AJ777, problem of Evil and cosmological argument.

154 posts / 0 new
Last post
arakish's picture
@ Empedocles

@ Empedocles

Henotheism refers to a pluralistic theology wherein different deities are viewed to be of a unitary, equivalent divine essence.

So who are your deities?

rmfr

EDIT: inserted omitted word

Empedocles's picture
@arakish

@arakish

Henotheism (from Greek ἑνός θεός (henos theos), meaning 'one god') is the worship of a single god while not denying the existence or possible existence of other deities.

The Bible calls Jehovah God Almighty and calls Jesus a mighty god. Jehovah appointed Moses as a God to Aaron and Pharaoh. He called the angels gods and the judges of Israel. The Bible even acknowledges false gods like Molech, Baal, Ashtoreth, etc.

Sheldon's picture
I still no attempt at

I see no attempt at demonstrating objective evidence for these claims?

Diotrephes's picture
Empedocles,

Empedocles,

"The Hebrew word for evil is ra. Isaiah 45:7 (KJV) translates ra as evil, but a more accurate translation there would be calamity."

The original Bible was written in Latin. All of the Greek and Hebrew Bibles are translations of the original Latin.

Empedocles's picture
@Diotrephes

@Diotrephes

The original Bible was written in Latin. All of the Greek and Hebrew Bibles are translations of the original Latin.

Oh, Buddha . . . where do you get ideas like that?

AJ777's picture
1.The Big Bang needs a big

1.The Big Bang needs a big banger.
2. Evil is not explainable on atheism. On Christianity evil is the lack of good. God did not create evil, where He is not there is evil.

Empedocles's picture
1.The Big Bang needs a big

1.The Big Bang needs a big banger.

It certainly is plausible, but how would you know for sure?

2. Evil is not explainable on atheism. On Christianity evil is the lack of good. God did not create evil, where He is not there is evil.

Scriptural reference, please?

LogicFTW's picture
So are you saying there are

So are you saying there are places god is not? I thought he was everywhere? You also admit god is not all powerful? Just how powerful is he? Apparently not very powerful against evil.

Empedocles's picture
@LogicFTW

@LogicFTW

I think you should probably use @Empedocles like you suggest for responses for you . . . that might help me get accustomed to this odd format.

Uh . . . the primary objective to terms like the omni's is they are exaggerated. Except for presence which isn't just exaggerated, it's wrong since God's position is fixed in heaven. There would be no point in saying that if he were everywhere.

God almighty is a correct term, but that doesn't necessarily imply the exaggerated sense of the omni's or perhaps even how all powerful could be used as well, I suppose. God can do anything he wants, but he is limited, in a sense, in that he can't lie or do something against his own will or purpose. Much the same as I can't, for example, kill anyone. It certainly is possible but when I say I couldn't that isn't a contradiction, it just means that I'm capable of doing it, sure, but it is something so against my will that I wouldn't.

Diotrephes's picture
Empedocles,

Empedocles,

"Will you speak lies for God? Do you really believe your lies are what God wants you to say?" ~ Job 13:7 (ERV)

As it says in 2 Thessalonians 2:11 (CEV) = "So God will make sure that they are fooled into believing a lie."

Empedocles's picture
@ Diotrephes

@ Diotrephes

A Response To The Skeptic's Annotated Bible (SAB) - Is It Okay To Lie?

According to the Bible a lie is not only a verbal expression but also may be action designed to deceive a person who is entitled to know the truth. Living a lie, for example, pretending to be faithful when intentionally carrying out that which is gross sin is, though unspoken, nevertheless a lie.

