It desires to have you

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
So letting a kitten grow old and die naturally is the same to you as randomly feeding such kitten to a bear?

I hope sir you're not in charge of kittens?

Death is the end result and as such we will all end up passing from this world to the next. God sets that, the manner we act is on us, as you point out the kitten is going to die no matter what. If we take it upon ourselves to do something that evil it is something we will give an answer for. God and man have two different positions in the universe, when we act as if we are God, it isn't something righteous on our part.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Sorry, should have said to provide non-fictitious evidence.

Ah but when it says God killed 14000 then it's good enough ey? You can't have it both ways.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Ah but when it says God killed 14000 then it's good enough ey? You can't have it both ways.

The bible is the basis for your belief in God, not my disbelief.

If God is 'all good' and the bible is your support for this goodness, then you can't just gloss over the petty killing of 14000 people.

Sure, an all powerful God can do what he likes. But then, so can a tyrant.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
The bible is the basis for your belief in God, not my disbelief.

If God is 'all good' and the bible is your support for this goodness, then you can't just gloss over the petty killing of 14000 people.

Sure, an all powerful God can do what he likes. But then, so can a tyrant.

Sure, but if you accept the Bible's account about 'killing 14000' and reject it's account of God's omniscience then you are just nitpicking what you like.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Sure, but if you accept the Bible's account about 'killing 14000' and reject it's account of God's omniscience then you are just nitpicking what you like.

The bible is the word of God, so it is God alone telling you He is omniscient.

The evidence doesn't appear to support His claim. Perhaps he exaggerated His position?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
The bible is the word of God, so it is God alone telling you He is omniscient.

The evidence doesn't appear to support His claim. Perhaps he exaggerated His position?

Obviously faith is required to believe God's word. I just find it interesting that you don't treat the 'killing of 14000' with the same skepticism.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I think that if you say something is evil you have to assume there's good. You also assume there's such a thing as a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. Also, if you assume a moral law, you must posit a moral Law Giver. If you assume that the God of the Bible does exist, he has to be the Law Giver. So saying He doesn't exist because He is evil is self defeating.

Of course "saying He doesn't exist because He is evil is self defeating" but "saying He doesn't exist as traditionally depicted because He is evil, is not self defeating.

However, there is a way around this. If it is God who decides and declares what is good and what is evil, then he can just decide and declare that all his actions are good. Is the traditional depiction of God really like that?

Originally posted by JS357
Of course "saying He doesn't exist because He is evil is self defeating" but "saying He doesn't exist [b] as traditionally depicted because He is evil, is not self defeating.

However, there is a way around this. If it is God who decides and declares what is good and what is evil, then he can just decide and declare that all his actions are good. Is the traditional depiction of God really like that?[/b]

How does adding 'as traditionally depicted' to the equation, change the dilemma?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
How does adding 'as traditionally depicted' to the equation, change the dilemma?

That is hard to explain to someone who just doesn't get it. It will take your answering a question or two, about God.

Do you believe that God decides and declares what is good and what is evil?

Originally posted by JS357
That is hard to explain to someone who just doesn't get it. It will take your answering a question or two, about God.

Do you believe that God decides and declares what is good and what is evil?

The Euthyphro dilemma is actually a false dichotomy. That is, it proposes only two options when another is possible. The third option is that good is based on God’s nature.

https://carm.org/euthyphro-dilemma

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
The Euthyphro dilemma is actually a false dichotomy. That is, it proposes only two options when another is possible. The third option is that good is based on God’s nature.

https://carm.org/euthyphro-dilemma

I am aware of that alternative explanation. However, I didn't ask you about the dilemma. I asked you if you believe God decides and declares what is good and what is evil.

You might have answered, yes, and he decides in accordance with his nature. Or you might have answered no.

It's like this: Do you believe lions roar? Is not the same question as "Do lions roar? The first question is asking you to check your beliefs, its about your internal belief state. The second is about something out there in the world.

So, do you believe God decides and declares what is good and what is evil?

Originally posted by JS357
I am aware of that alternative explanation. However, I didn't ask you about the dilemma. I asked you if you believe God decides and declares what is good and what is evil.

You might have answered, yes, and he decides in accordance with his nature. Or you might have answered no.

It's like this: Do you believe lions roar? Is not the same question as "Do li ...[text shortened]... here in the world.

So, do you believe God decides and declares what is good and what is evil?

No, I believe good is a revelation of God's nature. God is the standard of what is good. He is good by nature and he reveals his nature to us. This means that God does not declare something to be good (ignoring his own nature) or say that something is good by nature (recognizing a standard outside of himself).

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
No, I believe good is a revelation of God's nature. God is the standard of what is good. He is good by nature and he reveals his nature to us. This means that God does not declare something to be good (ignoring his own nature) or say that something is good by nature (recognizing a standard outside of himself).

That's an interesting response I will think about. My initial reaction is that to you, God is more than an all-powerful person that we think of in terms of "he" or "who" does this or that.

Originally posted by JS357
That's an interesting response I will think about. My initial reaction is that to you, God is more than an all-powerful person that we think of in terms of "he" or "who" does this or that.

We continually think in terms of "who" ( 'god' is ), but I contend the question is WHAT god is.
Quantum hacks away at the physical interpretations of this and has done for some time now.
It's sad that Quantum findings 50+ years ago have not yet been recognized by the general public yet.
The implications are truly revolutionary.
Heck , we even got 3-d printers now. The potential is there. We have the technology to manipulate the world for the good....

oh, but Tesla realized that over a century ago and died penniless and destitute.
He does hold a heck load of patents on gadgets used to this day. Like AC/DC voltage. Before that it was just DC, which was quite dangerous.
Anyway, the answers to our problems are there - spiritually and technologically.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
We continually think in terms of "who" ( 'god' is ), but I contend the question is WHAT god is.
Quantum hacks away at the physical interpretations of this and has done for some time now.
It's sad that Quantum findings 50+ years ago have not yet been recognized by the general public yet.
The implications are truly revolutionary.
Heck , we even g ...[text shortened]... te dangerous.
Anyway, the answers to our problems are there - spiritually and technologically.

Do you means questions like, "Of what substance(s) is God composed? If not substances whose behavior can be studied by the science of modern physics, then by what scientific method,(SM) if any ,can studies be done? Also if this is the case, by what SM can we study the interactions between God and the physical world (which we study by modern physics)?"

I don't know of any such effort having been made -- if anything, science and religion have at best, stayed out of one another's way, at least when not besieged by politics.

'Study" includes the classical scientific pursuits of observing, explaining and predicting, if not in this case, controlling.

A typical area of study is how The divine utterance "Let there be light" brings about light.