6399 replies to this topic

[Malice Ructor]

People like you think God is malevolent just because there is suffering in the world at all. Why do you think you can understand God? Also, one problem people have is that they DO look to God as an explanation for the existence of the universe, but you should probably look at it more like the creation of the universe IS God. God did it is not an excuse either, and we're not any closer to explaining every part of it. You are jaded if you think so. For every question about the universe we answer, at least two more pop up-probably even hundreds more in most cases.And the main belief of God is that nothing created him. He created himself, or he always was. You should accept that there are some things that humans just can't understand. We're not gods after all. How do you expect us to be able to understand and explain anything and everything?The opendix [sic] is a vestigial organ that is believed to have been a second stomach by some, but we don't know what its purpose was yet. We also have vestigial tails. So I guess if there's something in the anatomy of an animal that it doesn't use in its current evolution that means there can't be a God because you obviously understand his plan and that he wouldn't make mistakes like that as you seem to think they are.

1.) If God isn't malevolent, whence cometh evil? Why is there infinite punishment for finite sins?Surely God, who is described as omnipotent, omni-benevolent and omniscient would try to save all his children, from suffering. It's the same with a parent who wants to help his child who is suffering. Since Satan wants to do the exact opposite, and is God's enemy(so to speak), why can't God flick him out of existence? He is omnipotent after all.2. Nothing can't just exist all of a sudden. It's the same with the world. Both religion and science seeks to explain why, only that there's more proof with science.I never said that we should be expected to know everything. But we use science as a way to try to explain the phenomena that exists in the world. Science can be boggled at times.3. In my view, the vestigial tailbone is one piece of proof that we evolved from primates. Our DNA is also shockingly similar to primates as well, which is also part of the proof that God may not have created us.The appendix only exists to get us killed from it exploding.

[Malice Ructor]

Evil is a result of the sin of mankind. I guess, in a sense, God created it since he created everything, but does he perpetuate it? I think your thinking is rather spurious. Also, God could save us from everything, but wouldn't that take away our free will? A parent might want to help out his/her child who just got out of college and can't even afford a place to live, but don't they let the child make it on their own instead rather than smothering them? And I can't explain God's plan or anything. I don't know him. Nobody knows things like that. I'm sure God could eliminate Satan if he wanted to, but for whatever reason he doesn't. Maybe it would make more sense if you were in God's position.If nothing can't exist all of a sudden, then how does anything exist period? Religion doesn't try to explain these things either. What are you talking about? That's just Science. Religion is about morality and ethics, not science, and I don't believe they stand in opposition. Thus, I don't think it's impossible that we evolved from primates. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's how it happened, and I think it was God's idea too.The appendix is useless now, but like our tails, it was probably useful for whatever we came from.

You say that a being must have freewill to be happy. The omnibenevolent God did not wish to create robots, so he gave humans freewill to enable them to experience love and happiness. But the humans used this freewill to choose evil, and introduced imperfection into God's originally perfect universe. God had no control over this decision, so the blame for our imperfect universe is on the humans, not God.Here is why the argument is weak. First, if God is omnipotent, then the assumption that freewill is necessary for happiness is false. If God could make it a rule that only beings with freewill may experience happiness, then he could just as easily have made it a rule that only robots may experience happiness. The latter option is clearly superior, since perfect robots will never make decisions which could render them or their creator unhappy, whereas beings with freewill could. A perfect and omnipotent God who creates beings capable of ruining their own happiness is impossible.Second, even if we were to allow the necessity of freewill for happiness, God could have created humans with freewill who did not have the ability to choose evil, but to choose between several good options.Third, God supposedly has freewill, and yet he does not make imperfect decisions. If humans are miniature images of God, our decisions should likewise be perfect. Also, the occupants of heaven, who presumably must have freewill to be happy, will never use that freewill to make imperfect decisions. Why would the originally perfect humans do differently?Religion about morality and ethics? I'll tell you what morality: At Jabesh-gilead, there's rape, murder and pillage ahoy. In Genesis, Abraham built an altar to sacrifice his son, lies to him and even has him build his own altar. Just when Abraham is about to kill Issac, God comes in with "Just kidding lol." Even if Abraham didn't kill his son, it's a evil thing to do. There are instructions for fathers to sell their own daughters as slaves! How moral is that?!Yes, I may select passages that highlight the less moral side of the Bible, but Christians do the same thing.Religion tries to explain how everything came to be! So does science! Also, the Big Bang is the most likely cause of the universe.I selected Christianity because it's one of the more prominent religions. Then again, this debate is pretty much on Christianity.