Reply to locked thread titled "The omnipotent God"

I went through the trouble of writing a reply tothis thread, but it was locked by the time I went to post. I hope it is ok that I start this thread to post it.

I’m an atheist, and I must say, that was pretty lame. Is that first paragraph all about convincing the reader that the writer is capable of a much more scholarly work, but wants to be understood by the average Joes of the world? Give me a break.

Last line of second paragraph:

However, I will address this issue later or perhaps in another essay.

Not sure what you’ll be writing in your essay? At least edit the sentence when you’re done.

Why not? Just because us humans wouldn’t be able to reconize it because there is no evil to compare it to, does that mean it can’t exist?

Who is claiming that God is incapable of evil? Maybe he just chooses to be all-good.

[qoute]Let me put forth yet another argument directly related to the subject of this essay. Suppose your god were to take you to heaven, where there is no evil at all; how would you be able to enjoy the all-good nature of heaven?

Perhaps by retaining your memory of an earthly life?

Giving food to starving children half way around the world is good, because it eases suffering. There, I just did it.

That’s the point, we don’t live on a planet where we are robots or vegetables; isn’t that good?

It’s not new at all.

This makes no sense at all. It shows that God is pro freedom and freedom to make independent choices is not evil, choosing to do evil is evil.

Huh? We are supposed to choose evil?

I can keep going, but I think I made my point. I hope.

It was a pretty weak OP.

So is his next one about some abortion related bill that hasn’t been specified.

[Moderator Hat: ON]

Normally, no, opening up a new thread in response to a locked one is not a good idea, as the thread was usually locked for a pretty good reason.

In this case, I’ll let it slide because you actually raise debating points that were curiously absent from the thread I locked.

David B, SDMB Great Debates Moderator

[Moderator Hat: OFF]

Are moderator hats adjustable? Is there, say, a moderator visor?

I’ve heard a rumor that Coldfire has a Moderator Helmet. He wears it when he rides his motorbike around Amsterdam; once in a while a tourist skirts out of the way and you know: there’s another Doper.

I forget…is Coldfire the Nazi Fascist Moderator or the Pinko Commie Moderator? Because it would affect the type of helmet…

In religion, one experiences a deity in a relationship. Science however, is the study of process. If one is looking for origins and attempting to use Science, it is origin of process.
I can prove a Design Engineer as the origin of process of the natural world very simply by integrating the whole to application or purpose. Integrations have requirements; interdependencies that must be satisfied to enable the application or purpose.
I have never met Bill Gates, by I can prove that some entities like Intel and Microsoft exist, by highlighting the interdependencies of hardware/software integration of computing.
Logic has no bias receptors, no philosophical debates and no axes to grind.
All narratives are circular reinforcement. We choose a narrative and then use the narrative to interpret the data. Logic creates the litmus test. The number one priority of a Research Institute is to attempt to make a narrative, process or application fail. If the data coming from that Institute is not reliable, nothing else coming from that Institute matters.
All integrations are context driven. The context is embedded in the integration’s application or purpose. We confuse random with dynamic because the lens we are interpreting with has no ability to see the integrated whole or the interdependencies thereof.
The Human Bio-integration is an automation run from a genetic database. The integration is both context driven and an integration that is driven by context. Context is cognitive integration of thought.
To have context of any kind, whether it is language, a database or a resultant integration, one needs a character base, a format and then context. We integrate context to a format. Without the format, the context is impossible. Grunts even if meaningful, do not make context. They have no ability to integrate.
Organization is a lens of Logic, but it has no ability to build. Integration builds. We say a technology evolved. It makes for a nice socially correct euphemism, but it is Scientifically incorrect. Progression is the driving engine of technology. Progression is application of knowledge gained, each being an integrated whole. Multivalve technology is not an add-on to the Model T, it is application of knowledge gained. Progression is only seen in manmade applications, because animals have no ability to integrate and therefore build.
What one’s personal views are toward Bill Gates, has nothing to do with the logical proof or Microsoft’s existence.
I am flawed to the core and I live in a glass house. I do not throw rocks at other people’s house, because they might throw the rock back. But if we want to discuss Logic, we have hit upon my favorite topic.
I am a student of the True Narrative. Reason? When this train stops at my stop, I have to get off all by myself.
Have a great day!
Mark Kroger