Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

sign...

At 10/9/07 06:35 AM, pimpbiscuit wrote: Honestly, what does god have to do with free will?
Our brains are programmed to do things to keep us alive. They are also programmed to defend yourself, whether or not you're doing something malicious. Erasing someone from your mind is like trying to fly without an airplane, it can't happen. So this whole arguement thing is kind of ridiculous, since God has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Yes it does. According to the theist, God created reality and logic. (indeed, often that is used as an argument for why he is able to break reality and logic when we are debating his existence). If he created this world, and all things in it, then he, at some point, chose to let evil exist.

This is often explained by that evil must exist for us to have any alternative for good. However, what I'm asking is this:

Not all evil is permitted. I cannot erase you with my mind. I cannot zap your life away with my hands. I cannot go back in time and prevent your birth.

The list could go on and on about the evil things God has chosen to not make possible. As we can see, not all evil is needed for free will to exist. These evils don't exist, and yet here we are with what appears to be free will. However, not all of the really nasty evil things are prevented. Murder and rape is sadly part of this world. Why would a loving God allow these things to exist, when he could have blocked them, just like he did life zapping?

At 10/9/07 07:20 AM, poxpower wrote: But couldn't you also say that giving us even ONE choice qualifies as free will?

He couldn't have given us all the possible choices without making us omnipotent and omniscient like himself, but if you take the definition of free will to the other extreme and assume that simply having one simple choice at one point qualifies us as free, then it works.

If I can choose between eating a banana and an apple, do I not have some form of free will?

It is. However, why did God allow the option "Go out and murder people and destroy people's lives" to be possible?

I can't destory the earth. It isn't with in my power. Yet, it is within my power to destroy a human life. Why would a loving God give me such an ability? In what way could it possible benefit anything at all?

At 10/9/07 07:36 AM, Drakim wrote:

I can't destory the earth. It isn't with in my power. Yet, it is within my power to destroy a human life. Why would a loving God give me such an ability? In what way could it possible benefit anything at all?

Never said he was loving.

At 10/9/07 08:57 AM, poxpower wrote:

At 10/9/07 07:36 AM, Drakim wrote:

I can't destory the earth. It isn't with in my power. Yet, it is within my power to destroy a human life. Why would a loving God give me such an ability? In what way could it possible benefit anything at all?

Never said he was loving.

Oh, okay, sorry.

I assumed the Christian God, who is supposed to be all loving, for this argument. This argument falls short unless we are talking about a all-loving God.

At 10/9/07 06:16 AM, EndGameOmega wrote:

At 10/9/07 05:57 AM, Tomsan wrote:

if god is omnipotent and all knowing, as well as the past as the future, can he then alter his own destiny?

No. If something is... just one huge mess of flogic (false logic).

yes so exactly the point I am making down here..

if one knows his own future one can change it meaning it didnt really knew its own future. Or when you state he can only travel in his own set future (not able to change it) meaning he is not omnipotent.

More or less correct.

yes I know so why did you just put this argument in other words?

At 10/9/07 06:20 AM, Drakim wrote:

Erasing people with your mind is not a physical thing, that's why you can't do it.
God decides what is physical and not. He could have made rape collide with the laws of physics, and let erasing people with your mind be a natural thing like jumping. Remember, he is God.

No I dont agree, he chose to let us live under the law of natural rules to which we have to oblige (gravity etc), being able to move the way we can icw free choice automatically allows us to rape.

obviously he could restrain us from being able to move.

Preventing rape would stop sex, and doom the human race
Yet again, we are talking about God. It should be well within God's power to make it simply impossible to have sex unless both people agree.

not if there is free choice like so many have told you, the argument still counts.

Rape can't be prevented in the same way as mind erasing because the mechanics are different
Yet again, God. Omnipotent. By definition, nothing can be too hard for him.

We're limited by our physical forms
God defines what is physical and what is not. He could have made rape and murder impossibilities.

I think the free choice argument still counts. god created us to love, not to have. By givin us a free choice he could love us, but this also led to the ability to do bad. Taking away the possibility to sin, means takin away free choice. one who cannot sin has no choice, so that would make us unloveable.
But I think more people have sort of said the same before me.

Free will is just about thinking, not action

Thinking is an action too. By thinking of a math problem, I use energy of my body. Thinking also changes your mind slowly, making your person. So, it isn't a "non-physical" action that you are hinting at. And, we do act our other actions, such as jumping, based on what we have been thinking.

agreed I dont see how this would backup any of your statements though.

Tomsan, you seem to be saying that some of the things I suggest is beyond what God could have done. for example, such as making rape impossible without making sex impossible.

Remember, God is supposed to be omnipotent, not just very powerful. There should not exist a single thing that he cannot do. Saying that rape is a byproduct of sex doesn't make sense with this in thought, since God should have no trouble limiting rape without limiting sex, due to being omnipotent.

