God is evil if He has miracles and does not use them.

No, we don't.
We don't have to follow things we know are wrong.
We don't have to bend to the will of the one with the biggest stick.We have the ability to do what's right, even if it's going to be the losing side. Even if we're going to be hurt by the one with the biggest stick.Or, maybe, there is no winning and losing because there actually is no stick... and you're just completely wrong.

Who's affected? It's a human problem. No god has a right to interfere. But that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying it's no god's problem and so no god's business. What choice? I don't know. I'm not her. I don't know what you're asking. I think I've been pretty clear regarding my position on this.What more do you want?

Too funny.What does the evidence show? It seems that "evil" depends on the era and culture so unless God constantly changes the definition of evil to meet the expectations of a given culture at a given time then it is not a construct of any God. That might well be true but then again it would not be a construct of God and so again makes that question when asked of a God moot. LOLBut again, there is no sign that there is anything that is absolutely evil for all time and in all cases. It is the society that decides what is considered evil not the act itself. When a male lion kills cubs sired by some other male lion it is not evil. When a male human in a modern western country kills babies sired by some other male human it is considered evil.It is the property assigned by a human that determines whether or not an act is evil or not.

You keep bringing up utter nonsense and the worst to be found in the Bible Faith. But of course that is not what Jesus said and as always there are also passages to be found in the Bible that refute your position.

I have no doubt that xians around the world work massively to help the disadvantaged.But lets be honest, your god could save those good hearted xians a lot of bother if he just tweaked reality so that (for example) babies were not born with the AIDS because the men folk in that country erroneously believe that fucking a virgin would cure them of the AIDS.And when you say that heritability is built into the fabric of the the universe you must understand that an all powerful god has designed reality.Your god designed the fabric of reality to include heritability and therefor consigned all those poor babies to an early death.Or do you dispute that your god is all powerful?All the best.

Even if his moral standard means the suffering of the many?Edited by Larni, : Stop judging me!

The suffering is caused by sin, by OUR corrupt morals, not His; as I keep saying over and over and over, it's caused by OPPOSITION to God. That brings suffering down on our heads. And the reason it occurs is that God is too pure for us, we can never be righteous enough to please Him. This is why He gave us salvation and ways to communicate with Him, out of mercy to us in our sinful and blind condition. But actively opposing Him is NOT a good idea. This IS His universe and you DO live in it and it IS governed by HIS Law that is too righteous and holy for us, and if you continue to oppose Him you only ruin yourself.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It's probably the most insidious aspect of any abusive relationship, that the victim convinces themselves that it's all their fault, and that if only they could change and please their abuser, then they'll be loved.This is really basic psychology, in abusive relationships, and you have utterly captured it with those words. Surely you see the parallels, Faith ?

Well i might have a philosophical argument as to why god does not use his miracles to help people.We all know power corrupts give a good man power and sooner or later he will start abusing it no longer being a good man. Absolute power corrupts absolutely so maby god figured that he was such a prick in the old testament cause he used his power the only way for him to stop being a prick is to not use his power anymore.

If you can't understand that having sex with a child is different from having sex with an adult then that makes you a potential paedophile.I'm sure that is not what you mean.

First off, my apologies. I got a little heated and carried away in my previous message to you. You don't deserve such angst and I will try to stay more calm when discussing such things. Sometimes it's an animal-action, and an animal is affected, and an animal-reaction to the situation with no humans involved whatsoever.
As studies in such things show with dolphins, monkeys, mice and other non-humans.Hence my claim that evil is an intelligence-problem and not necessarily an only-human problem. If it is just a human problem, I would agree with you.
However, I don't think it is. I think it's an intelligence problem. And God, assuming He exists and has intelligence, would therefore be involved. If He has intelligence and is aware of our situation and can do something about it... then it is His problem and it is His business. He would be the equivalent of a human standing by doing nothing.But that all hinges on my claim that evil is an intelligence-problem, not simply a human-only problem. If you do not agree with me on that, I can provide links of morality and evil in non-humans (animals) that do have levels of intelligence. Hmmm... perhaps "respect for her desire" would have been a better phrase for me to use instead of "choice."
You don't want God "deciding your fate."
She would (very likely) want God to interfere and prevent her rape.Two equally valued opinions. Now what?
I say that her opinion is attached to a more... dire situation... than yours is. Therefore, I'm on the side of God interfering. Unless you can convince me that having God not-interfere is worth allowing this daughter to be raped? So far, all I've heard is "it's probably for the best." Well... that's not good enough for me to overcome the emergency situation that this daughter finds herself in. As far as I can tell (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), your position is that you think God should stay out of things because:1. Evil is a human problem
-I am contending this, I think that Evil is an intelligence-problem, not something connected only to humans2. You think it would probably be better if God stayed out of it.
-I contend this with the example I provided... I'm pretty sure the daughter would very much appreciate it and consider it "better" if God prevented her rape. I know that I personally think God should prevent the rape in that situation. Discussion, of course
That's what I'm here for... to toss my ideas out and discuss them and to see if they hold water or not through "trial by fire."
So far, I think I have pretty reasonable rebuttals to your position such that I still think that my position is more upstanding, rational and reasonable. But I'm always open to further objections I may have yet to think about.Don't feel like you have to oblige me, though.
If you'd rather not continue the discussion for any reason... don't worry about me, I'll be fine. I really just visit this site for fun and personal growth

