Christians, did Yahweh create evil?

I suspect you're right. There is so much youthful naivety to his/her posts it's the only explanation. Either that or he/she comes from one of these heavily 'cloistered' families/cultures, in which no one would ever dare ask hard questions. These poor folk suffer the most when finding themselves for the first time in enemy territory - ie, the great majority of the world. Having said that, I know a few who've reached their final years without ever having entered enemy territory. Lifelong diligence and effort in: never suffering questions, avoiding all thought (associated with their position), and avoiding humans who might somehow cause them to think. It can be achieved when non-christians cater to their automatic assumption of primacy in every social situation, and by pandering to their demand for veneration.

 

was jesus god? the majority of Christians say yes. nuff said.

 

since every man's truth is different, that's some seriously tall order. or do you want everyone to seek YOUR truth. because it is only yours, you know. there isn't a Christian alive who's interpreted Yahweh precisely as you have.

no matter how much Christians like to imagine that 'god's word' is a fixed thing, with enough power magically inherent to produce the same result in anyone who reads it, the reality is that it's effectively a blank canvas. your god has precisely zero power to align people via words. each culture which has adopted your myth has simply laid a thin veneer of jesus over a much more influential cultural tradition. our humanity will ALWAYS outgun him, and the evidence of this is the billions of interpretations.

 

So he demands we remain with him, like a controlling boyfriend? And will punish us via torture if we attempt independence?

And the award for "most abusive spouse/parent" goes to Yahweh for this nugget: teach them they can't cope without you, because they're useless.

 

how do YOU, personally, explain (to yourself) how two thirds of the world manage quite nicely without your god? because that's a deal breaker, right there, and makes a nonsense of your claim, quoted above. furthermore, countries which may have previously been majority Christian and are now majority atheist, are not only managing nicely, but are leading the world in human welfare.

the only explanation I can come up with is that you deliberately avoid thinking about this. or pretend it's not true. either way, you must need to work hard to avoid reality neutering your god!

 

Well then I suggest you figure out what the Truth is

 

You seem like you can't help but make wacky child-like statements like, "God deciding to plant the fossils". I'm not a child. Please speak in a way that doesn't make it sound like your question isn't a complete joke. If I can't take your question seriously, then how do you expect a serious response? Reword your question in an adult manner and I will answer it. Otherwise, forget it.

I recommend you speak for yourself and not for Dairyair. You and Dairyair do not both agree to the same foundations. The only atheist who has a clear understanding of what his foundations are is Trevor.
Also, the only person who answered my question was Tecoyah. Everyone (including you) avoided the question entirely. So, what will you do? Will you answer my question or continue arguing schematics? If you want to argue schematics, realize that I will ignore you, like I've been ignoring all of your other responses since that day. If you can't stay on point and answer my questions or attack my statements head on, then I really don't want to waste my time.

 

Not if there is a consensus between people as to what qualifies as evil. The society I live in long ago determined that genocide and infanticide were evil. Where have you been?

I'm specifically talking about this belief:

 

So, you admit its your opinion, right? I mean, you can't blame someone living under Sharia Law for thinking stoning adulterous women is OK.

 

why don't you respond to the question about genocide and infantacide?

incidentally, referring to islam is ridiculous. we're not worshipping allah.

 

Very well...How's this:

If you would, please explain the verified transition over time that has created the current Cetacean population and the vestigial legs found within many of the species.

 

It can't be explained because the evidence doesn't exist, nor was it ever verified. Even snakes have vestigial legs. Are you going to conclude that they too evolved from whales or vice versa?

 

Dairyair simultaneously "liked" my answer and posted that you had already been given the best answer possible. Seeing as mine was the only answer that had been offered at the time, it seems like a logical conclusion. Dairyair, I apologize if I was mistaken.

We may very well disagree about our foundations, but 1) I didn't say we agreed about our foundations; I said we agreed that atheists are going to disagree on how to run a country which . . . 2) The fact that we disagree about our foundations, just like theists disagree about their various foundations, is exactly the point I was making.

As you would say, that's your opinion.

Have you not been paying attention? Let's try again:

"So... If atheists had their own country and they were in the majority, would they:"

And we can answer your question before continuing any further, because the answer is that atheists have different opinions. This is what Tecoyah said and you said he answered your question. I said the same thing and you said I didn't answer your question. Which is it?

Now, if you would like to amend your question and as how each of us individually would want to see our little atheist country run, then I can do that, but that isn't what you asked.

So... If Yardmeat had his own country and he was in charge, would he:

1) Allow anyone to practice any religion they want? Yep, so long as they were peaceful.
2) Allow tax exemptions for mosques and churches? Yep, so long as they were not involved in politics.
3) Encourage tolerance to other people's faiths without mocking their beliefs? It wouldn't be my government's place to tell people what they should or shouldn't say about religion.
4) Enforce rules on basic tenants? On secular tenants, yes.
5) Establish judges who make decisions based on their own interpretation of the law or someone else's interpretation of the law?Pretty much required to have a government, so yes.
6) Allow tax exemptions for religious charity funds and shelters? Yep, so long as they stayed out of politics.

Like I said, we are going to differ just like theists differ. Imagine that.

 

Apparently you are a bit confused on both the concept of evolution and timelines. Vestigial legs are the remainders of limbs that were once useful and required means of locomotion. Whales needed them while terrestrial creatures and snakes when they still walked as lizards do today.

As you can see, it certainly CAN be explained.

 

But I agree with everything you just said, but you do see the problem, right? My point is that, from an atheistic perspective, morality is an opinion. One atheist replied with terrible policies, and another replied with great ones, but none of us could judge another person based on those policies. So, if God (for example) said no to all of those policies, would that make him any more or less moral than you?

This wasn't really projected to you, but you jumped into the conversation, so....

 

Theists disagree among themselves about these same questions. Even Christians disagree among themselves. If disagreement were evidence that "from X perspective, morality is an opinion", then from a theist perspective, morality is an opinion and from a Christian perspective, morality is an opinion.

Just as some theists reply with terrible policies and others with great ones, and some Christians reply with terrible policies and others with great ones. I much prefer what you have said about politics so far to Paul's view of politics, for example.

So now you are arguing for subjective morality?

 

Not really. It goes to show that God values us so much that he is willing to do anything to reconcile our relationship with Him.

Think about it. What was the very first sin? Eating the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. There were no natural consequences of eating that fruit, but it was a rejection of God. All sin since has been the same.

God showed grace on Abraham, Sarah, and lots of other sinners because he wanted to show his glory through them. As the saying goes, God can use crooked sticks to make straight lines.

 

Sin isn't so much a thing that exists by itself, but it is an absence of something else. For example, cold is merely an absence of heat, and darkness is an absence of light. Sin is an absence of holiness, and since God is holy, holiness was already in the world.

I think you would agree that there is no love without choice. If you are forced to love someone, it's not really love, is it? That's why the forbidden fruit was in the Garden. God essentially told Adam and Eve, "You can live in a perfect relationship with me, and we can love each other and enjoy creation for all eternity. But if you don't want to be in a relationship with me, I offer you the opportunity to opt out. But be warned: you can never rebuild the relationship after it has been severed." We chose poorly.

- - - Updated - - -

Like I said, sin wasn't really "created", as sin is just the absence of holiness.

 

When I was little and I walked down the road with my parents, they made me hold their hands. Is that abusive, or is it protective? In fact, I would say that it would be unloving for them not to protect me from danger that they know is there.

We didn't need to be taught that we can't cope without him. Look around. How well is humanity coping right now?

 

Look at crime rates. Look at wars. Look at depression. Look at any kind of evil or injustice in the world. These are the results of humanity making it's own path.

I'm not saying that Christians or Christian nations are the things that will bring the world back into perfect order. History has shown that to be patently false, because Christians are sinful just like anyone else. Any Christian who claims otherwise is not a true Christian.

Besides, I was referring to "we" personally, as in each individual. Not necessarily "Christian nations".

 

Yardmeat did answer your question. Quite accurately also.
There are millions of atheists, they don't all have the same ideologies. So there is a possible million answers to your question.
Tecoyah gave but 1. His own personal view. And he stated it as such.

 

Why does God have to reconcile anything if God loves us so much?
He created the environment for us to lose the reconciliation in the 1st place.
He created the lack of holiness as you call it. He allowed it, knowing before hand it was going to happen.
What is the purpose for all this? And in the end, we supposedly go to heaven or where ever the paradise kingdom is to be and be like it was the garden of eden. Right back to square 1.

- - - Updated - - -

Way better than 2000+ years ago.

 

He created the environment because we have free will. He offered us the choice of a perfect, loving, eternal relationship with him, or separation from Him, leading to death. We chose poorly.

He did not create the lack of holiness. That would be like saying that the light is responsible for the darkness.

Maybe, but that doesn't really matter to my argument.

 

I'm not going to rehash the 'free will' thing.
If God is omni everything, IMO, there is no free will. It is an impossibility for me.

It absolutely does.
All these stories were made up in some very rough times. Little knowledge of the physical world. As we become more knowledgeable about our world and universe, those things once attributed to gods become less and less.

 

Well, free will can really only exist if a creator exists. Otherwise what we call "free will" is only a collection of random chemical reactions that are useful to our survival.

An all-powerful God can easily endow its creation with free will. He knows what our choice will be, but the fact remains that it is our choice.

You still need to prove that the world is better now than it was 2000 years ago.