On Jun 3, 10:45 pm, Meteorite Debris <epicurusboth@YOUR_SHOES.net.au>
wrote:

Last time that great scribe Ray Fischer <rfisc...@sonic.net> chipped
away at his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...

yarr...@aol.com <yarr...@aol.com> wrote:

On Jun 1, 11:36 pm, Meteorite Debris <epicurusboth@YOUR_SHOES.net.au>
wrote:

Last time that great scribe <a...@192.168.0.1> chipped away at his/her
stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...

Why would Satan be against abortion, you would ask?
For 2 simple reasons:

#1. Without abortion, a place would become very crowded.
Do this experiment:
In a 1 foot by 1 foot container, put two rats.
They won't bother each other because there is plenty of room.
Now you put in 10 more rats!
What happens then?
The rats would get stressed and become aggressive due to overcrowding.
And start to kill each other off.
That's right. Crowding causes conflict. And conflict is what Satan wants.

#2. The mother is the greatest contributing factor in how a child
develops. The Satan reasons, if you force a mother to have a child, the
mother will resent the child and therefore be abusive and neglectful to
the child. As a result of abuse and neglect, production of Hitlers and
Stalins is plentiful.

God is in favour of abortions. How do I know? Well each day 1 million
pregnancies occur in the world. 9 months later only 400,000 babies are
born - the rest have been miscarried by the biggest abortionist of all -
God.

He is against murder of innocent unborns.

Speaking for God, are you?

Why not? Christians do so all the time. They pretend to know what he's
like.

I can't speak to your numbers since I don't know how accurate they
are.
I wonder why you bother to use two different words "miscarried" and
"abortionist" when it is quite clear that you think that miscarriage
and abortion are the same thing.

If God thought life was so precious why would he abort so many by the
instrument of miscarriage? If he created the world and everything in it
then he must have created the biology that led to 60% miscarriage even
though the life of an embryo is "precious". Either he is cruel, has
double standards or he is not omnipotent but is totally incompetent.

Induced abortion vs. spontaneous abortion.

Miscarriage must be his creation. Anyway Isaiah 45:7 says "God created
all evil".

Actually that is a misquote in two different ways. In some versions it
states "I create peace, and create evil." Note the tense of that...it
does not say God CREATED(as in past tense) evil. When God creates
something, it needs to be created only once. The tense in the passage
indicates that he continues to create something that has already been
created. This is just a small clue that evil is not what is being
talked about here. You will find that since the time that the version
that you are quoting have been written, many more manuscripts have
been examined and scholars agree that based on a deluge of newly
discovered information the word is disaster, not evil. You rely on old
and somewhat unrefined information regarding that passage. We have
better data to confirm its actual meaning.

Now I would like you to peruze through this for the actual Christian
view on evil that should clarify the matter and it is from the STR.ORG
website.

"One doesn't need a Ph.D. in theology to look around the world and
realize something is desperately wrong. The existence of evil is one
of the most vexing challenges a Christian--or any person, for that
matter-- must grapple with. It's occupied the minds of great Christian
thinkers since the beginning, including St. Augustine (354-430). For
much of his life he worked hard at a solution.

Augustine's approach was not just brilliant; it was practical. His
insight is intellectually credible and emotionally satisfying in that
it gives hope and offers meaning to the Christian trying to make sense
out of life in a fallen world.

Two Aspects of the Problem

The problem of evil can be phrased in several ways. One approach
addresses the origin of evil, prompting the syllogism (a series of
statements that form a reasoned argument): 1) God created all things;
2) evil is a thing; 3) therefore, God created evil. If the first two
premises are true, the conclusion is inescapable.

This formulation, if sustained, is devastating for Christianity. God
would not be good if He knowingly created evil.

Augustine realized that the solution was tied to the question: What is
evil? The argument above depends on the idea that evil is a thing
(note the second premise). But what if evil is not a "thing" in that
sense? Then evil did not need creating. If so, our search for the
source of evil will take us in a another direction

Augustine approached the problem from a different angle. He asked: Do
we have any convincing evidence that a good God exists? If independent
evidence leads us to conclude that God exists and is good, then He
would be incapable of creating evil. Something else, then, must be its
source.

If Augustine's approach is fair, it prompts a pair of syllogisms that
lead to a different conclusion. First: 1) All things that God created
are good; 2) evil is not good; 3) therefore, evil was not created by
God. Second: 1) God created every thing; 2) God did not create evil;
3) therefore, evil is not a thing.

The key to success here, is the truthfulness of two premises. If
Augustine can offer evidence through natural theology that God exists
as Creator and also that God is good, making everything He created
also good, then the conclusion--evil is not a thing--automatically
follows.

