In the same way that it's physically impossible for people to fly but we still have free will, why couldn't God make evil physically impossi...

In the same way that it's physically impossible for people to fly but we still have free will, why couldn't God make evil physically impossible for humans to commit while still having free will?

Also, what's so important about free will? Why does having free will justify all the evils of the world?

Die For Epstein's Client List Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Die For Epstein's Client List Shirt $21.68

  1. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Why does having free will justify all the evils of the world?
    It doesn't. Especially with free will being kind of a contested subject nowadays. God is not omnibenevolent, at least not in a sense comprehendable by humans.

  2. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Epicurus poster gets BTFO and has to make a new thread to try and change goalposts
    "free will" is about moral freedom, not physical freedom. You can't have "free will to do whatever I tell you" even though that's what the atheists ironically accuse God of asking for.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >"free will" is about moral freedom, not physical freedom.
      But there's a physical aspect of morality, meaning the act of committing the evil. Why can't evil action be restricted for us just like flying is?

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Morality is determined by intent, not action. If you try to commit a murder and fail that doesn't mean you didn't still act immorally.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Morality is determined by intent, not action
          So if I have good intentions for shooting you in the head that means it's not immoral?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            What good intentions would those be? Defending your loved ones from the rape and/or murder of that anon? Or some epic fedora gotcha like "to send you to heaven :*~~))" you've been planning to post since you thought about it in your monthly shower?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >What good intentions would those be?
            It's irrelevant what they are. All that matters is if I believe the intent to be good.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Lying to yourself to excuse actions you know to be immoral isn't going to fool God

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Do you think no one has ever done the wrong thing with good intentions? Of course that happens.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah and there's a reason the road to hell is paved with them

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ok so we agree morality isn't determined by intent. Given this, why can't we have free will and be physically incapable of committing evil, just like we have free will and are physically incapable of flying?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Free will necessarily precludes the physical inability to do evil. Even if you were an amorphous static blob, or a brain in a fat, incapable of acting physically on the world around you, you would still be physically capable of evil by virtue of your capacity to hate. To conjure bad intent in your conscious mind is an aspect of free will, and just as sinful as acting upon it. The only way to physically remove this biological propensity of mankind toward evil, would be lobotomy, in which case free will is ipso facto destroyed.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Evil thoughts maybe but not evil actions
            >The keyword is "do". I can still have free will while not being able to do certain things.
            Having evil thoughts is sinning. The thought itself is the action.
            Matthew 5:28 - But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

            >you would still be physically capable of evil by virtue of your capacity to hate.
            >Having evil thoughts is sinning.
            So you both admit that it's perfectly possible for God to make a world with 0 human caused evils on other people (no rape, no murder, no theft, no torture, no war, etc), while still giving us free will, but that this doesn't solve the problem of evil because people can still think about evil things to themselves?

            Even if you believe this, why can't evil thoughts be impossible for us to think? We agree that there's some things we can't think about since we are not omniscient, so why can't evil thoughts be one of these things we can't think about?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Having evil thoughts is sinning.
            Yes, Jesus explicitly says this in Matthew as I just discussed. Have you honestly never heard of the Sermon on the Mount? That's the entire point of the Fall - Man is NOT intrinsically good, as Rousseau-ists would have you believe, he is thoroughly depraved, even such that the so-called "tabula rasa" of an infant is already capable of sinning the moment he or she is freed from the womb.
            I do not know how you can possibly reconcile Free Will with making it a priori impossible for the mind to sin, the two are mutually exclusive, much like God existing and God not existing. If the possibility of sin is removed, then of course noone will do it, because everyone will be will-less robots, literal npcs acting according to programming that is impossible to subvert or alter. That's what dumb animals do; and animals do not and cannot sin. Instinct precludes will. If you were sincere instead of a midwit looking for gotchas on Oyish to share on your faceberg, you'd realize this.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I do not know how you can possibly reconcile Free Will with making it a priori impossible for the mind to sin
            I already said how. We agree there's some things we can't think about since we are not omniscient, so why can't evil thoughts be one of these things?

            Also this idea that God can't do mutually exclusive things isn't a Christian one. Most Christians admit that things like the Trinity, the incarnation, the real presence, etc are mysteries, and even though they seem contradictory to us, we just can't understand how God works.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're still arguing in circles like the treacherous snake that you are. Asked and answered, Mr. Matlock.

  3. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    My question is, why should prioritizing free will over deliverance from evil sheerly justify God?

    Is it also true of me, that in order to be good I should not stop any person from working evil if I might, because I would be impeding their will?

  4. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Evil is a condition of free will. Can't give humans free will without giving them the free "will" to do bad stuff as well. Giving men "will" means they can will what they surmise from so much material, and it's a given they'll prefer some things over others.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Evil is a condition of free will.
      Evil thoughts maybe but not evil actions
      >Can't give humans free will without giving them the free "will" to do bad stuff as well.
      The keyword is "do". I can still have free will while not being able to do certain things.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Evil thoughts maybe but not evil actions
        >The keyword is "do". I can still have free will while not being able to do certain things.
        Having evil thoughts is sinning. The thought itself is the action.
        Matthew 5:28 - But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Evil is a condition of free will
      If God is omnipotent then he could create free will that does not have evil as a condition. So instead he just chose to add evil to the world.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        moronic homosexual fedora paradox, you think you're fooling somebody by spouting Alice in Wonderland nonsense dressed up as logic, but people can see through that shit as soon as you translate it to what you actually mean:
        >If God is so powerful, how come he can't make himself not exist, huh?
        Naturally anti-theists don't ever phrase their halfwit diabolical (in the literal meaning of the word) logical traps that way because it would completely embarrass them and immediately out them as morons.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >doesn't answer the question
          Interesting

