What type of design is this?

[OnceConvinced]

Presuming God is real and presuming demons and Satan is real...

Presuming God created them as angels and then the ones that rebelled became the demons, let by Satan himself. These fallen angels became so corrupt that they became completely evil, with no redeeming features at all.

So God created these beings and for whatever reason they became pure evil. Yet God, even if he didn't know for sure, had a good idea they would become that way. Yet he created them anyway, knowing they would be come corrupted and turn against him.

Or maybe he had no idea at all? Maybe their corruption was a complete surprise to him?

The thing is for them to become corrupt, they must have been designed in such a way that would allow them to become corrupt.

So....
What sort of design would this be?

Malevolent?
Incompetent?
Intelligent?

Please justify your answer.

[ttruscott]

It's encouraging to see you so quickly agree with the facts I have presented. Kudos for your honesty.

Cute...but erroneous.

I have posted here since 2012 and my message has not changed. You have had no influence upon it at all...

[Willum]

[Replying to post 81 by ttruscott]

Proudly, but erroneously, saying that I have had my message changed by both theists, spiritualists, non-theists and others since 2014.

I have been introduced to information, ideas and concepts that have expanded my personal truth.

[Tcg]

It's encouraging to see you so quickly agree with the facts I have presented. Kudos for your honesty.

Cute...but erroneous.

I have posted here since 2012 and my message has not changed. You have had no influence upon it at all...

You are misrepresenting my reply to you.

I'm not under the delusion that you will abandon your particular version of mythology nor have I claimed that you have done so.

I presented the fact that you made a claim on this very thread based on the assertion of a proven GOD that you can't support.

You finally admitted that when you stated, "Christians do not deal with a proven or proving GOD."

That is the very limited glimpse of honesty I was referring to.

[1213]

Murder is also crime in the Bible and there is judgment for that. But attempting something is not same as murder and perhaps is not enough for judgement, especially because we may not really know what people are attempting....

Perhaps Matt 5:27You have heard that it was said, You shall not commit adultery. 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. sheds light on this matter...

Thanks, that is good point. The only problem is, I dont see well what person thinks in his heart, that is why I dont want to judge possible attempts.

[Tcg]

Murder is also crime in the Bible and there is judgment for that. But attempting something is not same as murder and perhaps is not enough for judgement, especially because we may not really know what people are attempting....

Perhaps Matt 5:27You have heard that it was said, You shall not commit adultery. 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. sheds light on this matter...

Thanks, that is good point. The only problem is, I dont see well what person thinks in his heart, that is why I dont want to judge possible attempts.

When someone takes a knife and stabs another repeatedly, you don't need to see what a person thinks in their heart. You can judge their intent by the knife in their hand and what they did with it. No clairvoyance needed.

[William]

[Replying to post 1 by OnceConvinced]

Given what we now know ourselves about the universe, the story itself is the source of the lack of intelligent reasoning.

Willum nailed it when he wrote;

Post# 80; Seems like an intelligent design where the assumptions of foolish mortals are not anything like the intentions of the creator.

We should probably reverse engineer what is allegedly observed to glean the intent of this intelligence.

[ttruscott]

I presented the fact that you made a claim on this very thread based on the assertion of a proven GOD that you can't support.

whose assertion? not mine...

[Tcg]

I presented the fact that you made a claim on this very thread based on the assertion of a proven GOD that you can't support.

whose assertion? not mine...

It was yours indeed. In post 66 you stated, "No intelligent person would rebel against a proven GOD."

Certainly you remember given that claim started the very discussion we are still having and in fact is the very claim we are still discussing.

[OnceConvinced]

On the whole, no. With regard to those he released, yes. However, Hitler did not create the Jews, so that is a straw man argument.

Which makes God worse. He created angels (and people) he knew he would later need to get rid of.

Its not straw man at all. Im simply making a point that just because someone does a few benevolent acts does not make them a benevolent being. Nor does it indicate benevolent design.

Again, from the perspective of those angels (and people). So, one must ask, for what purpose was it designed?

That would be another topic for another thread.

It appears that you are seeing benevolence as an absolute. If that is the case there are no benevolent people, because no one acts favorably to everyone.

Im trying to focus on design of angels only (see the OP). It is you talking about how someone can be both malevolent and benevolent.

Let me give another analogy that might help get my point across. I used it before, but Ill take it one step further so that we bring in your scenario.

A developer creates a software program where there is a button that can be pushed that causes a self destruct. A user comes along to press that button.

Suddenly the developer steps in and says No, dont press that button and saves the user from dying in a massive explosion.

Does this mean the developer did a benevolent act because he saved that user?

No, of course it doesnt, because hes the one who designed and created that program. Hes the one who included the self-destruct program to being with! The fact that its there at all is malevolent and not benevolent to anyone. Simply because he stepped in and stopped the user from activating it doesnt change the fact that the design was malevolent from the beginning.

Again, this is not an appropriate analogy. You say you want to talk only about the angels, in isolation. The developer did not create the user, as Adonai did with the angels. If we are talking about an avatar in the program, that would be malevolent from the perspective of the avatar. However, what programmer creates a program simply for the sake of the avatar? Most, if not all create programs for a particular purpose which may or may not be beneficial for a particular part of the program.

Admittedly, that analogy tends to work better for human beings created in a world that becomes corrupted with sin.

Ok, lets use the robot analogy. A creator creates a robot that has a freewill. He includes in it features to kill and destroy. The robot chooses to take advantage of those features and goes out and runs amok, attempting to destroy anything the creator created.

What type of design is that?

The user did not come along. The user is an avatar in the program. The avatar changed the program

An avatar cannot change a program unless the system is designed in such a way that the avatar can change the program. That ability is either deliberately put there by the software developer or unwittingly put there. If deliberately put there, that would be an act of sabotage by the designer. Malevolence. Like putting in a self-destruct button.

Now, all of this is indeed created by the programmer for his own amusement. Such programming will cause the avatars to go through many experiences some of which the avatars might find malevolent and others that the avatars find benevolent. That said, on the whole, those avatars that do not reset view the programmer as malevolent and the ones that do reset see the programmer as benevolent.

Since when are demons infiltrating the system and destroying it ever benevolent for anyone?

Negatively effected in relation to what? Negative is a comparative. If not in relation to humans, how are we to judge what is positive or negative?

I think youre dodging now.

When can any of Satan's (or demons) acts be considered positive to anyone?

[OnceConvinced]

Presuming God is real and presuming demons and Satan is real...


So....
What sort of design would this be?

Malevolent?

Hardly. GOD is the great warrior against evil. Wet cannot be dry. Evil cannot be good. Good cannot create evil.

The bible shows us otherwise. But ok, incompetent design it is! Or foolish design perhaps, the other option I should have included in the poll.

The bible does actually tell us that God creates evil and whatever spin you want to put on that, hes still creating evil beings. Either thats deliberately (malevolent design), unwittingly (incompetent design), or without serious consideration of the ramifications (foolish design)

The logical and reasonable allowance of evil by a benevolent GOD:
1. SINCE we were created to become marriage partners with the Trinity in a loving heavenly state, it is a logical and absolute necessity that we be

This thread is not about us the humans. Its about the creation of the fallen angels. Were they created to become marriage partners to God too?