Evidence for God from Science

You still havent answered the question. Why does God allow thousands of children to starve to death every year? God provides and humans take it from children so thats just too bad; is thats what youre saying? Why does a God that allows suffering deserve to be praised and worshiped?

MAGSolo wrote:You still havent answered the question. Why does God allow thousands of children to starve to death every year? God provides and humans take it from children so thats just too bad; if thats what youre saying?

You keep saying ALLOW...
Why do WE ALLOW it to happen when WE CAN stop it?
It seems like you are suggesting that God should "take over" and enforce HIS will on US, is that what you are saying?

Either God has the power to stop it and doesnt, thereby allowing it to occur or he doesnt have the power to stop it. Are you saying God doesnt have the power to stop it. Or are you saying that God is fine with children starving to death if we dont do anything about it (which is the same thing as allowing it)

MAGSolo wrote:Either God has the power to stop it and doesnt, thereby allowing it to occur or he doesnt have the power to stop it. Are you saying God doesnt have the power to stop it. Or are you saying that God is fine with children starving to death if we dont do anything about it (which is the same thing as allowing it)

So, you feel that I should answer your questions even if you don't answer mine?
You keep using the term "allow"...
So, I ask you again:
It seems like you are suggesting that God should "take over" and enforce HIS will on US, is that what you are saying?

I believe that God should end suffering and evil by any means necessary even if it means wiping every human being from the face of the Earth. Now you seem to have a problem with me using the word allow. Once again, either God has the power to end/prevent suffering and evil and he doesnt which means he allows it or he doesnt have the power to end suffering and evil. Which is it. If you somehow have another option Id love to hear it.

PaulSacramento wrote:

MAGSolo wrote:Either God has the power to stop it and doesnt, thereby allowing it to occur or he doesnt have the power to stop it. Are you saying God doesnt have the power to stop it. Or are you saying that God is fine with children starving to death if we dont do anything about it (which is the same thing as allowing it)

So, you feel that I should answer your questions even if you don't answer mine?
You keep using the term "allow"...
So, I ask you again:
It seems like you are suggesting that God should "take over" and enforce HIS will on US, is that what you are saying?

For the sake of the discussion, why not assume his answer to that question is: "Yes."?

We all know where the discussion goes now: God allows man to commit evil to maintain our free will. MAGSolo would seem to argue that man is not deserving of such high esteem and god SHOULD take over and enforce his will, even if it means wiping out all human life.

This would be the classic problem of evil discussion, and I always feel like it gets nowhere. Many people are not satisfied with the free will argument, but it isn't really easily dismissible either. I think people generally want the answer to the question: "But why must he allow so much suffering? Not all of it is the result of man, sometimes it is the result of disease, accidents, etc." And I don't think anyone can really provide a satisfying answer to that. Perhaps suffering is needed to help understand something important, or perhaps it's something else entirely. I always feel like it's speculative though. My answer, as it is with most things (and take it with some pause, as I am a nonbeliever), would be: "I don't know."

Other people's thoughts are always appreciated, though.

MAGSolo wrote:Either God has the power to stop it and doesnt, thereby allowing it to occur or he doesnt have the power to stop it. Are you saying God doesnt have the power to stop it. Or are you saying that God is fine with children starving to death if we dont do anything about it (which is the same thing as allowing it)

God has the power to stop it. He also has the omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence to know the end of all things, and therefore to allow terrible things to happen in creation, even if temporal, fallible, ignorant beings can't grasp the why. Could suffering be worse? I would say, yes. In fact, how do we know that God is not intervening to prevent some suffering?
His permission of it, doesn't mean God is 'fine' with it. If God were not to allow evil would also mean that humans wouldn't exist, since humans are beings of free will. A human without such a will is simply not a human. It's a logical absurdity. The implications create all kinds of problems and contradictions. Other animals can't make a logical assesment of 'starvation' and form an opinion on it. Just like you do, and yet I'm assuming you don't do anything about children starving, and are fine with it. Except when it meets the requirements of an emotional objection to take a shot at God. Then all the sudden, you are concerned about the poor children. (Not that you shouldn't be, but I doubt you really are, except as it suits your agenda.)
If God eliminates evil, then also eliminated is your free will, along with everyone elses, which is really an absurdity.

