/christianity/ - Christian Theology & Philosophy

>>10488

Disagreeing with you is not shit posting. Your version of omnipotence simply is not sensible and can be rejected out of hand by anyone with the least bit of logic. To quote God, "You can't have a top without a bottom". (bonus points if you know which god I'm talking about

>>10488

If you are the same guy as >>10454 and >>10459 , then yes I am already actively reading

(http://www.ditext.com/mackie/evil.html)

in another tab as I occasionally check in here. Thanks again and I will get to the longer one another night when I have a bit more tolerance, time, and patience.

>>10492

In his defense a shitshow isn't necessarily shitposting

>>10489

It's a false dichotomy. If He created 'you' in such a way that you would make different choices, you would be a different person. 'You' would never have existed. He created you as you are because He loves you. It is still your choice to accept that love or not. Even though He knows and has always known what you will choose, He did not make that choice for you.

>>10449

>Being this gay

Listen friend,

The sum of good and evil is good

Better, in fact, than if there was no evil at all

You really don't think if there was no evil that there could be good, right?

>>10483

the only reason you're having a hard time understanding anything being presented here, is because you seem to have no clue what it is to study abstract/transcendental phenomena like math in the first place. You probably don't even realize that you've implicitly been arguing for a strict naive empiricist position, through the lens of a materialist worldview. Much less recognize the absurdities such a stance leads to.

Here, have some reading:

https://www.iep.utm.edu/mathplat/

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

https://arachnoid.com/is_math_a_science/

>>10499

Yes actually that is exactly what I am saying and if you think otherwise then I heard of this great religion called Buddhism you should try out

>>10487

>if someone picked up smoking and ended up getting lung cancer, it was NOT THEIR CHOICE

>>10501

If you created people and gave them the freedom to choose between right and wrong, some would inevitably do wrong. You've been arguing that God's omniscience means our decisions have already been made for us when it is self evident that we do have freedom of choice. Look at all the choices people have made. God does not do evil. Humans do evil, because they choose to. And humans also do good because they choose to.

>>10494

The J.L Mackie paper is a succinct formulation of what the problem is and he is arguing against theists in it. It was a seminal paper and has had a huge impact on philosophical discussion in this area.The book I linked is a theodicy, defending the idea of an omniperfect God and the presence of evil in the universe. You can download the book by clicking GET on the page the link I provided sends you to

>>10499

>You really don't think if there was no evil that there could be good, right?

I would be careful of attempting such a theodicy and ultimately do not think it is a good defense. God existed prior to the existence of any creation and hence any occurrence of evil. Does that mean He was not wholly good in that state because there was no evil? Absolutely not. Furthermore, a critic could point to the abundance of arbitrary evil - e.g. a shattered meteor falling from the sky and killing a child with the debris. It isnt clear how such arbitrary evil is seemingly necessary for good to be brought about and for it to exist.

>>10498

But if he knows you will choose not to be christian or to sin and end up in hell forever then why would he create you? If he wasn't evil and he could see the future then he simply WOULDN'T make someone who would end up in hell forever.

If I knew in advance that no matter what I did my child was going to spend forever being tortured I wouldn't have the child in the first place because I'm not cruel. The god you describe IS cruel.

>>10453

>>10449

evil is a necessity these hellbound people cannot be known to you it can be said that they were lacking something to begin with and only seemed human to you. you are coming across as a brainlet there is nothing incompatible with god being all knowing and us having free will you are imagining god as a person and not the metaphysical identity of reality

>>10505

Idk section B part 4 is pretty much my argument. So. Sucks to be on their side. And yes again I have downloaded the book I just want to sleep for now as I have to wake up for work in approximately 6 hours. Ill look at it tomorrow or soon after

>>10506

This

>>10506

those people who went to hell belonged there same as satan who god created knowingly they are the wicked ones you are such a bleeding heart you empathize and humanize devils in hell

>>10506

see why did god make satan

>>10510

whats the average iq on here 90?

>>10508

God could have made us to always use free will to be good bye

>>10492

>Your version of omnipotence simply is not sensible and can be rejected out of hand by anyone with the least bit of logic.

