# Reply to locked thread titled "The omnipotent God" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 19, 2003, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reply-to-locked-thread-titled-the-omnipotent-god/189539 "2003-07-19T03:58:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reply-to-locked-thread-titled-the-omnipotent-god/189539/1 "2003-07-19T03:58:50Z")
I went through the trouble of writing a reply to[this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=198725) 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. > [@](#): > > Can God create good without also creating evil at the same time? 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? > [@](#): > > First of all, if god is all-good and incapable of evil, then certainly god has limits and in turn is not omnipotent. 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? [/quote] Perhaps by retaining your memory of an earthly life? > [@](#): > > You cannot demonstrate to me nor anyone else, that a certain action is good without putting forth an example of evil. Giving food to starving children half way around the world is good, because it eases suffering. There, I just did it. > [@](#): > > If god could have designed a planet with humans without any evil on it but did not, then your god is not wholly good. Furthermore, if he had made such a planet, the beings he would create would not be able to choose anything; they would be robots or vegetable-like. That’s the point, we don’t live on a planet where we are robots or vegetables; isn’t that good? > [@](#): > > Now, to the free-will argument. Some scholars and preachers have invented yet a new argument in recent years. It’s not new at all. > [@](#): > > They argue that evil is due to the independent actions of human beings. For this reason, they say, evil cannot be ascribed to God. So this wholly good god gave humans free will, knowing that humans would commit evil through the utilization of their free-will. If we accept this argument, then what is revealed is that god is anti freedom or that freedom to make independent choices is evil. 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. > [@](#): > > Furthermore, if he knowingly and willingly created such beings, fully aware of the possibilities, how can he then turn around and punish his own handiwork for doing what they were supposed to do? Huh? We are supposed to choose evil? I can keep going, but I think I made my point. I hope. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reply-to-locked-thread-titled-the-omnipotent-god/189539/2 "2003-07-19T04:05:46Z")
It was a pretty weak OP. So is his next one about some abortion related bill that hasn’t been specified. ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reply-to-locked-thread-titled-the-omnipotent-god/189539/3 "2003-07-19T12:47:03Z")
[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] ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reply-to-locked-thread-titled-the-omnipotent-god/189539/4 "2003-07-19T20:25:25Z")
Are moderator hats adjustable? Is there, say, a moderator visor? ---
**Author:** ![Tusculan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecd19e/32.png) [@Tusculan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tusculan)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reply-to-locked-thread-titled-the-omnipotent-god/189539/5 "2003-07-20T11:04:13Z")
[hijack] 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. [/hijack] ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reply-to-locked-thread-titled-the-omnipotent-god/189539/6 "2003-07-20T18:28:07Z")
I forget…is **Coldfire** the Nazi Fascist Moderator or the Pinko Commie Moderator? Because it would affect the type of helmet… ---
**Author:** ![markkroger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@markkroger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markkroger)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reply-to-locked-thread-titled-the-omnipotent-god/189539/7 "2003-07-20T19:17:24Z")
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