There are literally enough resources to feed everyone in the world, now. Mankind has the ability to assess the needs and provide for everyone on this planet, yet people still starve? My guess is that since you own a computer, and many other luxuries, that you are spending your money in areas that could be going to prevent starving.

MAGSolo wrote:Is that not the state we were allegedly created in? We could not do evil if it we hadnt been created with the capacity to do so.

That is simply an absurdity. Evil is the result of failing to chose the good we ought to do. If there is no choice, there is also no good, and there is also no you. You assume that we could be created without such. Please explain how?

Suffering is a common objection to God, but a dead end street for the atheist. Let's play along. Let's hypothesize there is no God. Are people starving? Yes. Who is responsible? ________________________
Does it matter? I mean really matter. Humans (in this scenario) are afterall merely by-products of a material universe. Why is their starvation any more meaningful than a blade of glass withering from lack of water?
For human suffering to matter, means there has to be some inherent value to life, and in a material universe there is no such option.

So, the atheist assumes that God is indifferent if suffering is allowed to happen. The reality is that the atheist is indifferent, and hypocritical. In a material worldview, nothing is objectively right or wrong, good or evil, not even intentionally starving children or torturing puppies for pleasure. Yet, the atheist's objections only have even the slightest merit, if human life has some inherent, objective value. And, it also only matters if evil is a genuine possibility. The atheist worldview says no way. In an atheist worldview, good an evil has no instrinsic meaning. It is only subjective at best. Life has no inherent value. And thus self-awareness, which is just some wierd, unexplanable accident of nature, has caused all humanity to be deluded with in their own self-absorbtion, that human suffering matters. When in fact, they are no more biologically significant than an elephant fart.

Where is your proof of this? Without using the bible, what evidence can you offer that there is an afterlife where all will be made well? What will prevent humans from doing evil in the next life and bringing suffering and death to that one as well?

That's like saying, without using physics please explain gravitational theory.

I say this tongue and cheek, and only to make a point. If you are really concerned with eliminating evil, then why not start with yourself?

So, the atheist assumes that God is indifferent if suffering is allowed to happen. The reality is that the atheist is indifferent, and hypocritical. In a material worldview, nothing is objectively right or wrong, good or evil, not even intentionally starving children or torturing puppies for pleasure. Yet, the atheist's objections only have even the slightest merit, if human life has some inherent, objective value. And, it also only matters if evil is a genuine possibility. The atheist worldview says no way. In an atheist worldview, good an evil has no instrinsic meaning. It is only subjective at best. Life has no inherent value. And thus self-awareness, which is just some wierd, unexplanable accident of nature, has caused all humanity to be deluded with in their own self-absorbtion, that human suffering matters. When in fact, they are no more biologically significant than an elephant fart.

Hey now, I don't think this representation is fair. An atheist world-view isn't an actual world-view, only a preclusion of theist world-views. You can't make judgments about an atheist world-view without defining which one. Does an object have value if no one is there to value it? It doesn't feel that it's the case. And yet, a childhood remnant might hold a great deal of value to you (or say, a dollar bill). Just because value might be subjective it doesn't mean it's meaningless. And things can be objectively right and wrong if what is defined as right and wrong is what causes harm and what causes thriving - these can be measured objectively (by a subject) and are given meaning tautologically. I think your representation is overly pessimistic. Just because humans are not supremely significant does not mean they aren't significant (at least to other humans!). And if we're significant to each other, what does it matter if we're not significant to a rock or a blade of grass?

MAGSolo wrote:I believe that God should end suffering and evil by any means necessary even if it means wiping every human being from the face of the Earth. Now you seem to have a problem with me using the word allow. Once again, either God has the power to end/prevent suffering and evil and he doesnt which means he allows it or he doesnt have the power to end suffering and evil. Which is it. If you somehow have another option Id love to hear it.

It's been established that God is able to do anything and everything, eliminating the second option. The first option, then, is correct; but this approach is necessary to allow humans life on Earth, seeing as we are prone to evil/suffering and would therefore have to be eliminated to end evil/suffering. (And even though you might believe that to be a better option than evil/suffering, other people might not.)

Mark 10:2-5 (NIV) says:

2 Some Pharisees came and tested [Jesus] by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”

3 “What did Moses command you?” he replied.

4 They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.”

5 “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied.