No, its not 'my version' of what omnipotence is, it is the 'version' which most serious philosophers accept. I will state it for you: Omnipotence is simply the ability to bring about anything which is logically conceivable.

And you are shitposting friend, you are putting forward tired arguments in the vein of the paradox of the stone, which has been thoroughly dealt with and not really taken seriously by anyone but dilettante philosophers.

>>10506

Let's look at a hypothetical utopia. No one in this perfect society does evil. This is what the world would look like if God made everyone's choices for them like you keep trying to assert. If He picked who got the right to exist based on what kind of person they were. They ostensibly would have free will, but since they only have one option to choose from, they could not exercise it. The option must be there for free will to have any meaning at all, and the fact that we see people exercising the option is proof that it is there. God permits you to use the gift of free will He gave you as you choose. When you make the choice, the blame is yours, not His.

>>10514

Oh look, "logically conceivable". That's what I said. It doesn't include doing the illogical by your own definition.

>>10509

I am glad you have read the paper, as I think people on both sides need to. The book spends much time addressing the kinds of arguments Mackie is making, so it should be a fruitful read for you whatever you end up choosing to believe

>>10511

So you believe God knowingly created evil people (and good people who just don't happen to believe in him) knowing he would condemn them to eternal torture? That's the definition of an evil and cruel god.

>>10513

you imagine that having free will makes you inherently good, that someone who can make decisions must be good. when you make a decision you are doing so based on contingent factors out of your control and so humans are incapable of truly free action that is the work of god

>>10512

>see why did god make satan

The Satan(s) were made as servants to God. Turning them/him into an evil God is the influence of pagan (specifically helenistic) religious beliefs where they use multiple gods to explain why bad things happen.

>>10515

Punishing your child for all of eternity because of how you made them is cruel and evil. I don't think the god of Abraham is that evil. Eternal torture in hell simply makes no sense.

>>10516

Whoa shit my bad man, didnt see you write that but you did. Sorry about the misunderstanding

>>10513

If you can only choose to do one thing, choice does not exist. In order for choice to exist, we must have choices, and some will choose one thing and some will choose another. If nobody could choose to do wrong and everyone could only choose to do right, there would be no such thing as choice.

>>10522

>From where are you deriving your conception of love, to where removing free will is more loving?

It's not a matter of removing free will, its a matter of not creating a situation in which the person will be tortured for all eternity - just don't create that person.

>Giving the child agency to drive their own car without supervision is an act of love.

Agreed. But if the parent could see the future perfectly like god and knew that the child would be mutilated and live the rest of their life in torment from their injuries due to using the car the loving parent wouldn't lend them the car. Once you add perfect knowledge of the future you are simply cruel if you knowingly allow someone into a situation where they are guaranteed to be harmed.

>>10518

god creates someone evil, said evil person suffers thats what being evil is suffering. these people were created through creation, from the beginnings when things were set into motion until now. these peoples failures are all interconnected and the ascension to heaven for the good is contingent on the descent into hell for the bad. saying that god making a bad person bad makes god bad is to say that bad shouldnt exist thats all you guys failure to understand the necessity of evil for the experience of free will

>>10523

those who burn in hell are not children of god they are satan spawn

>>10526

You're arguing that the act of creation was an unloving act, because suffering exists here and in the afterlife. Is that right?

That's really just a value judgment by you.

Given that creation exists, and supposing for the sake of argument God exists as described in the Bible, it is logically conceivable that His status as all-loving is maintained and that your judgment of the morality of creating even though suffering occurs is mistaken.

>>10528

Ah, so you believe Satan has the same power of creation as God? Two equal gods, that's rather un-christian of you.

>>10529

Everything is a judgement but yes, in my opinion torturing someone for all of eternity (maybe TRILLIONS of years) because they didn't believe in you but were otherwise a good person isn't even a marginal thing. It is clearly evil because it is so horrifically out of proportion.

The Muslim and Bahai sects that believe hell is temporary (until the scales are balanced) is at least something that is justifiable but forever? That's just unrestrained evil to create someone knowing that they would end up with that kind of horrible existence and unreasonable punishment.

>>10526

You're saying God should only have created people who chose A and no one who chose B. If no one chooses B, then only A is an option. If we only have one option, there is no free will. So yes, it is a matter of removing free will.

