Quote:
Originally Posted by basilisk888  the greek gods were never "lawful" they did all sorts of thing to manny people... (in the stories...) well do you call Pandora lawful? |
Dude, considering that it was you who opened up this can of worms in the first place, you're not helping the discussion at all. We're not talking about Greek gods here. Besides,
they
don't
exist. Quote:
Originally Posted by Luminous If God has good intentions(If we assume that...), there are a number of ways in which this design is questionable. Life feeds off life to survive, a rather brutal aspect of nature, the universe is fairly unforgiving to life itself, given that Earth is really the only ideal location for any to exist. Weather like hurricanes routinely kill the innocent. Bears maul little children because they can. Nature is chaotic and unforgiving. Could I imagine a good natured God that would create a universe knowing that would happen? I could more easily imagine a good natured God that would create a universe, but did not concieve of stuff like Evolution and the brutal food chain that follows it(Like the guy who invented dynamite!). I know this idea is also contra to Omniscience, so maybe I'll stop here before I go too far again.
To sum up, if one were all powerful, they could do a lot better than this universe. |
Oh, looking at the newer posts, I'd say you've got your work cut out for you. You know, you could introduce plenty of new points to the discussion all at once in a single post, and hope that you could stop the show using numbers, but it won't get you anywhere closer to understanding my side. Just the opposite -- you'd just be confusing
you. But not me; this ain't a live debate, after all, we have all the time in the world. I'd be bewildered at first with what you throw at me, but at least you've given me lots to chew on in my spare time.
Are you willing to consider my side before arguing yours or not? If you interrupt me with further points, then you wouldn't be helping yourself. It's true that the more stones you use to build your fort, the stronger your position. The more shells you fire at the other guy's fort, the sooner you get to bring him down. But what applies in war doesn't work well entirely when it comes to serious discussion. You use force and deception to win in war. Unless you can manage to fool everyone, and keep them fooled for all eternity, either by force or persuasion, you can't win debates that way.
We ask questions not because we simply want to, or because we want to topple down the other guy with questions he can't answer all at once, but because we want
answers that are true. Not just baseless speculation, or things that are candy to the mind, but
what really is.
I want to hear what you think, one at a time, to make sure we don't overlook anything. So when I ask you a question, please answer it correctly as succinctly as possible. No new points until we resolve the issues we have at hand first. Capische?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luminous Anyways, that's all my input on the matter for now. I suffer from debate fatigue, and it doesn't take too long for me to stop wanting to debate, so I'll just be fading into the background again now, if that's all right. |
I can't stop you, but you won't be helping yourself if you concede the argument this early.
Back to the discussion. Let's clear up a bit of confusion first. Since we've been discussing omnipotence, I assume that you've assumed with me, at least for the sake of the argument, that God exists, and that he is sentient, and powerful?