Ron Paul Is Toast

[Napoleon Ier]

1. if God is willing but unable to prevent evil, he is not omnipotent
2. if God is able but not willing to prevent evil, he is not good
3. if God is willing and able to prevent evil, then why is there evil?

1. Iff God is omnipotent, he can make this "impossible" triangle "possible"
2. Evil does not exist, only an absence of good (Augustine).
3. Free Will is granted. It allows the perversion of good leading to its absece in certain acts.

Wittgenstein, its all semantics

[unriggable]

1. if God is willing but unable to prevent evil, he is not omnipotent
2. if God is able but not willing to prevent evil, he is not good
3. if God is willing and able to prevent evil, then why is there evil?

1. Iff God is omnipotent, he can make this "impossible" triangle "possible"
2. Evil does not exist, only an absence of good (Augustine).
3. Free Will is granted. It allows the perversion of good leading to its absece in certain acts.

Wittgenstein, its all semantics

1. That reasoning is stupid - its like cutting the Gordian knot instead of untying it.
2. Evil is acknowledged as existing in the bible.
3. God has already made his divine plan - there's no room for free will.

[Napoleon Ier]

1. if God is willing but unable to prevent evil, he is not omnipotent
2. if God is able but not willing to prevent evil, he is not good
3. if God is willing and able to prevent evil, then why is there evil?

1. Iff God is omnipotent, he can make this "impossible" triangle "possible"
2. Evil does not exist, only an absence of good (Augustine).
3. Free Will is granted. It allows the perversion of good leading to its absece in certain acts.

Wittgenstein, its all semantics

1. That reasoning is stupid - its like cutting the Gordian knot instead of untying it.
2. Evil is acknowledged as existing in the bible.
3. God has already made his divine plan - there's no room for free will.

That reasoning is perfectly logical, bu does not underpin the second statement : Evil = absence of good. Evil in the Bible?

Wittgenstein - it's all semantics

[OnlyAmbrose]

*sigh* here we go again. God is evil because he doesn't prevent evil. And in a Ron Paul thread. Here goes the explanation... AGAIN.

Love is not love without free will. God desires to love and be loved in return. Therefore, when God creates humans, he must also give them free will, or else he can't be loved because love requires free will. The fact that he allows for the ability to NOT love is because without that ability there is no such thing as love.

[Neutrino]

*sigh* here we go again. God is evil because he doesn't prevent evil. And in a Ron Paul thread. Here goes the explanation... AGAIN.

Love is not love without free will. God desires to love and be loved in return. Therefore, when God creates humans, he must also give them free will, or else he can't be loved because love requires free will. The fact that he allows for the ability to NOT love is because without that ability there is no such thing as love.

What? God is God. God is, by definition, outside the rules. If God wants a bunch of hairless monkeys to love it, then they love it. End of story. Whether God could trick itself into believing the monkeys loved it of their own free will is debatable, but if God cares for humanity so little that we exist only as a love-creation machine, then God doesn't deserve to be worshiped.
It's like a small child who'll make everyone else suffer, just to get a little attention. God gives us free will so we can love it in the way it wants, but flatly doesn't care about how badly we screw eachother over as a result of this.
Sorry to be so blunt, Ambrose, but someone apparently as bright as yourself not seeing this quite simple problem irritates me.

[DaGip]

*sigh* here we go again. God is evil because he doesn't prevent evil. And in a Ron Paul thread. Here goes the explanation... AGAIN.

Love is not love without free will. God desires to love and be loved in return. Therefore, when God creates humans, he must also give them free will, or else he can't be loved because love requires free will. The fact that he allows for the ability to NOT love is because without that ability there is no such thing as love.

The Buddhist philosophy is that the universe is based on the principal of Love and all other emotions are superficial and we always return to a state of Love. A tornado or a tsunami, as tragic as it is, is not evil nor good...but is but an act of nature. Something that must occur in the earth's system. We recognize this as an act of nature, but there are some of us that want to blame God for these incidents, when it is all but part of a natural system that must occur. It is part of the functioning of the planet.

Now humans love to place human concepts on things. In the human mind we believe that since the earth and the cosmos offers great bounty to its creatures, we must therefore determine that that is good...and therefore this bounty comes forth from a Creator--God. But through human experience in a natural system they have experienced the anamolies of suffering, and therefore make a polar separation between Good and Evil. One they must deem is prevailant to a Creator and the other to a Destroyer. A God and a Devil.

Now, as humans, we can choose to love or hate. The majority of the suffering in the world is caused by ourselves. War doesn't happen because of God, it happens because one side of human beings can't get along and love the other side. Those are choices.

But what do I know...

[jay_a2j]

Hey jay I can't post on your broadcast tv thingy

I think you have to join justintv first.

