aManFromMars:
Yeah.

Ihedinobi:
Dude, it is you who seem to not be thinking. You appear to be equating the existence of viruses, bacteria and other microorganisms to the existence of disease. Have you considered what might happen if none of these organisms existed in this world as you know it today? Have you considered that they have more to do in the scheme of things than cause disease? If your body wrre stripped of all the bacteria in and on it, would you survive?

Josh's point is not difficult to grasp at all. If man had not let sin in, all the thibgs that exist in this world would not be trying to destroy one another in their bid for survival. Relationships would be harmonious and symbiotic in nature. The Bible itself illustrates the type of world God had in mind and is bringing in after this whole scheme of things has been judged, it says that the lion and the lamb will lay down together and the young lion will eat grass, that a child will be able to play with deadly snakes and not be hurt, it says that in God's world, there shall nothing hurt or destroy.

So maybe it is you who should engage your brains a little.

Joshthefirst:
Smh.
Freewill is an attribute of man. Man was created good. But he chose to sin.
Others choose to follow God and not rebel against him.

Ihedinobi:
Dude, it is you who seem to not be thinking. You appear to be equating the existence of viruses, bacteria and other microorganisms to the existence of disease. Have you considered what might happen if none of these organisms existed in this world as you know it today? Have you considered that they have more to do in the scheme of things than cause disease? If your body wrre stripped of all the bacteria in and on it, would you survive?

Josh's point is not difficult to grasp at all. If man had not let sin in, all the thibgs that exist in this world would not be trying to destroy one another in their bid for survival. Relationships would be harmonious and symbiotic in nature. The Bible itself illustrates the type of world God had in mind and is bringing in after this whole scheme of things has been judged, it says that the lion and the lamb will lay down together and the young lion will eat grass, that a child will be able to play with deadly snakes and not be hurt, it says that in God's world, there shall nothing hurt or destroy.

So maybe it is you who should engage your brains a little.

Ihedinobi:
If that is your opinion it is also your opinion that an ability to do good is also a sign of imperfection since it is the same ability.

Logicboy03:






See this otondo!


Who said that viruses and bacteria are for only diseases?

Keep strawmanning.



The fact remains that certain viruses and bacteria cause illnesses as a resukt of their existence and nees to survive.


God createds the viruses n bacteria. Sin didnt them or their parasitic habits

Ihedinobi:
Logicboy, don't just through terms around. A straw man fallacy occurs when a debater addresses an argument that his opponent is not making. You claim even in the above that "certain viruses and bacteria cause disease as a result of their existence..." Is that not what I addressed?

I'll repeat myself, it is not the fact of their existence that is the reason for the existence of illness and disease. It is the disruption in the various relationships that the world was designed to run in that is the reason.

God created viruses and bacteria, He did not create the diseases they cause anymore than Toyota caused the death of a little schoolgirl who gets hit crossing the road when the sign says that all cars should stop. That is entirely on the drunk driver who operated the car.

GeneralShepherd:


Well, I find it ridiculous that God will create man knowing fully well he will eat the forbidden fruit and still plant the tree anyway!!

Secondly, project man according to christian belief in my opinion is a failure!!

Why? If I were to develop a car the first products will be prototypes(Adam and Eve) if they failed the field tests,why would I continue production knowing my products were dead on arrival.

If Adam and eve who were direct products from God failed,how does God expect derivatives of that product to become perfect?!

And since God is all knowing He planned all this from time immemorial from creation,to the fall and the names of all that will go to hell.

But then The Christian God doesn't exists,because if there was a God(the Christian God),his logic will be airtight and not filled with the contradictions in the bible.

Ihedinobi:
Bros, proving that A defines a given word in one way and B defines it another is not quite the same as proving that the word is not the word, wouldn't you agree?

But I see what you meant. Let's follow your thought a little, shall we? The Greco-Romans were very generous in their spiritual worship. They had a large pantheon of gods and goddesses. They would add yours if it was spectacular enough, but they still took issue with people who worshipped gods outside their own pantheon. That was why they attacked Christians in Ephesus.

That is, both the Christian and the pagan agree that idolatry is idolatry, they just disagree on which god is the idol and which the true God.

Let's take your other example of sexxual immorality. The Taoist may in fact consider multiple sexxual partners as not only not an evil thing but a good thing (can't confirm that now) and the Christian may consider it an evil thing, but the two agree that there is such a thing as evil and that sexxual immorality is evil. They just disagree on what acts may be called sexxual immorality and what acts may not.

So everyone has a concept of evil or sin and everyone agrees on what it conceptually is. What people may disagree with is what to call wvil and what not to call evil. Unless Taoists do not believe that there is no such thinf as sexxual immorality, they would be quite offended if you told them that they were immoral people for keeping multiple sexxual partners and probably try to show you how keeping multiple sexual partners is not sin. In other words, they agree that sin is sin, but not that keeping multiple sexxual partners is sin.

nnofaith: i get what you are trying to say, its the core of my atheistic beliefs, to me everything is random, evil and good are sides of the same coin, it is we humans that define good and bad, nature doesnt care. a lion killing an antelope is not good or evil, rainfall watering agric plants is not good or evil, typhoon destroying properties and killing pple is not good or evil, it is nature in its randomness.

macof:

nnofaith: i get what you are trying to say, its the core of my atheistic beliefs, to me everything is random, evil and good are sides of the same coin, it is we humans that define good and bad, nature doesnt care. a lion killing an antelope is not good or evil, rainfall watering agric plants is not good or evil, typhoon destroying properties and killing pple is not good or evil, it is nature in its randomness.

aManFromMars:
That which is perfect is good. So an ability to do good is indeed a sign of perfection. An ability to deviate from perfection is itself a sign of imperfection.

Ihedinobi:
Problem 1. You appear to have assumed that an ability to produce good and the ability to produce a deviation from good are two different abilities. They aren't. The ability to do good and and the ability to do evil are one ability. It is like a strong arm that you can use to hold a man under water until he dies from drowning and that you can use to haul him out of the river he fell into and can't swim. The same arm, different uses. Same ability, different uses.

Problem 2. It is not very clear what you mean by "sign of" perfection/imperfection? Did you mean that one is perfect for having the ability to do good and imperfect for having the ability to do evil?

rationalmind:

If A defines a word in a particular way, and B defines it in another way, There is no grounds on which A will say B is wrong (or better still, a sinner) and vice versa when its sin we are talking about.

Even if they admit there is idolatory, they won't admit what they practise is idolatory. The same way you won't agree you practise idolatory. Therefore, there are no grounds under which one can claim they are sinners and there are no grounds under which they can claim ure a sinner. And that exactly is what I said. So, please, help me tell Josh to stop saying what they preach is sin because there is absolutely no grounds on which to say that.

And there is something I noticed about your replies, you said taoists agree sin is sin
but not that keeping multiple sexxual partners is sin. That is, The practise of having multiple partners is not sin in a taoists worldview. Good, he doesn't agree with you keeping multiple partners is sin. Therefore, you both still disagree on what is sin.

GeneralShepherd:

Mr.Pagan if you edit my post kindly make it known

If there was a God I'll choose the christian before your regressive local gods

aManFromMars:
You know that freewill leads to chaos. soldiers MUST obey.

GeneralShepherd:


Well, I find it ridiculous that God will create man knowing fully well he will eat the forbidden fruit and still plant the tree anyway!!

Secondly, project man according to christian belief in my opinion is a failure!!

Why? If I were to develop a car the first products will be prototypes(Adam and Eve) if they failed the field tests,why would I continue production knowing my products were dead on arrival.

If Adam and eve who were direct products from God failed,how does God expect derivatives of that product to become perfect?!

And since God is all knowing He planned all this from time immemorial from creation,to the fall and the names of all that will go to hell.

But then God doesn't exists,because if there was a God,his logic will be airtight and not filled with the contradictions in the bible.

Ihedinobi:
Logicboy, don't just through terms around. A straw man fallacy occurs when a debater addresses an argument that his opponent is not making. You claim even in the above that "certain viruses and bacteria cause disease as a result of their existence..." Is that not what I addressed?

I'll repeat myself, it is not the fact of their existence that is the reason for the existence of illness and disease. It is the disruption in the various relationships that the world was designed to run in that is the reason.

God created viruses and bacteria, He did not create the diseases they cause anymore than Toyota caused the death of a little schoolgirl who gets hit crossing the road when the sign says that all cars should stop. That is entirely on the drunk driver who operated the car.

Ihedinobi:
Good. We're done with Stage 1. On to Stage 2.

Moral Objectivity is the issue here. It tends to be the atheist's/agnostic's position that morality is not objective, but that makes no sense. If there is no objective standard by which all moral codes can be judged, then there really is no real moral code, that is, amorality reigns - everyone does as everyone pleases.

In that case, only the strongest survives and the world will be ravaged by war. It is a fantasy that under a condition of rife subjectivity, everyone will live and let live. That is impossible because unless we will all individually retreat into caves and live entirely by ourselves and never see each other or desire anything, we must interact. And once one person must interact with another, there must be some objective code to which they must both yield to relate with each other.

For instance, if you and I didn't largely agree, even if unconsciously, that the dictionaries are supremne in defining the meanings of the words we're using, we wouldn't be able to communicate. Same thing with morality, unless there is an objective moral standard that bothe Christian and Taoist submit to, there can be no dealings between the two that will not end in serious conflict and the annihilation of one or both positions.

Thus, moral objectivity is an undeniable fact of life. That the Christian and the Taoist disagree on what may be qualified as sin does not mean that there is no particular practice that is only sin and nothing else regardless whether it is the Christian looking or the Taoist looking. It only means that one or both of them are wrong about what truly is sin. And there is an inviolable standard that proves it.

aManFromMars:

see nnofaith's definition. That's what I subscribe to. Rain soaks the ground, providing us food. On the other had, as the Op states, look at what's going on in Phillipines. All acts of nature.

With humans,we find something different. An ability to consciously decided to treat humans as you want to be treated or treat them as crap. emphasis on conscious.

It's this consciousness I refer to. Freewill, I believe, is being aware of making decisions unlike what we find in artificial intelligence systems et al. When these systems fail, we do not blame the failure on the systems themselves, but we rework our algorithms, codes, infrastructure etc.

Perfection in a system would imply zero probability of failure. A system that's capable of failing can't be described as perfect.

Joshthefirst: good, now we're getting somewhere. Man has freewill. God foreknows mans choices. He also foreknows the decisions man will take. He knows that some will rebel, and some will embrace obedience. That's why he came to save.



I can't give a comprehensive answer now, I'm indisposed.

Logicboy03:


Werent you telling me that i should know that not all viruses and bacteria cause diseases or ilnesses.......


Anyhoo.....which science journal told you that viruses and bacteria didnt cause dIseases at their origin.


This is how you christians peddle pseudoscience

Ihedinobi:
Alright. But we define perfection in a system by the purpose for which it exists, not so. You cannot talk of failure if there isn't an expectation. And expectation derives from purpose.

Ihedinobi:
So if man was created to be a moral agent who could intelligently choose good over evil, would his design not be perfect if he had the ability to choose good OR evil?

5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Ihedinobi:
I told you such a thing? Logicboy, read please. I said nothing of the sort.

Which science journal told you that they did at their origin? Besides, have you even ever learned how they cause disease?

That's how atheists peddle ignorance

rationalmind:

All ure doing here is to preach some sort of objective morality which I don't subscribe to. Everyone in my opinion should do as he pleases as long as he does not go against the law of the land.

You said unless there is some sort of objective morality taoists and christians subscribe to, there can be no sort of dealing between them that won't lead to conflict.

Who says when people subscribe to the same objective morality, dealings between them don't lead to conflicts. Shiite muslims and sunnis who both subscribe to the same objective morality from Allah, revealed through the quran have been killing eachother for ages.

Conflict in essence has nothing to do with sunbscribing to a particular objective morality.

aManFromMars: Back on Pc. Apologies for the typos in my last post,but it seems you got the general point.


Perfection is to be complete, lacking nothing, in other words to be without flaws. A process can be perfect. A product can be perfect. If man's purpose is to follow GOD's command( in essence avoid sin) and he ends up committing sin, in what way is man perfect. For those with a GOD-view, God is the ultimate from which man derives his purpose.

My point exactly. Handing over choice to man made him imperfect in respect to GOD's command. He could now choose to deviate from God's purpose.

GEN 6:

Logicboy03:

Lol denial and annonyism.

Dont twist my words.....the only claim i made was that viruses and bacteria cause diseases.....



You made the claim that the viruses n bacteria didnt originally cause diseases. Sir, that claim is not only nonsensical but also it is not supported by science

GeneralShepherd:

Why would come to save people you destined for hell..

Or are you saying that God doesn't know the exact number of people that will eventually go to hell before he created the world?

Joshthefirst: as usual, you keep repeating the same nonsense. How many times will it be drummed into your thick skull that people go to hell for commiting iniquity. You keep repeating this idiotic statement and calling others fools. Smh.

mazaje:

What are you talking about. . .The bible clearly says that those that do not believe in Jesus are condemned already. . .It does not even talk about sin or iniquity. . .It just says those who believe not are condemned already. . .