>>10517

Thanks for being the only person worth talking to here

>>10522

Haha posted funny face man so Im right

Blow it out your ass cunt

>>10534

Interesting argument, friend. I guess you've "won". How does that make you feel?

>>10518

>That's the definition of an evil and cruel god.

Unfortunately, you wouldn't even be able to make such a distinction between "good" and "evil" if it weren't for God. However, it is your choice how you assign those labels. So as you can imagine, assigning "evil" to God isn't something that's likely to bode well for you.

>>10533

No problem, it is a very serious topic, and should be treated as such. As this is a Christian board, I would have hoped Christians here could maintain a degree of cordiality and kind-heartedness when talking to others, especially non-Christians who are presenting their grievances with certain aspects of the faith.

>>10534

>Blow it out your ass cunt

I cant say I appreciate this sort of thing though OP and you shouldnt expect level headed responses when you talk like this - cordiality is definitely a two way street. Having said that I would not expect the Christians here to talk like this, but seeing as this does not include you I cant hold you to the standard.

>>10531

> in my opinion torturing someone for all of eternity (maybe TRILLIONS of years) because they didn't believe in you but were otherwise a good person isn't even a marginal thing. It is clearly evil because it is so horrifically out of proportion.

Then you're misunderstanding what hell even is. It's not like you'll be getting beat repeatedly by bullies, it's more like an unending self-inflicted depression because you refuse to change your perspective on something. Read 'The Great Divorce' by C S Lewis if you want to understand the concept better. Vid related.

>>10531

>(eternal damnation) because they didn't believe in you but were otherwise a good person isn't even a marginal thing. It is clearly evil

You're mistaking the Christian conception of the relationship between God and man. In the Biblical picture of damnation, the damned are there because they deserve it for sinning against God. The saved are not damned because they accepted the free gift of salvation after God condescended to us in grace.

You are not a "good person", you are a wretched sinner. God is perfectly good, any sin is infinitely evil by relation.

Again, you're still just importing your conception of what's good and what's not. I'm arguing that the Christian position is consistent, even if it doesn't align with your presupposed moral code.

>>10531

Not this dumb meme again

https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/the-river-of-fire-kalomiros/

Also, no. Muslims believe that hell is eternal. Maybe you should not limit your knowledge with internet memes.

>>10505

If a being created two things whose sums is good, then that being is good.

Which I'm not arguing that God DIRECTLY created evil either. Only that he necessarily knew it would exist and come forth from his creation.

>>10564

>If a being created two things whose sums is good, then that being is good.

I would be interested to know exactly what you mean when you talk about good. It a concept notorious for having such a huge disparity in meaning amongst philosophers.

>>10566

Ultimately, God determines what is good.

However, good means "that which eliminates suffering, physical and spiritual."

The commandments God gives us reduce our physical suffering, and following them is good.

Believing on the Lord Jesus reduces our spiritual suffering by granting us an eternal place in Heaven.

I think all philosophers would agree that "good" from the human perspective would mean a lack of suffering.

>>10453

Him knowing where you end up doesn't mean you didn't choose to be there in the first place. You have the choice to be righteous or be a faggot. It says multiple times that it grieves him to send people to hell, but they made the choice to reject truth (and by extension him) so ultimately it is perfectly just. You seem to think God's primary attribute is "Love" whereas the God of scripture is one that's more interested in Justice and Truth, to the point he describes himself as Logic incarnate.

>>10568

>You seem to think God's primary attribute is "Love"…

Except that it is. God IS love

And such legalistic autistic attitude is one of the reasons that caused the weakening of Western Christendom

>>10637

You're going to have two perspectives here, no matter what. Good from God's perspective, and good from the human perspective.

God simply made everything for his own pleasure. He saw nothingness as "not good," and creation, as "good."

We, as created beings, cannot necessarily define how the universe *should* be. Only the Creator can decide how things *should* be.

That being said, we have the Bible, which says God does not want us to suffer. And in the Bible, we have God's commandments, which, if followed, reduce suffering. Therefore, I can deduce that God's Good includes the reduction of suffering.