Each of the verses which are used by the SAB in order to establish that the Bible says it is wrong to lie are acceptable interpretations, and so will not be addressed, but the verses used to convey the idea of a contradiction by seeming to say it is alright to lie are misunderstood as the aforementioned rule of entitlement. According to the Bible one is not obligated to tell the truth if the person receiving the information is not entitled to it. (Matthew 7:6; 21:23-27) The difference being deceiving for personal gain or to avoid due punishment as opposed to misleading in order to avoid unjust harm or allowing someone who wishes to believe a lie to continue doing so. (Genesis 12:10-19; Chapter 20; 26:1-10 / 2 Kings 6:11-23)

It is also important to note that those who tell a lie and repent are forgiven. The case of Peter, for example, having denied Christ 3 times, repented and was forgiven. But those who carry on a lie without repentance are, of course, not forgiven. (Matthew 26:69-75)

Joshua 2:4-6 - And the woman [Rahab] took the two men and hid them and said thus: There came men unto me, but I wist not whence they were; and it came to pass about the time of shutting of the gate, when it was dark that the men went out; whither the men went I wot not; pursue after them quickly, for ye shall overtake them. But she had brought them up to the roof of the house and hid them with the stalks of flax.

James 2:25 - Was not Rahab, the harlot, justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

Response: Rehab was not under any moral obligation to tell the officers of the king of Jericho the truth which would have resulted in the destruction of her and her family by the Israelites, or if found out then by the king of Jericho. She knew of the recent exploits of the Israelites in battle and she put faith in Jehovah, their God and so was declared righteous.

Exodus 1:18-20 - And the king of Egypt called for the midwives, and said unto them, Why have ye done this thing, and have saved the men-children alive? And the midwives said unto Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women; for they are lively, and are delivered ere the midwives come in unto them. Therefore God dealt well with the midwives.

Response: Here it isn't just a case of the midwives misdirecting the Pharaoh, who meant to do harm, but it also may have been true. The Ancient Hebrew Social Life and Custom and The New Bible Dictionary both convey the idea of Hebrew women giving birth by crouching on a stool or pile of bricks or stone. It seems that they called upon the services of a midwife only in serious cases when assistance was needed.

1 Kings 22:21-22 - And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, I will persuade him . . . I will go forth and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him and prevail also; go forth and do so.

Response: This is what the apostle Paul called "operation of error." It is a case of allowing those who prefer to believe in a falsehood to continue to do so. (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12) Micaiah had foretold disaster but the prophets of king Ahab didn't want to hear the truth, he wanted victory. It should be recognized that Micaiah did foretell the truth, but Ahab chose not to listen.

2 Kings 8:10 - And Elisha said unto him, go, say unto him, Thou mayest certainly recover: howbeit the Lord hath showed me that he shall surely die.

Response: This is a really interesting case. The margin of the Masoretic text, the Greek Septuagint, Latin Vulgate, Syriac Peshitta and 18 other Hebrew manuscripts read: "Say to him, 'You will.'" but the actual text of the Masoretic reads: "Say, 'You will not.'"

It would seem likely that Hazael was given a riddle by Elisha which stated that Ben-hadad would recover if it were not for the fact that Hazael was going to kill him. Hazael only told the first part of the prophecy.

Diotrephes's picture
Empedocles,

Empedocles,

"According to the Bible one is not obligated to tell the truth if the person receiving the information is not entitled to it."

That is the Jewish theory of dealing with Gentiles, which is repeated in the Jewish Babylonian Talmud. Notice in Matthew 7:6 it refers to Gentiles as dogs and swine. That image is also repeated numerous times in the Jewish Talmud which depicts Gentiles as animals who can be deceived and abused at will.

If you are not a Jew why would you worship one who considers you to be a dog or a pig who doesn't deserve the truth?

Empedocles's picture
@Diotrephes

@Diotrephes

Well . . . when you study religions you see a modus operandi emerging over and over. And all mixing together as well. Moses and the faithful Jews had a somewhat more practical and concrete way of thinking. For example, the soul, to them (though the English word soul is actually a terrible translation, I will show why later) is the life, the blood which gives life, of any breathing creature. Animal and men. The Hebrew and Greek words translated soul, ne′phesh [נֶפֶשׁ] and psy·khe′ [ψυχή], respecively, literally meant "breather." The soul is mortal. It dies or can be destroyed. (Ezekiel 18:4 / Matthew 10:28) Socrates and other Greek philosophers thought of the soul as immortal (Plato quoting Socrates, Phaedo, 80, D, E; 81, A). When Alexander was welcomed into the temple at Jerusalem in the summer of 332 B.C.E. Greek philosophy began to influence Jewish thinking. So the soul began to be thought of as immortal.