[OnlyAmbrose]

*sigh* here we go again. God is evil because he doesn't prevent evil. And in a Ron Paul thread. Here goes the explanation... AGAIN.

Love is not love without free will. God desires to love and be loved in return. Therefore, when God creates humans, he must also give them free will, or else he can't be loved because love requires free will. The fact that he allows for the ability to NOT love is because without that ability there is no such thing as love.

What? God is God. God is, by definition, outside the rules. If God wants a bunch of hairless monkeys to love it, then they love it. End of story. Whether God could trick itself into believing the monkeys loved it of their own free will is debatable, but if God cares for humanity so little that we exist only as a love-creation machine, then God doesn't deserve to be worshiped.
It's like a small child who'll make everyone else suffer, just to get a little attention. God gives us free will so we can love it in the way it wants, but flatly doesn't care about how badly we screw eachother over as a result of this.
Sorry to be so blunt, Ambrose, but someone apparently as bright as yourself not seeing this quite simple problem irritates me.

Yes, God is God. He has a nature. It so happens that the nature of God is such that he desires freely given love.

The fact that God is God brings up the question: who are we to say what God should want? God is PERFECT, or rather, perfect is GOD. Whatever God is... is what is perfect. And if God has a desire for freely given love, then freely given love is perfect.

It's not quite so simple as "God is almighty so he can force us to love him." Yes, he can, but he does not desire us to be forced into loving him.

[vtmarik]

Yes, God is God. He has a nature. It so happens that the nature of God is such that he desires freely given love.

The fact that God is God brings up the question: who are we to say what God should want? God is PERFECT, or rather, perfect is GOD. Whatever God is... is what is perfect. And if God has a desire for freely given love, then freely given love is perfect.

It's not quite so simple as "God is almighty so he can force us to love him." Yes, he can, but he does not desire us to be forced into loving him.

But what if that isn't the nature of God? What if we, as fallible human beings, got It wrong?

And what if God isn't an anthropomorphized being? Maybe God is something slightly less human-faced and slightly more Jungian?

[Neutrino]

Yes, God is God. He has a nature. It so happens that the nature of God is such that he desires freely given love.

The fact that God is God brings up the question: who are we to say what God should want? God is PERFECT, or rather, perfect is GOD. Whatever God is... is what is perfect. And if God has a desire for freely given love, then freely given love is perfect.

It's not quite so simple as "God is almighty so he can force us to love him." Yes, he can, but he does not desire us to be forced into loving him.

The point I'm trying to get across here is that God is cruel. No matter how perfect its intentions, it has already doomed 60 billion humans to live and die in an imperfect world at best and die in an excruciatingly painful manner at worst. All for its own desires.
And death isn't even where it ends. Worship another god and it's off to burn in hell for all eternity for you.

If God limited itself to the first one; using people as love-creation machines and not caring what they do otherwise I would merely consider God selfish. Damning people for all eternity for a crime, in many cases they wern't even aware they'd comitted is an inescapably cruel act. Hell, it doesn't even serve a purpose like humanity's mortal lives (well, the ones that love God, anyway) do.

EDIT: The "Burning in Hell for all eternity" thing is composed mostly of half remembered facts. I take no responsibility if it turns out to be entirely wrong. You probably belong to a faction that doesn't believe that nonbelievers automatically go to Hell anyway (or will switch to one for the purposes of this argument ).

[DaGip]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8xgWjFe1cE

Any input on this vid?

[unriggable]

Kid's dad is about to die of cancer. He talks to God:

"God, is my dad going to heaven?"

"Of course not, Timmy, heaven is an imaginary land created and used by conservative self-righteous christians to justify atrocious acts of violence and to manipulate the public into thinking that these said christians are superior to them."

"Then, then were do we go when we die?"

"Hell."

[OnlyAmbrose]

Yes, God is God. He has a nature. It so happens that the nature of God is such that he desires freely given love.

The fact that God is God brings up the question: who are we to say what God should want? God is PERFECT, or rather, perfect is GOD. Whatever God is... is what is perfect. And if God has a desire for freely given love, then freely given love is perfect.

It's not quite so simple as "God is almighty so he can force us to love him." Yes, he can, but he does not desire us to be forced into loving him.

The point I'm trying to get across here is that God is cruel. No matter how perfect its intentions, it has already doomed 60 billion humans to live and die in an imperfect world at best and die in an excruciatingly painful manner at worst. All for its own desires.
And death isn't even where it ends. Worship another god and it's off to burn in hell for all eternity for you.

If God limited itself to the first one; using people as love-creation machines and not caring what they do otherwise I would merely consider God selfish. Damning people for all eternity for a crime, in many cases they wern't even aware they'd comitted is an inescapably cruel act. Hell, it doesn't even serve a purpose like humanity's mortal lives (well, the ones that love God, anyway) do.

EDIT: The "Burning in Hell for all eternity" thing is composed mostly of half remembered facts. I take no responsibility if it turns out to be entirely wrong. You probably belong to a faction that doesn't believe that nonbelievers automatically go to Hell anyway (or will switch to one for the purposes of this argument ).

God doesn't damn people to Hell, people damn themselves to Hell. Your conscious actions on earth are what damn you, God has no part in it. In fact, God has saved everyone... if only they would accept the salvation he is offering. Quite to the contrary of God being "cruel".

Catholics tend not to believe that non-believers automatically go to Hell. Like I said, going to Hell involves a conscious and intentional denial of the truth, on YOUR part, totally independent from God. If you have legitimate logical reasons not to believe in God, and you have never been exposed to a legitimate counter-argument, then you are probably not going to Hell.

A lot of Protestants differ on this, but the Bible says that Christ is the Word made Flesh, and that the Word is written in the hearts and consciences of all men, and therefore if you follow the Word in your heart, you are following Jesus.

So no, God is not cruel. God gave man paradise, which man of his own free will destroyed. God then came down to Earth to save humanity, but some people consciously refuse that salvation.

[comic boy]

Serious question
Does anybody seriously believe in a physical heaven and hell with angels floating on clouds or alternatively pixies prodding you with red hot pokers. I know that Fundamentalists probably still do but I assume the more discerning amongst you think more in terms of a spiritual after life.

[DaGip]

Serious question
Does anybody seriously believe in a physical heaven and hell with angels floating on clouds or alternatively pixies prodding you with red hot pokers. I know that Fundamentalists probably still do but I assume the more discerning amongst you think more in terms of a spiritual after life.

I think my consciousness will go into space...is that heaven? I believe I will meet other consciousness'...are those angels? I think that dreaming is a lot like after we die, except dying our concioussness will go from a subconscious state to a more conscious state...actually, our concioussness can travel freely between the two states or combine them simultaneously. Thusly, we can experience those things in which we believe (Such as a Heaven or Hell, Angels and Devils, Jesus, etc...)

I believe in astral travel, which is probably the closest we can come to experiencing dying. If you have ever had an astral travel experience, it is quite scary. The Buddhist monks experience it all the time...I have experienced it only a few times in my life, and every time it was scary. I got scared because I didn't know if I could get back in my body, and once I started to feel fear, my astral body went back into my physical body.

[OnlyAmbrose]

I think my consciousness will go into space...

I believe I will meet other consciousness

I think that dreaming is a lot like after we die, except dying our concioussness will go from a subconscious state to a more conscious state

Why?

[Neutrino]

God doesn't damn people to Hell, people damn themselves to Hell. Your conscious actions on earth are what damn you, God has no part in it. In fact, God has saved everyone... if only they would accept the salvation he is offering. Quite to the contrary of God being "cruel".

God is damning people to hell through it's own system. Why not have a "Non-Believer's Heaven" where Non-Christians can go after they die? You could even make it less good than the Christian heaven as a reward. Of course, the murderers and rapists and what have you can still go to the regular hell, but I don't see why everyone has to suffer simply because they were Non-Christian.

Catholics tend not to believe that non-believers automatically go to Hell. Like I said, going to Hell involves a conscious and intentional denial of the truth, on YOUR part, totally independent from God. If you have legitimate logical reasons not to believe in God, and you have never been exposed to a legitimate counter-argument, then you are probably not going to Hell.

What if you were exposed to Christianity but never decided to convert?

A lot of Protestants differ on this, but the Bible says that Christ is the Word made Flesh, and that the Word is written in the hearts and consciences of all men, and therefore if you follow the Word in your heart, you are following Jesus.

That sounds like a beter idea. "Worship who you want and as long as you're a decent person you'll still get into heaven"

So no, God is not cruel. God gave man paradise, which man of his own free will destroyed. God then came down to Earth to save humanity, but some people consciously refuse that salvation.

It wouldn't exactly take a huge amount of effort (in fact, it would take an infinitely small amount of effort. The wonders of having infinite power) for God to create humanity a new paradise to live on...

[OnlyAmbrose]

God is damning people to hell through it's own system. Why not have a "Non-Believer's Heaven" where Non-Christians can go after they die? You could even make it less good than the Christian heaven as a reward. Of course, the murderers and rapists and what have you can still go to the regular hell, but I don't see why everyone has to suffer simply because they were Non-Christian.
...

What if you were exposed to Christianity but never decided to convert?

I can't pretend to know your heart. It depends on your motive. Like I said, if you have legitimate reasons not to believe and you've never been exposed to a good counter-argument... in other words, if you've failed to come to Christ through no fault of your own, you're ok. But if you are consciously denying the truth, then no, you are not saved. But no one can know the answers to these questions except you and God. That's why I get a little peeved when Christians take it upon themselves to damn people to Hell...

It wouldn't exactly take a huge amount of effort (in fact, it would take an infinitely small amount of effort. The wonders of having infinite power) for God to create humanity a new paradise to live on...

No, it would take no effort whatsoever, but the nature of God is justice, not taking it easy.

And incidentally, there's a perfectly good paradise available, for those who desire to enter it...

[DaGip]

I think my consciousness will go into space...

I believe I will meet other consciousness

I think that dreaming is a lot like after we die, except dying our concioussness will go from a subconscious state to a more conscious state

Why?

Because that's what I am comfortable with...

[OnlyAmbrose]

I think my consciousness will go into space...

I believe I will meet other consciousness

I think that dreaming is a lot like after we die, except dying our concioussness will go from a subconscious state to a more conscious state

Why?

Because that's what I am comfortable with...

Doesn't seem to be an effective way of finding truth to me...

[Snorri1234]

I think my consciousness will go into space...

I believe I will meet other consciousness

I think that dreaming is a lot like after we die, except dying our concioussness will go from a subconscious state to a more conscious state

Why?

Because that's what I am comfortable with...

Doesn't seem to be an effective way of finding truth to me...

Well....what's your view of heaven then?

[OnlyAmbrose]

I think my consciousness will go into space...

I believe I will meet other consciousness

I think that dreaming is a lot like after we die, except dying our concioussness will go from a subconscious state to a more conscious state

Why?

Because that's what I am comfortable with...

Doesn't seem to be an effective way of finding truth to me...

Well....what's your view of heaven then?

It wasn't developed based on "what I'm comfortable with." To be honest, I'd be far more comfortable with the idea that I could be livin' large and then enjoy the perks of a pleasant afterlife. But that's not how I make my judgments...

I've been over my reasons for being Catholic numerous times and in numerous threads, but in essence I have philosophical and logical issues with atheism, and a synergism on historical, philosophical, and observational thinking has led me to Catholic Christianity.

I'm just saying that believing something just because it's a nice thought isn't an effective way to find truth.

[Snorri1234]

It wasn't developed based on "what I'm comfortable with." To be honest, I'd be far more comfortable with the idea that I could be livin' large and then enjoy the perks of a pleasant afterlife. But that's not how I make my judgments...

I've been over my reasons for being Catholic numerous times and in numerous threads, but in essence I have philosophical and logical issues with atheism, and a synergism on historical, philosophical, and observational thinking has led me to Catholic Christianity.

I'm just saying that believing something just because it's a nice thought isn't an effective way to find truth.

Oh no Gip's reasoning is a bit silly I admit. But I'm just curious how you picture the afterlife. Do you imagine it like the traditional cloud-setting and people walking around in angelgear and classical music playing all the time?

[OnlyAmbrose]

It wasn't developed based on "what I'm comfortable with." To be honest, I'd be far more comfortable with the idea that I could be livin' large and then enjoy the perks of a pleasant afterlife. But that's not how I make my judgments...

I've been over my reasons for being Catholic numerous times and in numerous threads, but in essence I have philosophical and logical issues with atheism, and a synergism on historical, philosophical, and observational thinking has led me to Catholic Christianity.

I'm just saying that believing something just because it's a nice thought isn't an effective way to find truth.

Oh no Gip's reasoning is a bit silly I admit. But I'm just curious how you picture the afterlife. Do you imagine it like the traditional cloud-setting and people walking around in angelgear and classical music playing all the time?

I don't really know what the afterlife will be like, and I don't think anyone can. "No eye has seen, no ear has heard" what the Lord has in store for us. I simply believe that heaven is infinite happiness. The nature of that isn't really important to me, and I don't presume to know what I obviously can't.

[DaGip]

I think my consciousness will go into space...

I believe I will meet other consciousness

I think that dreaming is a lot like after we die, except dying our concioussness will go from a subconscious state to a more conscious state

Why?

Because that's what I am comfortable with...

Doesn't seem to be an effective way of finding truth to me...

Listen...I am not going to kill myself to prove it... Just stating my own personal belief system. It doesn't mean that I am an atheist. I believe in a Creative Force, you call it God and I do not have a problem with calling it likewise. If you want to believe in Heaven and Hell...go ahead, God allows you to! Me, however, i am going to be a Humpback whale and lead the Whale and Dolphin revolution on this planet! Damn nuclear subs and secret Navy sonar! It is hurting our ears and killing our people! Time to say, enough is enough!