WHAT makes a person saved in Christ Jesus?

[Owlswing]

Always an excuse for the deity and its misdeeds!

Would it be too much for you to give a logical argument as to why you think this is the case?

Well, you keep saying there is some unspecified greater good to come. Has God told you what it is? Do you think it would be a comfort to all those innocents tortured and murdered to know that it was all in the cause of God's alleged nebulous greater good?

When you analyse it, in the context of the World we live in, the idea that its creator is the embodiment of Good is really an insult to our intelligence.

Alien - A suitable case for treatment (British Lion 1966!)

[Alien]

And the logical reason it is that is what? That sounds like a typical atheist rant totally lacking in reason. Of course proposing such a God does not demonstrate that God actually exists, but it does show that the existence of evil is not a defeater for the existence of God. Until you lot can see that this conversation is going to be fairly pointless.

Evil isn't the problem. Not being evil is.

And I would suggest daft sweeping statements like yours here are a good demonstration of being unreasonable.

Why?

See #102.

As in "If god only does good and god is the reason why everything exists, then the existence of everything is good. This means there is nothing in existence that is not good, which removes all contrast and any frame of reference. It's a bit like if everything was the same temperature, hot and cold would be meaningless."?

"If god (sic) only does good and god is the reason why everything exists, then the existence of everything is good." Why do you think that follows?

Through simple logic.

OK. Please demonstrate it.

[jakswan]

That is a misrepresentation of my position. Since you are a nice chap, perhaps it is because you have forgotten.
I have said on a number of occasions that there are various ways of working out what is morally right or wrong, though some situations are very difficult indeed. Stuff like the overall wellbeing of humans might be one way of helping determine it. As I have also said on a number of occasions I have said I am probably happy to go with whatever method you use to work out whether something is morally right or wrong (since most methods come up with the same result most of the time). The "objective" bit of objective morality as used in the particular argument for God's existence is that something is objectively morally wrong independent of how many people think it so. TATCTJFF was chosen as it is clear, whatever method of determining the morality of action, that this is morally wrong and that even if all the world thought it morally OK, it would still be morally wrong.

Again, how do you know TACTDJFF is objectively morally wrong, lots of subjective opinions does not make something objective.

Again to remind you of your previously stated position.

I could be wrong (with regard to TACTDJFF), because I am fallible. I don't think I am in this case though.

Why? That does not necessarily follow. If you think it does, please demonstrate why. If OM (objective morality) exists, e.g. that it is morally wrong for a person (in fact, anyone) to torture a child to death just for fun. It does not say anything about us having to stop it. We might not know that it is happening, for example, and might not be reasonably expected to know it is happening and it might be happening in the middle of the Amazon in a tribe as yet unknown to the rest of us (reduction ad absurdum). How would there be a moral obligation on us to stop it?

I forgot how obtuse you can be, I'll change my statement thus; OMV creates a moral obligation on every moral agent who is able to stop this action taking place. Your god is always able according to you.

No, I have not previously agreed this. You seem to be muddling up people's morals (what they think is right, and which may well change) and objective morality.

No I think you misunderstand.

[jakswan]

When the argument about the "witches" operating as the Devil's servants on Earth was in full spate during the Burning Times it was stated, by the Christian Church, that the Devil was only able to operate in the world by the permission of the Christian god.

Thus all the evil in the world only exists by permission of the Christian god - ergo - the Christian god IS evil considering the suffering he allows in this world and no amount of biblical quotes and verbal gymnastics is going to change that.

Take this to its logical conclusion and the IS exists and operates by the permission of the Christian god - according to some on here - for the greater good!

Greater good - CRAP - considering the number of Christians who have died at the hands of the IS!

Is that meant to be a logical argument against God being good? You seem to write it as if it is something new you have brought to the discussion. It has already been said that, yes, God allows some evil in order that a greater good will occur.

What if your god allows some good in order that a greater evil will occur.

[2Corrie]

If God were to put an end to all evil tonight, do you think any of us would still be here in the morning?

[Shaker]

Why not?

[Andy]

"If god (sic) only does good and god is the reason why everything exists, then the existence of everything is good." Why do you think that follows?

Through simple logic.

OK. Please demonstrate it.

I'll put it alongside another argument that uses the same valid form:

Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
Everything god does is good.

