Why didn't a god create perfection?

[Donray]

Why didn't a god create perfection?

One of the arguments for a god creator is that the universe is perfect. A matter of fact, everything a perfect god creates should be perfect.

the problem is that the universe is not perfect, Earth is not perfect, animals are not perfect, etc.

For example: what is purpose of black holes, why create galaxies that collide with each other, why is our galaxy on a collision course with another galaxy? Why create an Earth with plates that move and cause earthquakes and massive destruction? Why create virus? What is the purpose of the asteroid belt that cause destruction on Earth? Why cerate a brain what goes haywire?

There is not very much perfection why if a perfect god created it?

[Willum]

[Replying to ttruscott]

Good point.
But Yahweh died in the early 1400's. So your point no longer has any bearing.
See tag-line.

[ttruscott]

I will say it again: [God] created the earth AFTER some of HIS creation CHOSE BY THEIR FREE WILL to become evil.

If I may offer my thoughts on this, TT, and of course everything after this presupposes that God actually exists (we must apparently always preface every post with that provision, which I think is stupid, but it seems necessary) . . .

The OT isn’t clear on the “when� the immaterial creation was . . . well . . . created. If we allow that science is right in this area – that God’s creation of light was the explosion of the singularity (certainly such an event would be somewhat bright [*giggle*]) then there was no before (since space/time wouldn’t have existed) then a gap occurred and perhaps then is when the immaterial creation came into existence.

I accept the Trinity, the Union of three divine persons whose sharing of the divine attributes creates the Unity. As living and intelligent, I accept that the Three communicated amongst themselves. To me this calls for time. Time may have entered into the physical creation with the big bang but it preceded the big bang within GOD.

So I have no trouble with a creation of all spirits in HIS image before the big bang which I think we all saw as per Job 38:7 and Rom 1:20 if it refers to the big bang.

HE did not create them evil.

I agree, but I would clarify that evil isn’t a thing that can be created; although, we use the word, which is an abstract description of the consequences of actions, as though it is a created thing.

I use it to mean: GOD is good and only good. That which was not in accord or agreement with HIS goodness did not exist. When Satan, the name of the first person to choose to reject GOD's goodness, to choose that which was NOT in accord with HIS goodness and out of agreement with HIM, he established evil as a reality, not just as a possibility.

And he recreated his character of ingenuous innocence as evil, so evil new words had to be invented to describe him with his new nature, demon and devil. Thus evil did become an objective thing, a demon soon joined by other things of evil, other demons. Evil is not just an abstract but is a thing in the form of a person who has rejected YHWH's claims to deity and HIS promises of salvation from all sin as the lies of a false god and accusing HIM of being the first liar in all of reality, accused YHWH as the most evil person in all of reality, thereby sealing his fate.

Hence, creating creatures with the ability to deliberate between good and evil is superior to creating automatics.

I consider that the marriage of the Lamb with the holy church as the end of the story Bible of earth and humanity as the culmination of the story as a whole. That is, the purpose of the creation of people in HIS image was to marry them and have a loving relationship with them. I also accept that true love and a true marriage cannot be forced. Therefore it was a logical necessity that we be created with a free will* and the ability and opportunity to choose to become perfectly holy or to become perfectly eternally evil, the opposite of holy.

* Free must mean free from any coercion to choose one option over another nor to be unable to chose one option at all due to any force or created nature.

Some chose to fulfill that purpose and agreed to marry HIM. Some rejected HIS proposal completely and thereby made themselves as impossible to ever be a proper wife, fit only to be destroyed in hell. Some who accepted HIS proposal of marriage then rejected HIS call for the destruction of those who rejected HIM, becoming sinful themselves, sheep gone astray as it were, needing redemption.

[otseng]

I guess that speaks to your credibility and knowledge any topic on your god.

Aside from that, your comments on my credibility (more accurately my alleged lack of it) are inappropriate comments of a personal nature, that is, they are attempts at character assassination. Such comments also presuppose that I care what someone else thinks about my credibility and I assure you that I could not possibly care less w/o being comatose or dead. Kinds of insults like that also presuppose that the person who comments on my lack of credibility has credibility him/herself, which might not be the case. Indeed s/he might be in possession of no credibility whatsoever so perhaps it’s best to refrain from commenting on another poster’s credibility or lack thereof. [smile]

Moderator Warning


Please do not make any comments of a personal nature. This includes responding to personal attacks. Report it and do not comment back.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[alexxcJRO]

[Replying to ttruscott]

"this does not apply to a living GOD who is aware of possibilities and choices and self understanding"

Your not making any sense.
Please explain further you've lost me here.

[JLB32168]

Well, sorry, but in my opinion, you have TRIED to.. I don't think, that in my case, you have succeeded.

Okay.

But those are not my words, they are your own. Sorry, your equivocal use of "need" still exists.

Okay. Sorry, but I can’t break it down any further. Oh well.

And as it stands, I am confused by your language.

Okay.

That's fine, but the we were discussing NEEDS.. and I was asking if God NEEDED to create, or if he had any reason at all.

