How can you unironically defend the bible and God? First of all, if God is all-knowing and all-foreseeing...

Terrible analogy. You don't know that they "can" break, you know for certain it will break. Not only will it break, and this is where your teacup analogy fails, they will also suffer for all eternity.

Elohim is plural and angels are part of the hierarchy of God. God is order and good. According to the scriptures there was once a time when only that had existed.

You have to be a moron to think that all of this exists as pure chance.

Thank you for this absolute quality post. No one actually has yet claimed that all this exists by pure chance. But I'm glad you put those imaginary people to their places with such eloquence before they even had the chance to post.

If your argument stems from trying to understand why god did something then you have already failed.

If I can surprise God in any way, then he's not all-knowing.

My question is, if God gave us free will then how can he be all perfectly all knowing and powerful. Those two things seem metaphysically incompatible to me. If we have choice that means God has limits to his power and knowledge over fate. If this is true, then God does not exist in the traditional judeo-christian sense. Instead he would be relegated to some kind of prime mover. Am I missing something here?

>Is omnipotent
>Can create a universe according to anything he desires
>Makss a universe where suffering is supposedly necessary but also where a myriad of tortures await the innocent

Christianity is beyond dumb. It is also full of pseuds trying to retroactively adjust the theology to make it sound like anything other than a joke.

The only "real" answer imo to the problem of evil is that the reason for it is simply incomprehensible. This still isn't a good answer to me.

What would the world be like without evil? Sure, remove malevolence. Remove cancer. Remove everything negative. Now evil is having to walk to the fridge instead of food just appearing in your hand. Alright, it appears in your hand now. Now evil is having to move your hand and chew the food instead of it just doing it on your own. Why does god tease us so?

How far until we stop seeing evil? Would endless dopamine-high and existence without having to do anything at all be life without evil? But then you're stripped out of your free will since there's nothing to choose anymore, you just are and experience happiness. I'm not sure I'd call that good either

So then why did God create us, if it's seemingly impossible to reach a divine state of bliss? Would you rather not exist at all, would that be better? I wouldn't call that better. So then is the whole question just something we can't comprehend fully because we're not perfect, we're not God?

Perfection is positive, not negative.

Not only awful non-arguments, but degeneration into actual word salad at the end.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropomorphism

Failed at what? Questioning God's existence? Elaborate.
Elaborate.

Describe to me existence without evil then, your post is completely worthless as it is right now

>So then why did God create us, if it's seemingly impossible to reach a divine state of bliss?
But according to the Judeo-Christian lore God did create Adam and Even into divine bliss in which they dwelled until they fell. You're not arguing for God here.

Yes and he gave them the choice of free will, which they wanted. That's when the evil began

>If we have choice that means God has limits to his power and knowledge over fate.

I don't follow. Fundamentally, power over something does not entail exertion over it, and, incidentally, I maintain that they are actually mutually exclusive - the more power, the less exertion, and the less power, the more exertion - and that the latter is control, rather than power. Regardless, omnipotence and free will are compatible even in the vulgar "Newtonian" sense, never mind in the Dialectical sense.

>imagine believing biblical stories to be literally true

>why does this being that exists beyond the confines of my existence not adhere to my human reasoning i just made up
im an atheist and you are a retard

Existence where you could renounce anything and everything you might consider evil and where the consequences of doing so would become as immanent as they are proselytized to become such that you could deem the evil necessary and the world just or the evil unnecessary and the world unjust of your own accord.

Religion is useful as allegory and a set of organizing moral principles for societies. Stop trying to argue against the literal existence of god with rationalism, it's boring, no one cares and hardly anyone disagrees.

Why use one set over any other?

There's no room for the concept of evil to begin with, for it to exist evil must also exist. An existence without evil wouldn't ever come up with the abstract idea of evil. What you're suggesting is just an existence where evil is, but you're able to deal with it

Because sharing values with the people around you helps you to anticipate their behavior and cooperate with them more effectively.

Because one set is better than others. Morals aren't subjective
>nuh-uh all morals and values are subjective, post-modernism told me so!
Try again bucko, we have beat Humes guillotine. Read Moral Landscape and become enlightened, stop increasing the amount of boredom in the universe

I have a hard time trying to articulate something that seems so self-evident to me. The Grand Inquisitor chapter in The Brothers Karamazov explaines the essence of what would answer your question. God chose to give his creation ultimate freedom by allowing them the choice between good and evil. Isn’t that what a father should do? What sort of God would simply make puppets that lack autonomy? What a great act of love that is especially if you consider the fact that God deeply loves all his children and is willing to bear the burden of their sin. Why do we as men do anything if we know we may fail? The same principles that render a utopian society as a stupid ideal are the same principles that explain why god would give humans the freedom of choice.

Isn’t it self evident that happiness and perfection are not the ideals? That there is something of great value in voluntary suffering?

I dread to take you seriously but yes, in my description the concept of Evil would be tenuous since Evil itself would be tenuous at best. This is intentional on my part as per your initial request. Please don't reply.

That's silly. You can negate anything.

That's a reason to choose a set, but not to choose any particular set.
>inb4 just do what the people around you do
I'm not stuck with the people around me and can go wherever I please. I still have to make the choice and have some reason for it.

To compare them already presupposes values against which they are compared. Anyway I was leading the conversation towards the ubiquitous "because God said so" that religions use to justify their morals, which is why so much effort is poured into debating the literal existence of God.

Even if you assume we don't know why God created man with the knowledge he would fall or couldn't come up with any plausible explanations, this wouldn't contradict the existence of God or the truth of revelation so why pretend it does?

It contradicts a popular description of God, though.

bro i can't even tell when i'm being ironic or not anymore

I don't know what this popular description of God is and how it's contradicted, but even if we assume that's true, it doesn't follow that the existence of God or revelation in itself is false which is what was implied in the original post when the OP asked how God or the bible can be defended.

>he must've known we would fall
He did. Read John Calvin.
>why did he create man
For his own glory. Read John Calvin.
>he let's people burn in hell
Yup. Read John Calvin.

Yea Forums is a Calvinist board.