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Paradoxes are, by definition, impossible to answer. They are specifically crafted through sophistry to be unanswerable. You can't cry when you don't get an answer to an unanswerable question - that's called nonsense. Meaningless syllables aren't answers. I could ask you what the infraplanetary weekly wavelength of the letter Q is, and you would be unable to answer it because it's as random a conglomeration of letters as devoid of meaning as hsqpflkjzmbrt. Can you answer hsqpflkjzmbrt? Why not? is it because you're stupid? Can you believe this gay, he doesn't even know what hsqpflkjzmbrt is.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            But it wasn't a paradox

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >the epicurean paradox is not a paradox
            highest IQ Oyish poster

  5. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because God doesnt care about stopping evil, christians and israelites have the wrong idea on Yahweh

  6. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Evil is the privation of good, it isn't a thing in itself. Anything that exists in time and can change has potential for evil, because if a perfectly good thing were to change states it could only go towards a less perfect, worse state. That is why God, who is eternal and unchanging, is the only thing that can exist with no evil.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Evil is the privation of good, it isn't a thing in itself.
      I understand this, but this privation either comes from the creator causing it or his creation (or both). The question is if the creator doesn't cause it then why does he give the ability for his creation to cause it? We can still have free will while not having the ability to do certain things.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        It's what I said. God created imperfect beings, as he is the only unchanging perfection. Imperfect beings interacting is gonna lead to imperfect outcomes.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Imperfect beings interacting is gonna lead to imperfect outcomes.
          The question is specifically about evil outcomes. Some outcomes are off limit to us no matter what we do, so why can't evil be one of these outcomes?

          >Why does having free will justify all the evils of the world?
          It doesn't and that's not the argument. You're conflating the fact that something exists with being condoned. Why don't you take out a 9mm and go blast all the pedophiles running your country for being pedophiles? What do you mean you aren't willing to do that? Ah well, that means you must support pedophilia and the destruction of your country simply because you didn't do a terrorism. I guess OP is ontologically evil.
          >In the same way that it's physically impossible for people to fly
          Are you high? Human beings don't have wings or glider skin flaps or whatnot, we aren't capable of flight. Planes can fly but those are inventions that have nothing to do with human anatomy. Might as well propose the facetious argument that human beings are the fastest swimmers on the planet because we have access to boats lmao.
          >Why can't God make it physically impossible for people to have agency while also giving them agency?
          Might as well complain that square circles don't exist and get mad at God for not making the world inherently contradictory and undefinable. Imagine living in a reality where at one moment you have free will and at the other you don't, having to rapidly flip flop between a robot and a person with agency at the whim of an all powerful deity who can do whatever he wants. You're advocating for existential terror.

          >Human beings don't have wings or glider skin flaps or whatnot, we aren't capable of flight.
          Yeah that's brought up to demonstrate how even though we are physically incapable of doing certain things we still have free will.
          >Might as well complain that square circles don't exist and get mad at God for not making the world inherently contradictory and undefinable
          Except having free will and the inability to do certain things isn't contradictory.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Every outcome that is not perfect is lacking good in some way. Lacking good = evil. Every single thing other than God is lacking good in some way. The material, created world is therefore full of evil.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't know if you're a Christian but this goes against Genesis because when God created everything he said it was good, but according to you it's all imperfect and therefore evil. Besides, this a moronic definition of evil that no one actually uses or believes. Is it evil to draw a circle because it will always be imperfect?

            >Every single thing other than God is lacking good in some way.
            What does it even mean for a thing to lack good/be imperfect? How does a brick lack good or a chair lack good? You're precluding the possibility that things can just be neutral, or good or bad depending on how they're used.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Besides, this a moronic definition of evil that no one actually uses or believes
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absence_of_good
            https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil-kinds-origins/#AbseTheo
            I admit my response is more in line with the Neoplatonism version of this idea than Christianity's, since the OP has a pic of Epicurus who wasn't criticizing Christianity in particular. In it, according to Timaeus the creator is good,
            >and the good can never have any jealousy of anything. And being free from jealousy, he desired that all things should be as like himself as they could be.
            >God desired that all things should be good and nothing bad, so far as this was attainable.
            That is, everything is as good as it can be, and creation is as close to God as possible. But it's still a material, changing world. So you have an imperfect imitation of the perfect. Christian views on this problem sometimes argue something similar, but as you said they believe everything is good, so they have to provide some additional justification for why good things can end up lacking good.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            gnostic heresy

  7. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >why couldn't God make evil physically impossible for humans to commit while still having free will?
    He could have.
    >what's so important about free will?
    The part where humans have agency.
    >Why does having free will justify all the evils of the world?
    Because none of the goodness in the world would be attributable to humans.

  8. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Why does having free will justify all the evils of the world?
    It doesn't and that's not the argument. You're conflating the fact that something exists with being condoned. Why don't you take out a 9mm and go blast all the pedophiles running your country for being pedophiles? What do you mean you aren't willing to do that? Ah well, that means you must support pedophilia and the destruction of your country simply because you didn't do a terrorism. I guess OP is ontologically evil.
    >In the same way that it's physically impossible for people to fly
    Are you high? Human beings don't have wings or glider skin flaps or whatnot, we aren't capable of flight. Planes can fly but those are inventions that have nothing to do with human anatomy. Might as well propose the facetious argument that human beings are the fastest swimmers on the planet because we have access to boats lmao.
    >Why can't God make it physically impossible for people to have agency while also giving them agency?
    Might as well complain that square circles don't exist and get mad at God for not making the world inherently contradictory and undefinable. Imagine living in a reality where at one moment you have free will and at the other you don't, having to rapidly flip flop between a robot and a person with agency at the whim of an all powerful deity who can do whatever he wants. You're advocating for existential terror.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *