I base my atheism / agnosticism on a simple paradox. If you can explain it to me in a way that makes sense, I will adopt your religion.

I base my disbelief on the beneovlence vs omnipotence paradox. Let me explain:





God is supposed to be both benevolent and omnipotent, but if you look at history, he cannot be both.

Let's take the following event:



God being omnipotent (Being all poweful) let or made this happen. To say that he did not would say that he is not omnipotent, and therefore not godly or godlike.

So if God let or made this happen, then murdering 230,000 people by drowning and suffering can not be considered benevolent by any description of the word. Nor can sentencing beings to burn for eternity in fire (hell).

In conclusion, any god that exists today is neither benevolent or omnipotent, and thereby not a god or deserving of worship. For me 2+2=4.

Anyone willing to take up this challenge?

I do not believe in god..(something that controls everything)
I do believe that that our intelligent life do not end in a single lifespan..
I do not believe in "heaven" where is everyone to supose to live in peace just because we were good boys on earth...
I believe in some sort of life after this one..
Does not make sense to me, live a single life than go to "heaven" and be live happy forever..

However I believe your acts good or bad will make difference, I believe somehow that bad decisions and acts will be punished somehow..

So I believe in parts of budism,induism,christianism,spiritism..


Physicists have said that there could be the possibility of an infinite number of universes each with yourself but taking different decisions each time ..

What came before the Big Bang? would be that the universe expands and then shrinks infinitely?

You have the right to choose.. if that's not reason enough to believe then your lost

Um care to expand on that at all? Because I have the right to choose I should believe in God?

If you don't believe then why is it a problem? why do you care?

Have we gone that far as to say... " I don't believe what you believe, so you need to take down the cross that's in your front yard"

Our country is lost. Having rights is a great thing, UNLESS someone else's rights get in the way of yours.

It doesn't matter what I say, you're a non-believer I doubt I could say anything that would change your mind because your mind has already been made up. I don't go to church every sunday, I've not been to a church since I was 17 (besides weddings & funerals). Growing up my mother and grandmother has told stories from their spiritual experience's. If you like I can go through some of the stories I heard.

I can also tell you of one story of my own. But I doubt you would still change your stance. Ever see the show called "Beyond & Back"? The stories themselves aren't the part that makes you think, it's the part of how all of these stories are similar. But even those probably wouldn't change your mind. Believing isn't something you just go with, you have experiences that solidify that belief.

I don't hate on someone because they don't believe, or that they believe an alien flew into a volcano. That's your choice, so I ask again... why does it matter if you don't believe?

Interesting. As I have stated before, I am not certain of my belief on a "God"..I am certain that I believe in a higher power. One that drives ocurrences perhaps, or simply one that sits back and watchs us. I sometimes think "God" is more like Conan's "Crom", who sits back and watches and who does not give a shit..LOL.

Your true problem, as I perceive it Jet, is not really a matter of a God per se, your problem is one of religion. On that, shockingly, we both very much agree. Religion, as we know it, in all of it's varied forms, are useless extentions of various man made institutions designed to control men. They can all be laid at the feet of various rituals and belief systems before them, carrying symbols and other parts forward. I will more than gladly deate this with anyone as fact.

I will also debate any crotchery having to do withh scientific mumbo jumbo and evolution as the process by which man came about. The so called "big bang" from which all life spread must have been an instantaneous bang, as is proven by the existence of Granite and Polonium 218, a radioactive substance found within Granite. I can expound on that if you wish.

I would be willing to state that there is most probably a God, what his intentions for "man" are is as much a mystery to me as to most people. But to believe in the dogmatic stuff presented by almost all religions is simply an attempt to provide many people who have no purpose and who do not understand purpose, with some hope that when they leave this short life there is something to look forward to. I would be more inclined to believe we are descendants of alien beings, such as can be found in this article http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/dm_report.html than I am in anything from religion.

So by your logic parents who allow any harm to come to their children are also not benevolent. If you're anything like me you learned much more when you got hurt than when you didn't so in reality, is the parent who hovers over their child and never lets them touch something hot, and thereby learn that lesson, more or less benevolent than the one who allows some accidents to happen so the child will be prepared for life?

While there are many events across the world that cause great loss of life, no one forced anyone to live in the path of natural disasters, so anyone who pays attention or has lived through one, like a hurricane, either assumes the responsibility for the risk they take or they leave that area.

If I had complete faith in the existence of God then I would argue that any direct interference would violate his promise to let us make our own decisions. When we get to make our own decisions then we have to be responsible for the ramifications of those decisions, no matter how sad that may make God.

Now your next question may be "how can prayer accomplish anything if God does not intervene?" Again, if I was confident in God's existence, I'd say that prayer is an exercise of your free will and by asking for God's intercession you give him a window through which he may act without violating his promise. How do you know that if people didn't pray every day for people all over the world that the disaster you posted wouldn't have killed many more people?

I think Helemoto accurately described the Christian Hell in a post in another thread. As understood by the Christian faiths, Hell is not a place of fire and brimstone, it is simply spending an eternity outside the presence of God. So, if you don't believe in God then what difference does it make? FYI the folks who preach fire and brimstone are usually the same charlatans that say you're going to burn if you don't send me $1,000...

*edit
I'm not trying to convert you or convince you of anything, since I don't even know what I believe. I just thought, based on my knowledge of Christianity and my limited ability to make logical arguments, I could help bounce your questions around.

Well said Kaotic..well said indeed. I like it.

It comes down to this: If we have free will, then God has a better than even chance of existing. Even Chaos is technically just systems too complex for our current understanding. So, if free will exists - it must be due to interface with forces that exist outside of understood physics. Otherwise, we have predestination.

While this in of itself does not prove that God exists, we can prove that, if we have free will - God CAN exist. If free will exists, we can also make a good case that there is some form of life after death - because for all we know whatever is pulling the strings on our meat puppet still exists after the puppet. In fact, lacking a co-dependant energy relationship, it is highly likely what whatever it is that pulls the strings on our meat puppet still exists after the puppet is gone.

If there is an interface between the unknown and our meat puppet , then it also stands to reason that historical cases of divine knowledge and precognition etc have a high possibility of being legit - at least in some instances. But the fact that a 2-way communication with the unknown is a requirement for free will opens all sorts of logical doors. At least if you believe in free will. If you don't believe in free will, it does not matter anyhow, because you are basically as dead as you will ever be from the moment you are born. Just more bits of matter traveling in a predetermined path, in which case nothing really matters anyway because there is nothing you can do about anything.

So, if we work from the basis of free will I posit that God is not only possible but likely.

Working from the basis of free will, you have your answer to why there are ills in the world and bad things happen to good people.

As far as evolution, and things like that go - I would say that the Old Testament is certainly not intended to be literal. Early man, and probably even modern man would not comprehend the details of something like the creation of the universe. There would also have been little point in God sharing those details.

In fact if we look at the etymology of the word "Day", we realise that God's use of the word day in the Old Testament by necessity must have been an abstraction. First of all, the concept of a day as humans understand it did not exist until after the Earth and the Sun were created.

Secondly and even more telling - the exact time it takes for the Earth to revolve around the Sun is NOT static. It changes. Therefore it is self-evident that God was not being literal in the Old Testament when explaining how things were made. It had to have been made so the people at the time could understand it.

From that, it is logical to conclude that science as we understand it does not conflict at all with what our historical perception of God should be. The world was obviously not created in seven days as humans know them, but since it is easily proven that God was not being literal there is no conflict between religion and science.

Also, Got created the universe in several stages, and then rested. This means that he is not literally omnipotent in the strictest sense, though could be considered so for practical purposes.

There is plenty of anecdotal evident throughout history to support the existence of a higher power. Once you take a few minutes and logically sort out early religious works, it is also evident that they were not intended to be literal, it was intended as metaphor so God did not fry puny cave-people brain with concepts they could not understand, and would have no immediate use if they did.

Now, as for evolution. It is pretty obvious that God could predict the end result of creating a particular environment. God used the Big Bang ( or however our current universe got started ) as the initial condition, with a predicted path of motion that led to the development of life and of humans. Seems pretty simple to me, though actually doing it was certainly very complex. Difficult enough than an omnipotent being/force has to rest afterwords even.

A good analogy would be the break in a game of pool. A good player can position the balls off the break. God can apparently take a glob of super compressed reality and position stars, planets, etc and load them with the stuff of life. Neat trick.

The idea that God would, or would need to go outside his own laws of physics to accomplish his will was always a mystery to me. So many people think that if it does not break the apparent laws of physics that it is not mystical or divine. What horseshit. The universe only exists as a constant because the laws are constant. If the laws were not constant, there would not be a universe. There would have been no reason God would need to go outside the established means of accomplishing change in his own universe to work his will. The idea that he would need to is silly.

Proving without doubt that God exists may not be possible. Proving that the commonly held objections to either God or Science not existing is a trivial matter. Making a case that God is very likely to exist is pretty simple. At least if free will exists. And if it doesn't, then it doesn't matter anyway.

Another rational and exceptional arguement. Well said as well Derid.

While I respect your vision Derid, I do not agree or make sense to me that free will is related to god or our need to see a greater entity as a creator of everything.

So I take that because I believe somehow in the theory of Parallel worlds

According to the scientific theory of the multiverse there are many worlds or universes alongside ours. Some of these universes, in terms of physical laws, can be found next to ours and others 'further away' in the sense that they are ruled by other laws of nature. A multiverse may consists of many parallel universes. Our universe and our earth is part of only one of many parallel universes in a larger multiverse. Famous statements are: "there are many universes, our universe is just one of many", "the theory that all possibilities that can happen do happen in another quantum reality," depending on our choices there are an infinite number of realities, though existing in another quantum reality", "there may be hundreds or thousands of these worlds / universes existing in the same time / space continuum", "same planet, different dimension". Another word used for parallel worlds or parallel universes are alternative realities.

Parallel worlds in science
For decades now, in the scientific world, people try to make a so called "unified theory" or "theory of everything" that can explain everything. In 1957, Hugh Everett III developed his Many-worlds interpretation to solve various problems that arise during scientific experiments and to explain certain phenomena that occur in quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics deals with the study of the smallest particles that the material "reality" is made of. In the many worlds theory every possible outcome of a particular event creates a new branch in a parallel universe. The idea of the many universes and even many multiverses was then taken up by many other scientists and has become a serious part of modern science. The Russian-American theoretical physicist Andrei Linde came up with the theory of the "bubble universe" where new universes are formed as bubbles from a multiverse or where one bubble creates (branches of from) another one. In this theory our universe is a bubble in an ocean of millions of bubbles. The most recent theory is based on the M-theory and represents a comprehensive description of different string theories. In M-theory, new universes are formed by collisions of cosmic membranes in a eleven dimensional space where each universe can have its own physical laws. There are also other variations on the string theory which lead to a theory of multiple universes.


We have instilled this primitive concept of God, on the creation of everything, which in my view there is no argument that I can connect it to something else if not pure belief, but not the philosophy of free will, because even this free will can be a reflection of the different decisions possible in infinite universes.

Yes, but we as observers are only observing one path. The locus of consciousness so to speak. At least this is generally the case for most people. In other words, there may be many realities but humans typically perceive only one at a time.

Besides, I specifically stated that the free will logic cannot prove God exists. Only that God CAN exist.

Under the God+Free will scenario, I interpret man being created in Gods image as a reference to the fact that both are observers of reality that are on some level observing from outside of Einsteinian relativity, ergo both have an ability to create. Create in this sense would be to alter the course of predestination.

But like I said, I cannot prove that God exists. Only that he can exist, and that popularly held objections to God existing are easily overcome. Many other theories could be held up as valid pending further examination.

I refute the argument of God as creator related to the free will of man, with all respect but not because the prove thing, while your statment seems beautiful, I cannot understand the logic or philosophy tied thing.

And it´s possible to be "religious" man and do not believe in God.

"The refutation of the notion of a supreme God or a prime mover is seen as a key distinction between Buddhism and other religions, In Buddhism, the focus is primarily on the effect the belief in theories of creation and a creator have on the human mind."

I´m not budist, but I believe in certain precepts of it, as the same go to Christianity, Hinduism and other religions. And we are so tied to the root, that must be a god and single entity creater of everything that we will always create arguments to that view.

I would to ask you a question, what are the consequences to you, of not believing in God as creator? I know I should not ask that because you already said the free will argument.

Hmm, maybe language barrier - but I do not think you are understanding me.

But, consequences of not believing in God.. there arent any. At least, no theoretical consequences are related to my argument.

But I am not arguing that free will exists because of God. I am arguing that if free will exists, God can also exist. There is an important difference there.

Also if God exists, who created God, is possibly that nobody created God? if so is also possibly that nobody create man and all things that exists?

Does this matter? I do not think so, only to humans that want control or influency another human with religious arguments..

Also I´m not saying that religion is a bad thing, with or without religion man would kill the same or more people that was killed because "God".

Religion is good because it teach good preceipts, and give us hope to our lives, if there is a God, or Pantheon of Gods, of there is no God as our mind think of it, does not matter to me.

I take it those are rhetorical questions?

Anyhow, my arguments have little to do with religion, other than debunking a couple things that have been occasionally taught by them.

All I recommend is looking at it logically, and am simply trying to provide some examples. I am not stumping for any particular religion or belief.

Science does not disprove religion, religion cannot countermand science. That is all. No need to assume there is any other meaning behind it, I am saying - and ONLY saying, precisely what I say.

edit. :D, Jetstar where are you.. you were the one that asked so join the discussion!

Derid, I think I understood what you were trying to pass in that first message, I was just trying to get more discussion about that.

Just watching :-)

To Jets point, if God is both benevolent and omnipotent.

He is both but doesn't have to be both at the same time.


More riddles Jet. I love riddles.

As a freshman in High School I took AP Biology. The instructor for the lab and the class was a Nun. She had the best answer for the balance of science and religion I have ever heard, and it changed the way I look at religious and scientific philosophy since that day.

The conversation arose during a discussion on ameba and protozoa. Someone in the class asked the Nun (Sister Margret), how someone like her who is of the cloth, can teach something like evolution, when creationism as taught by the Holy Roman Church is in direct contrast.

Her answer sums it up best.

She told us that she believed both were true at there core. That a reasonable educated person could not disagree with the cold truth and facts of science that clearly showed the relative chain effects that drive evolution. That as well, evolution is not by chance, it is by design. Therefore if evolution is by design, then whose design is it by? That is where the metaphorical "God" entered the equation. It was by God's design that evolution took place and the outcome has resulted in bi-pedal humans.

Chomp on that for a moment...

In science you can not make something out of nothing.
Why do I say this?

Because energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Therefore, how did it all start?

Therefore, if God created everything, what did exists before God, who created god?

Yeah, pretty much.

As far as what came before God etc....

Those questions really cant be answered, so I dont spend much thought on them. I hypothesize that the universe exists simply because it can. Hence, if God can exist I think it more likely than not that he does.

There is of course, no proof.

HAHAHA..Mithus, you funny communist boy..it does not work that way. God existed before anything, everything exists because of God. Get with the program.

Heathens...sheesh

Oh fucking please...First off, Drakiss is proof evolution can work in reverse, so we will give you that. Beyond which, that is some serious catholic horseshit to be sure. I applaud Sister Margret. Since I was very young, I was groomed to be the first Catholic Priest in my family. One of the things I learned along the way, before Deanna Drew taught me what I was giving up with celebacy, was that Catholics have a good, reasonable explaination for almost everything. I applaud that as well. However, no nun I ever knew in school, nor science teacher, has ever been able to explain several things. How for example there are human fossilzed footprints beside those of dinosaurs in the bedrock of Texas? How, if the same amount of cosmic dust falls on the surface of the moon every year that falls to earth, did Neil Armstrong not sink feet into the surface of the moon rather than inches, if indeed the earth and moon are as old as claimed? I could go on, but let's keep this at least to the areas best debated, not some moronic and pathetic attempt to explain it all with the spooge from the ocean and we evolved from monkeys thing. That one I just don't fly with.

Holy bat shit are you one of the ones that believe the earth is 5k years old?

I´m socialist old man, comunism never existed, you americans think that thing on USSR was comunism, it was not, that was a corrupted capitalism of state.

as the question who created God, I´m just using the logic like you guys are using to explain God..

WOW

Maybe you should watch...

I like pies.

Wolfgang wokeup and joined the discussion!
just kidding, but the bold text is nothing something that I invented.

*Communism, in the scientific sense of a classless society, has never existed, on USSR there was two class the government party class and people class at least.. and about capitalism of state argument in a simple concept is when your government control all production..

Watch the Video I posted Mithus... especially pay attention around the 5:20 minute mark. From there on it continually gets worse. So pay attention.

Did Tas just ramble on for 2 minutes and then manage to make the Intelligent Design theory sound unintelligent?

What is Communism?
science vs. bullshit

Scientific definition:

A classless society with no exploitation. No state machine used by one section of the population to oppress another section. No need for professional armies or police forces. No use of production for profit or exchange. Society runs in accord with the principle: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Bullshit definition (ie: commonly believed--but WRONG)

Rule of society by a single party which maintains a monopoly of political power and suppresses all opposition. Control of the economy via centralized bureaucratic planning.

Examples of bullshit definition: the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, North Korea, etc.

a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs

direct for the oxford dictionary, there is no scientific definition as its not science

Yours sounds more like utopia

that´s right scientific comunism from Marx is most like a utopia, no ever existed..

I´m going to put an example that I found on web about USSR that is simple:

What happened to Lenin's 1917 revolution?

The most well-known attempt at working class rule (ie: Lenin's October 1917 revolution) was eventually suffocated and degenerated into a single party regime that ruled like feudal lords and suppressed all serious opposition (ie: a police state where a single organization enforced a monopoly on political thought and activity).

USSR would only be classified as a degenerated form of socialism..

The destiny of all attempts at communism or socialism are inherently doomed to degeneration. This is why many of us despise them. They sound good, but achieving that utopian vision is simply impossible. Trying results either in USSR, North Korea, or Greece.

You need to get used to comunism, when you going to meet God on heaven, what do you think that are you going to experimt for eternity, capitalism or comunism? again, i´m joking.

If there is a flawless God then communism would work under him. The reason that communism has never and will never work on earth is that humans are flawed and greedy.

I hope you get a hippopotamus of a lesbian for a Professor at some point in the next year.

ROTFLMAO..that was good Tas...


@Helenmoto..one of the ones? No, I would say the earth is older than 5k, but it's not 665 bazzillion billion years old either.

We can just say the earth is Vuldan old. That would be pretty damn old. LOL

You could just say you hope he gets Rosie Odonnel as a professor. That's horrible, I don't wish her for my worst enemy. I think Peolosi and maxine waters had a 3 way with a horse , and rosie is the result.

LOL That's great Tas, but I haven't seen any of those walking around our campus. It's not a very liberal campus, in fact we even had a school sponsored reading of the constitution on Constitution Day in the quad.

Definitely NOT a liberal campus!

Oh, you funny. Bastache...

Simply not having the time to fully read everyones responses, I will state my own perspective.

My belief is a gift to myself for standing watch over my fellow man, specifically my friends and family, those I love. As I have asked God to watch over me, defend and protect me, so shall I repay that by manning the walls of the kingdom of heaven, where my grandfather awaits me so that together we may fight the great adversary on the heavenly battle grounds that lay beyond those beautiful walls, we do this so that heaven can be the peaceful place of rest for many others.

That is a fanciful hope of mine, realistically speaking I am not a Evangelist or Crusader, I am a Knight of God, I came to Christ at 32, when I was informed I had never been baptized. However that does not mean I am the type to force others to believe as I do. I sought to be baptized because all my life I struggled for things, sure everyone does to some extent. The difference was/is that I felt besieged, overwhelmed, and alone, anything that could go wrong did, and usually at the worst possible times. I felt I did not have Gods protection, and that having God on my side was better then having nothing. From a warriors perspective you cannot wage war on two fronts without some heavy casualties. All my life I had been fighting against the great adversary, and bucking against Gods advances. So if you are going to join a side why not pick the winning side was my thinking.

Believe how you want Jet, I would be a hypocrite to say otherwise and I don't have any answers for you, nor would I presume to think it appropriate to force any beliefs on anyone. There is a popular quote;

"Faith is daring the soul to go beyond what the eyes can see."
- William Newton Clark

God can be both benevolent and wrathful, but that does not mean there is no purpose to his wrath, aNnNNNnnnND is not the only force at work here either...

Shut up and get back in your hole Drakiis.

You have PlanetSide2 plans to work on.

Chop-fucking-Chop.

Satan is that you?

Satan is a dingle berry on my bat wings.

Besides, you couldn't handle my slip of silver.

-Bune

Laminin wiki it.

Here is the definition

Laminins are trimeric proteins that contain an α-chain, a β-chain, and a γ-chain, found in five, four, and three genetic variants, respectively. The laminin molecules are named according to their chain composition. Thus, laminin-511 contains α5, β1, and γ1 chains.[2] Fourteen other chain combinations have been identified in vivo. The trimeric proteins intersect to form a cross-like structure that can bind to other cell membrane and extracellular matrix molecules.[3] The three shorter arms are particularly good at binding to other laminin molecules, which allows them to form sheets. The long arm is capable of binding to cells, which helps anchor organized tissue cells to the membrane.


That is what holds your body together now look at what shape it is.

Colossians 1:16–17

16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him.

17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.


If you dont believe then i challenge you? what are you missing out on in becoming a believer. Weigh your options here.

Ask yourself what have i gained here on this earth i will be able to take with me after i die. Nothing u keep nothing no matter who you are what u believe in it is all material. Your house,car,cloths,COMPUTER,job nothing u get to keep nothing.

Ok now flip the switch here. What if you are a believer. You get to spend eternity with God and not only that he promises to anyone that believes in his son jesus christ as there saviour u get a mansion, streets of clear gold, pearl gates, and get to spend eternity there.



God lets things happen to people to test there loyalty. Look at Job he lost his riches family he lost it all but still served god and got back triple of what he lost.

Ok, I don't know about the mansions or streets of clear gold, cause I've never been there, but I think you're supposed to have faith and I don't think you can define faith as: I'll believe just so I don't have to burn for eternity. Is that really believe or faith, or is that a game of CYA? Given that, while I know your intentions are good Ken, I don't think your argument here is sound.




This argument only works if you happen to be a believer, what about the people who undergo trials and tribulations who don't believe? How do those trials help them to believe in God? Now, I know that traumatic events often do move people toward God, but as a general rule, I think most people tend to curse God when they run afoul of adversity.

No kaotic if someone dont believe then why are we typing on this forum trying to challenge someone. I mean i know tas probably made this post jokingly. If jet is a atheist then why does he post on a subject he dont believe in why waste the motion of typing to something he dont believe in. Same for anyone else ill tell a evolutionist why dont we still come from monkeys or fish today.

Also i dont agree with these type of post even though it is a everything goes forum still u have to understand Jet he is and always be like this likes to see crap stirred up. so if we quit posting he wont get his jollies off of us arguing over something he dont believe in. This forum was intended to get heated arguements over crap none of us can do anything about it because he loves the drama been knowing that for 10+ years.