This evil/suffering/hardness of the heart that we are prone to is allowed by God, because He has given us free will. He allows us the opportunity to sin (and we do) so that when we follow Him and His Word it is of our own choice and through our own devices. A pastor I once listened to said this (and I paraphrase slightly because I don't remember his sermon verbatim): "A father had a son who wanted to skateboard. The father, of course, allowed him to. Then, later, the son was showing his father how much he had practiced and fell from the skateboard, injuring his knee. The father had been close enough to catch him, but didn't, for it had been his son's choice to skateboard and he wanted his son to know what it felt like to fall. Afterward, the father bandaged his son's wound and let him go off and try again." Granted, skateboarding isn't the same as sinning, but the idea remains: We, through our own free will, are subject to sin. God allows this and provides healing and forgiveness for the sin, but doesn't force His Word upon us.

God has the power to stop it. He also has the omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence to know the end of all things, and therefore to allow terrible things to happen in creation, even if temporal, fallible, ignorant beings can't grasp the why. Could suffering be worse? I would say, yes. In fact, how do we know that God is not intervening to prevent some suffering?

How do I know that an invisible, make believe being, that never talks to us or shows himself isnt preventing some suffering? Gee, I guess I dont know for sure. Maybe Im not starving to death right now because God is watching over me. So what makes me any more special that God is preventing me from suffering while some child is starving somewhere or getting sexually abused?

His permission of it, doesn't mean God is 'fine' with it. If God were not to allow evil would also mean that humans wouldn't exist, since humans are beings of free will. A human without such a will is simply not a human. It's a logical absurdity. The implications create all kinds of problems and contradictions.

Ill ask again, do angels in heaven have free will? Will we have free will when go to heaven?

Other animals can't make a logical assesment of 'starvation' and form an opinion on it. Just like you do, and yet I'm assuming you don't do anything about children starving, and are fine with it. Except when it meets the requirements of an emotional objection to take a shot at God. Then all the sudden, you are concerned about the poor children. (Not that you shouldn't be, but I doubt you really are, except as it suits your agenda.)

Let me just roll with this idea of yours for the sake of argument. Lets say I couldnt care less about starving children, we live in a world where the young of all species die early and human children are no different. I dont personally care about children dying of starvation, and I dont intend to do anything about it, but I do believe the fact that many children suffer and die every year from starvation, disease, and neglect, is strong evidence that there is no all powerful, good, and loving God watching over us. You see, you saying that I dont really care about starving children doesnt diminish the strength of my argument at all because even if I didnt care a bit about them, that doesnt change the fact that God still allows them to suffer and die daily.

If God eliminates evil, then also eliminated is your free will, along with everyone elses, which is really an absurdity.

So angels dont have free will and we wont have free will in heaven? If angels in heaven can survive without free will then not having free will must not be that bad so what is so great about free will?

There are literally enough resources to feed everyone in the world, now. Mankind has the ability to assess the needs and provide for everyone on this planet, yet people still starve? My guess is that since you own a computer, and many other luxuries, that you are spending your money in areas that could be going to prevent starving.

I will provide for the children I create. I cant save the world and Im not going to try. If I personally saw a child starving I would give that child food (which seems to be more than all powerful God is willing to do) and if it were within my power to feed every last starving child I would, but I cant and starving children are just a part of living in a natural world where no invisible supernatural being is watching over us and protecting us.

That is simply an absurdity. Evil is the result of failing to chose the good we ought to do. If there is no choice, there is also no good, and there is also no you. You assume that we could be created without such. Please explain how?

Do angels have free will? Will we have free will in heaven?

Suffering is a common objection to God, but a dead end street for the atheist. Let's play along. Let's hypothesize there is no God. Are people starving? Yes. Who is responsible? ________________________

People who produce children they cant provide for are responsible.

Does it matter? I mean really matter. Humans (in this scenario) are afterall merely by-products of a material universe. Why is their starvation any more meaningful than a blade of glass withering from lack of water?

No it doesnt matter. We arent special and this proves it. In the bibles Jesus asks are we not much more valuable than birds, and he provides for them so he will provide for us. The fact that children die of starvation and lack of clean water shows that the bible is wrong, that we actually arent any more special than birds and grass, we are just smarter than them.

For human suffering to matter, means there has to be some inherent value to life, and in a material universe there is no such option.

For suffering to matter to whom?

So, the atheist assumes that God is indifferent if suffering is allowed to happen.

