PROOF that Evolution is a Myth

[photon]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Objective Standard of Morality

There are laws that God created, he is obligated to to follow them as long as wel follow them. If we follow them, we will recieve the rewards of these laws. If we do not follow them, we cannot recieve the rewards for it. ie God can't feel sorry for us and reward us if we didn't follow the 'rule'. This might be hard to understand, but this topic could be discussed for days on end without being complete.

God is pure goodness and pure love. He created everything and when he did he knew that Lucifer would be revolt and fight against the heavens. Without evil, there can be no good. Just as without darkness there can be no light. Evil tempts us, if we were not tempted we could not learn.

Not all areas of Christianity believe this though.. you say that you have to follow the laws to reap the rewards, but wasn't the whole point of Jesus dying that man could never follow the laws themselves? (Sucks to be a pre-Jesus person) So salvation comes through grace by faith, not by actions such as obeying or disobeying any law.

Plus God didn't obey his own commandments. The Old Testament is filled with people being killed by God. God killed 42 kids who made fun of Elisha (2 Kings 2:23-24)

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Which way is it? Are you questioning the existance of God, or are yo uaccepting this as true and using it as a premise to question reason for the existance of evil?

I'm not going speak for him, but the way I see it, it goes like this.

1. God can do everything and anything and controls the universe, sees into the future and reads our minds.
2. He loves us all.
3. He lets the devil mess with us all the time and destroy our lives, murder our children and trick us into eternal damnation.
4. That doesn't sound like love to me.
5. "It's free will, he's giving you a choice". No he's not, he knows whats going to happen and he always knew what was going to happen and it happens and we end up in hell.

It doesn't add up.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I'm not going speak for him, but the way I see it, it goes like this.

1. God can do everything and anything and controls the universe, sees into the future and reads our minds.
2. He loves us all.
3. He lets the devil mess with us all the time and destroy our lives, murder our children and trick us into eternal damnation.
4. That doesn't sound like love to me.
5. "It's free will, he's giving you a choice". No he's not, he knows whats going to happen and he always knew what was going to happen and it happens and we end up in hell.

It doesn't add up.

Yeah, that's the exact same thing Cheese wrote but a little longer, and I've already explained the problem with this.
The problem is as follows: at least one of the premisis must me incorrect.
It could be that he loves us, it could be the implied premis that love requres, that he protect us from evil at all cost, or it could be that God exists. Either way, we know evil exists, so we know that one or more of the premises must be false, this CAN'T be debated, it is a fact, and right now we don't know which premis is false. Is it that God exists, or is it that he loves us? I don't know which means we can make NO conclusions as to the existance of God using this logic. This is a classic example of a flawed arguement, from which no conclusion can be made, other than, "At lease one premis is false".

My point is that Cheese was claiming that all he wanted to know was why evil existed, and wasn't trying to make a point about the existance of God. You can't do both.

To use this to ask why evil exists, you must first conclude that it presents a paradox, and the only way for that to be is if the premises are correct, including "God exists", which we know Cheese does not believe. So using this as a means to ask why evil exists, is the same as saying something like "The Oilers are the best team in the NHL this year" So why are they not in the playoffs?".

To use this as an argument about the existance of God is also impossible, becasue from this statement all you can conclude is that one of the premises is correct, unless you have powers beyond the average man, you can't deduce, whether it is the existance of God, or the necessary requirements for God that is flawed.

And to say "I can't imagine a God who isn't those things", is about as valid, of an arguement as the old Rock that keeps tigers away.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Okay, fine, my response is "I don't know", but I'll tell you this, any attempt to determine anything about the existance of God from that line of reasoning is doomed to failure.

But come on, let's call a spade a spade. You honestly want me to beleive that you just wanted to know why there was evil, or was what you really meant "How can you justify the existance of god based on this arguement and the existance of evil".

Because if that wasn't your intent, then it would seem to me you're going in circles. You know evil exists, and you believe God does not exist, yet you want to know why it is that evil exists based on the premis that God doe exist.

Which way is it? Are you questioning the existance of God, or are yo uaccepting this as true and using it as a premise to question reason for the existance of evil?

I want to know how a person who believes that their God...any God for that matter, ( could be Zeuss, the Abrahamic version, Mohammed, or the God of the Flames), could believe that IF their version is an Omnimax God how could He let evil survive...or begin for that matter. It has nothing to do with my beliefs whether you want to buy into that or not.

What I believe is irrelevant, but if you want to know a small part...then heres a snippet...

"Without Evil there can be no religion."...this is their point of view...

Without evil, there is no good. Without sin, there can be no salvation

Therefore it is in ANY religions interest to ensure that Evil takes front and centre stage to ensure that their flock remains complacent. Without a fear of Hell there is no need for <pick your flavor> religion.

Now use this with omnipotent = all-powerful, omniscient = all-knowing and omnibenevolent = all compassionate, and you are close to where Im leaning.

I believe that man is inherantly good....of course some people have difficulties, (either through social upbringing or emotional distress) that make bad things happen...like Murder, Rape, election to Political Office, etc etc. That does NOT suggest that Satan made them do it, nor would it have changed the outcome if they were fine upstanding Christians. (of course Im minimilizing things). There are also MILLIONS of good people who hold no theistic leaning, they do great deeds and make this earth a wonderful place to live...Further to that...speaking from a Christians point of view....you MUST accept their version of an Abrahamic God in order to get the free pass into their version of heaven. If thats the case many good and wonderful people outside of this choice will go to hell. That includes visionaries such as Mahatma Ghandi, Mother Theresa, and BILLIONS of young babies who have died from various scourge and attrocities throughout history who never had the chance of accepting this God Version 2318C. That is the kind of Omnipotence I dont buy into...and many are turning their backs on.

[troutman]

Interesting discussion on the Daily Show the other day about good/evil, by the author of The Lucifer Effect:

http://www.lucifereffect.com/

The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil (Random House, 2007). In this book, I summarize more than 30 years of research on factors that can create a "perfect storm" which leads good people to engage in evil actions. This transformation of human character is what I call the "Lucifer Effect," named after God's favorite angel, Lucifer, who fell from grace and ultimately became Satan.

Rather than providing a religious analysis, however, I offer a psychological account of how ordinary people sometimes turn evil and commit unspeakable acts. As part of this account, The Lucifer Effect tells, for the first time, the full story behind the Stanford Prison Experiment, a now-classic study I conducted in 1971. In that study, normal college students were randomly assigned to play the role of guard or inmate for two weeks in a simulated prison, yet the guards quickly became so brutal that the experiment had to be shut down after only six days.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Yeah, that's the exact same thing Cheese wrote but a little longer, and I've already explained the problem with this.
The problem is as follows: at least one of the premisis must me incorrect.
It could be that he loves us, it could be the implied premis that love requres, that he protect us from evil at all cost, or it could be that God exists. Either way, we know evil exists, so we know that one or more of the premises must be false, this CAN'T be debated, it is a fact, and right now we don't know which premis is false. Is it that God exists, or is it that he loves us? I don't know which means we can make NO conclusions as to the existance of God using this logic. This is a classic example of a flawed arguement, from which no conclusion can be made, other than, "At lease one premis is false".

My point is that Cheese was claiming that all he wanted to know was why evil existed, and wasn't trying to make a point about the existance of God. You can't do both.

To use this to ask why evil exists, you must first conclude that it presents a paradox, and the only way for that to be is if the premises are correct, including "God exists", which we know Cheese does not believe. So using this as a means to ask why evil exists, is the same as saying something like "The Oilers are the best team in the NHL this year" So why are they not in the playoffs?".

To use this as an argument about the existance of God is also impossible, becasue from this statement all you can conclude is that one of the premises is correct, unless you have powers beyond the average man, you can't deduce, whether it is the existance of God, or the necessary requirements for God that is flawed.

And to say "I can't imagine a God who isn't those things", is about as valid, of an arguement as the old Rock that keeps tigers away.

I have to say BBS that I am really trying to understand your logic...but I cant. You may be writing it too fast to complete the thought, or maybe its the thought pattern of an Agnostic that doesnt have an idea one way or the other?
Seriously...I dont follow your thought process at all...maybe Rouge can.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Y
The problem is as follows: at least one of the premisis must me incorrect.
It could be that he loves us, it could be the implied premis that love requres, that he protect us from evil at all cost, or it could be that God exists. Either way, we know evil exists, so we know that one or more of the premises must be false, this CAN'T be debated,

I know one of the premises is incorrect. I know it doesn't make sense. But that is the story we are supposed to believe. Those are the premises, as I see 'em, put forward not by me, but by lots of Christians, maybe even Christianity itself.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Cheese

I have to say BBS that I am really trying to understand your logic...but I cant. You may be writing it too fast to complete the thought, or maybe its the thought pattern of an Agnostic that doesnt have an idea one way or the other?
Seriously...I dont follow your thought process at all...maybe Rouge can.

It's simple Cheese. You asked Why does evil exist. Based on something like this:

1) If God exists he must be an omnimax God (implied by the rest of your posts)
2) If God is an Omnimax God then evil should not exist
3) Evil Exists

If you're truely perplexed why evil exists then what you are asking is which of the premesis is incorrect:
a) That God is an omnimax God
b) That an omnimax God should stop evil
c) The implied premis that God exists, becasue God existing is parmount to making this a Paradox.

We know that you do not believe in God, this arguement should be irrelevant to you in a discussion as to why evil exists, becasue the flow of logic has no bearing.

However, to use this as an arguement about the existance of God:
If you're trying to conclude that God does not exist from this, it is impossible because there are sevarl posibilites, that would allow for evil to exist.
a) God doesn't exist
b) God is not an Omnimax God
c) An Omnimax god does not need to stop all evil (possibly because something else is of greater importance, ie free will)


Seriously, for someone who claims to hold logic and science so dear, I'm supprised you can't grasp, the meaning of something so simple. this is one of the basic arguements used in first year logic/philosophy courses to show flawed arguements, and the fact that you can't grasp this concept is hilarious.

either that or you know exactly what I'm talking about, and you're using your usual tactic, of posting a bunch of random quotes (is there no original thougth in that brain of yours), and taking your ball and going home (or is it, "I don't follow, you really are lost aren't you?"). Either way for someone who tries to come off as so enlightened it really is funny.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I know one of the premises is incorrect. I know it doesn't make sense. But that is the story we are supposed to believe. Those are the premises, as I see 'em, put forward not by me, but by lots of Christians, maybe even Christianity itself.

No, these are the premeses set forth by ATHEISTS to prove that God doesn't exist, and it has ben rebuffed for HUNDREDS of years. This is one of the first arguements that comes up on first year philosophy courses to show a flawed arguement.

The concept of an Omnimax God that wants to do away with all evil has never been proposed by the Christain faith (or any others that I know of), that is the whole point of free will, which is a cornerstone of the Christian Faith.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

It's simple Cheese. You asked Why does evil exist. Based on something like this:

1) If God exists he must be an omnimax God (implied by the rest of your posts)
2) If God is an Omnimax God then evil should not exist
3) Evil Exists

If you're truely perplexed why evil exists then what you are asking is which of the premesis is incorrect:
a) That God is an omnimax God
b) That an omnimax God should stop evil
c) The implied premis that God exists, becasue God existing is parmount to making this a Paradox.

If you're trying to conclude that God does not exist from this, it is impossible because there are sevarl posibilites, that would allow for evil to exist.
a) God doesn't exist
b) God is not an Omnimax God
c) An Omnimax god does not need to stop all evil (possibly because something else is of greater importance, ie free will)

Seriously, for someone who claims to hold logic and science so dear, I'm supprised you can't grasp, the meaning of something so simple. this is one of the basic arguements used in first year logic/philosophy courses to show flawed arguements, and the fact that you can't grasp this concept is hilarious.

either that or you know exactly what I'm talking about, and you're using your usual tactic, of posting a bunch of random quotes (is there no original thougth in that brain of yours), and taking your ball and going home (or is it, "I don't follow, you really are lost aren't you?"). Either way for someone who tries to come off as so enlightened it really is funny.

wow...you sure read between the lines a lot Mr Shantz!
Maybe you should become a mind reader LOL...seriously...
Its not me who suggests that God is Omnimax...the FACT it doesnt make sense isnt MY issue....LOL
Im not perplexed by anything but you.... Maybe you should go argue on a Philosophy board.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

No, these are the premeses set forth by ATHEISTS to prove that God doesn't exist,

I'm not even debating the existence of god here. What I said above is what I've been led to believe that I should, umm, believe. If I'm all turned around on the matter then straighten me out.

Any churchifying I've sat through contained the following in one form or another:

1. God exists and is the creator of everything that ever was or will be.
2. He loves you
3. The devil is out to get you, don't let him or you'll wind up in hell
4. If you are good you will wind up in heaven with God

I'm sure there are more, but those are the basics. I wasn't in first year philosophy when I started to wonder about how it all works. It never made sense and nobody has satisfactorily explained the contradictions, even if you claim it was resolved hundreds of years ago.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

No, these are the premeses set forth by ATHEISTS to prove that God doesn't exist, and it has ben rebuffed for HUNDREDS of years. This is one of the first arguements that comes up on first year philosophy courses to show a flawed arguement.

The concept of an Omnimax God that wants to do away with all evil has never been proposed by the Christain faith (or any others that I know of), that is the whole point of free will, which is a cornerstone of the Christian Faith.

BS BBS LOL. PROVE your point with facts and or links.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I'm not even debating the existence of god here. What I said above is what I've been led to believe that I should, umm, believe. If I'm all turned around on the matter then straighten me out.

