any other) post please let me know. When you have been studying something for a while you can shortcut or abbreviate what you are trying to say forgetting people don't have the prerequisite knowledge of what you are talking about.

I
In the Bible it mentions that the Earth used to be satins kingdom and he used to rule over it. .

This is the sort of nonsense that comes from letting Xians anywhere the fucking Bible.

Obviously kindness, thoughtfulness, love, empathy isn't "evil" and it doesn't make you "evil". However, do you think it is enough to make you not evil?

Hypothetically, if you displayed all of the above characteristics but you rape 100 people a day and eat babies, which rules the other out?

Rape and murder hardly fall into the characteristic of kindness, thoughtfulness and empathy. Therefore, I wouldn't be displaying those characteristics at all.

Remember the definition I'm using of the word evil is "the absence of God"... Living by exhibiting kindness, thoughtfulness, love, empathy and positive behavior doesn't make you not "evil".

I understand, but it just seems like redefining the common understanding of "evil" might confuse people into thinking that you are one to harshly judge people whose only crime is not sharing your love of God.

Rape and murder hardly fall into the characteristic of kindness, thoughtfulness and empathy. Therefore, I wouldn't be displaying those characteristics at all.

What I was trying to illustrate: it doesn't matter how much good you do it doesn't override the bad.



I understand, but it just seems like redefining the common understanding of "evil" might confuse people into thinking that you are one to harshly judge people whose only crime is not sharing your love of God.

It isn't aimed at people whose only crime is not sharing the love of God. It is aimed at people who are evil, like you and me. I sin most/everyday which makes me evil by definition. That being the case, the only way to counteract it is God.

It isn't aimed at people whose only crime is not sharing the love of God. It is aimed at people who are evil, like you and me. I sin most/everyday which makes me evil by definition. That being the case, the only way to counteract it is God.

I feel sorry for you.

I feel sorry for you.

Don't, if it helps him get through the day, y'know? Only thing that annoys is his lack of knowledge of the bible. But then again thats common to most Xians with their non-dualism dualism.

What I was trying to illustrate: it doesn't matter how much good you do it doesn't override the bad.

Sure it does. And since the only "bad" is your own personal definition of evil, then it especially does.


It isn't aimed at people whose only crime is not sharing the love of God. It is aimed at people who are evil, like you and me.

Please don't refer to me as evil, for I am not. Only by your harsh judgment - no one else's.

I sin most/everyday which makes me evil by definition. That being the case, the only way to counteract it is God.

Another definition of evil? Earlier you said this:

Evil does not exist, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God.

So if you have God in your life, how can you be evil by your first definition, where evil is simply the absence of God?

Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart.

You said you were evil because you sin every day. Does God's love vanish from your heart whenever you sin, Nuclear? And then magically reappear whenever you're not sinning?

A more evolved view of this is that evil, sin and death are simply illusions. At the Highest level of reality, there is no difference between good and evil. In the long run, it simply does not matter. Why not?

Simple. We all have immortal souls--the soul is our essential self. So what if, say, someone should destroy the body I happen to be using at the moment? It would be inconvenient for my family, but in the context of eternity, one lifetime is less than a single leaf in a forest.

What's more, I have been taught and accept as true after much thought and observation of my own life, that God gives nothing but blessings and sends nothing but angels. In any situation, no matter how challenging or painful it seems at the time, there is a perfection which may not be fully revealed for years.

Take the Holocaust. Many people use this for a metaphor of Ultimate Evil--but by now, most of the people kileld then would be dead anyway. As a result of the Holocaust, world-wide Jewry was brought together and the state of Israel formed. No Holocaust, no Israel. (Palestinians may argue this was a Bad thing, but even now there are people of good will among both sides who are working for peace.)

According to the Bible, man was removed from the Garden of Eden in order to be born again so that one day, he could eat of the Tree of Life and be forever in God's company as a holy people. If men were made to live forever in their natural, sinful state, they would be eternally hellish creatures. God sees the greater good being accomplished in the transformation that will allow us to live eternally in heaven, a transformation that can only take place in the physical world. Spiritual lessons can’t take place in the garden; they have to take place in a desert.

