Is God real post your thoughts!

[The Runar]

I was in Hyde Park on Sunday, and well this guy kept on telling me...

 

 

 

"Jesus loves you", Doesn't that make Jesus a paedophile?

 

 

 

But the bible is very very flawed... Aparently I am commiting Adultery... but don't you have to be married to do that :P

 

 

 

The Bible has lots and lots of flaws. For example, God kills much more people than Satan (God kills about 10 million, Satan... like 10?), but God is said to be "good" and Satan is said to be "evil". That's one reason why I don't believe in God.

[noble_aloof]

edit: guy above me we have the same total level :shock:

 

 

 

 

 

But the bible is very very flawed... Aparently I am commiting Adultery... but don't you have to be married to do that :P

 

 

 

yes, of course. the bible can barely be taken into account considering today's world..

 

we're supposed to call a priest if there is mold in our house? when was the last time you did that?

 

 

 

 

I go to the Jesuit school also, we're encouraged to think for ourselves, develop our own opinions but also the basic Jesuit ethos, be the best of what you can be and help others. Honestly, sounds like you're just going with what the priests you know are telling you to believe. At least it's Jesuits you're listening to anyway, religious people with a lot of sense.

 

 

 

very true. i am raised a catholic however my mother and maternal grandmother(only living grandparent) are both agnostics- i have realized over the years that they are both very brilliant women. they play by the rules, and don't try to press their beliefs on others (some religions could learn from this >.>). my father's family is irish- all roman catholics. my father talks about how losing his father at a young age crushed his faith in god. at a time my father (and his 5 siblings) needed god the most- he wasn't anywhere to be found.

 

 

 

don't get me wrong, i still have faith in me, and i'm not going around bashing anybody elses religion. i enjoy the feeling i get when i go to mass. and i have guilt in me when i do things i shouldn't do. sometimes i go out of the way to do the right thing, or to keep my mouth shut- hoping to please someone up there. we've all thought about it.

[Housepig]

edit: guy above me we have the same total level :shock:

 

 

 

 

 

But the bible is very very flawed... Aparently I am commiting Adultery... but don't you have to be married to do that :P

 

 

 

yes, of course. the bible can barely be taken into account considering today's world..

 

we're supposed to call a priest if there is mold in our house? when was the last time you did that?

 

 

 

 

I go to the Jesuit school also, we're encouraged to think for ourselves, develop our own opinions but also the basic Jesuit ethos, be the best of what you can be and help others. Honestly, sounds like you're just going with what the priests you know are telling you to believe. At least it's Jesuits you're listening to anyway, religious people with a lot of sense.

 

 

 

very true. i am raised a catholic however my mother and maternal grandmother(only living grandparent) are both agnostics- i have realized over the years that they are both very brilliant women. they play by the rules, and don't try to press their beliefs on others (some religions could learn from this >.>). my father's family is irish- all roman catholics. my father talks about how losing his father at a young age crushed his faith in god. at a time my father (and his 5 siblings) needed god the most- he wasn't anywhere to be found.

 

 

 

don't get me wrong, i still have faith in me, and i'm not going around bashing anybody elses religion. i enjoy the feeling i get when i go to pass. and i occasionally have guilt in my when i do things i shouldn't do. sometimes i go out of the way to do the right thing, or to keep my mouth shut- hoping to please someone up there. we've all thought about it.

 

 

 

Guilt isn't an exclusively religious thing. I don't know if that's what you were trying to say, but it sounded like it.

[lobsta]

You're an ignorant [bleep] head if you disrespect personal beliefs, which is all that spaghetti thing is used for anymore.

 

 

 

No. It would be unwise not to respect the freedom for people to have beliefs. However, we do not necessarily need to respect the beliefs that other people have. It becomes very dangerous when we can not challenge ideas about the world. Religion should not warrant any form of immunity to criticism.

[Lenticular_J]

And respecting opinions purely because they're 'personal beliefs' isn't ignorant? Hitler had strong personal beliefs; we ought to respect them; never mind the fact they happened to include mass genocide. I don't respect his beliefs, nor do I respect the beliefs of Al-Qiueda (spelling...) or Sarah Palin. There's no difference.

 

Touche. Perhaps when those beliefs infringe on others' beliefs (namely their belief not to be lit on fire and such and such) is when everyone should cluster[bleep] them.

