You, doubter, opened this door when you stated.. "a. Where has God said that the only attribute to His being is benevolence. He has said that He has several attributes or parts to His mentality. ie. jealousy, all knowing, everlasting, all powerful, loving, able to be angered, able to be provoked to wrath and several others." You have ascribed to god these human attributes such as jealousy, anger, love AND benevolence... therefore axle's use of benevolence is allowed in the context of this argument, so rules the court
Doubter claims an all powerful god. Does it strike you as silly that an "all powerful" god, who is also benevolent, seems powerless to prevent a church school bus full of children from crashing and killing them? Some christians even claim that he is omnipresent, which means HE WAS THERE when the church bus crashed. Show me what is wrong with this picture: 1) God was near the bus before the crash 2) God knew the bus would crash 3) God is all powerful and could have stopped the bus 4) God is benevolent ---------------------------------- God lets the bus crash and kill innocent children Great god you go there. What a loseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeer. peace axeman
Still the frame of reference. You are continually judging on your frame of reference. Carryin out your reasoning, no one should ever die because God could have prevented it.
LS - You're making my point. You are not God (I hope ) . He should be allowed to tell His side of the story. And by bringing in 9/11, that is exactly my point. Why just a bus load of church children or children running over a cliff? The list could be endless. Every death for whatever cause.
"Still the frame of reference. You are continually judging on your frame of reference." This makes no sense. Who elses frame of reference SHOULD I be using? Gods? Are you asking me to read his mind?? As I explained before, this is not relevant. The judge and jury could care less what your frame of reference is when you let those kids fall to their death. "Carryin out your reasoning, no one should ever die because God could have prevented it." False. Did I ever say that god should prevent all death? No I didn't. Is this the logical conclusion? No its not. For example: If I get drunk, get in a car on a wet dark night, and slide off the highway and kill myself, then I did not die as an innocent victim. My choices caused MY death, and no one can be held negligent for my death. It's amazing to what lengths some of these theists will go, to protect something so obviously flawed. peace axeman
Oh I see what you're saying a god's morality is different than the morality it demands of its subjects.
You have consistently FAILED to provide a good reason why being god absolves him of all responsibility. In fact, with great power, comes MORE responsibility. If SUPERMAN stood idly by and let the children fall to their death, when he is even MORE capable of preventing this terrible crime, we would be even more disgusted with him God, is more powerful than superman, and yet, you want to wave a wand and claim we should not hold him responsible, even though anyone else WOULD BE. I already explained that this does NOT mean that every life should be saved, so drop that excuse already. peace axeman