This is Augustine's strategy. If evil is not a thing, then the case
against Christianity stated in the original syllogism is unsound
because one of its premises is false. The critical question is: What
is evil?

Digging a Hole in Goodness

Central to Augustine's idea of goodness (and, consequently, evil) was
the notion of being. To Augustine, anything that had being was good.
God as the ground of being was perfectly good, along with everything
he brought into being. This goodness was a property that came in
varying degrees.

With this foundation Augustine was now prepared to answer the key
issue: "Where is evil then, and whence, and how crept it in hither?
What is its root, and what its seed? Or hath it no being?"[i] To this
Augustine answered: "Evil has no positive nature; but the loss of good
has received the name 'evil.'"[ii]

Augustine observed that evil always injures, and such injury is a
deprivation of good. If there were no deprivation, there would be no
injury. Since all things were made with goodness, evil must be the
privation of goodness: "All which is corrupted is deprived of
good."[iii]

The diminution of the property of goodness is what's called evil. Good
has substantial being; evil does not. It is like a moral hole, a
nothingness that results when goodness is removed. Just as a shadow is
no more than a "hole" in light, evil is a hole in goodness.

To say that something is evil, then, is a shorthand way of saying it
either lacks goodness, or is a lower order of goodness than what ought
to have been. But the question remains: "Whence and how crept it in
hither?"

Augustine observed that evil could not be chosen because there is no
evil thing to choose. One can only turn away from the good, that is
from a greater good to a lesser good (in Augustine's hierarchy) since
all things are good. "For when the will abandons what is above itself,
and turns to what is lower, it becomes evil--not because that is evil
to which it turns, but because the turning itself is wicked."[iv]

Evil, then, is the act itself of choosing the lesser good. To
Augustine the source of evil is in the free will of persons: "And I
strained to perceive what I now heard, that free-will was the cause of
our doing ill."[v] Evil was a "perversion of the will, turned aside
from...God" to lesser things.[vi]

Flawed Perfection

Augustine's solution has not been satisfying to some. Friedrich
Schleiermacher snorted at the concept that God gave good creatures the
freedom to do bad. If a being is perfect in its goodness, he held, it
would never sin even if it were free to. Evil would then have to
create itself ex nihilo, which is ridiculous.[vii]

However, it doesn't follow that moral perfection necessarily entails
immutability. That's a different type of perfection, a perfection in
being. Schleiermacher's objection confuses the two. The fact that a
perfectly beautiful vase is capable of being broken doesn't take away
from its aesthetic perfections. In the same way, it makes sense to say
that man was created morally perfect (morally whole or complete, at
his proper level of goodness), even though he wasn't immutable in this
perfection.

The objections raised by atheist philosophers J.L. Mackie and Antony
Flew are more substantial.[viii] Isn't it possible that God could have
created man immutable in his goodness, yet still have the opportunity
to freely choose in other areas? Won't man have immutable goodness in
heaven? And will he not also have freedom to choose among certain
options? Why not here on earth? Couldn't God construct man's nature
such that evil simply was not an option?

Mackie and Flew are right in one regard. God could have created such a
world. Freedom in the larger sense (the ability to make choices) does
not require freedom in the narrow sense (the ability to make moral
choices).

They miss the big picture, though: God would not have accomplished a
second purpose. He not only wanted free creatures; He also wanted
plenitude, that is, the greatest good possible. Plenitude--the highest
good, the best of all possible worlds--requires more than just general
freedom; it requires moral freedom, and that necessarily entails the
possibility of evil.

Since all that God made is good, even those things which appear evil
only appear that way because of a limited context or perspective. When
viewed as a whole, that which appears to be evil ultimately
contributes to the greater good.

For example, certain virtues couldn't exist without evil: courage,
mercy, forgiveness, patience, the giving of comfort, heroism,
perseverance, faithfulness, self-control, long-suffering, submission
and obedience, to name a few. These are not virtues in the abstract,
but elements of character that can only be had by moral souls. Just as
evil is a result of acts of will, so is virtue. Acts of moral choice
accomplish both.

The Best of All Worlds

A world that had never been touched by evil would be a good place, but
it wouldn't be the best place possible. The best of all worlds would
be a place where evil facilitated the development of virtues that are
only able to exist where evil flourishes for a time. This would
produce a world populated by souls that were refined by overcoming
evil with good. The evil is momentary. The good that results is
eternal.

What good comes out of a drive-by killing, someone might ask, or the
death of a teenager through overdose, or a daughter's rape, or child
abuse? The answer is that a commensurate good doesn't always come out
of those individual situations, though God is certainly capable of
redeeming any tragedy. Rather, the greater good results from having a
world in which there is moral freedom, and moral freedom makes moral
tragedies like these possible.