See Image below: Alexander The Great In The Temple Of Jerusalem, by Sebastiano Conca: c. 1727

When everything is magnified being a part of it appeals to the ego. The Pharisees and Scribes of Jesus time were religious and they wanted the power of the Aaronic priests. When Jerusalem and all of it's genealogies were destroyed in 70 C.E. the Pharisees took over the role of priests, without Jehovah's approval. In Jesus' time they were already problematic in their religiosity. If you read the Pirqe Aboth it's all about self exaltation. The "wisdom" and traditions of men. They would exaggerate rules, like washing ones hands up past the elbows before eating or doing good works on the Sabbath. All that comes from them. For example, if a baby was born eight days before the Sabbath then the priests would circumcise the baby on that Sabbath day. Or David and his men would pluck wheat from the fields when they were hungry, like the disciples did later. They missed the heart of the law.

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?: 

Yes
Diotrephes's picture
Empedocles,

Empedocles,

"...They missed the heart of the law.

Moses's law was inflexible and without mercy. The Jesus character made it acceptable to ignore most of it. If he had been around Moses he would have been stoned to death in the blink of an eye.

In Exodus chapter 16 the people had free manna six days a week with a double portion on the sixth day. That way they could not do any gathering or cooking but had to sit on their asses without doing any work. If they did any work at all they were to be stoned to death. So,according to the law, when Jesus and his disciples picked grain on the sabbath they would have been stoned to death by Moses for breaking the Fifth Commandment.

If you had to obey the Fifth Commandment today you wouldn't be able to do jack shit on the sabbath except to mostly sit on your ass all day.

Empedocles's picture
@Diotrephes

@Diotrephes

And likewise David with the bread, as Jesus pointed out?

Matthew 12:1-8 / 1 Samuel 21:1-6

arakish's picture
Empedocles: "Is It Okay To

Empedocles: "Is It Okay To Lie?"

Of course. Always. I for one never tell the truth.

rmfr

Empedocles's picture
@arakish

@arakish

Of course. Always. I for one never tell the truth.

That's a lie!

arakish's picture
@ Empedocles

@ Empedocles

Arakish: “Of course. Always. I for one never tell the truth.

Empedocles: “That's a lie!

But how does one prove I said a lie in my statement?

rmfr

LogicFTW's picture
@Empedocles

@Empedocles

I think you should probably use @Empedocles like you suggest for responses for you . . . that might help me get accustomed to this odd format.

Ah sorry, yeah I forgot to put an @AJ777, it was intended for him. Sorry my bad, sometimes I put out a quick response where I do not bother with an @ and my signature at the bottom.

In full sized web browsers (most of the ones I used anyways) you can see discussion thread lines that show one response to another.. it is somewhat buggy though (especially when replies spill to the next page from a posting a page earlier.) The forum software is outdated and I fully agree the forums are an odd format. I been here long enough to get pretty used to it though.

the primary objective to terms like the omni's is they are exaggerated. Except for presence which isn't just exaggerated, it's wrong since God's position is fixed in heaven. There would be no point in saying that if he were everywhere.

I actually like that you say god is not everywhere and the 3 omni's are way overblown it actually makes the reasoning,logic,common sense argument for your particular god idea stronger. The 3 omni's using the word "all" is a huge problem for anyone what claims it. Like the simple basic problem of evil in relation to the 3 omni's/all.

God almighty is a correct term, but that doesn't necessarily imply the exaggerated sense of the omni's or perhaps even how all powerful could be used as well, I suppose.

Successfully negotiating the problems with omni/all by saying simply more along the lines of "almighty" helps, however notice it looks real similar to: "all mighty" I at least find that troubling as well.

But taking a step back and going along with just the god is powerful and knowledgeable, to a much greater extent then humans is not a bad place to start. However it does open the door to interpretation.

Just how powerful and knowledgeable is "god" ? We can reference books, we can ask religious leaders and scholars, but it is all simply just human interpretation and writings and talking. We have no real: measurable: god is x powerful and y powerful. Perhaps a god does not have the power to grant miracles. Perhaps god cannot grant eternal afterlife in heaven and instead when we die we simply become worm food? If god cant do miracles, and there is no afterlife, why bother with the whole worship god part? I think all we are left with is: because it would makes us feel good.

