Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted February 9 Super Moderator Share Posted February 9 Imagine, if you will, a seedy hotel room in the dirty part of town. In the corner there is a small table, the drawer of which contains a Gideon bible. A garishly ornate lamp casts a pool of dingy yellow light upon the wall behind it, covered in peeling wallpaper, the fading floral pattern now more a study in browns after decades of dust and cigarette haze. In this room we have a 10-year-old girl: a singular expression of innocence and unfettered hope. Beside her, on the bed, is a 39-year-old pedophile rapist: the epitome of sociopathic sadism, a monster. He is neither her father, nor her uncle. He is, in fact, no one with whom this little girl should be alone. We know what is going to happen in this room; there is no need to provide further detail. This is the essence of meaningless, purposeless, gratuitous suffering inflicted upon innocence, examples of which can be seen in every imaginable time, space, and location—throughout the entirety of human history—which god allows. We know that god is also in this dismal hotel room. His omnipresence places him everywhere at all times. He is there when the horrific and appalling deed occurs. He has always been in this hotel room, is always being in this hotel room, and will always be in this hotel room—before, during, and even long after the traumatizing event takes place. We know that god has the ability to prevent what is going to occur in this hotel room. His omnipotence allows for him to do anything he wants to do. But there is another side to his omnipotence, one that may become important a bit later on: his omnipotence also allows him not to do anything he does not want to do. So, we know that god has both the presence and the power to stop the ungodly proceedings here before they ever occur. But we also know, from hundreds, thousands, millions of such scenarios since time immemorial, that god is going to do nothing. The question is “Why?” If he is there, and he has the ability, why would he allow a little girl’s life to be ripped into pieces, even as her little body is torn and injured, and her soul and mind left damaged and scarred for the rest of her life? Why would god turn a blind eye and do nothing? At this point, an apologist might protest that I am misinterpreting omnipotence. “Omnipotence doesn’t mean that god can do whatever you want him to do!” the apologist might proclaim. I’m not asking god to do whatever I want him to do. I’m asking god to prevent a little girl from being raped. Is that too much to ask, of a supposedly “loving” god? Is providing food for a starving child too much to ask? Or curing a child of cancer so that they can go on to live a happy, healthy life? Do these actions not fall under his omnipotence? Are these not situations in which he has the ability to respond? The apologist might also claim that suffering is a result of our sin; and that the little girl in the hotel room is merely one of many unintended victims. Now, we know this little girl could not have possibly done anything in her life so grave, so depraved, as to warrant the punishment she is about to receive. There simply is no “sin” she could have committed that would mark her as deserving of what is happening. None. Rather, she is suffering as a result of someone else’s “sin” and god is allowing it. So the idea of reaping what we have sown, the christian version of karma, simply doesn’t make sense, especially given that jesus allegedly suffered all things as we do, in order to relieve us of our own suffering. But didn’t jesus also say, “Let the little children come unto me, and hinder them not; for to such belong the kingdom of heaven”? Children are constantly abused, starved, abandoned in the gutter while god does nothing to alleviate their suffering. How is his detached and dispassionate inaction not an active and deliberate hinderance? Their bodies ravished and wasted away from cancers, parasites, disease and pestilence while god looks down with benign indifference. god is the greatest hindrance of all; because he has both the presence and the power to stop it. But he refuses to do so. Why? The apologist will now triumphantly proclaim that “god doesn’t interfere with FREEEEEE WIIIILLLLLLL!” But, let’s examine this claim through the lens of god’s purported omniscience. Of the two people in the hotel room—the 10-year-old girl and the 39-year-old pedophile—which person is there of their own free will? Which of these two people chose to be there; and which person decided what would happen there? I think we would all readily agree that the little girl did not volunteer for the events of the day. Her Free Will has been, and is going to be, violated. That much is certain. I think we would all agree that she was either abducted and forced to be there, or she was tricked by hook or crook to be there. We would probably also all agree that it is the will of the 39-year-old monster that is at play here. We would likely say that this is all unfolding as a result of his choice, his will, his decision. But is it? (more on that in a moment). When were the events of the day first known to the individuals involved? When did this innocent little girl first know what was going to happen to her? It’s possible she suspected what would happen even before she entered the hotel room. It’s certain she didn’t know until it was already too late; and the moments preceding that knowledge were filled with sheer terror and a deep longing for the loving arms of her mommy. When did this sadistic monster know what would happen? Did he know a day in advance? A week? Perhaps he had been stalking this little girl for several weeks and had planned his attack out a month ahead of time? When did god know it was going to happen? Did god only know an hour in advance? Did god know the morning of the event? Did god only find out after the fact when it was too late to do anything? Is god scrambling to put together a contingency plan for this little girl’s life now that his perfect will has been completely shattered by an unforeseen circumstance? The omniscience of god, on the surface, tells us that god knows everything; but that hardly covers the full depth of what it means to be omniscient. Knowledge is a constant state; and god is in a perpetual state of knowing all things at all times. god has always known, is always knowing, and will always know exactly what will happen in this hotel room. Long before god stitched that little girl together in her mother’s womb, god knew. Before that horrible sociopath was ever born, god knew. Before Adam and Eve, before the creation of time, before the foundations of the earth, god knew. Omniscience puts god in a constant and perpetual state of knowing what will happen to this precious and innocent little girl. And god has always known, is always knowing, and will always know that he will do nothing to stop it. This implies that the choice to do nothing is constantly before god. In all of time and eternity, he is in a perpetual state of choosing not to prevent a little girl from being raped. What beast could be so cruel? So, now we know that god has the presence to prevent it, and he has the power to prevent it, and he has the knowledge to prevent it. There is only one critical factor still remaining, only one omni- trait left: omnibenevolence, the willingness to prevent it. If it happens despite god’s presence, if it happens despite god’s power, if it happens despite god’s knowledge, then it must have happened because god allowed it. There are no other options. It has to have been god’s unwillingness to act; because he has the presence to act; he has the knowledge to act; and he has the ability to act. Therefore, no other excuse for inaction exists. He simply does not want to. Why? By now, our faithful apologist has grown frustrated and insists, “We don’t know god’s reasons! His ways are not our ways! He’s all mysterious and shit! If he allows it to happen, it must be for some greater good that we don’t yet know! He has a purpose and a plan!” Fair enough. But the implication here is that god planned the event taking place in this hotel room. If he has always known it would happen, is always knowing it will happen, and will always know of it happening, then he has also always planned to use it for reasons we don’t know, is always planning to use it for reasons we don’t know, and will always plan to use it for reasons we don’t know. How is this any different from god simply planning for a little girl to be raped in a dingy hotel room by a 39-year-old pedophile? “Ah, but there is a difference!” Our apologist proclaims. “Knowing something will happen and planning to use the result for his own purpose isn’t the same as planning for the thing to happen!” Sure, certainly there is a difference, if you’re content cobbling your faith together with semantics and nothing more. But there is no practical difference between god planning to use a known outcome to his advantage versus god planning the outcome itself. The little girl still has her life shattered; and god still does nothing to intervene and prevent it. There is also no legal difference between the two. Imagine a man wants his wife dead; but he doesn’t want to kill her himself. So he hires a hitman. Which of these two men “planned” the murder? Well, it certainly wasn’t the husband who bought the gun. It wasn’t the husband who stalked her for several days in order to get familiar with her routine so as to know the best point to lay in ambush for her. Is the husband completely absolved then, since he didn’t “plan” the murder, he only planned to use the outcome as an excuse to cash in on a large life insurance policy and run off with his hot young secretary? This argument that god doesn’t plan the event, but does plan to use the outcome for his “reasons” merely adds “conspiracy to commit rape” to the litany of charges god has already racked up on account of the events in the hotel room. Whether he planned the actual rape, or simply planned to use the outcome of it for his own “reasons” is ultimately immaterial. If he has always known it would happen, and he has always known he would do nothing to prevent it, then he is as guilty as the monster who committed the crime. The “reasons” themselves are also immaterial. The hardcore truth and reality is that if god had “reasons” for allowing this little girl’s soul to be split from her body in such a brutal manner, then it was god himself who violated her free will. He knew it would happen and decided, without her consent, that the outcome he wanted was more important than any consideration of her desires, wishes, or choices. This decision alone demonstrates god’s complete lack of regard concerning the free will of each and every one of us. Without even knowing what his “reasons” might be; the fact that he has “reasons” is enough to shatter the concept that god refuses to violate free will. And whatever “reason” our apologist may list off as a potential excuse for god’s inaction is just another violation of that little girl’s free will. “god wanted to use this event to make her stronger!” Who decided she needed to be stronger? Her? Or god? “god will use this outcome to draw her closer to himself!” Who decided she needed to be closer to god? Her? Or god? “Her testimony will be so much more powerful because of all she endured!” Who decided her testimony