Since I can’t describe “need� to your satisfaction there’s no reason to proceed.

That's basically why I couldn't stomach their preaching.

Okay

Asking questions is a good way.

Yup

I'm just questioning if what you present about the origins of the universe are facts.

I defer to experts in the field. You can accept or reject what they have to say.

Your opinion of what Hawking means is NOT evidence for your opinion of what Hawking means.

Okay.

So, in your opinion, "God" DID have a plan in mind for creation before he created.

I’m not interested in speculating since that would entail explaining things that apparently are inscrutable - such as "need."

It's fun to play around with the word "need" like that.

Yup

If it weren't for those three little problems.. your case might succeed.

Okay

Your ambiguous use of the word "possess" presents to me a language difficulty.

I’m the sphinx.

But you say that "singularity" possesses everything.. ( sounds like it possesses cakes ) But.. that it doesn't mean that the singularity possesses everything ( like cakes ) ... hard to tell, really.

Cakes are made of matter, all matter ultimately came from the singularity; therefore, cakes ultimately came from the singularity. Seems easy to me – not difficult at all.

I can't make heads or tails of this mess.

Oh well.

I wonder what "oh well" is supposed to mean?

Resignation.

Ambiguity like that does not make a case. It rather destroys it.

Okay.

I COULD take this " oh well" as a concession. You seem ready to give up the fight.

Pretty much. One word answers would certainly suggest that.

You can't seem to really explain your reasoning in a way that I can understand.

Apparently.

And.. I'm not convinced right now, that you care at all about my "understanding".

Closer

Well, FYI, in my understanding, your ideas don't have very much MERIT, my friend.

In your eyes they don’t. I can live with that.

In my opinion, it's the language that's tripping you up. But logic 101 isn't far behind trying to stick your wheels.

You’re entitled to your opinion.

I suggest that you read up on "equivocation" ... that's one of the main culprits here.

Okay.

Can you not see how confusing a statement like that is?

Yup.

We can actually COUNT how many times I get confused .. by the number of questions.

Indeed.

I wont ask you any below here, as I am quite happy to accept your resignation.

Okay.

It seems as if you are quite done trying to explain yourself concerning your initial claim way back in Post 4, but I can't really TELL.. due to your ambiguity.

Okay.

I am not getting my hopes up, by the way.

Good.

Right, we won't be discussing your claims about the origins of the universe any longer.

Okay.

Question:

Sorry – but I wouldn't be able to explain my answer.

[Donray]

You make statement then refuse to discuss them like your god lived in a place that had no time or space.

I don’t discuss things when I have little working information on them.

Could you at least tell me why you made a statement about time and space since now admit you are very ignorant of the subject? I would not bring up a subject if I could not discuss it.

Again, just answer the question. Before your god created the universe could he count to five and know that he did it?

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 104 by JLB32168]




[center]
Fallacious Religious Reasoning:
Is it an opinion or a claim?
Part Eleven: JLB32168 hands in his resignation concerning his claim in Post 4[/center]

I wonder what "oh well" is supposed to mean?

Resignation.

Thank you for the clarity.

[JLB32168]

Could you at least tell me why you made a statement about time and space since now admit you are very ignorant of the subject? I would not bring up a subject if I could not discuss it.

I’m not ignorant on the subject. It just falls outside the purview of this thread. The fact that time/space are joined together is hardly something I invented. “Where� God exists or existed prior to that has absolutely nothing to do with a scientific question. You’re conflating the natural - theoretical physics - w/the alleged supernatural and it is comparing apples to oranges.

[JLB32168]

Thank you for the clarity.

I’ll interject more clarity. I’m not conceding the argument. I’m resigning because while everyone else seems to understand quite clearly what I said, some don’t and breaking things down any further would dilute their meaning so as to make further discussion pointless. I've also invested enough of my energy to clarify further and am unwilling to invest more.

[Donray]

Could you at least tell me why you made a statement about time and space since now admit you are very ignorant of the subject? I would not bring up a subject if I could not discuss it.

I’m not ignorant on the subject. It just falls outside the purview of this thread. The fact that time/space are joined together is hardly something I invented. “Where� God exists or existed prior to that has absolutely nothing to do with a scientific question. You’re conflating the natural - theoretical physics - w/the alleged supernatural and it is comparing apples to oranges.

You need to read what you wrote. You said you cannot discuss because you were Ignorant

You wrote “I don’t discuss things when I have little working information on them.� That is the same as ignorance. Also, at your recommendation I sated a thread on your subject and you failed to respond in that thread also about my question about your god before the universe was created.

Again, it is two simple question that if you understand anything about your god you should be able to answer.

If your god counted to five (before he created the universe) would he remember that he did count to five??? If he does, then time did exist. Also, does your god take up any space or is he nothing? If he takes up space, then space existed.

So, do you know anything about your god or are undereducated in both your god, physics, and basic science?
PS I will also post in the other thread on the subject so you don’t need to continue trying to use the same excuses.