I agree.
It wasn't what I was talking about, though. But it doesn't matter. I completely agree.
Which is why in the same reply you posted to I mentioned that Evil being a God-construct is irrelevant. The only thing necessary for my point to stand is that Evil is not an only-human construct.Since you agree that Evil could quite possibly be an intelligence-construct (as the evidence shows us with animals).
Then the next few steps are easy:Evil is an intelligence construct.
If God exists...
and if God has intelligence...
Then God plays a part in dealing with Evil.If the above is valid, then God doing nothing when evil things happen is the equivalent of a human doing nothing when evil things happen... abhorrent, cowardly and disgusting.Therefore, God should interfere to prevent evil whenever He possibly can. I never intended to imply that there was. Such a notion is not necessary for my argument. I disagree. I think that it is the intelligence (usually a human) who gets to decide if the action acted upon them was evil or good.
Everyone else's opinion about the action on that intelligence (person...) is irrelevant. I would say this particular example is up to the lions. What makes you the arbiter? Agreed.
And if a human stood by and did nothing to prevent such a thing, wouldn't you call that human also evil?
And if a God stood by and did nothing to prevent such a thing, wouldn't you call that God also evil?I would call both the human and the God evil for standing by and doing nothing if they could prevent the situation.
I take it that you would not? Why is that? I disagree.
It is the property assigned by intelligence (usually human...) that determines whether or not an act is evil or not.And, of course, there are many things some people agree are evil while other people agree that it is not. Like, for example, eating animals. Vegetarians vs. meat-eaters. Who is right? Is someone "right?"I understand why you would be wary and even scared that an All-Powerful God might interfere and there's nothing you could do about it.
I agree, and such a thing makes me wary and scared as well.But I'd still want God to prevent the rape in my example. Is your fear so great that you'd allow an innocent girl to be raped just so that you can sleep at night?

Sorry but again that simply does not seem to make any sense.Have you ever not9iced that God is almost always supporting both sides in a war?And how exactly can you tell if God is doing nothing?Is there anything inherently wrong with what we define as evil outside the context of our own definitions?

Some suffering is, some is not.
Some we can control and mitigate, some suffering is beyond our abilities to change it.Suffering is not such a simple concept. This is true if you are afraid of His wrath.
This is false if you think that a decent moral standard is worth standing up to a God for. Or maybe He doesn't exist at all and therefore there's nothing to worry about.Or maybe He does exist as you say.
I would still oppose Him and ruin myself in order to protect and help the innocent people that I love. Because I think that is a noble goal.I would rather die spending time with others who simply try to do their best with what they have... then live on in eternity knowing that I rejected those that deserve love just so that I could live on in eternity.What's offered simply isn't worth the cost.

I think I see the problem, I don't see how to resolve it.
I am talking in hypotheticals... because, well, I don't think that God exists. I can't resolve this because I don't see a way you're going to convince me that God does, in fact, exist. So I have to continue to use hypotheticals. Yes, and never seems to help either side.
Which leads me to believe that He does not exist.However, if He existed, and did this, it would lead me to believe that He doesn't care (which is what I said originally). When people still get raped. I don't know. I don't think so, though.
I don't see how this changes anything.There is nothing "inherently wrong" with rape. Such an action seems extremely natural in the animal population. We (as currently living humans) just tend to universally judge it as such.I'm just saying that according to the definitions we use, we should also (as currently living humans) tend to universally judge God as evil for not doing anything to prevent it.This doesn't make rape "inherently wrong."
This doesn't make God "inherently evil."Such terms are, basically, meaningless.It doesn't change the fact that we do have current moral standards, and that they should apply to God as well, and that this is what they say.