At 10/9/07 06:20 AM, Drakim wrote: Erasing people with your mind is not a physical thing, that's why you can't do it.
God decides what is physical and not. He could have made rape collide with the laws of physics, and let erasing people with your mind be a natural thing like jumping. Remember, he is God.

I guess he could of, but he didn't. And I assume he didn't because people need to breed to insure life continues and decided not to give us the ability to erase people with our minds because it's a stupid pointless skill to have. All life would have failed to exist the second an ability like this was born into a person like Hitler or Manson. God, being all knowing, probably realized this and that's why we don't have such a stupid, stupid, power and I'm a little bit concerned that you're upset over it. Is there someone you want to erase? If you really really want to, you could kill them. Free Will allows that.

Preventing rape would stop sex, and doom the human race
Yet again, we are talking about God. It should be well within God's power to make it simply impossible to have sex unless both people agree.

Then we wouldn't have free will. If we can do it, we can choose when to do it and how to do it... even if it means taking it against anothers will.

We're limited by our physical forms
God defines what is physical and what is not. He could have made rape and murder impossibilities.

And God did defines what is physical and what is not. And you are existing in it now. I have to be able to kill things otherwise I'd never be able to eat. If I can kill one thing (A plant or a deer) then I can kill all things (including people). Once again, Free Will. This is a very simply concept that you don't seem to understand.

If God made laws where we could only do certain things to certain other things when all parties agree it wouldn't be free will as there is nothing free about being governed on how to act all hours of the day. We woudln't be alive, we'd all be puppets and that's not what God wanted.

On the other hand, I have this crazy feeling that if rape was impossible, you'd be sitting here right now saying "If there is a God and he gave us Free Will, why can't I have sex with my neighbor against her will?".

Free will is just about thinking, not action

Since when? I can do whatever I want... free will says that I can shove a fork in a light socket. Last time I checked, that was an action... not a thought.

At 10/9/07 11:36 AM, iEatFood wrote:

At 10/9/07 06:20 AM, Drakim wrote: Erasing people with your mind is not a physical thing, that's why you can't do it.
God decides what is physical and not. He could have made rape collide with the laws of physics, and let erasing people with your mind be a natural thing like jumping. Remember, he is God.

I guess he could of, but he didn't. And I assume he didn't because people need to breed to insure life continues and decided not to give us the ability to erase people with our minds because it's a stupid pointless skill to have.

And it's not pointless to have the ability to rape?

All life would have failed to exist the second an ability like this was born into a person like Hitler or Manson. God, being all knowing, probably realized this and that's why we don't have such a stupid, stupid, power and I'm a little bit concerned that you're upset over it.

Yet, God decided to make it possible for people to rape each other, and he even made it so that some are stronger than others, making it impossible to avoid rape in some situations (such as being a kid).

You seem to confuse rape and sex. I don't see why God couldn't make rape simply not be part of reality. There just wouldn't be such a thing as rape, without erasing sex too. Are you saying God is unable to do such a thing?

Preventing rape would stop sex, and doom the human race
Yet again, we are talking about God. It should be well within God's power to make it simply impossible to have sex unless both people agree.

Then we wouldn't have free will. If we can do it, we can choose when to do it and how to do it... even if it means taking it against anothers will.

I asked this before. Why does preventing rape limit our free will, but preventing things like mind erasing does not?

We're limited by our physical forms
God defines what is physical and what is not. He could have made rape and murder impossibilities.

And God did defines what is physical and what is not. And you are existing in it now. I have to be able to kill things otherwise I'd never be able to eat. If I can kill one thing (A plant or a deer) then I can kill all things (including people). Once again, Free Will. This is a very simply concept that you don't seem to understand.

No, I'm sorry to say it, but I think you are simply unable to understand my argument, and therefore it seems very stupid to you. What you are arguing against is not what I'm trying to say. You have your own version of my argument that you are debating against, and it isn't correct.

On the other hand, I have this crazy feeling that if rape was impossible, you'd be sitting here right now saying "If there is a God and he gave us Free Will, why can't I have sex with my neighbor against her will?".

Just like I'm now asking why I can't erase people with my mind? He made that impossible, and nothing bad happened to my free will.

Free will is just about thinking, not action

Since when? I can do whatever I want... free will says that I can shove a fork in a light socket. Last time I checked, that was an action... not a thought.

Lol, actualy, it was somebody else who said that argument, I was just repeating it to refute it, as I didn't agree with it.

At 10/9/07 10:25 AM, Drakim wrote:

Saying that rape is a byproduct of sex doesn't make sense with this in thought, since God should have no trouble limiting rape without limiting sex, due to being omnipotent.

No I said that rape is a byproduct of free choice (I was pretty darn clear)

At 10/9/07 02:47 PM, Tomsan wrote:

At 10/9/07 10:25 AM, Drakim wrote:

Saying that rape is a byproduct of sex doesn't make sense with this in thought, since God should have no trouble limiting rape without limiting sex, due to being omnipotent.

No I said that rape is a byproduct of free choice (I was pretty darn clear)

Why can't God prevent that byproduct? Is he that weak? Is he simply unable to create a world were sex exists but rape does not?

Perhaps God has no view on right or wrong but only creation and existance. OR maybe it was Gods will to create good and evil so that man can divuldge himself in both.

Maybe we're just a test. This omnipotent god decided to create a race in his image as im sure the bible states. Maybe he wanted to toy with life. But, if we were made in his image (not just physical but, mental and ability wise) we would be able to create our own worlds and destroy his. So, he limited our power.
Maybe too much, maybe not enough. Maybe hes left us and made a new world with the expiriance he gained from our evolution and culture and Humanity was left to ponder its own existance in the dark.

I wish people would stop trying to debate how we existed. It's clearly a matter of people giving their opinions, like cats are better than dogs, or blue is your favourite colour.

People are never going to know how and why they came into existence. It is a complete waste of time to debate it.

At 10/9/07 04:33 PM, Mr-Money wrote: I wish people would stop trying to debate how we existed. It's clearly a matter of people giving their opinions, like cats are better than dogs, or blue is your favourite colour.

People are never going to know how and why they came into existence. It is a complete waste of time to debate it.

How do you know this? How did you become so omnipotent in the subject that you know nothing will ever change no matter how much time passes? There might come up convincing evidence in the future, or something of those lines.

At 10/9/07 03:52 PM, Drakim wrote: Why can't God prevent that byproduct? Is he that weak? Is he simply unable to create a world were sex exists but rape does not?

I'll admit right now that I have only read a miniscule portion of this thread, but what would the point of Hell and Heaven be if God had already made all forms of sin and causing harm impossible? I'm not saying that I necessarily agree with what I'm about to write but from a theological standpoint (from what I know of the Mu'tazilah standpoint to be exact, although I don't know that much of it, I'm just throwing it out here to see what responses it'll get), each man or soul or whatever is given a mind, desires, a basic conception of good and evil and a body which he can use to carry out whatever sick, depraved act he desires or can think of at birth. When he dies he will be judged according to his actions. If a man is handsome then he will judged negatively if he falls into vanity and if a man is ugly he will be judged negatively if he becomes scornful and jealous because of it. A man who rapes will be judged negatively and a woman who is raped will be judged according to how she responded to the experience, if she encourages a relative to kill one of the rapist's family members for example then she will also be judged negatively. God or his angels will probably take the circumstances into account (compensation), then again, only He knows how He judges.

The point is that God allows evil, including the possibility to inflict harm, because without it, there would be little point in testing people and rewarding or punishing people on the day of Judgement or immediately after they die. It's even stronger than that, He must have willingly created the possibility to commit evil at some point since all creation must ultimately be traced back to him. Whether that makes him truly benevolent is up for debate, one could argue that restraining someone to the point where you force him to live his life exactly to how you planned he would is not very benevolent either, since it curtails the most basic of his freedoms. Some religions believe that some people are exempt, like little kids and the mentally handicapped. People who are always, from pubescence until their deaths, unable to judge properly might have been put on earth just to gauge how their neighbours respond to them and after they die, these neighbours are judged for those responses. In the case of the conversion-based Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Islam and whatever offshoots that they've produced) might say that people who have never been exposed to the divine revelations might also be exempted, I have no idea where they go when they die according to these doctrines. Islam maintains that God sent every tribe or nation a messenger at one point (16:36).

To each his own, of course, everyone can believe whatever he wants. But I'm not convinced of the logical contradiction or absurdity in having a omnipotent, benevolent God that allows rape. Life is a test of strength (can someone prevail in the battle between resisting what he knows isn't right and his urges) and the possibility of raping or getting raped is simply part of that test.

At 10/9/07 11:49 AM, Drakim wrote: You seem to confuse rape and sex. I don't see why God couldn't make rape simply not be part of reality. There just wouldn't be such a thing as rape, without erasing sex too. Are you saying God is unable to do such a thing?

If we can't rape, we can't have sex. it's that simple. You can't say it's pausable to stick your penis in a vagina but it's impossible to stick your penis in a vagina without creating a paradox that would probably implode the universe.

Either I can put my penis in a vagina or I can't. If I can do it when you let me, free will states that I can do it any time I want. And sometimes some people want to put their peins in a vagina when other people don't want them too.

The problem is here, you're confusing free will with magic.

I asked this before. Why does preventing rape limit our free will, but preventing things like mind erasing does not?

Because I can have sex. I can't create anything with my mind, nor can I destroy anything with my mind. That's not to say that it can't happen though. Maybe in a billion years man will develop that power through evolution. Once again, I'd like to refrence the cartoon character I created a few responses back.

I can create him however I want. Just because I don't create him to look or act a certain way doesn't mean that I don't exist. It's just not how I decided to draw him. But, if I so choose, I can always change him later if I see fit.

Just like I'm now asking why I can't erase people with my mind? He made that impossible, and nothing bad happened to my free will.

Because erasing people with your mind isn't a neccessary skill for survival of life nor does it fit in with overall laws of physics creted with universe. Sex is... therefor I can rape. Killing is, therefor I can murder. Running is, therefor I can run off a cliff. Building is, therefor I can build a gun and shoot you.

God created everything, including the laws of physics. He did so because this is how he wanted it. Mind power doesn't fit in with those laws so it's therfor impossible for us in the physical realm. It's really that simple.

At 10/9/07 06:27 PM, iEatFood wrote:

At 10/9/07 11:49 AM, Drakim wrote: You seem to confuse rape and sex. I don't see why God couldn't make rape simply not be part of reality. There just wouldn't be such a thing as rape, without erasing sex too. Are you saying God is unable to do such a thing?

If we can't rape, we can't have sex. it's that simple.

Well, for instance, God could have designed vaginas to have some kind of defense mechanism that would secrete some chemical substance at the woman's will, which would immediately make the man's penis to go limp or make him lose his sexual drive. Women could use that whenever they doesn't consent with the sexual act. And for good measure, the assholes of both men and women could have a similar gland. Or anything like that. God could even strike a lighting to your penis every time you try to have sex with someone against their will.

In short, God could have easily designed a world where sex is possible, but rape is not. You just have to use your imagination. Otherwise you're suggesting that God is not omnipotent.

At 10/9/07 06:27 PM, iEatFood wrote:

At 10/9/07 11:49 AM, Drakim wrote: You seem to confuse rape and sex. I don't see why God couldn't make rape simply not be part of reality. There just wouldn't be such a thing as rape, without erasing sex too. Are you saying God is unable to do such a thing?

If we can't rape, we can't have sex. it's that simple. You can't say it's pausable to stick your penis in a vagina but it's impossible to stick your penis in a vagina without creating a paradox that would probably implode the universe.

Either I can put my penis in a vagina or I can't. If I can do it when you let me, free will states that I can do it any time I want. And sometimes some people want to put their peins in a vagina when other people don't want them too.

LOL, so, you are actualy saying God cannot do this. God does not hold the power to stop rape without stopping sex.

I think you need to think a little about what it means to be omnipotent. By definition, you can do anything. Absolutely anything. To say that "without rape, there cannot be sex, it's that simple", you are effectivly saying that God isn't omnipotent, making him more of a very powerful being rather than a God.

The problem is here, you're confusing free will with magic.

No, it's you who think in such simple terms. God, if he wishes, could make rape an impossiblity as a matter of reality. It doesn't matter if you can't imagene how it would work. He is freaking God. He supposivly made the laws of logic. 1 + 1 = 2 is because of him. He invented humans, every action, every object, and so on. He invented sex, and he used whatever power he had to make sex part of reality. It would absolutely be no biggie for him to prevent rape from existing because of sex existing.

You are thinking in straight lines. "If this happens, then that must also happen". God is omnipotent. He can do whatever he want, however he want, whenever he want. He doesn't need to follow the same limited thinking you have. You are arguing that rape cannot be prevented as a matter of the laws of reality, but you don't see that God made the laws, and can bend them however he wish. That is, if he is omnipotent, which most Christians belive from what I've heard.

(Talking about the Christian God here, ofcourse. Some other Gods are quite limited)

God created everything, including the laws of physics. He did so because this is how he wanted it. Mind power doesn't fit in with those laws so it's therfor impossible for us in the physical realm. It's really that simple.

I have a theory. You seem to do what I'd like to call "selective thinking". What if God has prevented something like I'm now saying?

Let's say there is something called "urbing". Urbing exists because of we being able to run, just like rape exists because we are able to have sex. However, you do not know about this action called urbing, because God has blocked it completely out of reality. He chose to not let it exist at all.

Now, since he has removed it, you never knew about such an action. And therefore you still think that it's impossible for God to prevent some actions. Had God taken away rape from reality just like he did urbing, we would be arguing over something else, like stealing, and you would be arguing that God cannot stop stealing, because it needs to exist in order for us to give away stuff.

At 10/9/07 06:02 PM, lapis wrote:

At 10/9/07 03:52 PM, Drakim wrote: Why can't God prevent that byproduct? Is he that weak? Is he simply unable to create a world were sex exists but rape does not?

I'll admit right now that I have only read a miniscule portion of this thread, but what would the point of Hell and Heaven be if God had already made all forms of sin and causing harm impossible? I'm not saying that I necessarily agree with what I'm about to write but from a theological standpoint (from what I know of the Mu'tazilah standpoint to be exact, although I don't know that much of it, I'm just throwing it out here to see what responses it'll get), each man or soul or whatever is given a mind, desires, a basic conception of good and evil and a body which he can use to carry out whatever sick, depraved act he desires or can think of at birth. When he dies he will be judged according to his actions. If a man is handsome then he will judged negatively if he falls into vanity and if a man is ugly he will be judged negatively if he becomes scornful and jealous because of it. A man who rapes will be judged negatively and a woman who is raped will be judged according to how she responded to the experience, if she encourages a relative to kill one of the rapist's family members for example then she will also be judged negatively. God or his angels will probably take the circumstances into account (compensation), then again, only He knows how He judges.

The point is that God allows evil, including the possibility to inflict harm, because without it, there would be little point in testing people and rewarding or punishing people on the day of Judgement or immediately after they die. It's even stronger than that, He must have willingly created the possibility to commit evil at some point since all creation must ultimately be traced back to him. Whether that makes him truly benevolent is up for debate, one could argue that restraining someone to the point where you force him to live his life exactly to how you planned he would is not very benevolent either, since it curtails the most basic of his freedoms. Some religions believe that some people are exempt, like little kids and the mentally handicapped. People who are always, from pubescence until their deaths, unable to judge properly might have been put on earth just to gauge how their neighbours respond to them and after they die, these neighbours are judged for those responses. In the case of the conversion-based Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Islam and whatever offshoots that they've produced) might say that people who have never been exposed to the divine revelations might also be exempted, I have no idea where they go when they die according to these doctrines. Islam maintains that God sent every tribe or nation a messenger at one point (16:36).

To each his own, of course, everyone can believe whatever he wants. But I'm not convinced of the logical contradiction or absurdity in having a omnipotent, benevolent God that allows rape. Life is a test of strength (can someone prevail in the battle between resisting what he knows isn't right and his urges) and the possibility of raping or getting raped is simply part of that test.

I like your post. It brings in new points.

You see, we are sort of arguing the same thing. I'm taking a sort of devils advocate here to stir up a debate.

The real point behind this whole post isn't to say that God doesn't exist, but rather, that he isn't an omnipotent all-loving God. You see, I find it hard to belive that an all-loving God would want to filter out the "bad people" like you speak of.

Just look at what Jesus said. He seemed more like an all-loving guy, talking about loving your enemies and turning the other cheek. The God you desribe sounds more like a "strick but just" kinda guy, but not an all loving one.

I'm not saying that an all-loving God would accept anything no matter what, but when we look at the conspept of heaven and hell, it isn't very forgiving. Once you go to hell, that's it. No more chances, no more tries. You are forever damned, no matter how hard you cry and scream. Does this fit with the image of an all-loving God?

Well, for instance, God could have designed vaginas to have some kind of defense mechanism that would secrete some chemical substance at the woman's will, which would immediately make the man's penis to go limp or make him lose his sexual drive. Women could use that whenever they doesn't consent with the sexual act. And for good measure, the assholes of both men and women could have a similar gland. Or anything like that. God could even strike a lighting to your penis every time you try to have sex with someone against their will.

This is pretty much exactly what I was thinking. It's actually a really funny thought :D

Didn't someone make a device that was like... vagina teeth? Like, if a guy raped you, the thingy would slice his dick up and then be stuck to it?

At 10/10/07 03:09 AM, Drakim wrote: Just look at what Jesus said. He seemed more like an all-loving guy, talking about loving your enemies and turning the other cheek. The God you desribe sounds more like a "strick but just" kinda guy, but not an all loving one.

You have to love the sinners and hope that they will repent and better themselves. If they sincerely regret a misdeed and ask for forgiveness then they will not be punished for those actions, but if they don't then they might never see Paradise. Jesus also said something along those lines: Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

God is benevolent in the sense that he rewards the good and punishes the evil but he's technically not all-loving because he does not love sin. But he allows us to commit them because free will, the ability to do whatever your body and circumstances allow, is the greatest gift that He could have given us. Or that's what I think religious people say.

I'm not saying that an all-loving God would accept anything no matter what, but when we look at the conspept of heaven and hell, it isn't very forgiving.

Heh, repenting is easy when you've just heard what your punishment (Hell) entails. The struggle is in the here and now, to do good works and obey God even though you're not certain about the final consequences of any transgressions on your part, though you've been warned.

As a sidenote, Hell does not always have to be permanent. For example, there's scripture that mentions seven layers of Hell and it might be possible to move to a less unpleasant layer or even Paradise after some period of time. George Sale, for example, mentions that, according to Islam (or rather the main Islamic school of thought in his time, the 18th century), believers that did not repent for all their sins are sent to the first layer but will eventually leave it and go to Paradise (As to the punishmenet of the wicked (...)). It is also written that everyone, even the believers must see Hell temporarily. So maybe not all is lost (forever) if you're sent to Hell for minor transgressions. In Christianity Hell might be permanent, though.

At 10/10/07 09:40 AM, lapis wrote: As a sidenote, Hell does not always have to be permanent. For example, there's scripture that mentions seven layers of Hell and it might be possible to move to a less unpleasant layer or even Paradise after some period of time. George Sale, for example, mentions that, according to Islam (or rather the main Islamic school of thought in his time, the 18th century), believers that did not repent for all their sins are sent to the first layer but will eventually leave it and go to Paradise (As to the punishmenet of the wicked (...)). It is also written that everyone, even the believers must see Hell temporarily. So maybe not all is lost (forever) if you're sent to Hell for minor transgressions. In Christianity Hell might be permanent, though.

An very interesting concept.

However, as I said before. The idea of an all-loving and forgiving God does not fit with a permanent hell. It just doesn't make sense to call something very forgiving when it only forgives for a limited time. In fact, if I was to sin, and die of a car crash 10 seconds later, then all the Christian God would have offered me is still ten seconds. Should I not seek forgiveness within those 10 seconds, then I'm forever damned.

At 10/10/07 03:00 AM, Drakim wrote: LOL, so, you are actualy saying God cannot do this.

God can do whatever he wanted... he just didn't. And just because he didn't do something doesn't mean that he doesn't exist.

I went to your webpage Last Breath. I noticed you had a blue circle in the top left corner. Why? Why didn't you make that circle red? You could have, but you didn't... and since I like red more then blue, that's proof to me that you don't exist because if you really where the creator, you would have made that circle red.

We can do this all day. Go to the page, change the circle to red. I'm going to turn right around and say, I hate circles... why isn't a character of somesort... like Newgrounds has Pico of P-Bot. And when you design a mascot, I'm going to say it's an ugly mascot and if you really where the creator you would have designed a better one.

Just because you didn't do something, doesn't mean that you can't, you won't, or that you don't exist. For all I know that blue circle could be something important to you or part of a bigger website design that just hasn't been finished yet. When somebody asks me "why is it a blue circle?", the only answer I can give is... I don't know, I'm not Drakim. Only you are Drakim and only you can answer that question because only you know why you created it the way you did. So if you want to know why you can't erase people with your mind, ask God.

Oh wait, you can't, because you don't believe he exists.

At 10/10/07 11:07 AM, iEatFood wrote:

At 10/10/07 03:00 AM, Drakim wrote: LOL, so, you are actualy saying God cannot do this.

God can do whatever he wanted... he just didn't. And just because he didn't do something doesn't mean that he doesn't exist.

Okay, first of all, I NEVER EVER claimed in this thread that God doesn't exist. That is just something you automatically assumed because I don't agree with you.

Rather, I was arguing about diffrent qualities about God that cannot logically co-exists. Just like, God cannot be all-evil and all-good at the same time, and he cannot be called all-loving when he doesnt' actualy do things in a loving way. Dor example, hy make rape part of reality when it doesn't need to be? That doesn't sound very good and loving. That sounds more netural. That was my argument, and nothing else.

I went to your webpage Last Breath. I noticed you had a blue circle in the top left corner. Why? Why didn't you make that circle red? You could have, but you didn't... and since I like red more then blue, that's proof to me that you don't exist because if you really where the creator, you would have made that circle red.

(thanks for visiting my site ^^)

No, you miss the entire thing here. I never claimed that my site is perfect. I never claimed that I've made the site to please you. I never that my site is "all-likeble"

If I had for example said, my site is "all-likeable" (liked by all), and then you visited the site, only to find that you do not like it, THEN I would be contradicting my all-likable claim. I claimed that my site would do something, but I failed to uphold that promise.

The Christian God is supposed to be all-loving. He loves everybody. However, his world shows actions that does not match with an all-loving God, such as unnecessary evil. I was arguing that, while things such as lying has to exist, since it's such a basic action (sometimes, lying might even be the right thing to do), I don't think rape is a necessary evil, since it doesn't result in anything useful. You cannot use rape in a good way, so to speak. It's just as useless as erasing people with your mind.

Understand the argument better now? If God claimed that he loved us all, but screwed us over at every chance he got, then we would understand it wasn't true that he really loved us. I'm arguing the same for rape. A world were rape exist, an unnecessary evil, does not appear to be created by an all-loving God. It fits more the description of an neutral or evil God. (although using words like "neutral" and "evil" and "good" might be a bit limiting in this case)

At 10/10/07 11:24 AM, Drakim wrote: If God claimed that he loved us all, but screwed us over at every chance he got, then we would understand it wasn't true that he really loved us. I'm arguing the same for rape. A world were rape exist, an unnecessary evil, does not appear to be created by an all-loving God. It fits more the description of an neutral or evil God.

But rape comes from the evil of man. God loves us all but he agknoweledges that we're not perfect. And with our imperfections comes an imperfect world... one that includes rape. Just because the guy down the street is an asshole doesn't mean that I don't love my dog.

On that same note, maybe the guy down the street has a reason to be an asshole. Maybe he's lived a bad life and thus I'm able to understand his reasons for being a jerk. In that case, I can forgive his bad attitude and still think of him as a good person even though he's really a dick. The same can be said about God. He understands what we go through so he can forgive and still love us regardless of our actions.

I can't say where "evil" came from to begin with. The Bible says man was perfect in the begining but then the devil tempted Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge and that's where our imperfections came from. That could all be made up, it could be a huge metaphore of some kind, or evil could exist in the world based on the simple laws of "you can't have one with out the other".... you know, Yin and Yang.

But just because we do rape, doesn't mean that we're still not loved. And just because God probably could have made a vagina with a bear trap in it, but didn't doesn't mean he doesn't exist or doesn't care. I think you're failing to see the point that I'm making as well. The point is, I can do whatever I want based on Gods laws of physics due to free will. God could have, and probably still could, create any laws of physics he wanted but he didn't and I'll never be able to explain why because I'm not him. But I don't think there is a single religion that claims that God doesn't love you... in fact every thing I've ever seen states the oposite. God loves us because we are imperfect... which is why he gave the world his only begotton son.

If your buddhist, life is God and God isn't a personal thing. And life has desires. And these desires lead us to do crazy things. Be it eat, or rape. And the only way to escape and end it is to rid yourself of desires so you don't want or need to do anything. Thus when you die, you can return to where you came from and stay there forever. Even in that context, bad things doesn't prove a lack of purpose or love. In fact, it actually states that bad things are caused by too much love... the love to do things, or "desire". Hence the term, "life is suffering."

Once again, I fail to see how bad thigns disproves the existance of a higher purpose or love. It's still very plausable that God loves us all very very much... even though we're stuck in a world with rape.

I see. I think I understand your argument better now, and it does bring up several points. But at the same time, I think that we are missing each other still.

I can come up with a new way to put my argument that should make it easier to understand.

There is Bill Gates, and there is you. You are hanging out together. Bill Gates, for a reason we don't know, is presented a situation. He has these choices:

1. He may do nothing.
2. He may give you 10$
3. He may give you 100$
4. He may give you 1000$ but then he has to kill you afterwards.

(no matter what he picks, he gets nothing himself, but he is already filthy rich)

Now, this is basically the same chose God faces. If he gave us ultimate happiness, with no evil, he would remove our free will. That is the same as Bill Gates picking option 4. It would destroy the purpose for the happiness to not have free will to enjoy it, just like there would be no point for Bill Gates to give you a 1000$ just to kill you. You wouldn't be able to enjoy the money.

Now, what I'm saying, is that Bill Gates (God), has picked option 2. He has given us a world, and he has given us the possibility for happiness. However, he has not done so in the best way he could. Just like Bill Gates has chosen to give you 10$ instead of 100$ for no reason at all, God has decided to make a world that is more evil that it could have been. It made no difference for Bill Gates if he gave you 10$ or 100$, but yet he chose the bad one for you. Nobody would say that he is the best buddy in the world for that. Sure, he gave you something, but he had no reason to give you less than 100$. It made no difference for him, and you only got less.

The world that we have is not perfect. It cannot be, as it would be the same as option 4. However, it is not as good as it could have been. God did not give us the optimal reality to have our free will in. He made rape and murder part of reality, and I cannot, and neither has somebody else up to this point, been able to provide just exactly why these things must exist. For me, it seems like God chose option 2. He gave us something, but he didn't give us the best option, despite that it cost absolutely nothing for him. That is why I find it hard to connect this world to an all-loving God.

Had Bill Gates been the best buddy in the world, he would have taken option 3, everybody can see that. I'm arguing that if God was all loving, he would have picked option 3 too, but it appears he has not.

At 10/10/07 04:39 PM, Drakim wrote: Now, what I'm saying, is that Bill Gates (God), has picked option 2.

I could do this a couple of ways. I mean, you don't know God went for option 2... it just might seem like that because that's all you've ever known. For all we know this is option 3 and the world could have been much much worse. After all, $100 isn't really that great either... it's a decent amount of money but it's not such a large sum that all of your money problems vanish. Maybe God (Bill Gates) did give you $100 dollars and you're just pissed off that it wasn't $200.00 completly ignoring the fact that he could have given you $10.00.

I mean, Earth is a pretty nice place if you ask me. Nicer then Mercury.

On the other hand, maybe this is just option 2... and maybe Bill Gates (God) chose option 2 because it was enough to get us a bite to eat but it wasn't so much that we would take advantage of it. In other words, $10.00 not only provides you with funds to survive, but it teaches you the value of a dollar because it doesn't last very long. It lasts just long enough for you to realize that you need to get a job. If Bill Gates gave us $100.00 it might be too much and we might have all ended up like Paris Hilton...

Or, maybe you're right and Bill Gates (God) is just an asshole. But even if this is the case, who cares? In the end you're rewarded with an infininte amount of money forever... so getting by on $10.00 for a few years really isn't that bad of a deal when you look at the big picture. It's like that old riddle of decideing weather it's best to get paid $1,000.00 a day or $0.01 cent a day, but every day the pay check doubles. At first you're starving, but after a while you're making so much money you couldn't spend it fast enough.

At 10/9/07 03:52 PM, Drakim wrote:

At 10/9/07 02:47 PM, Tomsan wrote:

At 10/9/07 10:25 AM, Drakim wrote:

Saying that rape is a byproduct of sex doesn't make sense with this in thought, since God should have no trouble limiting rape without limiting sex, due to being omnipotent.

No I said that rape is a byproduct of free choice (I was pretty darn clear)

Why can't God prevent that byproduct? Is he that weak? Is he simply unable to create a world were sex exists but rape does not?

I also explained this already.
In order to love someone, there must be free choice and so the ability to sin.

At 10/10/07 04:39 PM, Drakim wrote:

here I'll help you:

1. If God is all-loving, then he could not have made things better for us
2. God has all the powers
3. Pain is OBJECTIVELY bad, in itself. ( i.e., in a void, pain is real and unpleasant, for serious )

So couldn't God have, say, made the pain of getting kicked in the nuts slightly less worse?
Cleary, he could have, as there are pains in your body that are lesser.

So there you go. He's not all-loving, he wants us to get kicked in the nuts and fall to our knees crying in pain.
You will argue that pain is a deterrent for idiot behavior, but it would still be a deterrant if it was 1% less painful. Or 5%. Or however many percent.

The point is that even at 0.00001%, he's still not the perfect all-loving God...

At 10/10/07 04:55 PM, Tomsan wrote:

At 10/9/07 03:52 PM, Drakim wrote:

At 10/9/07 02:47 PM, Tomsan wrote:

At 10/9/07 10:25 AM, Drakim wrote:

Saying that rape is a byproduct of sex doesn't make sense with this in thought, since God should have no trouble limiting rape without limiting sex, due to being omnipotent.

No I said that rape is a byproduct of free choice (I was pretty darn clear)

Why can't God prevent that byproduct? Is he that weak? Is he simply unable to create a world were sex exists but rape does not?

I also explained this already.
In order to love someone, there must be free choice and so the ability to sin.

And I and others answered it. But I have the feeling you won't go back and read it anyway.

At 10/10/07 04:57 PM, poxpower wrote:

At 10/10/07 04:39 PM, Drakim wrote:

here I'll help you:

1. If God is all-loving, then he could not have made things better for us
2. God has all the powers
3. Pain is OBJECTIVELY bad, in itself. ( i.e., in a void, pain is real and unpleasant, for serious )

So couldn't God have, say, made the pain of getting kicked in the nuts slightly less worse?
Cleary, he could have, as there are pains in your body that are lesser.

So there you go. He's not all-loving, he wants us to get kicked in the nuts and fall to our knees crying in pain.
You will argue that pain is a deterrent for idiot behavior, but it would still be a deterrant if it was 1% less painful. Or 5%. Or however many percent.

The point is that even at 0.00001%, he's still not the perfect all-loving God...

Thanks. That shortened my argument a bit, but I don't know how well some people here will understand it. It think you will be forced to explain a lot of basic easy things after this. >>

At 10/10/07 10:55 AM, Drakim wrote:

However, as I said before. The idea of an all-loving and forgiving God does not fit with a permanent hell. It just doesn't make sense to call something very forgiving when it only forgives for a limited time. In fact, if I was to sin, and die of a car crash 10 seconds later, then all the Christian God would have offered me is still ten seconds. Should I not seek forgiveness within those 10 seconds, then I'm forever damned.

This is just making assumptions, maybe god made it so that your last living second lasts a lifetime.

He made rape and murder part of reality, and I cannot, and neither has somebody else up to this point, been able to provide just exactly why these things must exist.

lol so many already have done this, but you just dont agree, well I am an atheist and I agree with their logic.

Bill Gates (God), has picked option 2. He has given us a world, and he has given us the possibility for happiness. However, he has not done so in the best way he could.

you are already bending, thats good to see. How do you know he did gave us number 3? I think alot of people thinks he did.
(obviously for this argument you will have to accept that sin is related to freechoice and love, like I (and others) have already mentioned a few times)