|
|
Post by Josh on Sept 17, 2009 0:00:10 GMT -5
Wikipedia knows all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brent on Sept 17, 2009 0:10:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by feverstone on Sept 17, 2009 0:18:24 GMT -5
Yeah, Wikipedia is...well...it's Wikipedia.  And the banners of Brent's site made me laugh. "The Heathen's Magazine.... you'll laugh like HELL." xD |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Sept 17, 2009 0:19:27 GMT -5
AMAZING POST.
why cant i be amazing like this guy...
._.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brent on Sept 17, 2009 0:20:41 GMT -5
suck his dick already
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Sept 17, 2009 0:24:43 GMT -5
k
|
|
|
|
Post by feverstone on Sept 17, 2009 0:53:05 GMT -5
Not until we finish reading Heathen' Magazine, kthnx!
|
|
|
|
Post by clareabel on Sept 17, 2009 3:46:53 GMT -5
1.If a perfectly good god exists, then there is no evil in the world. Brent, I know better than to argue with you. It doesn't achieve anything. However, as nobody took issue with this statement, I'd like to. I'm not entirely sure why good God=no evil. As far as I'm concerned, God is good, but allows humans free will; in the way that a parent allows their child to grow up and make their own choices. It's the best way for a human to grow, but inevitably leads to rebellion in one way or another as humans are tempted or otherwise choose to follow other paths. Evil as far as I'm concerned is the concept that goodness is absent- or alternatively that God is absent. I'm not implying that God isn't everywhere, but that if a person makes a decision which is against God's will, evil can come out of it because God is not within it. (I hope that makes sense.) You've also brought up the idea previously that if God made the devil, God made evil. This is to do with the same principle I used above. Everything sentient has free will, and I believe that also includes angels. |
|
|
|
Post by Brent on Sept 17, 2009 4:02:59 GMT -5
The argument you are using is indeed the main argument which has been used many times.
It is ultimately is refutable. God gave us freewill yes, but that only accounts for moral evil. Natural evil is not accounted for.
I'll use the example from the link I posted since it is better than anything I could come up with:
When a fawn burns to death in a forest fire and no human being ever knows about it, this apparent unnecessary evil neither preserves human free will nor builds the character of human beings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Sept 17, 2009 4:19:28 GMT -5
I bet that damn fawn was asking for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by notavailable on Sept 17, 2009 4:26:01 GMT -5
Not to turn on you Brent, but what about a fawn accidentally dying in a forest fire is evil? Is it not just an unfortunate event?
|
|
|
|
Post by Brent on Sept 17, 2009 4:32:58 GMT -5
A forest fire is a natural evil, assuming it is not caused by man.
For example, lightning hits a tree or something and causes a fire.
Natural evil is uncontrollable, but if Christians claim God controls rain, snow, lightning, etc.
he is responsible.
Thats the problem of evil. God cannot be both omnipotent and all-good. It is logically impossible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Sept 17, 2009 4:46:07 GMT -5
so, for example, when a cold winter comes and only the strong fawns survive (thus the weak unfit fawns die), that is an example of evil?
wait, are you saying evolution is evil?
|
|
|
|
Post by Brent on Sept 17, 2009 4:53:02 GMT -5
I guess so, I'm not sure.
If you believe God created Evolution, then yes, Evolution is therefore evil because natural evil is inevitable, which causes the suffering. Whether or not animals can actually suffer is another argument in itself, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by clareabel on Sept 17, 2009 5:30:27 GMT -5
I don't think those things you described are inherently evil. Hot summers cause forest fires. These fires control the spread of certain plant and animal species which would otherwise begin to overpopulate areas. I think forest fires are simply another way in which the natural world controls the population. (Can you tell I'm not too sure on this subject cos I've never really thought about it? ) Essentially, a fawn dying in a forest fire may enable two other fawns to have enough food, so that there are two well nourished, healthy fawns instead of three malnourished ones. Sorry I couldn't answer you more helpfully. |
|