I fortunately or unfortunately perhaps, (depending on your stance,) make my demands for proof/evidence/etc that I have for everything else in life, (this serves me VERY well!) on the god concepts, so the god concept cannot even offer me "feel good."

Instead I end up with the gap, that leads me to focus on all the harm humans have done to other humans in the name of religion.

I also feel an almighty god would not rely on physical location and parents/peers teaching from birth that this all mighty god idea exists in particular form. That the various god ideas only spread to new locations that have never heard of the particular god idea, by force, instead of people finding "god" idea on their own.

 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Empedocles's picture
@LogicFTW

@LogicFTW

I actually like that you say god is not everywhere and the 3 omni's are way overblown it actually makes the reasoning,logic,common sense argument for your particular god idea stronger. The 3 omni's using the word "all" is a huge problem for anyone what claims it. Like the simple basic problem of evil in relation to the 3 omni's/all.

Well, thanks, but I can't pick parts of the Bible or truth that I like. There are some things about it I don't like. From our perspective it would seem easy to assume that a being that could create the heavens and earth could do anything, but the omni's just don't fit with scripture in their exaggerated form.

Successfully negotiating the problems with omni/all by saying simply more along the lines of "almighty" helps, however notice it looks real similar to: "all mighty" I at least find that troubling as well.

But taking a step back and going along with just the god is powerful and knowledgeable, to a much greater extent then humans is not a bad place to start. However it does open the door to interpretation.

Just how powerful and knowledgeable is "god" ? We can reference books, we can ask religious leaders and scholars, but it is all simply just human interpretation and writings and talking. We have no real: measurable: god is x powerful and y powerful. Perhaps a god does not have the power to grant miracles. Perhaps god cannot grant eternal afterlife in heaven and instead when we die we simply become worm food? If god cant do miracles, and there is no afterlife, why bother with the whole worship god part? I think all we are left with is: because it would makes us feel good.

I have no doubt that when we die we become worm food. This is in agreement with the Bible, some of us also have the resurrection hope. (1 Corinthians 15:12-21) That's a miracle. The purpose of worshiping God is for our good, rather than his, but it isn't always about "feeling good." Also, the idea that the "good" go to heaven and the "bad" go to hell are both ideas of theology rather than the Bible. The meek inherit what?

Instead I end up with the gap, that leads me to focus on all the harm humans have done to other humans in the name of religion.

Humans have done harmful things to each other in the name of many things. Love, freedom, and politics or nationalism as well. People can be harmful.

I also feel an almighty god would not rely on physical location and parents/peers teaching from birth that this all mighty god idea exists in particular form. That the various god ideas only spread to new locations that have never heard of the particular god idea, by force, instead of people finding "god" idea on their own.

That's reasonable to an extent, but you have to ask yourself, how else would he do it. As for physical location, all will have the chance to make an informed decision. You and I have our chance now. But others in problematic locations have the promise of Acts 24:15 which indicates a resurrection of the unrighteous as well as the righteous. For those who haven't had the opportunity to have been introduced to God and his purpose for mankind.

LogicFTW's picture
@Empedocles

@Empedocles

Well, thanks, but I can't pick parts of the Bible or truth that I like. There are some things about it I don't like. From our perspective it would seem easy to assume that a being that could create the heavens and earth could do anything, but the omni's just don't fit with scripture in their exaggerated form.

You are probably one of the more reasonable theist/apologist I have seen here in awhile. It would be real nice to me if most of the theist I deal with in my family or otherwise adopted a stance closer to what you talk about here.

I have no doubt that when we die we become worm food. This is in agreement with the Bible

Cool I wish more theist held that attitude. I think many theist push the full on omni's god and afterlife because thats what THEY need, even if it is not reality. It seems you expect much less from your interpretation of god, and I consider that a much healthier stance then quite a few of the highly religious people I encounter here or in life.

Humans have done harmful things to each other in the name of many things. Love, freedom, and politics or nationalism as well. People can be harmful.

Agreed 100%.

Of course from my stance; god, the bibles, religion etc are all human made too, so it keeps in line with humans doing harmful things to each other. It is not all doom and gloom though, I am fully aware humans have done many nice things for each other as well. We would not have advanced as far as we have if we did not work together and try to make things better for all of us. My dad was and still is quite religious, but I would still say he did a great job raising me and I would not be 1/2 the man I am now without my fathers direction growing up.

but you have to ask yourself, how else would he do it.

I feel a god that could create the entire earth/universe and everything on it in 7 days, (okay not sure how literal you take genesis.) Anyways, such a god could of easily at the least instead of doing all his "evidencing" and miracles, instead of geographically located pretty much strictly in the more immediate surround area of mediterranean sea, he could of also revealed himself and did miracles etc everywhere where there was humans. Much of the world population then (and now) are very much cut off from the area of the mediterranean sea. No one in the Americas ever heard of any abrahamic (or many other gods) until east europe brought their religions with them across the Atlantic.

Do have to ask though, if there isn't really a heaven or hell, or much of a requirement to "be with god," then why bother? Why bother read about him, study the literature, spread religion etc, if in the end it doesn't really matter? For me looking at the available evidence and being firmly convinced there is no god, I do not lose out on much if I am wrong. So is there any reason to change my view even if I was convinced if there really was a god similar to the one you believe in?
 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Empedocles's picture
@LogicFTW

@LogicFTW

You are probably one of the more reasonable theist/apologist I have seen here in awhile. It would be real nice to me if most of the theist I deal with in my family or otherwise adopted a stance closer to what you talk about here.

Thanks, you are most kind. I can be unreasonable though, as well, of course.

Cool I wish more theist held that attitude. I think many theist push the full on omni's god and afterlife because thats what THEY need, even if it is not reality. It seems you expect much less from your interpretation of god, and I consider that a much healthier stance then quite a few of the highly religious people I encounter here or in life.

Yeah. They need or want it or they didn't bother to look beyond the tradition.

Of course from my stance; god, the bibles, religion etc are all human made too, so it keeps in line with humans doing harmful things to each other. It is not all doom and gloom though, I am fully aware humans have done many nice things for each other as well. We would not have advanced as far as we have if we did not work together and try to make things better for all of us. My dad was and still is quite religious, but I would still say he did a great job raising me and I would not be 1/2 the man I am now without my fathers direction growing up.

I could say the same for my father, who was and still is atheist.

I feel a god that could create the entire earth/universe and everything on it in 7 days, (okay not sure how literal you take genesis.) Anyways, such a god could of easily at the least instead of doing all his "evidencing" and miracles, instead of geographically located pretty much strictly in the more immediate surround area of mediterranean sea, he could of also revealed himself and did miracles etc everywhere where there was humans. Much of the world population then (and now) are very much cut off from the area of the mediterranean sea. No one in the Americas ever heard of any abrahamic (or many other gods) until east europe brought their religions with them across the Atlantic.

My take on Genesis can be found on my website Here. It's a literal interpretation but the 7 days are not literal days. For example, the seventh day began after the completion of the creation and the making of it habitable for men, and continues to this day thousands of years later.

And the thing you have to understand about the Bible is that it wasn't written for us, as such. It was written for the people in the times of it's writing. It's useful to us only as an example. For our information. For this reason Paul said that all of the healing, speaking in tongues, prophesies, etc. would end upon the deaths of the apostles. It was accomplished. And too, you have to realize the meaning of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, namely; it's about the vindication of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus.

So, Jehovah created Adam and Eve to live forever in paradise and to fill and subdue the Earth. Adam rejected that and brought about death, so that mankind couldn't destroy themselves and end God's purpose for them. So Jehovah made a nation with laws that informed the people that they couldn't uphold them, to inform them of their sin and the need for salvation from their own destruction. Also to provide that salvation, justice through Christ. Originally meant only for the Jews, but religiosity transmogrified them and they rejected Christ. See the parable of the Wedding Feast (Matthew 22:1-14) So the resurrection hope was extended to the Gentiles, or peoples of the nations along with the Jews who accepted Christ.