A Heavenly Twist

This observation reveals an interesting twist in this problem. If
morality freely chosen can only happen in a world where evil is
possible, then heaven will be a place where there will be no moral
growth, where moral choices will not be possible because all the
inhabitants of heaven will be immutably good. There is a type of
soulish growth only available to inhabitants of a fallen world.

Two Scriptural observations lend credibility to this view. First, in
recounting the great heroes of faith, the writer of Hebrews mentions
that some were rescued by faith, but others endured by faith "...in
order that they might obtain a better resurrection."[ix] (Heb. 11:35)
Second, Paul tells Timothy that "...godliness is profitable for all
things, since it holds promise for the present life and also for the
life to come." (1 Tim. 4:8)

Both of these verses indicate that conditions in this life affect
conditions in the next. Bearing up under evil in this life improves
our resurrection in the next. Godliness in this life brings profit in
the next. These benefits are not available after this life or there
would be little urgency to grow now; all eternity would be left in
which to catch up.

It appears that a deeper, more profound good results when virtue is
won by free, moral souls struggling with evil, rather than simply
granted to them as an element of their constitution.

Spoiled Goodness

Augustine knew that evil was real. Independent evidence (natural
theology) was enough to convince him that God existed and that
everything He created would be good. Evil, then, must be something
real, but not a "thing" in the conventional sense. Evil is not a
created thing, but spoiled goodness made possible by the free moral
agency of rational creatures. Evil is not something present, but
something missing, a privation.

The challenge that God could have created a world of free-will
creatures immutable in their goodness is answered by the notion of
plenitude, the greatest good. The possibility of evil also makes a
greater good possible. God made a world in which true moral decision-
making and development of virtues is possible in humans, manifest by
persons whose character is formed through growth and struggle.

There's a sound reason why God has allowed evil. It doesn't conflict
with His goodness. God is neither the author of evil, nor its helpless
victim. Rather, precisely because of His goodness He chooses to co-
exist with evil for a time. "

Yes that right, the LORD of LORDS apparently aborts 60% of embryos,
even as he dictates to everyone else that "every sperm is sacred".

I can't comment on your percentages and have no idea how you come up
with that.
I think that you must be speaking to the Catholic contingent of
Chrisendom when you are speaking of "every sperm is sacred" issue. I
don't think that there is much support for the extreme contraception
views of the Catholic church from a biblical standpoint.

You are pretty loose in your word usage.

Not at all. If the world was created by this god then he must've created
the instrument of miscarriage as well.

Please refer to above regarding evil.

If you design a break lining in a

car that failed 60% of the time what does that say about
a0 your compassion
b) your competence
c) your condemnation of other evil/incompetent people.

You payed for your car, you have a right to complain. Your life is a
free gift...be a gracious recipient. How would you like it if you
purchased a porscha for your son as a gift and he called you a rotten
disgusting SOB for not buying it in red? This is a perfect analogy for
your example.

And you would never do anything like that.

Did I say that?

--

Remove both YOUR_SHOES before replying
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2009

Apatriotism Yahoo Grouphttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/apatriotism

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make
you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

On Jun 4, 2:06 am, Meteorite Debris <epicurusboth@YOUR_SHOES.net.au>
wrote:

Last time that great scribe

On Jun 1, 11:36 pm, Meteorite Debris <epicurusboth@YOUR_SHOES.net.au>
wrote:

Last time that great scribe <a...@192.168.0.1> chipped away at his/her
stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...

Why would Satan be against abortion, you would ask?
For 2 simple reasons:

#1. Without abortion, a place would become very crowded.
Do this experiment:
In a 1 foot by 1 foot container, put two rats.
They won't bother each other because there is plenty of room.
Now you put in 10 more rats!
What happens then?
The rats would get stressed and become aggressive due to overcrowding.
And start to kill each other off.
That's right. Crowding causes conflict. And conflict is what Satan wants.

#2. The mother is the greatest contributing factor in how a child
develops. The Satan reasons, if you force a mother to have a child, the
mother will resent the child and therefore be abusive and neglectful to
the child. As a result of abuse and neglect, production of Hitlers and
Stalins is plentiful.

God is in favour of abortions. How do I know? Well each day 1 million
pregnancies occur in the world. 9 months later only 400,000 babies are
born - the rest have been miscarried by the biggest abortionist of all -
God.

He is against murder of innocent unborns.

How do you know this?

General and specific revelation.

Translation: You pretend to be God.

I can't speak to your numbers since I don't know how accurate they
are.
I wonder why you bother to use two different words "miscarried" and
"abortionist" when it is quite clear that you think that miscarriage
and abortion are the same thing.

If God is all powerful and all knowing then the sloppy biology that
leads to such a high failure is also, by logical extension, a deliberate
act of cruelty.

God is not interested in

You don't speak for God, pro-liar.

--
Ray Fischer