If he has the power to stop it and doesnt, I dont see how that can be seen as anything but indifference. If he cared about children starving and could prevent it, for what good reason would he not do so?

The reality is that the atheist is indifferent, and hypocritical. In a material worldview, nothing is objectively right or wrong, good or evil, not even intentionally starving children or torturing puppies for pleasure.

Most atheist have a very good idea of what is right and wrong, good or evil, they just dont need a book to explain it to them. There are atheist all around you and they probably dont go around torturing puppies and starving children. To assume that a lack of belief in an invisible being that never speaks or shows himself automatically means one has no concept of right and wrong is a very ignorant.

That's like saying, without using physics please explain gravitational theory.

So are you saying you cant prove there is an afterlife without the bible?

I say this tongue and cheek, and only to make a point. If you are really concerned with eliminating evil, then why not start with yourself?

What point are you trying to make? Are you saying Im evil, are you judging me?

Is that not the state we were allegedly created in? We could not do evil if it we hadnt been created with the capacity to do so.

We were created with freewill and had the choice to choose, if we were created without freewill we would be robots not having the ability to think for ourselves.
I know what I would rather.

Where exactly did we say we could do it on our own and who is we in the first place? Did the hundreds and thousands of children who die of disease and starvation every year say they could do it on their own? Did the child in the picture I posted about to die in the baking sun say he could do it on his own? Did that child ever say I dont need God, I can do it by myself?

The whole human race everyday that they don't recognise God and reject him as their saviour say we can do it on our own, it is a constant and continual thing not just the time that Adam and Eve made their choice.
As for the Child in the picture, I have no idea I am not a mind reader, that is between them and God.

I dont see what point you are trying to make here

We learn through our mistakes and sometimes there are hard lessons to learn, if there were no consequences to our actions we would always be doing the wrong thing.

If he does hear us and he does act then how is it that children continue to die for lack of food, clean water, medicine and other basic needs. I continue to focus on children because they have not had time to make any decisions concerning acceptance of Jesus/God. If God continually allows them to suffer and die, how can you say he hears us and acts?

As an example, God's works through many charitable organisations, providing food and shelter to many starving and dying people. God is not always a booming voice from the sky working miracles, he is more subtle than that or else he would be effecting our freewill again.

Where is your proof of this? Without using the bible, what evidence can you offer that there is an afterlife where all will be made well? What will prevent humans from doing evil in the next life and bringing suffering and death to that one as well?

I reject your question, the Bible is God revelation to mankind, your asking me to explain complex maths without a maths book.
What prevents us from doing wrong in the next life is our change of heart and acceptance of God's sacrifice, once God has been revealed to us and we fully understand the nature of God we will no longer want to sin. That is my understanding of it.

I apologize, that was an emotional response. I said earlier that I dont feel any moral outrage but I think thats not entirely true. I do get outraged at the idea of a good and powerful God that would allow the suffering and evil that is rampant on this Earth and I think most ideas to defend such an idea are not well thought out and it tends to upset me I think.

Apology accepted, God is doing something about the suffering in this world, he came here and died for you and me so that we can be free from sin and spend eternity with him.

This would be a good argument if we held God to the standard of mere mortals.

So are you saying because we are mortals we are excused from rape,murder, genocide, etc... etc... and because God is God he is accountable?

Obviously you do not know everything and cannot know the future so you could not know that your child would disobey you. God is not supposed to be constrained by time and therefore he is supposed to be all-knowing. If you knew your child would eat the chocolate you told him not to and you knew it would upset you, then yes I would say you should have never bought the chocolate in the first place. If God knew that humans would eventually sin and he knew his punishment would be severe, I say that he should never have created humans. Are you going argue that God didnt know that humans with free will would be prone to sin and commit evil deeds? My bigger issue is that for the punishment for eating the fruit to be so severe, it seems that simply not putting the tree in the garden would have prevented a lot of unnecessary problems. If the punishment for eating the fruit was cursing the Earth, death and suffering for all humanity, and the eventual torture and death of your son (as yourself) then why put the tree in the garden at all? It doesnt make sense. What purpose did the tree serve that it was so essential to have in the garden?

What you keep forgetting is that yes God does know the future and his plan for our salvation was already conceived before we even existed, God loves us so much that he sacrificed himself, enduring our pain and hardship dying for us.
The tree to me is symbolic, if there was no tree we still would have done the same just as a child will always at some point disobey his parents and do the wrong thing.

If you knew your first child would grow up to be a serial murderer or a serial rapist or a child molester, would you still choose to have that child?

Yes. Point?

I think everyone realizes that their child will occasionally do something they dont approve of but they still expect their child to be a mostly good kid. Going back to your chocolate example, would you ever curse your child with something they would have to endure all their life for eating chocolate you told them not to?

What you are not recognising is that they never stop disobeying, if the whole human race stopped disobeying there would be no more punishment.

Would you view it as a malicious or rebellious act or would you understand that kids sometimes do things they arent supposed to because thats simply what kids do? Would you curse the ground they walk on to bring forth thorns and thistles for all the days of their lives?

Same as above.

This goes back to my original point of Gods reaction to them eating the fruit being a huge overreaction.

No it's not because the behaviour continues, people still do bad things all the time.

I give money to people who are obviously poor and in need. Not necessarily to every seemingly healthy and able bodied person at every street intersection with a homeless/jobless sign, but when I see people who genuinely look like they are genuinely not very well off, I give to them. I do whatever is within my power to ease whatever suffering I can

Do you think you could do more? Have you given everything you have?

Now I want to ask you a question. Look again at that picture of that child I posted and tell me why a God that would allow suffering such as that to occur deserves to be worshiped and praised?

God is not allowing the suffering, he is allowing our freewill to not act on it. It is our choice not God's, stop blaming everyone else for your iniquities.


Dan

We were created with freewill and had the choice to choose, if we were created without freewill we would be robots not having the ability to think for ourselves.

Maybe that would be better. I think it would be better if God had not created humans.

The whole human race everyday that they don't recognise God and reject him as their saviour say we can do it on our own,

no, individuals accept or reject God

As for the Child in the picture, I have no idea I am not a mind reader, that is between them and God.

Do you think its possible that the child rejected God and said he could do it on his own and that this is Gods way of punishing him?

We learn through our mistakes and sometimes there are hard lessons to learn, if there were no consequences to our actions we would always be doing the wrong thing.

I still dont understand what you are saying. If only evil people suffered I could see your point, but humanity suffers no matter how good or bad an individual might be. You are as likely to suffer or not whether you believe in God or not. Earthly suffering is not tied to how good or bad you are or whether you believe in God or not, so how can it be a consequence for our actions?

I reject your question, the Bible is God revelation to mankind, your asking me to explain maths without a maths book.

You can teach math without a math book. If God cannot reveal himself without the bible then he is not a very powerful God. The bible was written and put together entirely by men and there is no evidence that they were influenced by God to do so.

What prevents us from doing wrong in the next life is our change of heart and acceptance of God's sacrifice, once God has been revealed to us and we fully understand the nature of God we will no longer want to sin. That is my understanding of it.

So all God has to do to stop our desire to sin is reveal himself? Why then does he not just reveal himself so that nobody will have the desire to sin anymore?

So are you saying because we are mortals we are excused from rape,murder, genocide, etc... etc... and because God is God he is accountable?

Where did I say that?

What you keep forgetting is that yes God does know the future and his plan for our salvation was already conceived before we even existed

So if God already knew adam and eve would eat the fruit, why bother telling them not to eat it in the first place? Why place the tree in the garden if he knew thats what they would do?

God loves us so much that he sacrificed himself, enduring our pain and hardship died for us.

Its not a sacrifice when you get to come back to life. Furthermore you have no evidence that this happened besides a book written by men claiming that it happened.

The tree to me is symbolic, if there was no tree we still would have done the same just as a child will always at some point disobey his parents and do the wrong thing.

What was it symbolic of? Knowing that Adam and Eve would be disobedient, why would he then curse them for it?

Yes

Then you are a very selfish person and furthermore not a very good person at that.

What you are not recognising is that they never stop disobeying, if the whole human race stopped disobeying there would be no more punishment

That is not what I asked you? I asked you would you curse your child with something they would have to endure their entire lives for eating chocolate you told them not to? God didnt curse adam and eve for what they would do in the future, he cursed them for eating fruit he told them not to. So please answer the question.

Same as above.

No not same as above. Would you view it as a malicious or rebellious act or would you understand that kids sometimes do things they arent supposed to because thats simply what kids do? Would you curse the ground they walk on to bring forth thorns and thistles for all the days of their lives?

No it's not because the behaviour continues, people still do bad things all the time.

No they dont. Some people do lots of bad things and some people dont do many bad things at all. There are really bad people on Earth and really good people. Not all people do bad things all the time. That is flat out false. But if all people do bad things all the time then God was stupid to create people in the first place. Whats the point in making humans if all of them do bad things all the time?

Do you think you could do more? Have you given everything you have?

If you can prove to me that God exist without using the bible and you sell all you have and give everything to the poor then I will do the same.

Because God is not allowing the suffering, he is allowing our freewill to not act on it. It is our choice not God's, stop blaming everyone else for your iniquities.

By allowing our freewill to not act on it, he is allowing it. It is Gods choice not to do anything about it. Id blame him if he existed but he doesnt.

MAGSolo wrote:Ill ask again, do angels in heaven have free will? Will we have free will when go to heaven? . . .

2 Peter 2:4 (NIV) says: . . . God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment.

The fact that these angels sinned means that they had the free will to sin. So, yes, angels have free will.

As for your second question, there is a very thorough article on the subject of our free will in heaven here that might be useful to you.

Maybe that would be better. I think it would be better if God had not created humans.

That is fine If you think that.

no, individuals accept or reject God

Yep, every individual does it all the time. Even Christians ignore God because we are not perfect either.

Do you think its possible that the child rejected God and said he could do it on his own and that this is Gods way of punishing him?

I am not going to get bogged down in if, but's and maybes. Maybe you should accept that it is not God doing this but rather through OUR inaction this happens.

I still dont understand what you are saying. If only evil people suffered I could see your point, but humanity suffers no matter how good or bad an individual might be. You are as likely to suffer or not whether you believe in God or not. Earthly suffering is not tied to how good or bad you are or whether you believe in God or not, so how can it be a consequence for our actions?

We are all sinful, we have all fallen short of the glory of God. Suffering might not be because of something I did, it may be because of someone's bad choices, if God stopped that person's choice to ease my suffering then he would be interfering with that persons freewill. God is just and justice will be done, maybe not here on Earth but in the next life.
So who is good? what standard are you saying people are good?

You can teach math without a math book. If God cannot reveal himself without the bible then he is not a very powerful God. The bible was written and put together entirely by men and there is no evidence that they were influenced by God to do so.

I said complex maths, this is not a simple issue please don't over simplify it.
God is self evident through nature, you can see the work of his hand in nature.
Even the stars declare the glory of God. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGeSRyzN ... re=related
The truth claims of the Bible prove it was inspired by God, no other religion makes the claims that Christianity makes.

So all God has to do to stop our desire to sin is reveal himself? Why then does he not just reveal himself so that nobody will have the desire to sin anymore?

God was with us in the garden, but once we sinned he could no longer be with us as his perfect nature cannot look upon sin. He came and paid the price for sin which is death so that once again we can stand in his presence.

Where did I say that?

I was asking a question, I didn't say you said it.

So are you saying because we are mortals we are excused from rape,murder, genocide, etc... etc... and because God is God he is accountable?

So if God already knew adam and eve would eat the fruit, why bother telling them not to eat it in the first place? Why place the tree in the garden if he knew thats what they would do?

Why are you so hung up on some fruit, the fact is they disobeyed God, the fruit is not the issue here.
They wanted to be God instead of trusting him.

Its not a sacrifice when you get to come back to life. Furthermore you have no evidence that this happened besides a book written by men claiming that it happened.

Exactly God overcome death as only God can and so we can enter into eternity, but does this mean he didn't suffer on the cross. Because he was both fully human and fully God he suffered greatly.
Jesus historically existed, have a look at the shoud thread on this site or the earlier video I posted about the star of Bethlehem and there is much much more if your willing to look.

What was it symbolic of? Knowing that Adam and Eve would be disobedient, why would he then curse them for it?

It is symbolic of our desire to do things on our own instead of trusting in God.

You are a very selfish person and furthermore not a very good person at that.

Yes I am, definitely in need of salvation as are we all.

That is not what I asked you? I asked you would you curse your child with something they would have to endure their entire lives for eating chocolate you told them not to? God didnt curse adam and eve for what they would do in the future, he cursed them for eating fruit he told them not to. So please answer the question.

I did answer but you don't get that it is not about eating something, it is about disobeying.

No not same as above. Would you view it as a malicious or rebellious act or would you understand that kids sometimes do things they arent supposed to because thats simply what kids do? Would you curse the ground they walk on to bring forth thorns and thistles for all the days of their lives?

I would punish them every time they disobeyed me, as we are in a constant state of disobedience we are still under punishment.

No they dont. Some people do lots of bad things and some people dont do many bad things at all. There are really bad people on Earth and really good people. Not all people do bad things all the time. That is flat out false.

What is your definition of good? I know I cannot go one day without doing something wrong, everyday is a struggle to do what God requires of me.
I disagree, even the most Godly people I know still fall short of what we really should be doing.

If you can prove to me that God exist without using the bible and you sell all you have and give everything to the poor then I will do the same.

No one can prove to you God exists, that's why it's called faith.

Well you answered my question, you expect God to do everything while holding back on yourself, this is hypocrisy of the highest order.

By allowing our freewill to not act on it, he is allowing it. It is Gods choice not to do anything about it. Id blame him if he existed but he doesnt.

Like I have said earlier without freewill we are but automatons incapable of thought, I know what I would rather.

Why are you here if you don't think God exists, no one can prove it to you.

Maybe you need to read the board guidelines, this is a forum for genuine seekers not a platform for you to vent your misguided anger.

Dan

Mag,

I am not going to discredit your entire argument on this but I would like to point out that you are heavily leaning on the appeal to emotion argument (needless to say its a logical fallacy to start with) and trying to justify your own dilemma. If I may, I think you are quite troubled with the idea of suffering. You are outright not denying God and still trying to formulate God who should just wipe all suffering and according to you "wipe all human beings if that is necessary".

So I will put it to you this way, we should see if your argument is valid or not. I think your argument has taken liberties as you saw fit without any proof one way or the other. You have an emotional appeal to help you in this but as far as I can see, you lack the solution, thus you point out that it must be a Godless world - it has to be or God is not loving. I would say its a false dichotomy you have created that there is indeed certain explanations which you have overlooked or are simply unaware of.

I am going to go down on this argument with you, until we reach the logical ends on both sides of the argument, yours and mine, what say you? you up for it?

If you choose to explore this in detail, I think we should lay down some ground rules and definitions.

1. I will not involve the Bible as a proof for my argument. I may point you to a certain verse to conclude that if it is recorded or not but I will not ask you to accept it as truth. You can however choose to believe it or reject it as you please. But there is a catch too, you are not allowed to use the Bible as well. For instance you cannot say that the Bible says, God will provide for you. You can point out that its is written and whether you believe it to be true or not. But you can not use it to claim your conclusion as true. That would be a foul.

2. You will have to define Goodness and evil, what do these terms mean to you? why goodness matters? why is evil bad?

3. We are going to stick to one point at a time. No jumps. Now we are on the problem of evil, lets stay on it. we can later go to fall and Eve and Adam and etc later.

To your first sentence in this argument, I see problems already. So help me here that I get what you are trying to say.

I dont need to use the bible to show that God doesnt love us. The real world around us is evidence enough that he doesnt love us, doesnt care about us, or more likely doesnt even exist

First question: what is "Godly love" in your dictionary, is it a one way feeling? a two way relationship? something abstract?
Please feel free to detail the answer as much as you need to explain your point. Because right now, I do not know what exactly do you think about what Godly love is? I need to know that to answer your questions.

second question: Do you see any evidence in the world, where you think there is anything to indicate that God does love us?

For instance, a family adopts an orphan child. Can that be attributed to God's invisible hand or is it just US, human beings taking care of things?
What I am driving at? I think I am trying to point out the contradiction I see.


If you think that there is no God and it is just us human beings taking care of that orphan child - I would ask you then how come you attribute goodness to humans and evil in the world to God?

OR

if you think that there is indeed a God then you would have to concede that he loves his creation and takes care of them too?

So which one is it? I am not in the least worried about the side consequences of my two statements, Because I am just reflecting back to you the problem you have created in your own words. You would have to admit that you can not pick any notion on your whim and make-believe it as you wish.

I would answer all your questions, in fact I would go line by line with you if I have to, but you will have to clear the problems which exist in your argument. If you can tune your statement, I think we can at least reach a meaningful discussion, step by step.