Assuming God is real he is a terrible parent. To punish children for the inequities of the parents cannot in any sense of the words fair, just and good be fair, just or good. I am referring to setting up man to fail. Adam was set up to fail in the garden and the children of Adam (all of us) suffer mortality for HIS mistake. God even says I will punish the children of those who do not believe in me up to the forth generation and for those who hate me up to the tenth.

To punish one's unborn (even unthought of) children is insane and serves no purpose other than idle empty threats made to keep the sheep in line.

Numerous times god commanded the tribes of Isreal to slaughter entire races of people men, women, children, and babies. God supports slavery of ones enemies. The old testement is rife with God's "love" for us as a parent.

Does God inflict or arrange the pain that is coming? Did he give me cancer?, etc

Does evil exist? There are people being killed and raped everyday, every hour, every second. I'm going to ask a few questions and answer them before your read the answer.

You cannot answer a question with another question. This represents circular logic. To answer you first question (again assuming god is real) YES he does give infants cancer. To teach them to be better children b/c he is a loving parent right? Or maybe he will give a 2 year old cancer to punish the father of the child....right? He most certainly will do that and threatened to do it many times in the old testement.

* Does cold exist?

Cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy.......

Awesome observation. Backed by science. Two thumbs up, good work.

* Does darkness exist?

Darkness does not exist either....... Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present..

Awesome observation. Backed by science. Two thumbs up, good work. Your on a roll here.

* Does evil exist?

Evil does not exist, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.

Uh oh. Ran short of science when it comes to talking about the man upstairs it would seem. I do appreciate the classic example of how theists begin talking science about seperate things and then try to relate them to an uprovable fantasy like god.

Theists do this b/c they cannot back god by science at all. It is becoming more and more common practice to try and pervert science to "prove" theistic teachings. Fact is this type of apologetic nonsense does not hold one ounce of water to a skeptic.


What you have done looks like this.

Some cats are black.
Some TVs are black.
Some cats are TVs.

Sounds logical doesn't it? If you did not know what a TV was you could assume this to be the truth. Only the first two things are true. The last one is surmised "logically" from the first two. It still does not make it true.

Evil is subjective. Evil is a word we use to describe unfavorable actions or behaviors within a society or culture. A starving person stealing a loaf of bread is not evil to that person. The mechant he stole it from sees it as evil. This makes evil subjective and not absolute.

I only wonder if you believe in Noah's Ark/the great flood? I'm assuming not since you already stated you are not a biblical literalist. But in case you actually do believe it, please explain.

Please don't refer to me as evil, for I am not. Only by your harsh judgment - no one else's.

Everybody is evil by definition of Christianity.

If you murdered someone just once, what would that make you? A murderer? So if you have ever lied, what would that make you. A liar? Have you ever stole something just once? Even if it was something small and if it was ages ago? What would that make you? A thief?

Now I'm not saying you have done any of these, but I think you see where this is heading.


Another definition of evil? Earlier you said this:



So if you have God in your life, how can you be evil by your first definition, where evil is simply the absence of God?

Because God gave us free will. It doesn't matter how "Godly" you can be, you can and will sin. When you sin you are restricting God to "move" (for a lack of a better phrasing), when you "repent", he can.



You said you were evil because you sin every day. Does God's love vanish from your heart whenever you sin, Nuclear? And then magically reappear whenever you're not sinning?

It says in the Bible that God loves everybody, regardless of what sin you commit and how often. Does his love vanish from my heart whenever I sin? No. Do I feel a rift getting wider between us? Yes.

If you murdered someone just once, what would that make you? A murderer? So if you have ever lied, what would that make you. A liar? Have you ever stole something once and was something small, even if it was ages ago? What would that make you? A thief?

Murder, theft, and lying are not inheriently evil acts. Examples: I murdered Hitler. I lied to the Nazis about having Anne Frank in my attic. I stole food to feed my baby.

It says in the Bible that God loves everybody, regardless of what sin you commit and how often. Does his love vanish from my heart whenever I sin? No. Do I feel a rift getting wider between us? Yes.

You should read the old testament for a definition and examples of God's love and sense of justice. That rift when you sin is this...your meme complex kicking in forcing the guilt that someone told you to have for your natural actions to the surface.