The universe began to exist.
Everything exists because of god.

Therefore:
The universe has a cause.
Everything that exists is good.

Like I said - simple.

[jakswan]

If God were to put an end to all evil tonight, do you think any of us would still be here in the morning?

Doesn't it manage to sustain only good in heaven?

[wigginhall]

I'm dredging up various traditional arguments here, and as well as the free will one, there is the magic one, that if God kept intervening, that would disrupt nature, and produce a magical universe.   This would be unintelligible for humans, and too inconsistent for animals, possibly.   In other words, nature would become irregular. 

A  problem here is that this is indistinguishable from a universe with no God at all, as many atheists have commented.   If there are no interventions, there is in effect, no God.   This is how many people see it!  If there are small interventions, as some Christians argue (somebody's ankle is healed, or God whispers in your ear), why not bigger ones, e.g. stop the holocaust?

wigginhall, are you a Christian? If so, how would you explain the points put forward by our non-Christian friends here?

I ask because I have not seen you argue for anything positive about Christianity for months. Perhaps I have missed those posts, in which case please accept my apologies.

For some reason, you are always trying to define me.  Only the other week, you asked if I'm a Buddhist.  I'm not sure why you want to act as gendarme in this way, it's quite peculiar.

[Shaker]

Boxes, ticky tacky little boxes*. It suits some people, apparently.

* An internet fiver for the first one old enough to identify the reference.

[Nearly Sane]

Oh come now wigginhall, you must realise that we have to know what side every one is on for the Last Battle! The labels are the only important thing.

[Hope]

Boxes, ticky tacky little boxes*. It suits some people, apparently.

* An internet fiver for the first one old enough to identify the reference.

Malvina Reynolds & Pete Seeger - Little Boxes

[Hope]

Jesus never stood a chance   

Not the Jewish one anyway.

But surely he did stand a chance, Rose.  He was responsible for the rebooting of the message that the Jews had failed to impart to the world - that God loves all of us.

[trippymonkey]

Tell that to Muslims who are using the same weak argument of saying THEIR prophet is carrying one from Jesus etc etc....

[Hope]

Tell that to Muslims who are using the same weak argument of saying THEIR prophet is carrying one from Jesus etc etc....

Except that Muslims don't and never have argued that they carry a message from Jesus - any more than Christians argue that they carry a message from Amos or Jeremiah.

[trippymonkey]

Carrying on FROM is not the same as carrying a message.

[Hope]

Carrying on FROM is not the same as carrying a message.

Nick, you used the 'from', so I simply followed your pattern.

[Nearly Sane]

Carrying on FROM is not the same as carrying a message.

Nick, you used the 'from', so I simply followed your pattern.

No, you didn't. Nick used carrying on from - you changed that to carrying a message (hence, Nick's post)

[Alien]

"If god (sic) only does good and god is the reason why everything exists, then the existence of everything is good." Why do you think that follows?

Through simple logic.

OK. Please demonstrate it.

I'll put it alongside another argument that uses the same valid form:

1 Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2 Everything god does is good.

3 The universe began to exist.
4 Everything exists because of god.

Therefore:
5 The universe has a cause.
6 Everything that exists is good.

Like I said - simple.

Good question. BTW, your premises and conclusions don't follow necessarily. I've numbered them for easy reference. 1, 2, 3, and 5 look OK to me. 4 should be "Everything in the universe exists because of God." Let's make that 4'

4' Everything in the universe exists because of God.

6 therefore becomes

6' Everything that exists in the universe is good.

Now there is a difference between physical stuff existing and sin. Sin is a concept, an attitude of mind. You can't point to it and say, "There's some sin. I'll have a couple of kilos, please?"

Therefore, I don't think your conclusion holds.

A more fundamental question is, I would suggest, whether an all-powerful God can actually give creatures any independence, e.g. free will in any meaningful sense. We could argue that an all-powerful/omnipotent God can do anything, which means a creature is totally stuck with what God wants to happen. Alternatively, if God is all-powerful/omnipotent it would mean he, by definition, can give independence to a creature.

Yes, evil exists because God gave creatures the ability to do evil. Yes, he knew what would happen. Yes, the good coming from it is worth the evil. There is a heck of a lot of evil in the world, so, yes, the good to come from it is going to be absolutely wonderful.

[Alien]

I'm dredging up various traditional arguments here, and as well as the free will one, there is the magic one, that if God kept intervening, that would disrupt nature, and produce a magical universe.   This would be unintelligible for humans, and too inconsistent for animals, possibly.   In other words, nature would become irregular. 

A  problem here is that this is indistinguishable from a universe with no God at all, as many atheists have commented.   If there are no interventions, there is in effect, no God.   This is how many people see it!  If there are small interventions, as some Christians argue (somebody's ankle is healed, or God whispers in your ear), why not bigger ones, e.g. stop the holocaust?

wigginhall, are you a Christian? If so, how would you explain the points put forward by our non-Christian friends here?

I ask because I have not seen you argue for anything positive about Christianity for months. Perhaps I have missed those posts, in which case please accept my apologies.

For some reason, you are always trying to define me.  Only the other week, you asked if I'm a Buddhist.  I'm not sure why you want to act as gendarme in this way, it's quite peculiar.

OK, are you a follower of Jesus then?

I'm not sure why you find it peculiar that I should ask such a question. I'm not a gendarme, but rather curious as your tone seems to have changed on these boards over the last few months. It might be me misunderstanding you though.

[jakswan]

Yes, evil exists because God gave creatures the ability to do evil. Yes, he knew what would happen. Yes, the good coming from it is worth the evil. There is a heck of a lot of evil in the world, so, yes, the good to come from it is going to be absolutely wonderful.

Assuming you are not a universalist and some don't make it to heaven, they are left in deficit of good. Lets assume Islam is true and you are sent to the fire for turning away from Allah's last prophet, would that make Allah evil in your eyes?

[jeremyp]

Carrying on FROM is not the same as carrying a message.

Nick, you used the 'from', so I simply followed your pattern.

No, you didn't. Nick used carrying on from - you changed that to carrying a message (hence, Nick's post)

To be fair, he actually wrote "carrying one from". If you were Hope, you might read "one" as a message although it is a bit of a stretch.

[Alien]

Yes, evil exists because God gave creatures the ability to do evil. Yes, he knew what would happen. Yes, the good coming from it is worth the evil. There is a heck of a lot of evil in the world, so, yes, the good to come from it is going to be absolutely wonderful.

Assuming you are not a universalist and some don't make it to heaven, they are left in deficit of good. Lets assume Islam is true and you are sent to the fire for turning away from Allah's last prophet, would that make Allah evil in your eyes?

Sorry, would you please explain "left in deficit of good" first, then I'll definitely try to answer your question.

[Owlswing]

Yes, evil exists because God gave creatures the ability to do evil. Yes, he knew what would happen. Yes, the good coming from it is worth the evil. There is a heck of a lot of evil in the world, so, yes, the good to come from it is going to be absolutely wonderful.

When are you going to tell all those who have asked you just what the "good that is to come from evil" is?

You have used the woirds at least a dozen times on this thread and at least a similar number of times yoiu have been asked the above question yet you have spectacularly failed to answer.

Why?

Because there is no answer! Only the most gullible of Christians believe that good can come from evil.

[jeremyp]

Good question. BTW, your premises and conclusions don't follow necessarily. I've numbered them for easy reference. 1, 2, 3, and 5 look OK to me. 4 should be "Everything in the universe exists because of God." Let's make that 4'

4' Everything in the universe exists because of God.

6 therefore becomes

6' Everything that exists in the universe is good.

Now there is a difference between physical stuff existing and sin. Sin is a concept, an attitude of mind. You can't point to it and say, "There's some sin. I'll have a couple of kilos, please?"

Therefore, I don't think your conclusion holds.

A more fundamental question is, I would suggest, whether an all-powerful God can actually give creatures any independence, e.g. free will in any meaningful sense. We could argue that an all-powerful/omnipotent God can do anything, which means a creature is totally stuck with what God wants to happen. Alternatively, if God is all-powerful/omnipotent it would mean he, by definition, can give independence to a creature.

Yes, evil exists

Great, so by 4' evil was created by God (unless you are going to claim there is no evil in the Universe) and therefore by 6' evil is good.

Yes, he knew what would happen. Yes, the good coming from it is worth the evil.

How do you know? Has God told you what the good is that will come from evil? I think we deserve to know, especially the concentration camp survivors.