Originally posted by checkbaiter
God is omniscient and He did forsee evil....I'm not certain what you mean by omnibenevolent ...allowing evil to occur for a purpose does not make God evil....maybe allowing is not the right word.....God cannot go against Himself...Adam transferred all power and authority to satan, through deception in the garden. God cannot legally just take it back. He ...[text shortened]... s not some might say.."an indian giver" He cannot promise you something and then take it away.

allowing evil to occur for a purpose does not make God evil

Yes it does. God theoretically have the option of having that purpose occur without allowing evil as he is omnipotent. Please note I use the term evil to refer to pain, suffering, misery etc. or the lessening of happiness, pleasure, ecstacy etc.

God cannot legally just take it back.

Huh?! What laws are you talking about?

Yes God is all powerful, but He cannot be unjust, lie, etc

First of all, what does it mean to be "unjust"? I think he's unjust (assuming he exists). Why can't he lie? Why would he need to? He can accomplish anything without lying that he could accomplish with lying supposedly.

Originally posted by gentlegil
Love in the heart is the good.........Hatred in the heart is the evil......

the force of hatred leads ..to the sins......and the evils

It's not being forced to Love......it is the force of Love

How can Love in the heart create evil.........?

God IS love..........how can love create evil?

If one does not believe God is Love......it is still ...[text shortened]... .....always was simple

Love thy neighbour........as thyself

Love is the omnipotent

gil

God IS love

Oh, I thought God was the creator of the universe, and Jesus, etc, not the emotion of love. Was I mistaken?

If one does not believe God is Love......it is still the love in the heart that creates goodness....it is with hatred in the heart, that there is none.

That's not absolutely definitely true, though I agree it tends to work out that way.

the message is simple......always was simple

Love thy neighbour........as thyself

I thought the message was to accept that I am a scumbag who deserves to go to Hell and that I should accept a pardon from Jesus even though I don't deserve it?

Originally posted by Checkmate187
Two words for you all...

Free will.

This answers alot of the questions here.

Free will has zero value to me. It's only the consequences of free will (or the lack of it) that matter. I'd rather be a happy robot than an ignorant fool with "free will" who gets damned for his ignorance.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Free will has zero value to me. It's only the consequences of free will (or the lack of it) that matter. I'd rather be a happy robot than an ignorant fool with "free will" who gets damned for his ignorance.

I'd rather be a happy robot than an ignorant fool with "free will" who gets damned for his ignorance.

Well you ain't ignorant no more... Hmeh! Hmeh! Hmeh! 😕

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]allowing evil to occur for a purpose does not make God evil

Yes it does. God theoretically have the option of having that purpose occur without allowing evil as he is omnipotent. Please note I use the term evil to refer to pain, suffering, misery etc. or the lessening of happiness, pleasure, ecstacy etc.

God cannot legally just take ...[text shortened]... eed to? He can accomplish anything without lying that he could accomplish with lying supposedly.

This is my problem...."Is it God allowed" or "God cannot" stop certain things from occuring?
I am torn between these two ideas....
Let's take 9-11 for example....Did God allow the planes to crash or is it He could not stop them?
I am now leaning with the "could not."
Why?...I can only go by what the bible says...Since God is love, then this is sure unloving...so this rules out that He caused it or allowed it.
That leaves the notion that He could not.
Now....is He in control of all that happens?..I'm not so sure anymore...if He is, then why did Jesus encourage us to pray that "the will of God be done on earth as it is in heaven." Why should we pray that if everything that happens IS God's will?
Does this make sense?

[b]...is He in control of all that happens?..I'm not so sure anymore...[b/]

On some points I have no doubts.
There is one God ...there is one Lord Jesus Christ who died and was raised for my sins and the sins of the whole world.
Hell does not yet exist...the dead are dead and not raised until the return of Jesus Christ.
On the theology that God is in control of every thing that happens, I am open for discussion. I do believe that God does not cause evil, because He cannot. He cannot lie, and He is faithful to His Word.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
This is my problem...."Is it God allowed" or "God cannot" stop certain things from occuring?
I am torn between these two ideas....
Let's take 9-11 for example....Did God allow the planes to crash or is it He could not stop them?
I am now leaning with the "could not."
Why?...I can only go by what the bible says...Since God is love, then this is ...[text shortened]... ven." Why should we pray that if everything that happens IS God's will?
Does this make sense?

so god is not omnipotent after all?

Originally posted by LemonJello
so god is not omnipotent after all?

I'm not sure...Omnipotent is having all ability...Websters 1913...
m*nip"o*tent (?), a. [F., fr.L. omnipotens, -entis; omnis all + potens powerful, potent. See Potent.]

1. Able in every respect and for every work; unlimited in ability; all-powerful; almighty; as, the Being that can create worlds must be omnipotent.

So to answer your question, I would have to say yes, He has the ability...but ...I know this sounds like a contradiction...but He cannot, in the same sense that He cannot lie. I think He requires something from humans. He didn't stop Goliath, nor the prophets of Baal, etc...but humans took Him at His Word and stepped up to the plate...ala David, Elijah, etc. We seem to be living in a time where God is rejected by our nation as a whole....however there are countless stories of people He did save from the Twin Towers.

Originally posted by LemonJello
so god is not omnipotent after all?

You also have to forgive me for my inadequicies here. I am learning daily, and am not sure of anything. I am not the end all to truth...but this has been brought up to me and I am intrigued by it.

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]I'd rather be a happy robot than an ignorant fool with "free will" who gets damned for his ignorance.

Well you ain't ignorant no more... Hmeh! Hmeh! Hmeh! 😕[/b]

Yes I am. I still don't believe God exists as Christians claim he does. I've been told many things by many people who have a wide variety of beliefs. Just because I've been told doesn't mean that if any one of these people is right I am not ignorant of that fact. The claims are not believable to me, and I am therefore ignorant if they are in fact true.

Originally posted by rwingett
Quit playing the fool here, KellyJay. You understand my logic perfectly well and you know it. I have answered all these points already, but at the risk of sounding redundant, I will do so again.

•In a purely natural world, with no god, dying is not evil. It just happens.

•In a world created by god, dying itself may not be evil. But being slaughtered e ...[text shortened]... is from mass slaughter to merely dying, then I will have to quit wasting my time in this thread.

•In a world created by god, dying itself may not be evil. But being slaughtered en masse and indiscriminantly by a typhoon can only be described as being an act of evil. It is possible to argue that manmade evils are necessary for instructive purposes. We may learn something or become wiser in the long run for having experienced such evil. But natural evils such as typhoons serve no instructive purpose whatsoever.

•In a purely natural world, with no god, dying is not evil. It just happens.

I am not being obtuse here; a typhoon is not any more evil than a
virus. Evil in my opinion is that which is done purposely with purely
selfish reasons, more often than not to the hurt or destruction of
another without just cause. Typhoons do not fit that standard they are
simply results of physics within nature, nothing of intent there in a
purely natural world. It is simply nature acting upon nature nothing
more, intent to do wrong is not a matter here with storms; they are all
simply result of various affects within the universe. The results of
various causes within nature that bring about the formation of storms,
typhoons, hurricanes, earth quakes, tornadoes are due to various
stresses and pressures either in the atmosphere or the earth they
are not any more evil than the pressure my coaster on my desk feels
when I put my coffee cup on it.

So if understand your opinion the world is filled with evil no matter
what, if there is, or is not a God as a creator? Reason being evil must
be because a choice is made to act badly, and people seem to do
that world wide on a daily basis. They can do it in the name of what
ever, it really does not matter, the fact they are doing it alone tells
us people are evil, is that correct? The names can be changed for
the reasons acts are done, but those are just excuses for actions
nothing more?
Kelly

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I'm not sure...Omnipotent is having all ability...Websters 1913...
m*nip"o*tent (?), a. [F., fr.L. omnipotens, -entis; omnis all + potens powerful, potent. See Potent.]

1. Able in every respect and for every work; unlimited in ability; all-powerful; almighty; as, the Being that can create worlds must be omnipotent.