needed to be stronger? Her? Or god? And who decided that rape should be the catalyst by which all of these “reasons” would come to pass? I promise you it was not the little girl. Each and every one of these “reasons” are god’s. Not a single one belongs to the little girl. Each of them represents a decision that god made for that little girl, without her authorization or consent. Each is a direct violation of her free will. So it is clear that god had a plan that involved this little girl in this hotel room. He refused to act because he didn’t want to act; and this stemmed from the outcome which he intended to use for his own “reasons”. His omnipotence, remember, allows him not to do anything he doesn’t want to do; and if he doesn’t want to prevent suffering, he simply won’t. And as you have done unto the least of these, you have done unto me… Let’s then reconsider whose decisions ultimately led to the unfolding of events here in this hotel room. We initially agreed that it was the will of the sociopathic pedophile and the choices he made that brought us here. But if god has always had a plan to use this event for “reasons”, then isn’t the monster also just another pawn in god’s plan? Would he even be here himself were it not for god’s plan for this little girl? If this entire event is being allowed because god needed a particular outcome to use for his “reasons” then each part and player has to have been orchestrated by god toward that outcome. Moreover, if god had “reasons” to allow this event to occur, in order to achieve the specific outcome he planned to use, then, by extension and for those same “reasons,” god needed this man to become the monster he became; and there is no doubt that god also subjected him to a specific series of sufferings in his own life designed to make him become such. Although we have villainized him for the purposes of this narrative (and rightly so, from our perspective), should we not, perhaps, extend the hand of compassion toward him also, for he is also merely a victim of god’s ruthlessness? However an apologist wants to slice, dice, and splice it, in the final analysis, if god is in control, then what is occurring in this hotel room on this horrific day is god’s will. If it weren’t his will, he’d put a stop to it. He has the presence; he has the power; and he has the knowledge. So it either happens because it is his explicit will, or it happens because he does not have the will to prevent it; and, as I have often said before, there is no practical difference between the two. By now, our tenacious apologist is up in my face screaming and spitting. “You’re just angry at god! You just want to blame god for what people do! You want a perfect world where suffering doesn’t exist but since god has his ‘reasons’ you don’t like it and can’t accept it and you’d rather be angry and blame god than look at your own self and your own sin!” I invite you, then, to place me in this hotel room alongside this 10-year-old girl and her assailant. Imagine that beside that Gideon-laden table, under the dismal pall of that hideous lamp, there is a chair; and I am sitting in that chair with a loaded .44 magnum in my hand. At any point in time, I can place the barrel of that firearm to the temple of that man’s head, squeeze the trigger, and put an end to the suffering for good and all. I am present in the room; I know what is happening in the room; I have the ability to prevent it… And I do nothing… What would you think of me? Would you think I deserved a hero’s welcome when I came out of that room? Would you think I deserved gratitude? That I was worthy of worship, praise, or adoration? Would you trust me with your own children, knowing what I had done? Would you accept “reasons” as an excuse for my apathy and indifference? Or would you consider me a coward, a monster, as depraved and sadistic as the sociopath who committed the awful deed? Would you, in fact, blame me for my inaction? Would you feel a surge of righteous rage and indignation toward me? And would you consider your anger justified? If you look upon a woman with lust in your heart, you are already guilty of committing adultery with her. If you have hatred in your heart toward your brother, you are guilty of murdering him. If you do nothing while a little girl gets raped, what are you guilty of? Yet god watches this happen hundreds, thousands of times every single day; and has done so every day since time began. Why would you absolve him with such short shrift; but not me? This harkens back to the age-old question: Is it good because god does it; or does god do it because it is good? If it is wrong for me to do it, should it not also be wrong for god? Why should I be held to a higher moral standard than the god who supposedly is the objective moral standard? If your god does exist, wouldn’t the only appropriate response be to hold him accountable for his indifference and the insidious evil and suffering that has resulted from it, as you would have done me, were I the one in the hotel room? Wouldn’t the only justifiable reaction toward such cowardly inaction, such callous apathy, such calculated and meticulous planning with full knowledge of the outcome, be anger, righteous rage, and indignation, as you would feel toward me, had I been the one present, powerful, but unwilling? If your god does exist, then every metaphorical hotel room in human history happens according to his “perfect” will, and in the face of his careless indifference. But your god does not exist. Your god is a logical contradiction. He cannot be both omnipotent and omnibenevolent. If he has the ability to prevent suffering, but is not willing to prevent it, then suffering happens because he wants it to. He wants little girls to be raped; he wants children to starve to death. This is not benevolence. It is not compassion, mercy, pity or any of the other nouns associated with “love.” It is not perfect, unconditional, absolute, or any of the other adjectives therewith associated. Moreover, if he has “reasons” for wanting us to suffer, then he violates the very same free will that he claims we should be condemned to eternal damnation for exercising, in order to achieve those “reasons.” Free will which is violated is no longer free will; and “god’s plan” cannot exist without violating (thus nullifying) our free will. Thus, free will and “god’s will” are polar opposites in direct contradiction to one another. Logic tells us that A and not-A cannot both be simultaneously true; and the principle of falsus in uno establishes justification for us to consider an entire proposition false, if just one part of that proposition can be demonstrated to be false. Your god is, therefore, false. His purported omnibenevolence is false, if it is true that he has a plan; and his plan is false if it is true that we have free will. He simply cannot exist as he is described. If he exists at all, he exists only as a series of disconnected thoughts inside of your own head. Why should I be angry at a figment of your imagination? If I were inclined to be angry at all, I would more likely be angry at you for not thinking your theology through and allowing yourself to remain intentionally ignorant. But I am no longer inclined toward anger. And so, as we open the hotel door and we step out into the sunlight once again, leaving the trauma of this day’s events behind us, I conclude my brief homily with a simple prayer: “If it be possible, let this cup of suffering pass. Nevertheless, not thy will, but mine be done.” 5 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
older Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 I wish I could click two likes to this, but here's another way: Well thought out and well written. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator TABA Posted February 9 Moderator Share Posted February 9 Arguments about the historicity of Jesus, or scriptural contradictions, or evolution etc, valid as they may be, pale into insignificance compared to the problems of evil and suffering and divine hiddenness. It says something about human nature that Christianity, Islam and other theistic religions still flourish regardless. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casualfanboy16 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 I really love this post. I enjoy the way that you write. So articulate in your wording. Have you ever thought about writing a book? I don't know what you would write about, but your posts always have this very articulate way of expressing your thoughts and ideas and if you were to write any sort of book about literally anything you bet your ass I would buy it. Literally, give me your extensive vocabulary abilities. I'm nowhere near as articulate as you, but I would totally like to be. Should I just speedrun reading a dictionary or something lmao? But seriously, please write a book. Especially on Christianity, like, anything because I would totally give it a 5 star review. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonSan Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 hour ago, Casualfanboy16 said: I really love this post. I enjoy the way that you write. So articulate in your wording. Have you ever thought about writing a book? I don't know what you would write about, but your posts always have this very articulate way of expressing your thoughts and ideas and if you were to write any sort of book about literally anything you bet your ass I would buy it. Literally, give me your extensive vocabulary abilities. I'm nowhere near as articulate as you, but I would totally like to be. Should I just speedrun reading a dictionary or something lmao? But seriously, please write a book. Especially on Christianity, like, anything because I would totally give it a 5 star review. Yes!!! What I love about this forum is how well our members are thorough and articulated about the major flaws/contradictions in Xian theology. I would not be surprised if we become lawyers and/or PhD scholars out of this. ... or publish a 1000+ page hardcover textbook w/ supplementary thesis statements called: The Fundamentals of Christian Deprogramming: Principles and Rational Logic Debunking Christian and Other Cultish Theologies, 14th Edition (ISBN: 666-1-69-666666-1) 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
older Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 There is plenty of photographic evidence to support the professor's position. A simple internet search will bring up images of unimaginable suffering that are hard to look at — extreme deformities, starving children reduced to bones and skin, and horrific deaths. I once presented a Christian with a set of these, challenging him to look and then defend his allegedly benevolent god. I don't know if he looked at them but I never heard from him again. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
☆ moxieflux66 ☆ Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 3 hours ago, AnonSan said: I would not be surprised if we become lawyers and/or PhD scholars out of this. ... or publish a 1000+ page hardcover textbook w/ supplementary thesis statements called: The Fundamentals of Christian Deprogramming: Principles and Rational Logic Debunking Christian and Other Cultish Theologies, 14th Edition (ISBN: 666-1-69-666666-1) Hey, this is a great idea!!! Let's do it! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
☆ moxieflux66 ☆ Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/9/2024 at 12:33 PM, Casualfanboy16 said: I really love this post. I enjoy the way that you write. So articulate in your wording. Have you ever thought about writing a book? I don't know what you would write about, but your posts always have this very articulate way of expressing your thoughts and ideas and if you were to write any sort of book about literally anything you bet your ass I would buy it. I agree. Casual said it first. So more of this please, Professor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freshstart Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 Well stated as always, Prof. And I agree with others: you should publish! The problem of suffering has always been an existential dilemma for me and sometimes downright debilitating if I dwell on it for very long (easy to do in my line of work). I started asking questions about how God could allow suffering (and eternal hell!) as a small child so, in hindsight, I think I was deconverting even as I was being brainwashed throughout my upbringing. But the problem of suffering continues to nag me, even after deconverting. (I still can't watch the news without fighting tears). Then I discovered Alan Watts. (Fascinating guy who made some amazingly accurate predictions 60 years ago about what the world would look like today). And while I can't claim to fully understand everything he has to say, it gives me some hope that perhaps the world (and suffering at all levels) has some purpose unknown to us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ Weezer ◊ Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 13 hours ago, freshstart said: Well stated as always, Prof. And I agree with others: you should publish! The problem of suffering has always been an existential dilemma for me and sometimes downright debilitating if I dwell on it for very long (easy to do in my line of work). I started asking questions about how God could allow suffering (and eternal hell!) as a small child so, in hindsight, I think I was deconverting even as I was being brainwashed throughout my upbringing. But the problem of suffering continues to nag me, even after deconverting. (I still can't watch the news without fighting tears). Then I discovered Alan Watts. (Fascinating guy who made some amazingly accurate predictions 60 years ago about what the world would look like today). And while I can't claim to fully understand everything he has to say, it gives me some hope that perhaps the world (and suffering at all levels) has some purpose unknown to us. I get his drift about balance in nature, and how species feed off each other, and that without death the world would soon be overrun by life, but a child being raped IS AN EVIL MISTAKE!! Edit; Or is this a play on the word "mistake"? Is he saying that since humans are a part of nature, anything we do is part of nature?? And therefore not a mistake? I guess I am not getting the connection between god allowing and threatening suffeing, and "mistakes" as he describes in the video. The more I think about it, the more it seems like the universe is an experiment by some amoral or even sadistic "force" or "entity". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freshstart Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 19 hours ago, Weezer said: Is he saying that since humans are a part of nature, anything we do is part of nature?? And therefore not a mistake? I don't claim to entirely understand what Watts is saying, but yes, I think that is the gist of it. He even compared Hitler to an "earthquake." The problem for me is. . .there is so much to be heartbroken about (human trafficking, child abuse, war atrocities, people dying a slow miserable death. . . I mean, the list is endless) . . .I just keep looking for an explanation and also a way to stop feeling so miserable about it. Then again, I'm a pretty sensitive person. I've been known to shed a tear when watching a Hallmark commercial! LOL In any case, it seems like those who practice Eastern religion/philosophy on a deep level are much more at peace with the way things are, even when things are terrible. They seem to have an ability to swim in the riptide rather than fight it and drown. Its fascinating to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ Weezer ◊ Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 1 minute ago, freshstart said: In any case, it seems like those who practice Eastern religion/philosophy on a deep level are much more at peace with the way things are, even when things are terrible. They seem to have an ability to swim in the riptide rather than fight it and drown. Its fascinating to me. Perhaps it is because they didn't grow up in a culture where there is supposedly an omniopetent god that can control anything he really wants to control, but doesnt??? It is just the way things are? I have been mulling this subject over in my mind since watching the video last night, and think I am hung up on the word "mistake". Do my next statements fit in with what he is talking about?? Or the way we look at terrible abuse issues?? It has to do with (empathy??) or understanding human behavior, even behavior we call evil. There is a reason for everything. and when we understand that, we can understand why abuse, murders, rapes, etc take place. (and why we were once "christians", when after the fact it seems so ridicilous) As the saying goes, "before you condemn a person, remember that except for the chance of birth, there go I". Or some people say, "except for the grace of god, there go I". When we understand that how people turn out is determined by the genes they inherit, and the mental/psychological conditioning we get early in life, and perhaps by brain damage in one way or another, and that what they are, could have been us, then we are less condemning, blaming, and more understanding. Or more empathetic. Less vengeful. So, is the way a person turns out, no matter what they do, NOT A MISTAKE?? There is a reason for it? It is "nature"?? Just the way humans function? That puts the "God" power back into our individual and collective "laps", and the responsibility for improving things in this world into HUMAN laps. Thanks for listening to my musings. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 I'm with Walter on this one....seemingly goes back to Adam and Eve. Then I have to ask myself if I am privy to a knowledge and understanding of some absolute morality. Which I can't see myself owning at this time. But you write well....kinda flowerly the way you paint the scene... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 On 2/12/2024 at 8:53 PM, Weezer said: Perhaps it is because they didn't grow up in a culture where there is supposedly an omniopetent god that can control anything he really wants to control, but doesnt??? It is just the way things are? I have been mulling this subject over in my mind since watching the video last night, and think I am hung up on the word "mistake". Do my next statements fit in with what he is talking about?? Or the way we look at terrible abuse issues?? It has to do with (empathy??) or understanding human behavior, even behavior we call evil. There is a reason for everything. and when we understand that, we can understand why abuse, murders, rapes, etc take place. (and why we were once "christians", when after the fact it seems so ridicilous) As the saying goes, "before you condemn a person, remember that except for the chance of birth, there go I". Or some people say, "except for the grace of god, there go I". When we understand that how people turn out is determined by the genes they inherit, and the mental/psychological conditioning we get early in life, and perhaps by brain damage in one way or another, and that what they are, could have been us, then we are less condemning, blaming, and more understanding. Or more empathetic. Less vengeful. So, is the way a person turns out, no matter what they do, NOT A MISTAKE?? There is a reason for it? It is "nature"?? Just the way humans function? That puts the "God" power back into our individual and collective "laps", and the responsibility for improving things in this world into HUMAN laps. Thanks for listening to my musings. Really good sir... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator TABA Posted February 16 Moderator Share Posted February 16 19 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: I'm with Walter on this one... Did you mean Weezer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 7 minutes ago, TABA said: Did you mean Weezer? No, Walter always says it goes back to the Garden. Wheezer says everything has a cause. Problem is in this case we don’t know the cause for God not intervening similarly to why the subjection to evil in the garden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator TABA Posted February 16 Moderator Share Posted February 16 2 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Problem is in this case we don’t know the cause for God not intervening similarly to why the subjection to evil in the garden. It could be because God either doesn’t exist or is in fact evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted February 16 Author Super Moderator Share Posted February 16 Oh look! Our resident christian is arguing that god must have "reasons" that we don't know. Gosh, I really should have covered that topic in the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 9 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: Oh look! Our resident christian is arguing that god must have "reasons" that we don't know. Gosh, I really should have covered that topic in the OP. I was too caught up in the writing… lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 16 minutes ago, TABA said: It could be because God either doesn’t exist or is in fact evil. Could be that we understand quantum mechanics… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator TABA Posted February 16 Moderator Share Posted February 16 6 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Could be that we understand quantum mechanics… I go with the simpler solution in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted February 16 Author Super Moderator Share Posted February 16 4 minutes ago, TABA said: I go with the simpler solution in this case. Mr. Occam would be proud of you, sir. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 1 hour ago, TABA said: I go with the simpler solution in this case. Right, simplistic is the key word here. Make your case please.....given this is a recycled thread essentially. We need a new direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator TABA Posted February 16 Moderator Share Posted February 16 32 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Right, simplistic is the key word here. Make your case please.....given this is a recycled thread essentially. We need a new direction. No thanks. With all due respect Ed, I am not interested in debating Christianity with you. If you wish to know why I do not believe, you can look here… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 44 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Right, simplistic is the key word here. Make your case please.....given this is a recycled thread essentially. We need a new direction. How about looking to scripture to know the will of god? Would that direction suffice, Ed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now