English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

1-God has allowed killing to occur
2-God is supposed to be all-benevolent
3-He did nothing to prevent killers from killing
4-God is less perfect than someone who has not killed
5-God is not perfect, therefore is not God

2007-08-18 10:32:17 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

11 answers

6. Many reasons, but here's my favorite: If he's benevolent, how could he allow 6 million of his chosen people to be incinerated by Hitler, or why did he allow Truman to vaporize 200,000 Japanese men, women and children or Stalin to kill 30m Christians? If he was also omnipotent AND benevolent, then these events could not have happened.

If you counter that man's "free will" caused those events to happen, so don't blame God, then can it be said God is not omnipotent AND benevolent, because he allowed man's free will to reign?

And further, the mere existence of evil in the world makes the existence of a benign god impossible: if god were omnipotent, he could eliminate evil and if he were benign, he would want to do so...another way of saying this:

If god is able to prevent evil but is not willing to prevent evil, then he is not benevolent.

If god is willing to prevent evil but is not able to prevent evil, then he is not omnipotent.

Evil is either in occordance with god's intention or contrary to it. Thus, either god cannot prevent evil or he does not want to prevent evil.

THEREFORE, it follows that god is either not omnipotent or he is not benevolent. He cannot be both omnipotent and benevolent.

2007-08-19 07:14:21 · answer #1 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0 0

The problem with all these arguments are that they're based on criteria that we've made, and then use to judge how well God is doing or not doing. The entire concept of God and Man is that we seek God to understand the criteria, and even then we often can't understand it.

Does God prevent killings? No. He never has before, why would we think it's part of his job? Is he all-benevolent? His benevolence is almost like trying to cash in those points from the credit card company. There are so many loop holes and twists in the bible, that it's pretty much, we get what we get. There's never been a blanket benevolence. God doesn't stop killers? Of course not, part of him being God has always been allowing us to be human with free will. And your other two points... why do people think that killing is something unnatural? Everything kills. There is nothing that doesn't kill something else. You have kill everyday of your life hundreds of things each day. Plants die, animals die, germs die. There is or never has been a special rules that only humans don't have to die or be killed. We're not suppose to kill each other.. that's counter productive, but it doesn't mean we're not allowed to die. Thus, God is still perfect because he, not us, made the rules of what equals perfect.

2007-08-18 14:09:51 · answer #2 · answered by locusfire 5 · 0 0

No, argument for this question...#
1. Man as allowed killing to occur.
2. God is benevolent; your alive right? How do you think you get through the day everyday?
3. He's done everything to prevent killers from killing; it's man that has allowed these things by not believing in him and having faith; meaning they've separated from the word of God and God himself.
4. God is perfect; he died on the cross for your sins and I so that we can have eternity forever and live again.
5. How is God not perfect? Man isn't perfect in other words that 's why he asks us to come to him and be forgiven us of our sins.
What you need to do is find in him your heart and believe in him... We are living in our last days and sorry to say, many people will suffer when judgment day comes...

2007-08-18 10:45:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

none of those, to me, is an argument there isnt a God
perhaps God created humans, and gave them choice, and they choose to kill

you would have to prove that God must not allow killing to occur, be benevolent, prevent killing, is less perfect then someone who hasnt killed (for that i guess you would have to prove that God, not nature or humans , killed)
and that God is suppose to be perfect, in order to use those arguments against a God

some think of God like a parent, and we only hold parents responsible for their direct actions towards their children, we expect them to provide the basics of existence, but dont hold parents responsible for the actions of their offspring

2007-08-18 10:48:39 · answer #4 · answered by dlin333 7 · 0 0

FIRST OF ALL I will tell you that I could give you many very compelling arguements for there not being a God, but those would have to be based on humans knowing that God would have to be the way we think of Him to be in order for it being impossible for something like that to really exsist; but what if we don't? This idea that we call "God" is a pretty ridiculous idea; however, that cannot mean, necessarily, that there is no God, which there may be or maybe not, but the idea being ridiculous could mean that humans are idiots for thinking they could figure out what God would be like if he existed, when our scientists cannot figure out what our universe is like, not really. God cannot exsist because when we refer to "God" we are referring to God of the Jews, Christians and Moslems; do you see a little inconsistency here? Adherents of each of these religions have unshakable faith in knowing that God "said" that they should do these things that collectively totally contradict each other and rub each other out; so knowing that it would take a very dumb God to screw up humanity with teacings of Himself, of all things, I would sooner blame the very dumb humanity to screw up their idea of God, than I would believe that there simply cannot be a God under these circumstances..

2007-08-18 11:11:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

There are many arguments, really, and when used in conjunction, they are even better arguments.

A couple:
-The problem of evil (similar to what you described)
-No proof; i.e. God is just as likely as an invisible pink unicorn

Based on these (and many others), it is reasonable to conclude that a personal god is not only unlikely, but impossible.

Then there are more that are related to gods from each religion, as there are numerous contradictions in each.

2007-08-18 11:31:57 · answer #6 · answered by James 5 · 1 1

The historical record that documents the evolution of god from unseen spirits to sun worship to multi person groups to a single entity

2007-08-18 10:51:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Why would that prove that there is no God? Did it ever occur to you that God is NOT a benevolent, loving creature? Maybe he's an evil, twisted being that gets his jollies watching us kill each other......

2007-08-18 10:42:27 · answer #8 · answered by Bruce J 4 · 1 0

Briefly put:
6. None of the Above

2007-08-18 17:14:23 · answer #9 · answered by Patrick B 4 · 0 0

I'm not a follower but I think God let mankind follow their own destiny and he will judge when the day comes.

2007-08-18 10:40:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers