Total Posts:71|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Bible and Omnibenevolence

Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 1:37:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The Bible says God "hates" certain things. Also, it says that he "only" loves those who love him back. Wouldn't an omnibenevolent being not "hate" anything, and love everybody regardless? How do theists make The Bible compatible with omnibenevolence?
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 3:51:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well he hates evil, and loves good, isn't this omnibenevolent ?

But he is the one who defines both evil and good, morality.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 4:15:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 3:51:54 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
Well he hates evil, and loves good, isn't this omnibenevolent ?

No. Omnibenevolence would be not to create evil at all, so you do not have to hate anythying ;)

Also, he would love everyone, even if there could not be a real love relationship because the person does not love them back.


But he is the one who defines both evil and good, morality.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 4:25:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The Quran and Bible claim that God loves everyone. The Quran distinguishes between certain degrees of love. For example, a righteous person will have a special love from God, which is more of a reward than anything -- while the evil person will not receive a higher degree of love. Where both books mention that God does not love certain people, or God hates them, this simply requires you to read into the terms used. Nonetheless -- the Quran has a poetic style, and the Psalm (which is what you are referring to) does too. Non-commands can be interpreted many ways.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2013 5:05:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 4:25:39 PM, Mirza wrote:
The Quran and Bible claim that God loves everyone.

"There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers" -
Proverbs 6:16-19


Loves everyone? Apparently not "one who sows discord among brothers".

'I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me." -
Proverbs 8:17


He loves those who love him, not everyone.

"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him." -
John 3:36


It is clear God only loves believers.

Show me a Bible verse where is says he loves everyone? If you do, it would only prove The Bible contradicts itself.

The Quran distinguishes between certain degrees of love. For example, a righteous person will have a special love from God, which is more of a reward than anything -- while the evil person will not receive a higher degree of love. Where both books mention that God does not love certain people, or God hates them, this simply requires you to read into the terms used. Nonetheless -- the Quran has a poetic style, and the Psalm (which is what you are referring to) does too. Non-commands can be interpreted many ways.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2013 4:03:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 4:25:39 PM, Mirza wrote:
The Quran and Bible claim that God loves everyone. The Quran distinguishes between certain degrees of love. For example, a righteous person will have a special love from God, which is more of a reward than anything -- while the evil person will not receive a higher degree of love. Where both books mention that God does not love certain people, or God hates them, this simply requires you to read into the terms used. Nonetheless -- the Quran has a poetic style, and the Psalm (which is what you are referring to) does too. Non-commands can be interpreted many ways.

No the Quran doesn't claim that for sure, and the bible makes God love conditional and even insists on it being conditional.So here proofs that Allah doesn't love everybody:"Say (O Muhammad SAW to mankind): "If you (really) love All"h then follow me (i.e. accept Isl"mic Monotheism, follow the Qur'"n and the Sunnah), All"h will love you and forgive you your sins. And All"h is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (31)" Quran chapter 3

that's same kind of verse you'd find in John 14 to 16
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2013 4:08:23 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 4:15:23 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/11/2013 3:51:54 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
Well he hates evil, and loves good, isn't this omnibenevolent ?

No. Omnibenevolence would be not to create evil at all, so you do not have to hate anythying ;)

Also, he would love everyone, even if there could not be a real love relationship because the person does not love them back.

Hmm, well :Etymologies: From Latin omni- meaning 'all', and benevolent, meaning 'good'. This may be a recent creation, extrapolating the contextual meanings of 'omniscient' and 'omnipotent' to describe, in a consistent manner, this third divine quality. (Wiktionary)
Now if Omnibenevolent means All good, then this is coherent with Abrahamic religions, if it means all loving, it is not.All good means all he does is good, creating evil and good for test purposes is not doing evil, you mix up between doing evil and creating evil.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2013 5:44:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
RT -- I said earlier that where God says He hates certain people, it is mentioned in the poetic books of the Bible. This is NOT a contradiction.