I was totally sincere in my post, and I have yet to see an answer that addresses my question in a manner that would change my mind.

I wish someone would, cause I would like to live forever.



Would not a god already know? Why would he need to test?

I wish someone would, cause I would like to live forever.-Jet



Living forever is easy, just get one of those California vampires to do some work.

Someone once told me to trust in God, I said I do, but I trust in me more. The reality is fairly simple, if God exists, in whatever form, and if indeed he is omnipotent, than all of this is happening because we are a grand experiment, like a huge ant farm.

And I am going to live forever, in one form or another.

I know there are terms I use that are not universal among all religions or philosophies, if you like I can list them and provide explanations.

Your question Jet is a great one. In my years of missionary service, I served in Japan, I heard it many times. It is a great and difficult question, sometimes....

While we may not have all the answers in this life, the Lord does, and we can trust Him more than anyone or anything in this world. He will help us get through everything.

So what do we know for sure, from sources whose answers don’t change? We know that God loves His children. We know that part of His plan is to allow evil to exist in the world. We know that if we’re still alive, we have a work to accomplish. We know that the Savior suffered not only for our sins, but also for our pains and afflictions, and we know that one day He will conquer the evil one, answer all our questions, and bless us with a fulness of joy.

God already knows what we’re made of, but perhaps He wants us to learn what we’re made of. I think we would all agree that we learn more from our tough times than from our easy times. Sometimes bad things happen to good people.

Sometimes our trials are a direct result of someone using their agency to do evil. Often when tragedy strikes, someone will say, “Well, it must have been God’s will.” What exactly is “God’s will”? It seems to me that God’s will is that we choose righteousness over wickedness! However, He also desires that we have a choice in the matter.

What the Lord desires is that we love one another and choose to obey Him. But some do not. They are “without affection.” Everyone on earth has agency, and sometimes those who misuse it have an impact on many innocent people.

Many of the bad things that happen are contrary to God’s will. But remember that man’s will is temporary, and ultimately God’s will is what will be done.

There are other questions in all of this, too. How many acts of premeditated evil has God prevented? How many of these tragedies could have been much worse? There is no way we could know. Sometimes we see things on the news and ask, “How could God allow this to happen?” Could it be that one day we’ll discover that God prevented much more than He allowed?

How many times has someone prayed that “we might get home in safety,” and we actually did? How many traffic accidents has He helped you avoid? How many times has He inspired you to do something that saved someone from injury? We will never know in this life.

The plan of happiness allows for agency, and therefore it also allows for evil. There is no flaw in the plan.

We may never have all the answers in this life. The newspapers, the cable news networks, and the politicians will be debating the causes and solutions to our modern problems for years. The faithful will look for answers in the scriptures, where the answers don’t change. And one day, the Lord will return and answer all our questions.

I have always seen it like this.

Organized religion is crap. They are all based off of loosely the same concepts but the rest is just peoples perception (or lack of) of rules that have been censored by people who were previously censored before them.

The books in the bible were hand picked. If you think some of the stories in the bible are outlandish I suggest you read some of the omitted books IE the book of Solomon who according to that book on top of being the wisest King ever was also a grand sorcerer with super magic powers.

If by having and using my "god given" free will I do right and be good then religions dumb sect rules won't matter.

Therefore if there is some higher being out there that is omnipotent and what not who has some set of rules that we should be going by then he/she/it has either done a poor job of letting us know the guidelines or it has all been lost through translation.

Bottom line like old grampy bones put it.

"Do right and be good and everything has a way of workin out. When doin right and bein good puts you crossways with someone then fight like the devil and damn sure don't lose."

I don't think old grampy bones could get more Texas than that.

Thanks for your well thought out reply. I am glad this works for you and that you have found peace in your beliefs.

For me, a truly benevolent being would never allow the suffering going on around the world. Because it is allowed to go on, and I am unable to understand why, is the sole reason that I cannot take part.