Why Did God Have to Make Evil?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Erm, that's three choices.

Otherwise, keep rockin' the logic.  

Oooops....fixed it...thanks.

I'm going to leave this topic alone for now. It'll be interesting to see how Ad and voter reconcile this. I don't see how it is possible, but I'm sure they will find a way.

I'd say you've pretty much nailed it to the cross anyway (which is the main reason I've spectated and not posted much; no need to).

[Gawen]

Erm, that's three choices.

Otherwise, keep rockin' the logic.  

Oooops....fixed it...thanks.

I'm going to leave this topic alone for now. It'll be interesting to see how Ad and voter reconcile this. I don't see how it is possible, but I'm sure they will find a way.

I'd say you've pretty much nailed it to the cross anyway (which is the main reason I've spectated and not posted much; no need to).

*wicked evil grin*

It's why I chose my signature and avatar. I don't shoot from the hip (pray and spray). Set that bugger up on  a tripod, take deliberate aim and then give 'em the whole belt.

Thanks, though, for the compliment.

[Gawen]

9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?

Jer. 23:24: "Can a man hide himself in secret places so that I cannot see him? says the LORD. Do I not fill heaven and earth? says the LORD."

[TheJackel]

9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?

Jer. 23:24: "Can a man hide himself in secret places so that I cannot see him? says the LORD. Do I not fill heaven and earth? says the LORD."

That would be an argument of Solipsism However to counter that:

Prov 15:3/ Ps 139:7-10/ Job 34:22,21
God is everywhere present, sees and knows all things
God is not everywhere present, neither sees nor knows all things

This is a fun one too [/b]

[Voter]

Erm, that's three choices.

Otherwise, keep rockin' the logic.  

Oooops....fixed it...thanks.

I'm going to leave this topic alone for now. It'll be interesting to see how Ad and voter reconcile this. I don't see how it is possible, but I'm sure they will find a way.

I already have. Repeating an argument doesn't fortify it. Neither does patting each other on the back.

[Gawen]

Erm, that's three choices.

Otherwise, keep rockin' the logic.  

Oooops....fixed it...thanks.

I'm going to leave this topic alone for now. It'll be interesting to see how Ad and voter reconcile this. I don't see how it is possible, but I'm sure they will find a way.

I already have.

Not to anyone's satisfaction except your own. Not a good way to win converts. And here I would have thought the holy spirit would have spoken through you to make it plain beyond belief how the bible says one doesn't have free will and voter says one does have free will.

[TheJackel]

Erm, that's three choices.

Otherwise, keep rockin' the logic.  

Anyways, this was a debate and was never intended to offend your beliefs vs debate them. Cheers mate!  

[AnimatedDirt]

Again intentionally ignoring the definition of Omniscience.

I have already and completely debunked your assertion; that omniscience precludes freewill.
It is wrong and cannot stand even on layman's terms.

Knowing the end infinitely does not remove the freewill choice given to choose.

Example with 4 words I can imagine countless iterations of the same thing, and develop an entire folklore, and ideological construct around it:

One
Eyed
Green
Monster

Produce ancient books/letters claiming such as there is a "Bible" to substanciate God and I'll take you more serious.
Without this, you're green god IS AS YOU SAY MINE IS, just an existence in your mind.

The problem is, it can't under the rules of Omniscience.

Rules?  LOL  You, a finite being is proposing rules for something infinite?

Your argument is as follows: It is Omniscience, but I don't acknowledge that in his omniscience, GOD knew Lucfier would do what he did

That, sir, is either you twisting my words to establish your own or simply unable to read and/or comprehend because of your bias.  I totally and completely do not deny God's omniscience...in fact I've stated that in His omniscience, God knew before hand that Lucifer would do/think what he did.  The fact is that Lucifer chose on his own to think...it was of his own making, and not Gods because of freewill God Himself gives/allows.

[strike:31ydb5pa]Get your arguments against me and omniscience straight plz.[/strike:31ydb5pa]

Edit: On second thought, that sounds rude.  Apologies.

[Voter]

Not to anyone's satisfaction except your own.

If I don't get a response, I conclude it's to my opponents satisfaction (or consternation). Sorry if I missed a response. Also note that this isn't tag-team, and I'm not reading Jackel's stuff.

Not a good way to win converts.

I'm not trying to convert you.

And here I would have thought the holy spirit would have spoken through you to make it plain beyond belief how the bible says one doesn't have free will and voter says one does have free will.

I didn't argue in favor of free will, except to note that conclusions depend on definitions. Rather, I pointed out that, if you conclude that omniscience precludes free will, the greater argument - that God is unjust - fails. Again, sorry if I missed a response to that point, and if so please repeat it.

[Voter]

Thought there'd be a response by now. Let me repeat the argument. If you define omniscience such that God determines each person's thoughts and actions, and define free will based on possible alternatives, then yes, you can charge that omniscience precludes free will.

However, recall the main argument. People get so hung up on free will, they forget why it's important in the first place. The Bible doesn't come out and say that we have it, so it's not a direct Biblical defense. The point is that most people believe it's unjust to punish someone for an action if the person didn't have sufficient free will to choose to commit or not commit the act. So, critics think that if they establish that God's omniscience precludes man's free will, God is unjust for punishing man.

However, note that there is an unstated presumption in this argument - that man has a right to justice. This needs to be supported. Once on another site I posed the question, What gives something a right to justice? on its own. While opinions varied in detail, they all were based on some sort of autonomy. But, if God determines our every smallest thought, we are not autonomous, and sop we have no right to justice. So, the argument is self-defeating.

Similarly, the argument that omniscience precludes free will can usually be extended to god himself. So, if god has no free will, you have no right to judge him as unjust.

Another response takes omniscience a step further. Suppose omniscience precludes free will. OK as far as it goes, but wouldn't an omniscient god know what your life would be in the absence of an omniscient god? If so, he can justly judge you on that basis. Or a corollary: an omnipotent, omniscient god could determine what we would be like without an omniscient god, and then in his omnipotence create that world.

Then there are the time travel analogies. Suppose there is no god and we have free will. I invent a time machine and go back to last Saturday with videotapes of last Sunday's football games. I keep them to myself. Does the mere existence of those tapes now preclude the players' free will?

And the definition of free will is important. The critic usually uses a definition based on possible alternatives, but you can also define it based on mental processes.

If you've read up on this topic, then you're aware of an interesting scenario that blends the alternatives and processes approaches. Suppose I'm an evil neuroscientist and want to kill Fred. I know that Alan also hates Fred and Alan owns a gun and will have opportunity. So, I proposition Alan to kill Fred, and he agrees. But, I don't trust that, so I drug Alan and implant a chip in his brain that gives me control over his actions. I'll watch him at the opportune time. If he kills Fred on his own, I do nothing. If he changes his mind, I flip the switch and he kills Fred anyway. In this scenario, Alan has no possible alternatives - he will kill Fred. But, is his moral culpability the same either way?

[Voter]

Another point - is an omniscient/omnipotent god necessarily continuously omniscient? I.e., can he turn omniscience off as he chooses? If so, then there are more scenarios to consider.

[AnimatedDirt]

Another point - is an omniscient/omnipotent god necessarily continuously omniscient? I.e., can he turn omniscience off as he chooses? If so, then there are more scenarios to consider.

If it is by nature, I would say He can't turn it off.  By that scenario one could conclude He could simply turn off His Righteousness and omni-Judgeness and simply wave a wand and deem all perfect.

It is therefore my conclusion that God cannot simply turn on and off that which makes Him God.

[LegendarySandwich]

Another point - is an omniscient/omnipotent god necessarily continuously omniscient? I.e., can he turn omniscience off as he chooses? If so, then there are more scenarios to consider.

If it is by nature, I would say He can't turn it off.  By that scenario one could conclude He could simply turn off His Righteousness and omni-Judgeness and simply wave a wand and deem all perfect.

It is therefore my conclusion that God cannot simply turn on and off that which makes Him God.

Then he isn't omnipotent?

And, Voter, your argument fails -- because evil is evil, no matter if we have free will or not. Any omnipotent, omniscient, good god that would purposefully subject his beings to pain and suffering, especially on this magnitude, is evil, even if he's a puppet master (in this case, the master of puppets).

[youtube:3kvgum6w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_z-hEyVQDRA[/youtube:3kvgum6w]

[AnimatedDirt]

Then he isn't omnipotent?

I suppose you are able to turn off your humanity?

[LegendarySandwich]

Then he isn't omnipotent?

I suppose you are able to turn off your humanity?

No. And you know why I'm not able to? I'm not omnipotent.