So to answer your question, I ...[text shortened]... on as a whole....however there are countless stories of people He did save from the Twin Towers.

for our purposes, omnipotence is the ability to do anything that is logically possible ('logically possible' is key because not even an omnipotent being can do the logically impossible, like create a square circle or some other such nonsense).

do you think it is the case that god cannot lie (ie, it is not possible for him to lie); or do you think it is the case that he always willfully abstains from exercising his ability to lie? there is a big difference. if god cannot tell any sort of lie, then the answer is easy: he is not omnipotent. likewise, if god cannot stop airplanes from flying into buildings, then again the answer is easy: he is not omnipotent. but then you will have to live with the premise that god cannot fully specify or control his own creation.

if on the other hand, he is both omnipotent and omniscient, then i think there is no question that he is directly and morally responsible for absolutely every event that takes place. it could not be the case that any event simply happens against his will, for this would lead to a quick contradiction (assuming that he exercises his omni-capabilities); even events which go against a particular design must at the very least be willfully allowed to happen by him.

honestly, when i read the bible, i get the impression that the god described is NOT both omnipotent and omniscient (or at least that he doesn't exercise such capabilities). for example, did he not express sorrow and regret before flooding out mankind and starting a new pact with Noah's family? such a response, and indeed also the need to 'start over', is not indicative of an omni-whatnot being.

Originally posted by KellyJay
•In a world created by god, dying itself may not be evil. But being slaughtered en masse and indiscriminantly by a typhoon can only be described as being an act of evil. It is possible to argue that manmade evils are necessary for instructive purposes. We may learn something or become wiser in the long run for having experienced such evil. But natural ev ged for
the reasons acts are done, but those are just excuses for actions
nothing more?
Kelly

Evil in my opinion is that which is done purposely with purely
selfish reasons, more often than not to the hurt or destruction of
another without just cause. Typhoons do not fit that standard they are
simply results of physics within nature...

i think you are missing the point of the argument from evil. if an omnipotent, omniscient god exists, then every single event that occurs has his stamp of approval (or indifference) on it. he has the ability to carry out events exactly how he wants to, and he knows it. so if a typhoon happens, it does so because this god at the very least did not deem it necessary for the typhoon to not happen. there are, i guess, a few options:

1. god expressly wanted the typhoon to happen, and thus made it happen, killing lots of people. to mastermind such destruction and death is evil.

2. god didn't really care one way or the other if the typhoon occurred, killing lots of people; so he allowed it to occur because he did not see reason to prevent its occurrence. to demonstrate such indifference toward destruction and death is also evil.

3. god didn't want the typhoon to occur; but he allowed it to occur, despite having the ability to prevent it. this option is pretty weird. IMO, this is also a demonstration of callousness, not to mention wastefulness.

unless you can think of a reason why the typhoon is logically necessary for some greater good (by a reasonable ethical standard), then i would conclude that the typhoon is evil perpetrated solely by this god.

Originally posted by bbarr in the GAFE thread
Morally Perfect (def): An entity G is morally perfect if and only if for any two acts, events, or states of affairs A and B, if A is morally preferable to B then G prefers that A occur or obtain rather than B, and G acts accordingly.

According to this evil is implicitly defined by moral preference of consequences. I think this is essential for the argument to hold.

Does bbarr define evil other than through moral preference?

I also reject that a morally perfect God would prevent ALL evil if he attributes any value to free-will, but that was discussed in a previous discussion of ours. The fact that some evil (so defined) exists that does not come about by use of free-will is sufficient for the GAFE argument to hold, though.

Originally posted by LemonJello
for our purposes, omnipotence is the ability to do anything that is logically possible ('logically possible' is key because not even an omnipotent being can do the logically impossible, like create a square circle or some other such nonsense).

do you think it is the case that god cannot lie (ie, it is not possible for him to lie); or do you ...[text shortened]... esponse, and indeed also the need to 'start over', is not indicative of an omni-whatnot being.

honestly, when i read the bible, i get the impression that the god described is NOT both omnipotent and omniscient (or at least that he doesn't exercise such capabilities). for example, did he not express sorrow and regret before flooding out mankind and starting a new pact with Noah's family? such a response, and indeed also the need to 'start over', is not indicative of an omni-whatnot being.

Hiya LJ. You disapeared rather quickly yesterday, before we could get the discussion going. (I'm sure it was duty that called)

Omnipotent and omniscient: Yes.
Omnibenevolent: Hmmm... Aren't you trying to divorce God's love from his justice and judgement? Its a paradox, I know.