Fruity -- Take a look at the terminology. http://thehumblei.com... It illustrates my point perfectly well. God loves everyone by default.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 2:39:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/12/2013 5:44:40 PM, Mirza wrote:
RT -- I said earlier that where God says He hates certain people, it is mentioned in the poetic books of the Bible. This is NOT a contradiction.

Fruity -- Take a look at the terminology. http://thehumblei.com... It illustrates my point perfectly well. God loves everyone by default.

Well they are calling Mercy love ! I think this is not precise at all, Allah is merciful with all his creatures, but doesn't mean he loves them.

so if you want to make love really a general word that includes mercy , then fine, but usually when we say love we mean a particular thing.

So now you'd say all loving meaning all merciful , and people will understand all loving in the particular sense. that creates confusion.

Look what Allah says about love here from Quran: " And (both) the Jews and the Christians say: "We are the children of All"h and His loved ones." Say: "Why then does He punish you for your sins?" Nay, you are but human beings, of those He has created, He forgives whom He wills and He punishes whom He wills. And to All"h belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and to Him is the return (of all). (18)"

This is clear enough, if he loved everybody, he wouldn't punish anybody.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 2:52:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/12/2013 5:48:11 PM, Mirza wrote:
What's your point with the quote from John? It has nothing to do with God's love.

Well John 14:

21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

John 15

6-If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

Well if those word were in Arabic the meaning would be clear, that means the people who don't follow him will be thrown in Hell, remember Aramaic and Arabic are cousins and they kind of have the same way to say things

10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

So even the Love God has for Jesus is due to Jesus obedience to God.

I don't know if this is not enough clear Mirza, remember I mean true pure Love, not mercy or any other added meaning.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 3:23:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Just one more thing, Love and mercy and compassion have different equivalents in Arabic, they are never confused, so I'm not sure why some people confuse them.

For more about God attributes in Islam:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Although I can spot a mistake in the first attribute they say it was mentioned 57 times in 55th chapter! and it was mentioned once only !

But the attributes meanings are coherent with Islamic beliefs
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 3:39:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 5:05:06 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Show me a Bible verse where is says he loves everyone? If you do, it would only prove The Bible contradicts itself.

Isn't the Good-Samaritan parable therefore such evidence that Story book contradicts itself?
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 4:17:38 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 1:37:56 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
The Bible says God "hates" certain things. Also, it says that he "only" loves those who love him back. Wouldn't an omnibenevolent being not "hate" anything, and love everybody regardless? How do theists make The Bible compatible with omnibenevolence?

You have to provide quotes. Also, you need to understand that many places where the word hate is used, the definition is not actually the modern usage. For example when the Lord says he Hates Israel, He actually means he rejected them, not hate. The English language is rubbish when it comes to biblical translations, there is no English translation which is universally accepted. The Greek and Aramaic scriptures on the other hand are what you would use if you were an educated bible scholar. Interesting that these issues presented by common atheists are not prevalent questions among the educated scholars.

Just a reminder that Omni-benevolence means simply: depthless love. This is not mutually exclusive with hatred. God can dislike things just like He can love things.

But where does the bible say that God only loves those that love Him back?
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 5:46:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 4:15:23 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/11/2013 3:51:54 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
Well he hates evil, and loves good, isn't this omnibenevolent ?

No. Omnibenevolence would be not to create evil at all, so you do not have to hate anythying ;)

You are presuming that an Omnibenevolent God would not create free will, that is a bare assertion, you need to make your case that free will is incompatible with an Omnibenevolent God.

Also, he would love everyone, even if there could not be a real love relationship because the person does not love them back.


But he is the one who defines both evil and good, morality.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 9:52:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 5:46:01 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 5/11/2013 4:15:23 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/11/2013 3:51:54 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
Well he hates evil, and loves good, isn't this omnibenevolent ?

No. Omnibenevolence would be not to create evil at all, so you do not have to hate anythying ;)

You are presuming that an Omnibenevolent God would not create free will, that is a bare assertion, you need to make your case that free will is incompatible with an Omnibenevolent God.

Also, he would love everyone, even if there could not be a real love relationship because the person does not love them back.


But he is the one who defines both evil and good, morality.

He could create free will without evil. God cannot commit evil right? Obviously evil is not required for free will then..

I can choose Coke or Pepsi without choosing to stab someone. Thus, obviously evil is not required for free will. God choosing to give humans the free will for evil was evil in itself.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 9:58:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 9:52:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/13/2013 5:46:01 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 5/11/2013 4:15:23 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/11/2013 3:51:54 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
Well he hates evil, and loves good, isn't this omnibenevolent ?

No. Omnibenevolence would be not to create evil at all, so you do not have to hate anythying ;)

You are presuming that an Omnibenevolent God would not create free will, that is a bare assertion, you need to make your case that free will is incompatible with an Omnibenevolent God.

Also, he would love everyone, even if there could not be a real love relationship because the person does not love them back.


But he is the one who defines both evil and good, morality.

He could create free will without evil. God cannot commit evil right? Obviously evil is not required for free will then..

I can choose Coke or Pepsi without choosing to stab someone. Thus, obviously evil is not required for free will. God choosing to give humans the free will for evil was evil in itself.

He created the possibility of evil, you may take the Pepsi and stab me on your way, it is a possibility not a must.And the fix for evil is Justice, that is reserved for later.That's what I call Omni benevolence. Can you say It is evil that he created the possibility of evil, I mean that would be subjective.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 9:59:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
So Christians cannot say that evil is required for free will because that is BS. Free will means the ability to free choose from a bunch of options, there is no reason one of the options has to include evil. If God exists, he built that into the system.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:01:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 9:58:56 AM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 5/13/2013 9:52:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/13/2013 5:46:01 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 5/11/2013 4:15:23 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/11/2013 3:51:54 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
Well he hates evil, and loves good, isn't this omnibenevolent ?

No. Omnibenevolence would be not to create evil at all, so you do not have to hate anythying ;)

You are presuming that an Omnibenevolent God would not create free will, that is a bare assertion, you need to make your case that free will is incompatible with an Omnibenevolent God.

Also, he would love everyone, even if there could not be a real love relationship because the person does not love them back.


But he is the one who defines both evil and good, morality.

He could create free will without evil. God cannot commit evil right? Obviously evil is not required for free will then..

I can choose Coke or Pepsi without choosing to stab someone. Thus, obviously evil is not required for free will. God choosing to give humans the free will for evil was evil in itself.

He created the possibility of evil, you may take the Pepsi and stab me on your way, it is a possibility not a must.

God could have made it so I couldn't stab you. Just like he made it so I can teleport to mars just by thinking about it. He lets us rape people but not teleport? Some free will this guy has in mind lol

And the fix for evil is Justice, that is reserved for later.That's what I call Omni benevolence. Can you say It is evil that he created the possibility of evil, I mean that would be subjective.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:01:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 9:58:56 AM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 5/13/2013 9:52:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/13/2013 5:46:01 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 5/11/2013 4:15:23 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/11/2013 3:51:54 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
Well he hates evil, and loves good, isn't this omnibenevolent ?

No. Omnibenevolence would be not to create evil at all, so you do not have to hate anythying ;)

You are presuming that an Omnibenevolent God would not create free will, that is a bare assertion, you need to make your case that free will is incompatible with an Omnibenevolent God.

Also, he would love everyone, even if there could not be a real love relationship because the person does not love them back.


But he is the one who defines both evil and good, morality.

He could create free will without evil. God cannot commit evil right? Obviously evil is not required for free will then..

I can choose Coke or Pepsi without choosing to stab someone. Thus, obviously evil is not required for free will. God choosing to give humans the free will for evil was evil in itself.

He created the possibility of evil, you may take the Pepsi and stab me on your way, it is a possibility not a must.And the fix for evil is Justice, that is reserved for later.That's what I call Omni benevolence. Can you say It is evil that he created the possibility of evil, I mean that would be subjective.

(correction)

*Just like he made it so I cannot teleport to mars just by thinking about it.
AbnerGrimm
Posts: 114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:04:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 9:59:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
So Christians cannot say that evil is required for free will because that is BS. Free will means the ability to free choose from a bunch of options, there is no reason one of the options has to include evil. If God exists, he built that into the system.

Explain why it is BS? You are the one putting limitations on freedom. Freedom means you can choose anything, there is not limits on what you can choose. Therefore, you must have the choice to choose directly against God which is good opposed to evil. To not allow that is to not allow free-will to choose against God as you are doing now. You blame God for allowing you the will to choose against Him.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:05:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
It is clear that he does not let us do certain things if he exist. I cannot reach through the floor and touch someone in China. Does this mean I do not have free will? Of course not. So if God made it so we could not do evil, would that mean we would not have free will? Of course not. If we would not have free will if we could not do evil, then using the same logic we do not have free now because I cannot reach the floor to China. Evil could have just been one of the many things we cannot do. Nope. An omnibenevolent God apparently wanted a lot of evil. Makes sense!! ....
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:06:38 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 10:04:13 AM, AbnerGrimm wrote:
At 5/13/2013 9:59:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
So Christians cannot say that evil is required for free will because that is BS. Free will means the ability to free choose from a bunch of options, there is no reason one of the options has to include evil. If God exists, he built that into the system.

Explain why it is BS? You are the one putting limitations on freedom. Freedom means you can choose anything, there is not limits on what you can choose. Therefore, you must have the choice to choose directly against God which is good opposed to evil. To not allow that is to not allow free-will to choose against God as you are doing now. You blame God for allowing you the will to choose against Him.

Free will means no limits? Ok, I cannot freely read your mind so I guess we do not have free will lol
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:08:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 4:17:38 AM, Smithereens wrote:
Just a reminder that Omni-benevolence means simply: depthless love. This is not mutually exclusive with hatred. God can dislike things just like He can love things.

But where does the bible say that God only loves those that love Him back?

That is not the initial meaning of Omni-benevolence , that's an added meaning.And the bible doesn't say that God loves the people who love him back, but who love him in the first place, God love is something to win, not granted at all.21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.Only once you fulfil the conditions can you expect his love, and if he loves you then you are a winner.By the way this is the same logic in other Abrahamic scriptures. The claim that God initially loves everybody is not founded. But he initially is compassionate with all his creatures.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:08:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 10:04:13 AM, AbnerGrimm wrote:
At 5/13/2013 9:59:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
So Christians cannot say that evil is required for free will because that is BS. Free will means the ability to free choose from a bunch of options, there is no reason one of the options has to include evil. If God exists, he built that into the system.

Explain why it is BS? You are the one putting limitations on freedom. Freedom means you can choose anything, there is not limits on what you can choose. Therefore, you must have the choice to choose directly against God which is good opposed to evil. To not allow that is to not allow free-will to choose against God as you are doing now. You blame God for allowing you the will to choose against Him.

Also God has free will right? He cannot choose evil because that would go against his nature right? Thus, it is possible for free will to exist without evil as God would be an example of this if he exists.
AbnerGrimm
Posts: 114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:15:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 10:05:44 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It is clear that he does not let us do certain things if he exist. I cannot reach through the floor and touch someone in China. Does this mean I do not have free will? Of course not. So if God made it so we could not do evil, would that mean we would not have free will? Of course not. If we would not have free will if we could not do evil, then using the same logic we do not have free now because I cannot reach the floor to China. Evil could have just been one of the many things we cannot do. Nope. An omnibenevolent God apparently wanted a lot of evil. Makes sense!! ....

Not really. It made no sense. First, you connect physical limitations to mental or even spiritual senses. Applying physical limits to mental applications is more than absurd. We could go through some meta-physical scenarios that may make your analogy obsolete. Secondly, you compare touching someone to free-will. Thirdly, I contend we do have limits, even morally. That still does not mean we cannot do what is opposed to God's will. God has put limits on say murder...so have we....we still can do it.
AbnerGrimm
Posts: 114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:17:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 10:08:24 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/13/2013 10:04:13 AM, AbnerGrimm wrote:
At 5/13/2013 9:59:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
So Christians cannot say that evil is required for free will because that is BS. Free will means the ability to free choose from a bunch of options, there is no reason one of the options has to include evil. If God exists, he built that into the system.

Explain why it is BS? You are the one putting limitations on freedom. Freedom means you can choose anything, there is not limits on what you can choose. Therefore, you must have the choice to choose directly against God which is good opposed to evil. To not allow that is to not allow free-will to choose against God as you are doing now. You blame God for allowing you the will to choose against Him.

Also God has free will right? He cannot choose evil because that would go against his nature right? Thus, it is possible for free will to exist without evil as God would be an example of this if he exists.

God cannot commit evil therefore He has limits. The difference is Gods free-will of complete goodness and as you can see man's is not.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:19:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/11/2013 1:37:56 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
The Bible says God "hates" certain things. Also, it says that he "only" loves those who love him back. Wouldn't an omnibenevolent being not "hate" anything, and love everybody regardless? How do theists make The Bible compatible with omnibenevolence?

Where does it say God loves those who only love him back?

Where does it say God hates things?
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:19:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 10:15:02 AM, AbnerGrimm wrote:
At 5/13/2013 10:05:44 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It is clear that he does not let us do certain things if he exist. I cannot reach through the floor and touch someone in China. Does this mean I do not have free will? Of course not. So if God made it so we could not do evil, would that mean we would not have free will? Of course not. If we would not have free will if we could not do evil, then using the same logic we do not have free now because I cannot reach the floor to China. Evil could have just been one of the many things we cannot do. Nope. An omnibenevolent God apparently wanted a lot of evil. Makes sense!! ....

Not really. It made no sense. First, you connect physical limitations to mental or even spiritual senses.

It makes perfect sense. Free will is free will. Look up the definition. As long as I can choose between multiple choices, then I have fre will. Evil does not have to be an option chosen. I can choose McDonalds without choosing Rape. So evil is not required for free will. To say otherwise is absurd! Also, you are committing trhe special pleading fallacy. You are saying we can have physical limitations but not spiritual ones. This is an illogical double standard.

Applying physical limits to mental applications is more than absurd.

A restriction is a restriction. You are special pleading which is absurd.

We could go through some meta-physical scenarios that may make your analogy obsolete. Secondly, you compare touching someone to free-will. Thirdly, I contend we do have limits, even morally.

If we have limits, then not being able to commit evil could have been one of them. As long as I could choose Coke over Pepsi I would have free will by definition. Evil is not required for free will. God chose evil if he exists.

That still does not mean we cannot do what is opposed to God's will. God has put limits on say murder...so have we....we still can do it.

Why can we do evil, but not teleport? Obviously he is not that good of a God to choose evil or teleporting lol Acting like free will means physical but not spiritual restrictions is special pleading, as there is nothing in the definition of free will which states that.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2013 10:20:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 5/13/2013 10:17:01 AM, AbnerGrimm wrote:
At 5/13/2013 10:08:24 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/13/2013 10:04:13 AM, AbnerGrimm wrote:
At 5/13/2013 9:59:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
So Christians cannot say that evil is required for free will because that is BS. Free will means the ability to free choose from a bunch of options, there is no reason one of the options has to include evil. If God exists, he built that into the system.

Explain why it is BS? You are the one putting limitations on freedom. Freedom means you can choose anything, there is not limits on what you can choose. Therefore, you must have the choice to choose directly against God which is good opposed to evil. To not allow that is to not allow free-will to choose against God as you are doing now. You blame God for allowing you the will to choose against Him.

Also God has free will right? He cannot choose evil because that would go against his nature right? Thus, it is possible for free will to exist without evil as God would be an example of this if he exists.

God cannot commit evil therefore He has limits. The difference is Gods free-will of complete goodness and as you can see man's is not.

Why would a completely good God choose less than complete goodness? That is like a logical being choosing something less than logical to exist.