Amos

My point was that God did not want anything but man wanted to be "like god" (small g) and know the difference between good and evil. With this knowledge choices had to be made and therefore the idea of free will was lost.

This means that before man wanted to know between good and evil there was no evil and therefore no choice could be made. This makes the concept good and evil a human concept and free will is a human idea because 'no-choice' was lost when good and evil become known to man.

So if there is no right or wrong conceivable no choice can be made and if no choice can be made no freedom to make a choice is needed. If no choice exists no determination can be conceived to exist because determinism is contingent upon the freedom to choose component of the dichotomy.

Here is an example. If I draw a circle and ask you which part of the circle is the bigger half you would have trouble answering me unless I draw a line across the circle. The line is the distinction between good and evil but is not part of the circle.

[ November 01, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

Amos

The problem here is that God "is" or there would not "be" anything to negate God from.

penumbra

Vanderzyden posted
Hmmm……gratitude and adoration for a “Creator” that purposely continues to allow suffering, pain, degradation, and unspeakable agonies to be inflicted upon his creations, and then punishes them with eternal damnation when they question his motives? Yeah, I’ve always “adored” nice guys like that. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Answerer

I feel that this is the only point which I needs to address. Are you sure that God doesn't 'demand' or rather set any requirements from His creations? If so, I don't see any reasons for him to create Heaven and Hell(which serves as punishment and reward). Apparently, when God create Heaven and Hell and send Jesus, He is actually demanding faith from His creation (or face the consequence). He could just leave His creations with their choices alone but the problem is He didn't. Instead He toys with them (through the setting of his own rules and regulation), so tell me in what way does this God deserve any respect from us?

Amos

Yes, multiply and subdue the earth. Heaven and hell are religion specific and never part of God's idea. Heaven and hell are inspired ideas, true, but in Buddhism you can't get to either heaven or hell nor do you have to worry about Jesus demanding your loyalty.

In our mythology God created the heavens and the earth (yes read in Gen.1:1) and hell is when you are torn between heaven and earth, which must be true because earth is good and heaven is good.

Religion toys with the fate of humans and God does not demand your respect but deserves your respect if you ever wish to know who you are.

Answerer

Sorry, but I think things are getting more strange. Will you mind if I ask: 'Are you a christian?'.

Jobar

Amos:
Here is an example. If I draw a circle and ask you which part of the circle is the bigger half you would have trouble answering me unless I draw a line across the circle. The line is the distinction between good and evil but is not part of the circle.

Amos, you don't mean "the bigger half" as halves are the same size, by definition. You mean "the bigger part."

And you're still mistaken, because I would answer "the outside part!" The outside of any circle we can draw is always bigger than the inside part.

And I want to use your circle as a metaphor of God. We cannot draw a circle, even a conceptual one, big enough to contain *everything*- which is basically what attempting to define 'God' tries to do. How can we draw a circle which contains all things including itself? Perhaps it is fair to call God 'the outside part'- but the circle we are drawing surrounds all things meaningful. So this means that God is meaningless.

My metaphor explains the problem that those who believe in both God and Satan, have with Satan. Is he inside or outside the circle which is God? If inside, and therefore lesser than God, Satan is included with God- he is a part of God. Well, that will never do, for those who want to make Satan the cause of evil and God innocent. So they put him outside- and therefore, larger than God. Plus, that proves that God is *not* all inclusive. Quite a quandry for fundamentalists, isn't it?

Amos

Not at all. It depends on your definition of a Christian. I am not a Christian in the protestant interpretation.

Amos

</strong>

Right, bigger part of the circle but since good cannot be conceived to exist without evil both halfs are the same size. I was talking about the great divide, here, and not about God. The great divide is through which good and evil became known in equal proportions.

If you wish to call God the circle you should make it in the form of the human skull. Without a dividing line this will be the place where we are omniscient and a dividing line will create for us the place we must be scientific. They are looking for Love in all the wrong places, and that is why gravity (earthliness) usualy gets the best of them.

Answerer

Okay, are you a believer in Jesus then?