 

 

 

No. It would be unwise not to respect the freedom for people to have beliefs. However, we do not necessarily need to respect the beliefs that other people have. It becomes very dangerous when we can not challenge ideas about the world. Religion should not warrant any form of immunity to criticism.

 

I think differently than you. I don't consider opinions or, in fact, religion, to be a personal belief. Organized religion is just a half-assed attempt at putting what I'm thinking of as personal beliefs into words. Your soul, maybe, would be a better word.

[NoobelPrize]

Just thought of this, if Adam and Eve were the two original people, and it is against the bible to have a child with a relative...

 

 

 

Wouldn't Adam and Eve have their children, and then their children would be the only people?

 

 

 

Just think of how many years it's been since the original Bible. And think of how many times it must have been re-printed.

[hellbellz]

he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!

 

 

 

But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money!

 

 

 

I agree with Carlin here. Why would someone who loved you and made you send you to such a place?

[mmmcannibalism]

Just thought of this, if Adam and Eve were the two original people, and it is against the bible to have a child with a relative...

 

 

 

Wouldn't Adam and Eve have their children, and then their children would be the only people?

 

 

 

a. if you just thought of this Im amazed, the obvious problem has been around at least pre scopes trial.

 

 

 

b. unless those two laws were written very close the context of the second becomes important. It should be pretty obvious that incest wouldnt be considered immoral if there were no reasonable alternatives.

[Skeptical]

No. There is no god: what god would allow the holocaust?

[Zierro]

No. There is no god: what god would allow the holocaust?

 

 

 

A god who isn't a puppet master.

[deathdrow]

No. There is no god: what god would allow the holocaust?

 

the one that didn't like the jewish religion.

[mmmcannibalism]

No. There is no god: what god would allow the holocaust?

 

 

 

a god with limited power, a god that discovered the human race after it had naturally evolved and for whatever reason cant influence/wont influence it.

[hihihi727]

No. There is no god: what god would allow the holocaust?

 

 

 

a god with limited power, a god that discovered the human race after it had naturally evolved and for whatever reason cant influence/wont influence it.

 

A god with limited power... isnt that an oxymoron

[mmmcannibalism]

No. There is no god: what god would allow the holocaust?

 

 

 

a god with limited power, a god that discovered the human race after it had naturally evolved and for whatever reason cant influence/wont influence it.

 

A god with limited power... isnt that an oxymoron

 

 

 

My definition of god is a being/force that exists beyond reality. Its a human convention that makes people think god would have to be all powerful.

[hihihi727]

 

 

 

the big bang theory is bull, honestly. somehow those original molecules and laws were created.

 

 

 

 

Both theories whether it was God or the BBT which created the universe are as illogical as others, 1 just has physical proof and the other doesn't.

 

 

 

Both theories are based on something appearing out of nowhere, whether it's God or the vast amounts of matter involved in the BBT, both are as illogical as the other as nothing can appear out of nowhere or be made from nothing, matter can't just appear but neither can an all-powerful being.

 

 

 

I go to the Jesuit school also, we're encouraged to think for ourselves, develop our own opinions but also the basic Jesuit ethos, be the best of what you can be and help others. Honestly, sounds like you're just going with what the priests you know are telling you to believe. At least it's Jesuits you're listening to anyway, religious people with a lot of sense.

 

 

 

The Big Bang isn't "something out of nothing"

 

 

 

Also, even if it was, people continuously talk of the Big Bang in the sense that "something can't come from nothing" or "actual infinites cannot exist, the universe never having a beginning is an actual infinite therefore the universe must have had a beginning," when in actuality both of these assertions are hilariously stupid. God too can be made to regress infinitely. Where did God come from? How can actual infinites not exist when God is infinite, as well as heaven and hell? They start out with the most complex physical thing (the Universe), and in order to explain the so called inconsistencies in scientific theory, they posit an actual omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient consciousness that they call God. Which one of these two ideas is more complex?

 

 

 

It doesn't make any sense. If you're going to be making any assumptions (which you shouldn't be), positing an infinitely wise consciousness that is everywhere at once and outside of the rules of logic in order to explain the Universe is preposterous. You might as well just assume the Universe is infinite.

 

 

 

Yeah but hes trying to say that science can sound just as illogical as religion. If thats your reason that God doesn't exist then the same could apply arguments to the Big Bang, making science just as illogical as religion.

[mmmcannibalism]

[hide=]

 

 

 

the big bang theory is bull, honestly. somehow those original molecules and laws were created.

 

 

 

 

Both theories whether it was God or the BBT which created the universe are as illogical as others, 1 just has physical proof and the other doesn't.

 

 

 

Both theories are based on something appearing out of nowhere, whether it's God or the vast amounts of matter involved in the BBT, both are as illogical as the other as nothing can appear out of nowhere or be made from nothing, matter can't just appear but neither can an all-powerful being.

 

 

 

I go to the Jesuit school also, we're encouraged to think for ourselves, develop our own opinions but also the basic Jesuit ethos, be the best of what you can be and help others. Honestly, sounds like you're just going with what the priests you know are telling you to believe. At least it's Jesuits you're listening to anyway, religious people with a lot of sense.

 

 

 

The Big Bang isn't "something out of nothing"

 

 

 

Also, even if it was, people continuously talk of the Big Bang in the sense that "something can't come from nothing" or "actual infinites cannot exist, the universe never having a beginning is an actual infinite therefore the universe must have had a beginning," when in actuality both of these assertions are hilariously stupid. God too can be made to regress infinitely. Where did God come from? How can actual infinites not exist when God is infinite, as well as heaven and hell? They start out with the most complex physical thing (the Universe), and in order to explain the so called inconsistencies in scientific theory, they posit an actual omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient consciousness that they call God. Which one of these two ideas is more complex?

 

 

 

It doesn't make any sense. If you're going to be making any assumptions (which you shouldn't be), positing an infinitely wise consciousness that is everywhere at once and outside of the rules of logic in order to explain the Universe is preposterous. You might as well just assume the Universe is infinite.

 

 

 

Yeah but hes trying to say that science can sound just as illogical as religion. If thats your reason that God doesn't exist then the same could apply arguments to the Big Bang, making science just as illogical as religion.

[/hide]

 

 

 

the problem is they sound illogical initially for different reasons

 

 

 

the reason behind the big bang sounding unreasonable is a lack of understanding the scientific data that supports it involved. Im sure you dont understand the full proof of gravity/general relativity that doesnt mean its proof doesnt make sense

 

 

 

the reason people using god to explain the creation of the universe is partially illogical falls to the razor(forget name). If the universe is too complex to have created itself, and if its not possible for it to have gone back forever(big bang/crunch cycles), why does it make more sense for a being that is beyond observation and somehow existed forever to have created the immensly complex universe.

 

 

 

I hate sounding like a devout atheist, that was more of a devil's advocate explanation then anything.

[hihihi727]

[hide=]

 

 

 

the big bang theory is bull, honestly. somehow those original molecules and laws were created.

 

 

 

 

Both theories whether it was God or the BBT which created the universe are as illogical as others, 1 just has physical proof and the other doesn't.

 

 

 

Both theories are based on something appearing out of nowhere, whether it's God or the vast amounts of matter involved in the BBT, both are as illogical as the other as nothing can appear out of nowhere or be made from nothing, matter can't just appear but neither can an all-powerful being.

 

 

 

I go to the Jesuit school also, we're encouraged to think for ourselves, develop our own opinions but also the basic Jesuit ethos, be the best of what you can be and help others. Honestly, sounds like you're just going with what the priests you know are telling you to believe. At least it's Jesuits you're listening to anyway, religious people with a lot of sense.

 

 

 

The Big Bang isn't "something out of nothing"

 

 

 

Also, even if it was, people continuously talk of the Big Bang in the sense that "something can't come from nothing" or "actual infinites cannot exist, the universe never having a beginning is an actual infinite therefore the universe must have had a beginning," when in actuality both of these assertions are hilariously stupid. God too can be made to regress infinitely. Where did God come from? How can actual infinites not exist when God is infinite, as well as heaven and hell? They start out with the most complex physical thing (the Universe), and in order to explain the so called inconsistencies in scientific theory, they posit an actual omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient consciousness that they call God. Which one of these two ideas is more complex?

 

 

 

It doesn't make any sense. If you're going to be making any assumptions (which you shouldn't be), positing an infinitely wise consciousness that is everywhere at once and outside of the rules of logic in order to explain the Universe is preposterous. You might as well just assume the Universe is infinite.

 

 

 

Yeah but hes trying to say that science can sound just as illogical as religion. If thats your reason that God doesn't exist then the same could apply arguments to the Big Bang, making science just as illogical as religion.

[/hide]

 

 

 

the problem is they sound illogical initially for different reasons

 

 

 

the reason behind the big bang sounding unreasonable is a lack of understanding the scientific data that supports it involved. Im sure you dont understand the full proof of gravity/general relativity that doesnt mean its proof doesnt make sense

 

 

 

the reason people using god to explain the creation of the universe is partially illogical falls to the razor(forget name). If the universe is too complex to have created itself, and if its not possible for it to have gone back forever(big bang/crunch cycles), why does it make more sense for a being that is beyond observation and somehow existed forever to have created the immensly complex universe.

 

 

 

I hate sounding like a devout atheist, that was more of a devil's advocate explanation then anything.

 

 

 

Because the being can do anything. I saw proof of God before my eyes once, but afterwards i realised that many christians aren't that way because they had "proof" but because they just know that God exists. Its like how before the law of gravity people already knew that if you threw something in the air it would fall down, or that before the law of motions people already knew things moved without proof. There are many posts before about this, but God *has* to punish us. Although he loves us, he wants Justice and that is why he sent Jesus to sacrifice himself instead of poofing belief into us. He isn't going to make us his puppets to please himself. He gives us a choice. On the other hand, Satan is evil because he has caused Sin to enter the world and without him no one would ever die in the first place which is why he didn't only kill "10" people but every single person to have ever existed really and made our lives worse than they otherwise would have been.

[Rien]

Satan is evil because he has caused Sin to enter the world and without him no one would ever die in the first place which is why he didn't only kill "10" people but every single person to have ever existed really and made our lives worse than they otherwise would have been.

If the Bible is to be believed, then Satan merely tempted Adam and Eve; it was God who originally created the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. That God is supposedly omniscient would seem to indicate that he created it in the full knowledge of its future consequences yet continued on regardless. Prior to their consumption of the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve were little more than children in their blissful ignorance, so how can they be blamed for what occured since God clearly allowed for it to happen and they weren't able to fully appreciate the consequences of their actions anyway? I would liken the situation to that of a parent warning a child away from a hot stove; in general, the child will disregard the warning--not out of spite, but of infantile curiousity--and will touch the surface of a hot stove at some point. In this case, a child would walk away with a scortched finger at worst; God saw fit, however, to eject Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden and curse their descendants to lives of torment and damnation for the one, innocent transgression.

 

 

 

Again, if the Bible is to be taken at its word, then God can be said to be far more destructive and unsympathetic than Satan. Are we truly to believe that Noah and his family were the only people in the entire world worthy of being saved from the Flood? How can the 10 Plagues of Egypt be justified? What of the slaying of the Canaanites and of other ancient peoples who ran afoul of God's "chosen people?" I could continue on and on, but, essentially, God has continuously proven to be a harsh, oppressive, and prejudiced purveyor of "justice." One need look no futher than the descriptions of Heaven and Hell to understand this; they are far too black and white in their juxtaposition. Mankind, after all, has the capacity for both good and evil, so how is it fair to sentence some to an eternity of damnation while allowing others to enter into bliss? Does a finite amount of sin warrant an eternity of punishment? I, personally, would refuse both Heaven and Hell; Hell for the obvious reason of it being unjustified and Heaven since I would be required to be cleansed of "sin." Whether or not anyone reading this believes me, we are defined as people through our misdeeds just as much as we are through our benevolence. Anyone stripped of their capacity for "evil"--which, after all, is relative--would never be the same. It would be a terrible fate to have to live forever either way, but essentially being forced to undergo a lobotomy before being allowed into Heaven certainly isn't very appealing to me.

 

 

 

Anyway, and before I go to far off-topic, we are who we are. If God is indeed real and he wishes to either punish or reward us as befits his warped sense of justice as described in the Bible, then so be it, but it can hardly described as fair when he precipitated the Fall of Man, can it? I hope you can understand why atheists and agnostics are dubious of God's existence, even if you personally disagree with the viewpoint.

 

 

 

 

 

*EDIT*

 

I didn't want to post again just to tell you, but it's Occam's Razor you're thinking of, mmmcannibalism. Hopefully you'll see this. :-#

[mmmcannibalism]

[hide=]

[hide=]

 

 

 

the big bang theory is bull, honestly. somehow those original molecules and laws were created.

 

 

 

 

Both theories whether it was God or the BBT which created the universe are as illogical as others, 1 just has physical proof and the other doesn't.

 

 

 

Both theories are based on something appearing out of nowhere, whether it's God or the vast amounts of matter involved in the BBT, both are as illogical as the other as nothing can appear out of nowhere or be made from nothing, matter can't just appear but neither can an all-powerful being.

 

 

 

I go to the Jesuit school also, we're encouraged to think for ourselves, develop our own opinions but also the basic Jesuit ethos, be the best of what you can be and help others. Honestly, sounds like you're just going with what the priests you know are telling you to believe. At least it's Jesuits you're listening to anyway, religious people with a lot of sense.

 

 

 

The Big Bang isn't "something out of nothing"

 

 

 

Also, even if it was, people continuously talk of the Big Bang in the sense that "something can't come from nothing" or "actual infinites cannot exist, the universe never having a beginning is an actual infinite therefore the universe must have had a beginning," when in actuality both of these assertions are hilariously stupid. God too can be made to regress infinitely. Where did God come from? How can actual infinites not exist when God is infinite, as well as heaven and hell? They start out with the most complex physical thing (the Universe), and in order to explain the so called inconsistencies in scientific theory, they posit an actual omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient consciousness that they call God. Which one of these two ideas is more complex?

 

 

 

It doesn't make any sense. If you're going to be making any assumptions (which you shouldn't be), positing an infinitely wise consciousness that is everywhere at once and outside of the rules of logic in order to explain the Universe is preposterous. You might as well just assume the Universe is infinite.

 

 

 

Yeah but hes trying to say that science can sound just as illogical as religion. If thats your reason that God doesn't exist then the same could apply arguments to the Big Bang, making science just as illogical as religion.

[/hide]

 

 

 

the problem is they sound illogical initially for different reasons

 

 

 

the reason behind the big bang sounding unreasonable is a lack of understanding the scientific data that supports it involved. Im sure you dont understand the full proof of gravity/general relativity that doesnt mean its proof doesnt make sense

 

 

 

the reason people using god to explain the creation of the universe is partially illogical falls to the razor(forget name). If the universe is too complex to have created itself, and if its not possible for it to have gone back forever(big bang/crunch cycles), why does it make more sense for a being that is beyond observation and somehow existed forever to have created the immensly complex universe.

 

 

 

I hate sounding like a devout atheist, that was more of a devil's advocate explanation then anything.

 

 

 

Because the being can do anything. I saw proof of God before my eyes once, but afterwards i realised that many christians aren't that way because they had "proof" but because they just know that God exists. Its like how before the law of gravity people already knew that if you threw something in the air it would fall down, or that before the law of motions people already knew things moved without proof. There are many posts before about this, but God *has* to punish us. Although he loves us, he wants Justice and that is why he sent Jesus to sacrifice himself instead of poofing belief into us. He isn't going to make us his puppets to please himself. He gives us a choice. On the other hand, Satan is evil because he has caused Sin to enter the world and without him no one would ever die in the first place which is why he didn't only kill "10" people but every single person to have ever existed really and made our lives worse than they otherwise would have been.

[/hide]

 

 

 

If its illogical for the universe to have gone backwards forever on its own how is it more logical for a being that somehow has existed forever to have created it?

[lobsta]

.

[Kiriyama]

[hide=Quotes]

Satan is evil because he has caused Sin to enter the world and without him no one would ever die in the first place which is why he didn't only kill "10" people but every single person to have ever existed really and made our lives worse than they otherwise would have been.

If the Bible is to be believed, then Satan merely tempted Adam and Eve; it was God who originally created the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. That God is supposedly omniscient would seem to indicate that he created it in the full knowledge of its future consequences yet continued on regardless. Prior to their consumption of the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve were little more than children in their blissful ignorance, so how can they be blamed for what occured since God clearly allowed for it to happen and they weren't able to fully appreciate the consequences of their actions anyway? I would liken the situation to that of a parent warning a child away from a hot stove; in general, the child will disregard the warning--not out of spite, but of infantile curiousity--and will touch the surface of a hot stove at some point. In this case, a child would walk away with a scortched finger at worst; God saw fit, however, to eject Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden and curse their descendants to lives of torment and damnation for the one, innocent transgression.

 

 

 

Again, if the Bible is to be taken at its word, then God can be said to be far more destructive and unsympathetic than Satan. Are we truly to believe that Noah and his family were the only people in the entire world worthy of being saved from the Flood? How can the 10 Plagues of Egypt be justified? What of the slaying of the Canaanites and of other ancient peoples who ran afoul of God's "chosen people?" I could continue on and on, but, essentially, God has continuously proven to be a harsh, oppressive, and prejudiced purveyor of "justice." One need look no futher than the descriptions of Heaven and Hell to understand this; they are far too black and white in their juxtaposition. Mankind, after all, has the capacity for both good and evil, so how is it fair to sentence some to an eternity of damnation while allowing others to enter into bliss? Does a finite amount of sin warrant an eternity of punishment? I, personally, would refuse both Heaven and Hell; Hell for the obvious reason of it being unjustified and Heaven since I would be required to be cleansed of "sin." Whether or not anyone reading this believes me, we are defined as people through our misdeeds just as much as we are through our benevolence. Anyone stripped of their capacity for "evil"--which, after all, is relative--would never be the same. It would be a terrible fate to have to live forever either way, but essentially being forced to undergo a lobotomy before being allowed into Heaven certainly isn't very appealing to me.

 

 

 

Anyway, and before I go to far off-topic, we are who we are. If God is indeed real and he wishes to either punish or reward us as befits his warped sense of justice as described in the Bible, then so be it, but it can hardly described as fair when he precipitated the Fall of Man, can it? I hope you can understand why atheists and agnostics are dubious of God's existence, even if you personally disagree with the viewpoint.

 

 

 

 

 

*EDIT*

 

I didn't want to post again just to tell you, but it's Occam's Razor you're thinking of, mmmcannibalism. Hopefully you'll see this. :-#

[/hide]

 

 

 

I think it depends on how you look at Satan.

 

 

 

For one, God is all-powerful. Satan is not. God, as the creator of everything therefore created Satan and demons.

 

 

 

So say that when we sin, we listen to a demon/satan. However, since God created them to do that, he created the temptation. Is God therefore not the mastermind behind all this, if he was as loving, he wouldn't have created Satan/Demons to do what he deemed as a sin.

 

 

 

So I pose this question: Is God inherently evil if he created things with the intent of us to do evil things? Of course, we could ignore them, but then God could have gave us the power to ignore them completely and not sin. Why is he* testing us when he would want us to live in eternal paradise.

 

 

 

*I use "he" simply for convenience, I do not want to think that a God is a human in form (God could be a lamb, what is perhaps the symbol of innocence), nor do I believe in a God anyway.

[mmmcannibalism]

 

 

 

Because the being can do anything. I saw proof of God before my eyes once, but afterwards i realised that many christians aren't that way because they had "proof" but because they just know that God exists.

 

Are you saying that you saw proof that God existed? If so, what was this proof?

 

 

 

fix quote please, I didnt say that(error in my post caused wrong id I think)

[Zierro]

Is God inherently evil if he created things with the intent of us to do evil things?

 

 

 

No, evil is necessary in order for good to exist at all. I see it as nothing more than a reference tool for comparison. To understand the concept of "hot" you must understand "cold" as well. It's all relative, so a reference tool is required.

 

 

 

Why is he* testing us when he would want us to live in eternal paradise.

 

 

 

Not sure, but I think it might have to do with our independence. Having your parents do your science project for you is nothing to be proud of. Doing it on your own allows you to experience the feeling of triumph though.

[mmmcannibalism]

Is God inherently evil if he created things with the intent of us to do evil things?

 

 

 

No, evil is necessary in order for good to exist at all. I see it as nothing more than a reference tool for comparison. To understand the concept of "hot" you must understand "cold" as well. It's all relative, so a reference tool is required.

 

 

 

Why is he* testing us when he would want us to live in eternal paradise.

 

 

 

Not sure, but I think it might have to do with our independence. Having your parents do your science project for you is nothing to be proud of. Doing it on your own allows you to experience the feeling of triumph though.

 

 

 

second point I totally agree, but you dont need to burn someone for them to know fire is hot.

[Zierro]

second point I totally agree, but you dont need to burn someone for them to know fire is hot.

 

 

 

Really? I thought my second point was crap compared to the first. :P

 

 

 

You do not need to burn someone to know fire is hot, but you do need to experience both hot and cold temperatures to understand temperature in general. If you lived on the Equator all your life and you were sweaty all the time then you wouldn't see that as "hot", you'd see it as normal because it's all you know. However, once you go to Antarctica then you will realize that being sweaty isn't the only thing that can happen to your body - you can also shiver. You realize that being sweaty is not the default so you will then realize the distinction and two new terms will arise for you - cold and hot, instead of just what's normal or default.