Quote:

---

I must be having some sort of disconnect, or some brain burp.  Since nature and other outside influences can affect how people act, all a parent can do is to raise a person the best they can.  Teach them right from wrong, etc.  If that person ignores them, because of rebellion and outside influences..how exactly has the parent failed?  What, you want to lock up kids and never let them out of the bubble?  Cause that is the only way a parent could be the ONLY influence in a child's life.

---

Quote:

---

if-then combinations that amount to arriving at a contradiction,

---

Quote:

---

In fact, however, if this god was FORCED to ALWAYS BE omnipotent and omniscient - wouldn't that be a contradiction as well?

---

Quote:

---

So, very simply, very easy - omnipotence quite obviously offers the option to deliberately not making use of attributes to the fullest. Everyone can do that. Just because someone is a genius with an instrument, it doesn't mean that person always has to play like one. He/she can also play simple - or even faulty. Just for kicks.

---

Quote:

---

The term omnipotent has been used to connote a number of different positions. These positions include, but are not limited to, the following:

A deity is able to do anything that it chooses to do.[1] My point and my argumentation from earlier on was based of this.

A deity is able to do anything that is in accord with its own nature (thus, for instance, if it is a logical consequence of a deity's nature that what it speaks is truth, then it is not able to lie).
Hold that it is part of a deity's nature to be consistent and that it would be inconsistent for said deity to go against its own laws unless there was a reason to do so.[2]
A deity is able to do anything that corresponds with its omniscience and therefore with its worldplan.
Every action performed in the world is 'actually' being performed by the deity, either due to omni-immanence, or because all actions must be 'supported' or 'permitted' by the deity.

Omniscience (pron.: /ɒmˈnɪʃəns/[1]), mainly in religion, is the capacity to know everything that there is to know

Omnipresence or ubiquity is the property of being present everywhere.

Omnibenevolence (from Latin omni- meaning "all", and benevolent, meaning "good")[1] is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as "unlimited or infinite benevolence". It is often held to be impossible, or at least improbable, for a deity to exhibit such property alongside omniscience and omnipotence as a result of the problem of evil. However, some philosophers, such as Alvin Plantinga, argue the plausibility of co-existence. The word is primarily used as a technical term within academic literature on the philosophy of religion, mainly in context of the problem of evil and theodical responses to such. Although even in said contexts the phrases "perfect goodness" or "moral perfection" are often preferred because of the difficulties in defining what exactly constitutes 'infinite benevolence'.

---

Quote:

---

As it appears that the defenses and theodicies which might allow the theist to resist the problem of evil can be inverted and used to defend belief in the omnimalevolent being, this suggests that we should draw similar conclusions about the success of these defensive strategies. In that case, the theist appears to face a dilemma: either to accept that both sets of responses are equally bad, and so that the theist does not have an adequate response to the problem of evil; or to accept that both sets of responses are equally good, and so to commit to the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnimalevolent being as plausible.


Another general criticism is that though a theodicy may harmonize God with the existence of evil, it does so at the cost of nullifying morality. This is because most theodicies assume that whatever evil there is exists because it is required for the sake of some greater good.
But if an evil is necessary because it secures a greater good, then it appears we humans have no duty to prevent it, for in doing so we would also prevent the greater good for which the evil is required. Even worse, it seems that any action can be rationalized, as if one succeeds in performing it, then God has permitted it, and so it must be for the greater good. From this line of thought one may conclude that, as these conclusions violate our basic moral intuitions, no greater good theodicy is true, and God does not exist. Alternatively, one may point out that greater good theodicies lead us to see every conceivable state of affairs as compatible with the existence of God, and in that case the notion of God's goodness is rendered meaningless

---

Quote:

---

Apoloogists like you are sad.

---

Quote:

---

I must be having some sort of disconnect, or some brain burp.  Since nature and other outside influences can affect how people act, all a parent can do is to raise a person the best they can.  Teach them right from wrong, etc.  If that person ignores them, because of rebellion and outside influences..how exactly has the parent failed?  What, you want to lock up kids and never let them out of the bubble?  Cause that is the only way a parent could be the ONLY influence in a child's life.

---

Quote:

---

One reason why I'm losing interest here is, the fact that people are wasting so much time building if-then combinations that amount to arriving at a contradiction, letting it sound like omnipotence and omniscience were kind of a curse.

---

Quote:

---

[What you said is just babble. it leads to nothing ,says nothing and just stated the obvious, but only so by assuming something out of thin air.
By implying that "Omnipotence" is actually possible, You assume something about Omnipotence without a snowing shred of reasoning.

The point you ignore so conveniently is that god should be "Omnibenevolent".

What a joke.

Instead of throwing bible verses, you throw nonsense. Just stop it.

---

Quote:

---

Why would someone want to have less than two wives though? I thought the whole purpose of it was to find your soulmates and be happy and have children. How does that work when you have one wife... I suppose you can love one woman only but still...

---

Quote:

---

As it happens I'm just watching a Terra X episode about the search for the "lost ark", and something has been quoted from the book of Moses, something a lot of people know:

Quote:

---

Genesis 22 And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.
2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
...
10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.
11 And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.
12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

---

Does that make any sense? I mean, I thought, God was all-knowing. Here, however, he TEMPTS Abraham in order to test him, saying, NOW I know that...

Any interpretation that makes God not either not all-knowing or a mean snow (because if he knew what old Abe would do, why did he have to torture him, making him think he'd have to sacrifice his son)?

---

Quote:

---

Joh 17:3  And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

---