That rift eventually becomes your reason and logic returning to your infected addled mind. When you realize that good and bad shit happens without a belief in God the same as it does with a belief in him your rift gets larger. When you step outside of your mind virus for what alcoholics call "A moment of clarity" you realize your need for an imaginary friend should have left you in your childhood.

(coincidently the most prized recruitment age for all cults, xtians included, is when a person is young enough to still think about their imaginary friend and pretend the army toy in your hand is firing real bullets at your toy helicopter.)

Murder, theft, and lying are not inheriently evil acts. Examples: I murdered Hitler. I lied to the Nazis about having Anne Frank in my attic. I stole food to feed my baby.


Which strangely enough also happens to be what the bible actually teaches.

To oversimplify : All 'sins' are 'allowed' if it is to save the life of others.

Everybody is evil by definition of Christianity.

And you don't find that to be a little disturbing? Why not take the assumption that everyone is good, and has the propensity to become "evil" - instead of assuming they're evil, with the propensity to become "good"? I realize that taking that assumption would mean that it might seem apparent then that the presence of God is not required in order for a person to be "good". If it helps someone feel better about being good, then great. They can have at it. But it's completely unnecessary to just assert that all people are born into evil, like the Bible says.

If you murdered someone just once, what would that make you? A murderer? So if you have ever lied, just once, what would that make you. A liar? Have you ever stole something once, even if it was something small, even if it was ages ago? If you have what would that make you? A theif?


In the strictest sense, yes, to all of the above.

But here's the clincher - the path to redemption is ceasing this malicious behavior, yes? To becoming "good". If the liar, thief and murderer suddenly ceased all that activity and lived a life of peace, love and empathy ... how come he is still evil? How does it make them any less a righteous person than those who can only redeem their evil deeds through repenting to Christ? If the end results are the same (going from bad to good), why is the direct path that led them there so significant? Is it just due to the Getting Into Heaven factor?

(btw, do you believe in heaven or hell?)


Because God gave us free will. It doesn't matter how "Godly" you can be, you can and will sin. When you sin you are restricting God to "move" (for a lack of a better phrasing), when you "repent", he can.

Minus the first sentence, here's how I look at your above statement:

It doesn't matter how good you can be, you can and will be bad. That's part of the imperfection that is basic selfish human behavior. There are rewards and there are punishments within societies and groups that deter most people from living out their most primal urges, especially the ones that cause harm to others. Not everyone will seek to be the very best they can, but that would also be the case if God were present.

Because God gave us free will.

If God existed, he would have to be laughing at the repeated number of times us mere mortals have shot ourselves in the foot by exercising that "gift" of free will.

It says in the Bible that God loves everybody, regardless of what sin you commit and how often. Does his love vanish from my heart whenever I sin? No. Do I feel a rift getting wider between us? Yes.

Great! You are not evil, after all - concerning your first definition of evil. That is:

Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart.

Be kind to yourself, and to others. Wouldn't it be better to pat each other on the back for being kind, caring people with a healthy respect for others, instead of declaring how evil we are at our very core? It just seems better to encourage the positive while we work to rid ourselves of the negative.

in your childhood.

(coincidently the most prized recruitment age for all cults, xtians included, is when a person is young enough to still think about their imaginary friend and pretend the army toy in your hand is firing real bullets at your toy helicopter.)

Give me a boy til the age of seven...

I must say that I am not quite sure where the OP is deriving the idea that the repetition of sin is a result of freewill. In Romans, Paul says that it is impossible not to sin because there are so many Biblical laws that it’s basically impossible to follow all of them 100% of the time. So since all sins are equal and therefore deserving of equal punishment - that is, eternal damnation - the only way into Heaven is through accepting Jesus Christ as saviour. The reason for this is that Christ died on the cross and suffered for anyone who would accept him, so they themselves would not have to suffer.

Now the reason for why he only saves those who accept him and not everybody, whether or not they become a Christian, differs depending on if you’re a Catholic, a Lutheran, or a Calvinist, etc. etc. But none of them are very convincing. Philosopher and mathematician Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz saw God as a mathematician who was omniscient and omnipotent within the limits of logic. So for Leibniz, everything is predetermined by God, who weighed up all possible worlds and chose the best, i.e. the one with the most people in heaven. Hence he maintains God has made the best of all possible worlds and that even though there’s pain and suffering, he should be revered nonetheless.

But I’ve digressed, so to refocus on the topic at hand: sin is but disobedience toward God, a refusal or failure to obey his commands. This ties in neatly with the first sin committed. Adam’s eating of the apple was a direct failure to obey the one law placed upon the land. Prior to this, however, they’d have had no concept of obedience and disobedience, good and evil.

Even before this discovery, they were tempted to disobey. In this sense, then, it can be said that the knowledge of good and evil aided mankind. Unlike beforehand, now man is aware of his temptations and can better refrain from sin. But then one sees a ridiculous creating of laws upon laws upon laws. It’s almost as if God wants people to suffer, wants them to go astray so he can burn them for all eternity. I don’t think it makes much sense, then, to call Jesus God. He would be a much more heroic figure if he is seen as a demigod who made a deal with his father. He couldn’t stand to see people suffering, so he begged his father to allow him to take their place. His father agreed, but on one condition: he can only save them if they ask him to.

I know this ignores a lot of Biblical text, but it’s one way out of a deeply paradoxical literary figure who appears to be both a sadist and a masochist. The Bible is overfilled with such paradoxes, as expected from a collection of interwoven texts drawn from various cultural resources. I must say that this was but to be a response to the OP’s conception of sin. It seemed to go in a different direction halfway through though. Nonetheless, I expect it will be of some contribution to the discussion.

A more evolved view of this is that evil, sin and death are simply illusions. At the Highest level of reality, there is no difference between good and evil. In the long run, it simply does not matter. Why not?

Simple. We all have immortal souls--the soul is our essential self. So what if, say, someone should destroy the body I happen to be using at the moment? It would be inconvenient for my family, but in the context of eternity, one lifetime is less than a single leaf in a forest.

Very nice Arms.

Simple. We all have immortal souls--the soul is our essential self. So what if, say, someone should destroy the body I happen to be using at the moment? It would be inconvenient for my family, but in the context of eternity, one lifetime is less than a single leaf in a forest.

This line of thinking is how witch fires start. The inquisitors went to great lengths to have the future human torches repent their sins so they could go to heaven. It is much easier to burn a woman and her children at the stake if you KNOW she is going to heaven.

Belief in anything we cannot see or prove has the potential to be very harmful and detrimental to humanity if enough people buy into the bullshit of the unprovable.

Belief in anything we cannot see or prove has the potential to be very harmful and detrimental to humanity if enough people buy into the bullshit of the unprovable.


On the other hand, belief in anything we can't see or prove has the potential to be very good and helpful to humanity if enough people believe it.

On the other hand, belief in anything we can't see or prove has the potential to be very good and helpful to humanity if enough people believe it.

This is true. This historically has not been the case however concerning christianity and many, many other religions. You forget human nature. When one dupes enough people into believing their fantasy (fantasy b/c it is unprovable) then you have what ALL humans seek. Control.

One could convince his cult that the local Baron is in direct opposition with the tenents of the cult's laws and codes. A short human fire later and one can now control the wealth and lands of the aforementioned Baron.

This is historical fact. I learned a long time ago the primary reason to study history is to keep history from repeating itself. To learn from the mistakes and boons of the past. Some of us have learned and some of us need another present day lesson. Continue to fight secular humanism and try (even unbeknownst to you) to empower another theocracy and your lesson will be following in short order.

I hope you die NuclearWinter.

This is true. This historically has not been the case however concerning christianity and many, many other religions. You forget human nature. When one dupes enough people into believing their fantasy (fantasy b/c it is unprovable) then you have what ALL humans seek. Control.

One could convince his cult that the local Baron is in direct opposition with the tenents of the cult's laws and codes. A short human fire later and one can now control the wealth and lands of the aforementioned Baron.

This is historical fact. I learned a long time ago the primary reason to study history is to keep history from repeating itself. To learn from the mistakes and boons of the past. Some of us have learned and some of us need another present day lesson. Continue to fight secular humanism and try (even unbeknownst to you) to empower another theocracy and your lesson will be following in short order.

If we learn anything, it is that people desire power, and people will do some fucked up things for power.

And believe me, I've not forgot human nature, in fact you have only used one of my points. It is the result of Human nature that people seek control, not through theocracy that people seek control. A theocracy is a means to an end, the end being control, just as all other forms of Government are means to an end. A theocracy does not make a bad govenrment, bad and corrupt leaders make a bad govenernment.

Using the example of your baron, how is that differant to present day? I mean, we can point out the iraq war as an example of this. Convincing the poulace of an outside threat is merely a tool of control. Christianity merely used a spiritual threat, as opposed to a physical threat (though they used both, which you have to agree, is effective).

I know you think that your secular humanism will lead us into a beautiful golden age, and the idea is probaly not that differant from mine, but the ideal often fails to live up to the reality.

Give me a boy til the age of seven...

... And I'll really enjoy myself?

. It doesn't specify how long Adam and Eve were in the garden of Eden


.

Doesn't it?
Btw, are you proddy or papey?

Doesn't it?
Btw, are you proddy or papey?

Now that brings back memories...

Ye a Billy or a Dan or an Ol'Tin Can?

I know you think that your secular humanism will lead us into a beautiful golden age, and the idea is probaly not that differant from mine, but the ideal often fails to live up to the reality.

I am saying that humanity has had theocracy. Theocracy has proven time and time again its ineptness at running a nation. In fact, it is historically one of the WORST forms of government a nation can have.

I do not think secular humanism will lead us to a golden age utopian society. I think secular humanism COULD (hasn't really been given a chance, thanks jesus) be much better than a theocracy.

I believe when people realize there prayers are a waste of energy and no Knight in shining jesus armor is coming to rescue us, then we will realize that the future success and failures of all humanity lies squarely on our shoulders. Not the devil's. Not zombie jesus. Certainly not the invisible man upstairs. OUR RESPONSIBILITY.

I think AMAZING things lie in stem cell research and human cloning. I believe science should NEVER AGAIN be perverted by a theists fantasy land. I believe theism has hurt every society that has ever empowered it enough to change or lead government (see religious right, dubya, current holy war).

I believe the individual thiest is probably a decent person I would not mind having as a neighbor. They are a part in a whole. I think the whole, groups of theists create, is a nightmare to free people everywhere. I despise these decent individual theists for REFUSING to recognize the evil that the church, as a whole, have in store for the secular free peoples of the world. I despise stupidity in all it's forms, but hold a special place in my personal loathing for theism. Only the truly stupid and ignorant can give themselves over completely to the concepts found in theism.

I hope you die NuclearWinter.

Harrroollldldldld!

But what greater good can be derived from our suffering? Is there a greater good involved?

How does allowing your child to burn for an eternity further any greater good?

This line of thinking is how witch fires start.

To the OP - have you ever burned a witch wrongly? Also how do you start the fire, my friend says to use gas but I say there was no gas in the time of Jesus and a true Christian should use paper - books and papyrus and stuff as tinder.

Also is it necessary to torture protestants before sending them to heaven? My friend (yes same one) says you need to drive the sin out, but my neighbours are starting to complain. What do you do?

Suffering, in the sense you're speaking of is only an issue for those who desire so much. If you're greedy and you don't get what you want, then you suffer, if you're content with your life and something you'd like doesn't seem approachable, then it doesn't really matter either way.

Man doesn't require suffering in any way. Man can remove suffering from his life with or without trying to involve any god.

It sounds as though you believe the concept of "Original Sin" as well...
I'm I misreading you?

People aren't naturally evil.
If anything I would think the opposite would be much closer to the truth.

To the OP - have you ever burned a witch wrongly? Also how do you start the fire, my friend says to use gas but I say there was no gas in the time of Jesus and a true Christian should use paper - books and papyrus and stuff as tinder.

Also is it necessary to torture protestants before sending them to heaven? My friend (yes same one) says you need to drive the sin out, but my neighbours are starting to complain. What do you do?

Well first you need to realize that witch fires can only be started by an uneducated controlled flock of drooling sheep. You may ask yourself "How can I find a group of people this fucking stupid". Well the answer is easy: Write a sequel to a religious text that is already established. In the sequel you introduce concepts and ideals that are ambigious and over-generalized, think horoscope when your writing it. Try to stick with and answer questoins that NOBODY can answer. This way you cannot be PROVEN wrong.

The next step is to "interpret" the text however you see fit to bring about control over your sheeple. Once you convince all the masochists within earshot that they are peices of human shit unfit to draw breath you have them where you want them. It is now time to convert people with I.Q. above 85. Tell your roving band of madmen that the smartest people out there are witches sent by the devil to bring about the end of days. Point to your book a whole lot and re-interpret whatever you need from your book of horoscopes and PRESTO the fires will start themselves.

The added benefit of burning the people who call you on your bullshit religion is that you get to take their lands and holdings. Now you have sponsership to spread the word all across the globe. Kill enough people and fear will drive the sheeple to you like the cattle they are.

The great thing about this story is it that it CAN happen agian and here is why..........listen up...........THE SAME FUCKING BOOK THAT STARTED THE WITCH FIRES IS COMPLETELY UNCHANGED. So you don't need gasoline, you only need hundreds of people with all the mentality of a squash. If you wanted to create retards in this day and age you have to start young. Force children to pray in school. Tell science to stay out of the classroom and, VIOLA, brand new average I.Q. 85 population to do your bidding.

Good luck.

My question:

If God is the creator, who created God?

And don't give me that "mysteries of the world" bullshit that religious people love.

If we limit the definition of suffering to physical pain, then we have to acknowledge that loving parents permit their children to suffer pain, at least to some degree, when they allow them to have immunization shots, or undergo chemotherapy or teach them how to ride a bike, knowing that the chances of them falling and getting hurt are probable. Therefore, a loving parent does permit his child to suffer physically, if he considers the suffering to be insignificant and for a greater good.

The analogy between a loving parent and the Christian god is a false one. They are not analogous. A parent does not have omnipotence or omniscience. So while a parent must sometimes result to inflicting pain/suffering (or letting pain/suffering occur), and we judge that as necessary or even good, the Christian god, by definition of omnipotence, does not have to.

If a parent had the capabilities of preventing his child from suffering, yet deliberately chose not to prevent it, we'd certainly see him as despicable. The same applies to the Christian god. He has all the power in the world to stop the suffering/pain; it would cost him the same amount of resources and time to remove pain as it would to let it happen (by definition of omnipotence), yet he deliberately chooses to let it happen.

Of what significance is an hour of physical suffering compared to eternity? Of what significance is a lifetime of suffering compared to eternity?So then why is murder a sin to begin with? Who cares if someone kills another, this is just the physical realm; compared to the eternity of the afterlife, life on earth is meaningless, right?



Evil does not exist, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.
Evil being the absence of god changes nothing. He created the possibility for there to be an absence from god to begin with. The same problems, concerns, and criticism still apply - whether evil be defined as something in its own right, or the absence of god.


It doesn't specify how long Adam and Eve were in the garden of Eden for and dinosaurs might have existed outside of the garden, as well. So just like scientists say, the Earth is hundreds of millions (billions?) years old.It specifies how old Adam was when he died, as well as subsequent generations.

Sot if you believe the Christian bible is the literal word of the Christian god, then you must believe the genealogies that it lays out are true, and they are not compatible with millions of years.

Maybe you personally do not believe it literally, but many Christians do. Answering the question with an outright "no" misrepresents the Christian position.

Nice Job Nuclear winter, keep it up dude!

Nice Job Nuclear winter, keep it up dude!

Nice job of what? Reducing a supposed alien intelligence that is infallible, all-knowing, all seeing, and eternal to that of a infinitely inferior species parenting habits?

If God were real and were trying to be like a parent to humanity, child protective services would have taken homo sapiens away from god after one of his many abusive cataclysmic episodes.

Ok I have a question NuclearWinter. I apologize for my former animosity.

What exactly is my penalty for being an athiest?

Nice job of what? Reducing a supposed alien intelligence that is infallible, all-knowing, all seeing, and eternal to that of a infinitely inferior species parenting habits?

If God were real and were trying to be like a parent to humanity, child protective services would have taken homo sapiens away from god after one of his many abusive cataclysmic episodes.

Yeah, here's where the funny part come in, God RUNS the CPS!

God; he really has his hands in ALL the cookie jars!