Any churchifying I've sat through contained the following in one form or another:

1. God exists and is the creator of everything that ever was or will be.
2. He loves you
3. The devil is out to get you, don't let him or you'll wind up in hell
4. If you are good you will wind up in heaven with God

I'm sure there are more, but those are the basics. I wasn't in first year philosophy when I started to wonder about how it all works. It never made sense and nobody has satisfactorily explained the contradictions, even if you claim it was resolved hundreds of years ago.

What you have there and the arguement about God being an Omnimax God, and the existance of evil are not the same thing.
I'm not argueing the exisatnce of God. I don't care. What I'm arguing is the logic used in that arguement, which is flawed.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Cheese

wow...you sure read between the lines a lot Mr Shantz!
Maybe you should become a mind reader LOL...seriously...
Its not me who suggests that God is Omnimax...the FACT it doesnt make sense isnt MY issue....LOL
Im not perplexed by anything but you.... Maybe you should go argue on a Philosophy board.

you quote it as a premis in your arguement.

you say you know the arguement doesn't make sense, and yet you ask questions about why the conclusion is ture (you quoted the arguement, including the bit about God being Omnimax, and then asked "Why is the conclusion true")

Again, you show that, all you can do is throw around quotes and hope no one else sees, that it's all a veil so you can pretend to be educated on a subject. You want to quote a logical arguement, then perhaps you should have even the slightest knowledge of the basic tennants of logic.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

you quote it as a premis in your arguement.

Just realised what you'll say about this.

"It wasn't my arguement, I said "not my words" blah blah blah."

My point is that you are using this arguement for the purpose of furthering your point (namely that theists are stupid for believeing in God because they if they believe in an Omnimax God it doesn't make sense")

Your words or not, you're using it, and the logic in it is flawed, so using it to make any sort of point is useless.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

you quote it as a premis in your arguement.

you say you know the arguement doesn't make sense, and yet you ask questions about why the conclusion is ture (you quoted the arguement, including the bit about God being Omnimax, and then asked "Why is the conclusion true")

Again, you show that, all you can do is throw around quotes and hope no one else sees, that it's all a veil so you can pretend to be educated on a subject. You want to quote a logical arguement, then perhaps you should have even the slightest knowledge of the basic tennants of logic.

Man are you drinking tonite?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

What you have there and the arguement about God being an Omnimax God, and the existance of evil are not the same thing.

I'm not argueing the exisatnce of God. I don't care. What I'm arguing is the logic used in that arguement, which is flawed.

I realize the logic is technically flawed. It has to be. I'm trying to represent what to me seems like a pretty mainstream Christian set of beliefs so I can't take into account every possible "way" God could be.

1. Belief in an all-powerful, all seeing, universe creating and controlling god is pretty common, no?
2. He loves us -- this is also a very common sentiment.
3. The devil exists and is capable of tricking or enticing us into going to hell. We know that lots of people believe this.
4. We have free will

These are things I have been told or read that Christians (maybe not all of them) believe.

You may not hold those beliefs but you have to admit that many Christians do hold them all. The contradictions and flawed logic in these (what I believe to be mainstream Christian) beliefs are pretty obvious.

[FireFly]

If God in an Omnimax God, then not only does He know what will happen if He lets the evil happen, He also knows what will happen if He interferes. Did you ever think about that? Perhaps by interfering, it actually becomes worse. His ultimate goal is not that there should be no evil, it's that He should be as close to as many of us as is possible. Perhaps by interfering, He actually drives people away from Him? This is why He is Omnimax and we are not.

[SoCalFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by FireFly

If God in an Omnimax God, then not only does He know what will happen if He lets the evil happen, He also knows what will happen if He interferes. Did you ever think about that? Perhaps by interfering, it actually becomes worse. His ultimate goal is not that there should be no evil, it's that He should be as close to as many of us as is possible. Perhaps by interfering, He actually drives people away from Him? This is why He is Omnimax and we are not.

But how can things get worse? It's God. The all powerful? Do you mean that God doesn't have the power to stop evil?

I mean, is that what God is really all about... getting as close to as many humans as possible? That seems like a complete waste of time. He can just make it happen. I mean, if God can't do enough good to make us love Him or stop people from being 'driven away', what kind of All Powerful almighty is that? A very human sounding one. And if there was a God, he would not suffer any human frailty caused by our evolution.

[Bobblehead]

Interesting Newsweek poll.

Do you believe in God? Yes:91% No:6%

Also the Evolution question:

12. Which one of the following statements come closest to your views about the origin and development of human beings? Humans developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process (or) Humans developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process (or) God created humans pretty much in the present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so?
God guided process........30%
God had no part.............13%
Created in present form...48%
Other/Don't Know............9%