Well then; we have deity who has both created sin
and evil.
W: It seems He indeed is worth praising and glorifying, as here I am, glorifying and praising him. And, of course, I am not alone.
It is rare to see a sensible person glorifying and praising anything creating sin and evil. But, horses for courses, I suppose lol It
QED then and I thank you.
Er.. as already mentioned to you, God looked and found it only "very good". Look it up in Genesis - where presumably you'd say it must be literally true.
That is, it ought to be said, quite unbiblical. Scripture is in no doubt as to what the object of praise and worship.
But, subjectively speaking, I would have to think hard before worshiping the creator of and sin - especially when that was a deliberate decision and, worse, is allowed to continue. There is also the irony of a god creating an imperfect world, then blaming those who live on it for their faults. You can see the problem here.
As already mentioned, I will leave the purported characteristics and histories of angels, demons and fairies etc to you.
But did you not call the creation of evil 'terrific'? And does not the Bible say that, at least your deity created natural evil?
And I have replied that in context this is special pleading, not least since the words clearly suggest at the very least
approval, not just acknowledgement, of God's creation, which is the point; just as when God finishes His imperfect work in Genesis and, at the very least, expresses His satisfaction with it. 'Good' is not just an acknowledgement. It is a value.
Nevertheless you need to, Isiah says, clearly, that "I, God created ... evil". And you told me before that sin and evil are not interchangeable.
But here, once again, you ignore those inconvenient words of Isiah. And once again might note the words of Col 1:6 that "
For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.". 'All things' include sin and all evil. I hope that helps.
People have the perfect right to believe in what they want. Conversely, ideas and beliefs have no rights - and just because they are held strongly does not make them immune from criticism.
You say that God did not create evil. Bible says otherwise.
It is hard though to find a good word for jealousy in the Bible, which is more about patience, faith, and self control. So this is special pleading, or 'not using the classic interpretation'.
Texts like Deut 20:10-14: "you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies .."?
Or Judges 5:30 "They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man .."
or Zech 14 1:2 "Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished"?
Or Num 31 7-18: "Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves."
or Judges 21 10-24 etc?
Given that you have elsewhere told me that "God created Sin before he created earth and man" this seems a non-sequitur. But thank you for the diversion.
And yet, here's the Catholic Encylopedia's opening line on the subject:
And, never the less your all-good God created
both . Isiah, and you, tell me so lol. Neither are very attractive, are they?
But now, sin is a ...
woman? A fine extension of the anthropomorphic fallacy. But I think I understand you better now...
Especially when their existence, like so much of that which you believe in, has not been proven. People after all never speak of faith when there is
evidence.
Indeed. Which is why one typically sees so much argument and internecine disputes within all religions. As previously noted, God's will is harder to be done if it is couched in obfuscation.
So highlighting that you consider things that most abhor and try to avoid as "marvellous and wonderful" and "terrific" is 'tactless'? Not just plain inconvenient and embarrassing? As already noted, to this reader at least, your admissions have sounded increasingly uncomfortable. They're an awkward bending over backwards to explain the inconstancies of the bible - which are not surprising, given its patchworking, interpolations and heavily edited history..
The above implies you think things would not be better without evil. But, as we know, your god admits to creating at least one type of evil. So are we in effect now saying that things would be better if your god had not done something?
They don't create natural evil. Your god does that. And didn't you say just before that such
are things. So indeed, they "bring glory to God"? Would it be better if there was less glory brought to God?
So what type of 'glory to God' is it that's 'brought by the things of evil' then?
Which rather proves the argument I was hoping to make: that, since there are good things to which the argument does not apply, the original notion (that 'bad things are sent to make us stronger') would, one imagines, be similarly inconsistent.
Special pleading is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception ("I'm not using the classic definition") to a generally accepted rule ("things would be better without
evil"), principle, etc. without justifying the exception. The lack of criticism may be a simple oversight or an application of a double standard. You will excuse me if I continue applying the standard rules of debate. Feel free to apply them to me.
Don't tell me what I think, my friend.