The Great Compromise

What kind of sick god would use evolution as a mechanism for developing spiritual creatures? Or for the less metaphysic, natural creatures?I'll tell you: A sick perverted god who enjoys suffering and death and if it is true get ready for the fire cuz we're goin' ta burn!

If God made death and suffering as a mechanism to bring about life, he is reservered words far worse than sick and perverted. However, God is perfect, we humans are not and a woman brought it in and a man tried to save her so were all furked. That's ok, i don't mind living in shit because we were promised much more and better. I'll do my time.

Death is a consequence of action not a mechanism to bring forth creatures as you would like to think. Before the original sin, there was no death. There was no death before sin. The possibility existed but it was not created, rather sin was not an original consequence but more a opposing consciousness. Which is a historically accurate work detailing how sin has effected us and how God judges sin. Thanks for bringing that up.

It could have been 100 years before Eve ate of the tree of good and evil. The Bible says God saw his creation and it was good. Satan couldn't have rebelled before the creation of our world. There is a gap between when Adam was conceived and when Eve was created. Also, there was a gap of over 100 something years between when Adam and Eve had any kids. Sure it does. Romans 5:12"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned."

No, you are so autonomous with your replies I think you need a refresher (like a walk). My God didn't impose anything. Man imposed his will on creation and it was found wanting. This is the reality. Your (a) or (b) is of a simple mind. It is much more complex in its simplicity than you give credit. God didn't make death. Man chose death. And death is only a mechanism in your stupid theory of evolution. You should be ashamed of yourself, claiming that you are a deist.

Why don't you present evidence to the contrary? Hmmm? You also should be ashamed of yourself, calling yourself a christian. Your in the synagogue of Satan. You hate God, you hate on me, you are a hater. The only idiot is the one who thinks he knows God and the mystery of God. You are seriously deluded.

Sin and death is the opposite nature of God. God must have understood the implications of sin, however to claim he created it would be ridiculous. Man chose the opposition of God, this was a knowledge that wasn't previously known or understood. Also, the tree of life could have been created after the initial creation. Nowhere does it say that God must have stopped creating. How long does God need to rest?

What? Read my previous post here Message 41

???Sin is sick and perverted. Changes in a genome is a fact. Evolution as a possibility for origins is stupid. God is perfect.I am not following your logic. Would you like to take another run at it? and ufo's.

When did I accept that? I don't accept that, I accept that man invited in sin, and ran away from God. As it says in the bible. It depends on what you think the purpose of life is. I think it is to mature into a higher spiritual consciousness and enjoy everlasting attainments to the pleasure of our Heavenly Father. You seem to think that life evolved from non-life in from purely material and physical inevitabilities. Sin is sick and perverted, in fact that is its nature. What I am saying is that Theistic Evolution is stupid. No God no where, unless sick and perverted(sinful) would use evolution as a mechanism to bring about life and higher taxa. Stop putting letters in my non-physical forum mouth.

**deletedEdited by Highestevolvedwhiteguy, : No reason given.

**deleted, gots to stop doing that. Edited by Highestevolvedwhiteguy, : No reason given.

Yes and yes. This does not mean death and suffering were created. They are a byproduct of sin, rebellion and an ambition to become like God.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v15/i1/death.asp Why do you keep bringing up evolution? It doesn't matter that allele might have a mutation or two in a population. Death is only necessary for the ToE to work in a population so the mutated organisms can take over the population. Death doesn't result in higher taxa per-se, rather life results in higher taxa, if you want to believe that yarn. So your entire misunderstanding of my position is completely irrelevant and sustained only by your desire to argue with me.

---

The world embarrasses me, and I cannot dream that this watch exists and has no watchmaker.
Voltaire (1694-1778)

You wrote:

quote:

---

Why is it OK for God to permit suffering and death, as he evidently does; but wrong for him to permit it if this results in "higher taxa"?

---

Suffering can be alleviated IMO. What is the cause of suffering? I do not suffer. Death seems to be the issue. IMO, it is the result of sin, is this ok? By my standards, it isn't. But how would this bring about life and higher taxa if there was no death? I simply said no god would use evolution to bring about life and higher forms thereof. Does evolution involve death? Yes. It also implies simplicity and naturalistic materialism, of which I do not limit myself to in the universal scope. Can I justify this claim? No. Did you know that I cannot substantiate this claim? Yes. Is the reason you asked: to understand my position? Yes, you love me and care what I have to say. Thank you Dr. Adequate, I love you too.Edited by Ihategod, : No reason given.