I AGREE with your 'disagreement' 'Abra'. It's more like 'one-a-post-moment' !!!

I was just getting bored!

But if you've been watching the latest posts, I think a whole new angle to this 'saga' is about to unfold.

Let's stay tuned, it should get very interesting!!!

Do you really think so? I feel like the end of this discussion is at hand where the topic is concerned. The Bible clearly states that God created evil. Others believe that God created everything. Others believe that God IS EVERYTHING.

Personally I think ambiguous questions like "Did God create Evil?" assumes way too much.

It assumes there is a creator God.
It assumes there is someTHING called EVIL.

You cannot have a conversation about something where the participants don't at least agree on the basic definitions of what you are talking about.

You must FIRST define GOD.
You must then either prove God's existence under your definition or admit that it is your opinion or your belief.
Then you must define evil.
Is it a person, place or thing?
Does it exits as a substance, invisible or otherwise.

None of this has been done in this thread therefor the discussion is just a pissing contest.

Jeanniebean

Jeannie I adore you, but,

I thought that anyone who put their ideas forward on this would be people who accepted the existence of both God and Evil before they tried to answer. Some may not believe in either in which case it shouldn't take them too long to say so.

Some of the opinions and points have been a long way from the subject, but after a couple of attempts I gave up trying to steer people back. Sure some people have been arguing with each other rather than just stating their opinions, but a lot of the posts have been interesting, and not always predictable.

C.S.

Sorry for my absence the past few days - work & the flu has slowed me down.

Now... we are in agreement to a point. So far, at least in this thread, we have no less than 3 distinctly different understandings of the "God" of creation. The "monotheistic" God to which you have explained - which has no room for a "triune" God, which leads me to the Biblical God - seen slightly differently by the three main world religions which claim adherance to him (Christianity, Judism, and Islam) where a "trinity" of God the Father, God the son, and God the Holy Spirit are described, then we have the Pantheistic God, as described by Abra. Depending on which "method of creation" one has determined is logical - establishes the Premise of the "God of creation". So while perfectly logical to attribute the creation to a "monotheistic God" and follow that logic through to a conclusion, which of the three "God's" (as it were) do we chose to accept to substanciate the original premise? And what follows if we follow the thread of logic for each one independently?

I still remain with the question for the Rabbits of the thread, who haven't seemed to support any theory of God - but instead choose evolution as an explination for creation. For the evolutionists - "who created evil" takes on a whole new dimension.

I'll attest that I have not seen Spider fall short of any essential Christian doctrine.

Gen 2:9 (KJV)
And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Jeannie;

I would say you've captured my sentiments exactly.

Thank you for your adoration.

But the forum did not exclude pagans and pantheists and we love a good pissing contest sometimes. It keeps things interesting.

Yes it has been fun and interesting.

Jeanniebean

I know that we can all agree on something. Here it is:

Something exists.

We know this because we perceive it.

Each of us know for certain one thing about ourselves.

I am.

From there the question arises. What am I?

What are we?

If God is all, the answer is simple.

We are God manifest.

My proof is that I am.
My further proof is that I perceive.
My further proof is that I know I am. (self aware.)
My further proof is that I make choices. (Free will)
My further proof is that I create my own experiences. (with thought)
My further proof is that I create my reality. (through perception)

Therefore I have just proved that I am God.

This of course includes all of us.

Jeanniebean

Edit: p.s.

So you want to know if God created evil.
The answer is yes, I did.

If that’s true then I most certainly denounce the Bible as being a gross perversion of love.

No offense intended, but if Spider has the correct interpretations of the Bible then it’s not a religion that I would want to have anything to do with. It depicts and extremely unloving God who is obsessed with making sure that everything that humans might even remotely have an innate desire to do is considered to be filthy.

Spider, as well as you Eljay, have proclaimed that sin is defined by the act with total disregard to what the motivation might have been for the act.

If follows from that then, that God would denounce and condemn any LOVING act that might technically break a rule of the Bible.

Therefore YOUR GOD condemns LOVE.

That necessarily has to be the conclusion based on what you guys have been preaching over the past few months.

Pure and simple.

Therefore I reject your religion on the grounds that it depicts a God that condemns LOVE.

What does the motivation have to do with it?

Couldn't a man rape a woman, with the belief that by raping her, she would see how good he was in bed and she would love him? His motivation in that case is to spread love.

Show me a case where someone can rape, murder, blaspheme, or commit adultry, when the motivation is "good".

Abra;

Despite giving you a platform on which you can shout your denouncement of the God of the bible - that doesn't change Spider's grasp of the essentials of the Christian faith. If you want to shoot him for being the messanger - go ahead, but your complaint is not with Spider, but with scripture. So why do you keep attacking him?

Hate to say it, but you are just sick!

Why do you say that?

The fact that you need to ask pretty much drives her point home.

Abra said:



Well, before I give blind agreement to this rather vague statement - I would like to have an idea about what I'm agreeing to. There's never "total disregard" about motivation when viewing an act with discernment. But at times, it can become rather subjective when it comes to understanding what motivation is. I don't recall defining sin as exclusively an "act", and I know that I've said on more than one occasion that there are sins of commission, and sins of omission. Sometimes doing nothing at all can be "a sin". Or as I prefer to label it - "just plain wrong". But I determine these things only for myself. Some things are just obvious to everyone. I think we could call the incidents of 9/11/2001 "wrong", yet to some people in the world, these men carried out their mission with the highest of loving motivation to their cause. Are you absolving them of their wrong doing because their motivation did not lack sincerity? Well - if that's your religion - no, I won't go there. But perhaps you see my point.

I disagree with your assessment Eljay.

I don’t think Spider has a clue what the spiritual message of the Bible is.

He’s a fundamental literalist. IMHO he perverts the word of God.

He makes God appear to be sick and demented.

He doesn’t make God appear to be loving at all.

He uses the words of Jesus to belittle other people and accuse them of being sinful.

I don’t see any ‘good’ in anything he does on these forums.

Surely he can’t be speaking for God and convey such negativity.

God can’t be that demented.

I graphically pointed out the flaw in your personal understanding of sin. Eljay did a much better job. If you or OKC_Chef think that I was proposing that rape could be a loving act, then your reading comprehension needs some work. I was preposing a hypothetical that would disprove your statement.

Also, I have said this before...you didn't read it then and you might not read it now, I believe in Moral Objectivism. Most Christians are Moral Objectivists. Lying to save someone's life is the right thing to do. Killing to save someone's life is the right thing to do. Stealing to keep from starving is the right thing to do. Stealing, because you want a new TV is wrong. When it is a choice between two sins, the least of the sins should always be the choice.

That's a lie and I'm really tired of hearing it. Please stop lying about me. I don't think it's necessary. If you don't like me (which is obvious) then just say so. You don't have to make up lies about me. You lie about me and then you lie about the lies. I'm really worried for you James. Your behavior isn't normal.

I can't speak for Spider's understanding of the "spiritual message" of the bible, but I know he understands the gospel message.