There will be a resurrection of the unrighteous so they, that is those not having had the opportunity to make an informed decision will have that opportunity then. (Acts 24:15)

Do have to ask though, if there isn't really a heaven or hell, or much of a requirement to "be with god," then why bother? Why bother read about him, study the literature, spread religion etc, if in the end it doesn't really matter? For me looking at the available evidence and being firmly convinced there is no god, I do not lose out on much if I am wrong. So is there any reason to change my view even if I was convinced if there really was a god similar to the one you believe in?

There is a heaven, and a few, 144,000, will go there in spirit form to judge with Jesus. And hell, well, that's an old English word which means to cover or conceal. It's basically the common grave of man.

So, what you lose out on is the possibility to live forever on paradise Earth, without sickness, disease, crime, death, sin, Satan, etc.

LogicFTW's picture
@Empedocles

@Empedocles

Unfortunately I do not have time for a full proper reply that your long post deserves, hopefully I will have more time later to get back to it.

I did want to quickly point out though: 144,000? 144k all time? 7.5 billion people alive today, another 100 billion that have lived and died. (Many more if you consider a person/soul to be a person/soul at the moment of "conception")

144k versus potentially 144 billion (okay shortcut for easy math) that is one in a million. I am in my mid 30's No way I have been pious, or with god enough, or even really that one in a million special enough. At this point to ever make that 1 in a million. So I go to "hell" which you state is basic just, dying and being worm food. (did all those billions of unborn babies have no shot at heaven?) So correct me if I am wrong here, but by my math, I am fine to continue to be atheist as in the end it will make no difference whether I believe in god or not?

Additionally, it is unlikely anyone I know or love will make that one in a million cut as well.

Empedocles's picture
@LogicFTW

@LogicFTW

The modern traditional teaching that heaven is the reward isn't supported by scripture. It's a theological concept. It's origins are ancient Babylon most likely, though I haven't researched it. Most of that stuff is. If I say the meek shall inherit what? no one answers heaven. They answer the earth. God created the earth for man. He created Adam to live forever. Had Adam not sinned he wouldn't have died. The wages of sin equals death. Once we die we are acquitted from our sins. (Romans 6:7) Seeking knowledge of the true God and the one whom he sent forth brings not admission into heaven, but everlasting life. (John 17:3)

The 144,000 who do go to heaven go there for a reason. To judge with Jesus. Why is that? Because Jehovah and Jesus don't have any real intimate knowledge, or experience, in what it's like to live in sin. In a court of law the jury is supposed to be represented by your peers. That sort of thing.

LogicFTW's picture
@Empedocles

@Empedocles

So, no heaven and no hell as it is commonly described. Cool. I actually like religions/theist that cut out that nonsense, a sort of carrot and stick approach that seems obvious to me, made worse that the carrot nor the stick can in any way be proven real.

So with no heaven and hell, and no way "god" can affect our current lives, what's left? What possible advantage could I have for believing in a god? Let alone spending sunday morning in church, donating money to the church etc?

What motivation is there for anyone to make the "leap" to your particular god concept and "buy in?"
 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Empedocles's picture
@LogicFTW

@LogicFTW

If you want the possibility of being resurrected to life everlasting you seek knowledge of Jehovah God and Jesus Christ (John 17:3). If you don't you have nothing to do, you will die and that will be the end of you.

LogicFTW's picture
@Empedocles

@Empedocles

A 1 in a million shot? And I would have to compete against people that spent their entire lives trying to be "picked."
On top of the already problem that there is no way to know which particular god to follow?

Eh I will continue to just worry about myself instead of some god concept various people say is "real." I have plenty to do in this short life we have, no need to me to waste it worrying about some supposed completely unproven afterlife concept... that is supposedly 1 in a million anyways!

xenoview's picture
I apply xenoview's razor to

I apply xenoview's razor to your claims of a big banger. Objective evidence is required.

I believe the bible states god created evil.

xenoview's picture
Aj777

Aj777

God did create evil from the KJV
Isaiah 45:7

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace and create evil: I the Lord do all these things

Empedocles's picture
@xenoview

@xenoview

God did create evil from the KJV
Isaiah 45:7

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace and create evil: I the Lord do all these things

Okay, well, what does that mean exactly? That all evil in the world was caused by God?

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.