...and now for something completely different: Free Will!

[Wildswanderer]

I'm still waiting to hear why this god doesn't just cause the offender to drop dead after his first offense, instead of letting him claim a number of victims before dying of old age. The only reason I can think of is that this god being actually wanted the offender to claim additional victims. So apparently this sex offender isn't perpetrating evil, he's actually fulfilling this god being's will.

It's appointed onto man once to die. You can't just apply your logic to one situation and be logical.
And if you apply it to every evil, no matter how small, it just gets absurd.
Why didn't God stop you from stealing a dime? Did he want to to become a kleptomaniac?

 

[QuestioningMind]

No. Yes, in this life we will always be imperfect. But remember what I said about motivation?
Perhaps you've heard this quote by the apostle Paul: " what I do not want to do, that I do."

His motives are right but he can't woolly achieve sinlessness. That's why a sacrifice was necessary. If we could achieve sinlessness, why would Jesus have to die for us?

We are now of two nature's, where before there was only " me" and what " I " want. Now there's also what the Spirit wants me to be.
I know I've asked a question:why did God start the whole thing?
Why not just live in perfect Harmony as he did before man? Why subject himself to suffering?
Because of his love.
God is love. It's not just one of his attributes, it's his essential nature.
If he just skipped over the test and made us like the angels to begin with, we would not be able to choose him from love, but from obligation. And remember, even the angels had that choice at one time, and many of them choose the wrong thing. He still didn't force any of them to remain.
Just like he doesn't force us to accept his love.
He can stand being with us because he's already covered us in his righteousness. He doesn't change us against our carnal natures will even after salvation, BTW. Sometimes I wish he would. He still asks first. Sure, there is an element of mystery to salvation. But we don't have to fully understand... we only have to accept.

If he just skipped over the test and made us like the angels to begin with, we would not be able to choose him from love, but from obligation. And remember, even the angels had that choice at one time, and many of them choose the wrong thing.

That's a complete contradiction. First you say that if god had made us like the angles we would NOT be able to choose him from love, but from obligation. And in the very next sentence you say: Even the angles HAD that choice at one time... to choose god for love and not obligation, but they chose wrong. So clearly the angles WERE able to choose from love and not obligation, even though they were created as angles.

 

[Wildswanderer]

If he just skipped over the test and made us like the angels to begin with, we would not be able to choose him from love, but from obligation. And remember, even the angels had that choice at one time, and many of them choose the wrong thing.

That's a complete contradiction. First you say that if god had made us like the angles we would NOT be able to choose him from love, but from obligation. And in the very next sentence you say: Even the angles HAD that choice at one time... to choose god for love and not obligation, but they chose wrong. So clearly the angles WERE able to choose from love and not obligation, even though they were created as angles.

Well angles are just angles. I don't think they choose anything.
But angels did choose. We assume their choices are permanent now and that ours will be that way in heaven.
It may have been confusing to bring Angels into the conversation. Let's just say he could have made us love him but that's not really love. Maybe a better comparison would be creating an AI that adored you. It really has no other choice.

 

[QuestioningMind]

It's appointed onto man once to die. You can't just apply your logic to one situation and be logical.
And if you apply it to every evil, no matter how small, it just gets absurd.
Why didn't God stop you from stealing a dime? Did he want to to become a kleptomaniac?

It's appointed onto man once to die.
Okay, fine... so why if it's this god who decides when a person will die once does this god allow a child rapist/killer to live long enough to claim 12 victims, instead of giving him is one death after the first victim?

You can't just apply your logic to one situation and be logical.
Why can't I apply it to the most egregious moral violations? If I'm the final authority I can focus on stopping mass murderers and basically ignore people when they jaywalk. It's like any parent watching over a bunch of children. You don't step in and intervene every time two children have a disagreement, but you do step in when one child starts hitting another.

And if you apply it to every evil, no matter how small, it just gets absurd.
That's the point... this god being you propose apparently doesn't see a distinction between a huge evil and a small evil.

You're acting as if gunning down 23 school children and stealing a dime are equally offensive and if you step in to intervene in one case then for some reason you MUST step in and intervene in all cases. That suggests that this god sees stealing a dime and mass murder as equally sinful.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Well angles are just angles. I don't think they choose anything.
But angels did choose. We assume their choices are permanent now and that ours will be that way in heaven.
It may have been confusing to bring Angels into the conversation. Let's just say he could have made us love him but that's not really love. Maybe a better comparison would be creating an AI that adored you. It really has no other choice.

It's sounds like this 'test' you claim humans must pass is absolutely useless, since even if we pass the test and become like angles we could STILL choose to go against god. If some of the original angles did then so could we. So why didn't god just create us all as angles and let us decide from there?

 

[Sheldon]

Then he's not omnipotent, clearly.

If he wasn't, he couldn't choose to limit himself.

That's not what you claimed.

Once God created the physical world he created a situation where he could not do whatever he wants.

So that clearly isn't a choice. Though if it were a choice, then that deity is clearly not omnibenevolent.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You're acting as if gunning down 23 school children and stealing a dime are equally offensive and if you step in to intervene in one case then for some reason you MUST step in and intervene in all cases. That suggests that this god sees stealing a dime and mass murder as equally sinful.

In comparison to holiness they are basically the same.
In regard to both eternal consequences and salvation, all sins are the same.
There's a difference in the penalties in this life and there's a difference in how much certain sins affect others.
Jesus equated lust with cheating on your wife and hate with murder.
So yes, if God was going to stop sins he would have to control our minds... because that's where sin originates.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Okay, fine... so why if it's this god who decides when a person will die once does this god allow a child rapist/killer to live long enough to claim 12 victims, instead of giving him is one death after the first victim?

You are assuming a whole bunch of things here. Like that being the only factor in God's decisions. Obviously there's almost an infinite number of factors... and who is to say that God doesn't strike down a lot of killers? Ever think that maybe it saved the child a lifetime of suffering to die young? We see through a glass darkly, God sees everything, everyone's interwoven actions and what each result is and according to some theologians he chose the best option in every situation given all the factors.

 

[Wildswanderer]

It's sounds like this 'test' you claim humans must pass is absolutely useless, since even if we pass the test and become like angles we could STILL choose to go against god. If some of the original angles did then so could we. So why didn't god just create us all as angles and let us decide from there?

Because he doesn't like geometry either?
Obviously we don't know why God decided to create humans aside from this:

"Bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the end of the earth, everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made."

Not because he needed to but because he wanted to.
When God created the world he did not create out of any need or any weakness or any deficiency Jonathan Edwards said, “Tis no argument of the emptiness or deficiency of a fountain that it is inclined to overflow."

 

[Wildswanderer]

That's not what you claimed.



So that clearly isn't a choice. Though if it were a choice, then that deity is clearly not omnibenevolent.

Of course it was a choice. But once he had created he was limited in what he could do, because of parameters he'd already set. Pursuing one desire necessarily means he can't pursue an opposite desire.

 

[KWED]

Disease is a result of man's wrong choice.

How?
Which men (or women)?
What choice was it?
Why must art apply to all of humanity?

God created a perfect world. It's now cursed by sin. It will be perfect again. For now, to allow free will, God has to allow the possibility of suffering.

I'm sure that all made sense to you in your own head.

 

[KWED]

Again, this world is the test... not the reward. Suffering has to be possible here, or there would be no test.

*sigh*
An infallibly omniscient god cannot "test" anyone. The concept is incoherent.
And why should there be any test anyway? We didn't apply for this existence. It was forced on us by god. He owes us!

 

[QuestioningMind]

In comparison to holiness they are basically the same.
In regard to both eternal consequences and salvation, all sins are the same.
There's a difference in the penalties in this life and there's a difference in how much certain sins affect others.
Jesus equated lust with cheating on your wife and hate with murder.
So yes, if God was going to stop sins he would have to control our minds... because that's where sin originates.

I guess I really don't care what they are in comparison to holiness then. This 'holiness' does not reflect in any way shape or form my conceptions of what constitutes morality, if it equates the acts of a child rapist with that of stealing a dime.

And nothing I've said requires that any god must control a person's mind. It's all about this god being being able to recognize when one of its creations is going to cause a great deal of abuse and suffering and simply ending his life before he can do so.

 

[KWED]

The funny thing is, your compassion is too small. You want God to eliminate what you find offensive, without understanding that all sin is offensive to God. Don't you care about how the murderer or molester is destroying himself by his actions?
God cares about all. That's why he offers redemption to all.
A God who would die to save those who choose him is a God worthy of more than respect. He's worthy of worship.

The sad thing is, you have no compassion at all.
I want god to have not created humanity in the first place if our existence requires any suffering. If the universe had never existed, I wouldn't care. And no one else would. And according to apologists, neither would god.
So, would you prefer there to be zero suffering or a lot of suffering.

God doesn't care about anyone but himself. He is ultimately selfish. He created an entire universe just so people could worship him, despite him knowing that it would require almost untold and endless suffering, especially that of children.
But you don't care about that. All you care about is that you get to some promised wonderland of eternal life and reward. Such a childish and self-centred concept.

 

[KWED]

You still don't get it. It's not about what the penalty we decide on should be. That's just humans deciding the fine, and it's based usually on the amount of harm an action causes. But that's not how God determines what is good or evil.
In regards to what is offensive to God, you have to understand that he is perfect. There's no little sins. Eating a forbidden fruit doesn't seem that bad to us, because we measure by our own flawed system, but God looks at the heart and understands the motivation.

WADR it is you who doesn't get it. You keep claiming that all sins are the same, that there is no "small evil" and "great evil", just "evil".
Therefore you are saying that eating more than you need to is the same as murdering a child, in god's eyes. Therefore his punishment for both will be the same.

 

[QuestioningMind]

You are assuming a whole bunch of things here. Like that being the only factor in God's decisions. Obviously there's almost an infinite number of factors... and who is to say that God doesn't strike down a lot of killers? Ever think that maybe it saved the child a lifetime of suffering to die young? We see through a glass darkly, God sees everything, everyone's interwoven actions and what each result is and according to some theologians he chose the best option in every situation given all the factors.

Okay, so you're saying is all just part of this god's mysterious plans. Which means that all of the suffering that occurs, the rapes and murders that this god does not prevent are all part of what this god intended. That suggests that there actually aren't any wicked or evil people in the world, since this god's ultimate plan requires that certain people be murdered or raped and the murderer's and rapists are simply fulfilling this god's will. Apparently we should be praising the child murderer, because his/her actions saved the child from a lifetime of suffering to die young.

 

[KWED]

I'm saying we have the best possible world given the parameters God chose. He couldn't have created a more perfect world and still allowed for freedom of the will.

Complete nonsense, as I have already explained.
Unless, of course, you think that babies dying in agony from congenital conditions is one of god's "chosen parameters", in which case he is a sadistic psychopath who any sane person with a shred of empathy and compassion would roundly condemn rather than attempt to defend and justify his psychotic behaviour.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Because he doesn't like geometry either?
Obviously we don't know why God decided to create humans aside from this:

"Bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the end of the earth, everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made."

Not because he needed to but because he wanted to.
When God created the world he did not create out of any need or any weakness or any deficiency Jonathan Edwards said, “Tis no argument of the emptiness or deficiency of a fountain that it is inclined to overflow."

What does any of that have to do with you saying that this god could have created everyone as angles, but then it would prevent the 'test' of whether we choose to follow. Yet admit that even if we 'd been created as angles that we could STILL chose not to follow, making this 'test' useless? How about actually addressing the contradictions in the claims you make that I've pointed out instead of responding with some completely unrelated quote?

 

[KWED]

You have a very myoptic view of reality then.

You are spectacularly missing the point!
This isn't about what reality is like. We know that. Life involved huge amounts of suffering, death, pain, etc - not least for innocent children.
The issue is about why god chose to make life like that. You seem to be taking contradictory positions - that life has to be like this, but also that god chose to make it like this.

Suffering is the human condition.

Only because god chose to make it that way. He didn't have to (or did he?)

The fact that someone suffers more or less doesn't change the fact that all can experience eternal bliss.

What kind of an argument is that?
Again, you are torturing one of your children but letting the other play with toys, and your justification for the disparity is that they will both get ice-cream after. It's a monstrous idea.

In reality we don't even really know who suffers the most because one person can come through horrific experiences and take steps to recover while another can suffer less and choose to remain in his sadness.

You have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

You want to focus solely on children for some unknown reason.

*sigh*
No. This has been explained by several people. The "innocent child dying in agony from a congenital condition" is used because it eliminates any (admittedly deranged) sense of a "deserved punishment". Although you seem to think that everyone deserves whatever happens to them.

Well, if I had died at ten years of age I would have had an nearly perfect existence. I would have experienced very little grief or emotional stress. Should I wish for that? No, I don't think so, because life is a gift, even for the suffering.

If you had never existed, you would not have missed life.
Also, you subscribe to that bizarre and disturbing "suffering is good" dogma.

We look around and we say " That horrible person! How evil he is to hurt others.".. usually when we have hurt others too, just in less obvious ways.

Again, you seem to think that forgetting a child's birthday is in some way comparable to murdering the child. I really do worry for you and those around you.

If you want to do something about evil in the world, the only place to start is inside yourself, by giving God permission to work on your own evil. We all have that option.

You may be full of evil and a danger to children, but I am not. And neither are most of the people I know.
But the issue here is that if god has created evil because he needs there to be evil in the world, what can anyone do about it? Are you saying that you can change god's perfect creation? Remember that this is "the best of possible worlds". Why do you want to do anything about the evil in it?

 

[Wildswanderer]

How?
Which men (or women)?
What choice was it?
Why must art apply to all of humanity?

Read your Bible.