From: (Anonymous)	Date: February 15th, 2003 05:37 pm (UTC)		(Link)

If you had any sense at all, you'd know that your arggument was entirely one-sided. In order to prove Christians wrong, you have to PROVE them wrong i.e. use their Bible. Point out somewhere in the Bible where God was immoral or Evil.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 14th, 2003 10:45 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Tim's thoughts...

That would be the Calvinistic ideal of thought about Christianity. I personally believe God is playing a game of sorts, with himself. He either 1: is insecure about himself and needs people to choose to love him, 2: decided to make people suffer, giving them choices but inevitably knowing their doom, or 3: is evil himself, and decides to mislead people into a deceiving trap and we all are going to burn anyway. I just think he's in for the fun of it. We don't have free will, He knows before he creates us as a fetus that we are going to choose to burn in Hell. He knows the past, present, and future, right? Therefore, he knows who will serve him. The angels are dumb. They haven't figured this out yet? Oh well, it's none of my business. I'm going to die, just the same as everyone else.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: November 29th, 2003 09:06 pm (UTC)		(Link)
There is a loving God that will forgive you!

The best part about God is you can write all these thoughts about him and he still loves you. He can forgive you for these false teachings. I pray you change your thoughts and look at God as a personal friend.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 5th, 2003 11:47 pm (UTC)		(Link)
This is worth reading

http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/apologetics/evil/bosnia.htm

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 8th, 2003 10:20 pm (UTC)		(Link)
A third way

If God is everything, then God is both moral and immoral (and the world reflects that){I believe Jesus is alleged to have told his associates that there is no sin, except what they call sin.) Under these circumstances, God then is neither moral nor immoral and is therefore amoral. Morality, like evil, is a human-in-the-space-time, egocentric world construct. The third way is spiritual (aka moral) anarchy wherein each and every person "kills" their ego and surrenders to God as Creator in the ongoing, "everlasting" emergence and unfoldment. If God and Creation are yin-yang, plus/minus, then we have a problem: there will always be pain, suffering, and other dark stuff happening and no chance of the Universe and God transcending space-time unless there is some kind of "perfect" balance / harmony -- ie all humans are good, loving and joyful and every volcano on the planet is popping off, etc -- or some other ultimate "good" that resides out there in the land of uncertainty.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 9th, 2003 12:11 pm (UTC)		(Link)
johnmcdonagh

We have to be begin to understand we are locked behind our senses. That is our senses or collectively our consciousness is limited, but not confined.
How do we know? How do we know we know…the answer is we don’t but relative to what we did know and some objective evidence we judge something right or wrong (This I call marginal sense use). Take the study of most scientific endeavours and you shall find no end stage, no beginning with an end point, just more theory. The answer at this end is that we just don’t know.
Imagination and science are attempts to go beyond the senses in order to provide possible clues/answers to hard or paradoxical questions. It has to be understood that paradox signals the limit of human consciousness at this point in time. To go beyond paradox requires an understanding of consciousness and a willingness to increase the developmental evolution of consciousness. Questions such as god, infinity, good and evil could be to us what a human being is to a bacterium. The consciousness distance between being able to know that you have a question and what that question is may have a dimensional context that our consciousness has not reached.
The feeble attempts to answer questions such as ‘Why are free market mechanisms not perfect’ betray themselves as questions beyond our evolutional dimensional consciousness. This is also the problem for A.I. ‘Why won’t the thing think for us if we give it enough information?’ We can go on collecting knowledge but if we are not conscious of why we collect knowledge or by attempting to answer these questions with reference to the big questions – paradoxes, we are effectively citing knowledge as the precursor to greater consciousness; It is this that I disagree with for if I don’t see what I know then I am blind! If greater consciousness begets greater knowledge then perhaps then the big questions will yield; but the paradox of consciousness and knowledge is the paradox of the chicken and the egg.
An example might elucidate this idea. A foetus must have written within it’s DNA an algorithm either for consciousness leading to learning or learning leading to consciousness. What comes first? Perhaps knowledge has blinded us to the pursuit of consciousness and that more attention to consciousness is in order, yes, yes I know this is also the pursuit of knowledge.

jmcb3@lycos.co.uk

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 31st, 2003 03:16 pm (UTC)		(Link)
happiness v sorrow

I think of it this way: Christians tell us that there is no suffering or sorrow in Heaven, yet joy cannot exist on it's own - how would we recognise it without a contrast? Therefore either there is both suffering and joy, no emotion at all, or no Heaven.
Personally Earth is my only idea of Heaven - my search for knowledge more important than knowledge itself, and the challenges more exciting than the rewards. If God cannot cater for every individuals' personal tastes then he is not a perfect God, or he takes free will from us.
Which is it to be, Christians?

Love in Satan
~Azazel~

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 31st, 2003 03:48 pm (UTC)		(Link)
mm

Ow this site hurts my eyes... I would love to read the rest of it pain-free, you couldnt make it black on white instead?? :P

~Azazel~

From: (Anonymous)	Date: February 8th, 2004 07:44 am (UTC)		(Link)

the free will theodicy is not something that can be used as a conclusion to saying there is no god you cannot prove this with petty words about heaven about heaven and suffering, the real truth is far beyond anyones grasp