CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
If God exists, Satan exists Atheists don't know separation of powers.
Why atheists complain if God exists, why does he let evil things happen.
Here is not Heaven. The planet is ruled by the devil. Why do yous never see that in the bible?
Life in Venezuella can never be the same as China
Ok what if no one died ever since the race began, how would today be?
When evil men(just like you and me) make decisions that provoke wars and mass killings, Β why do blame the one does not share our evil fleshy desires ?
Give what is due unto to ceasar(men of power, Evil thoughts,father of evil Β Satan, Ruler of the dark planet) to ceasar and unto Β God to God(ruler of kingdom of light)
Sounds like the tantrum is coming from YOUR direction. This Atheist agrees with your statement, "IF God exists, Satan exists". Conversly, If God does NOT exist, Satan does not. Mythology is entertaining and educational .... whether the "god" be Zeus, Neptune, Allah, or yours.
As Richard Dawkins said: "We are all Atheists about most of the gods humanity has believed in. Some of us just go one god farther."
According to a lot of belief systems, if a force of good exists then it must have an opposing force of evil, to keep an equilibrium in the universe and stop an overloading of one side.
St. Augustine argued that evil is in fact just a privation (lack) of good (like darkness is a lack of light) and when bad things happen it's because God is punishing us. No mention of Satan, though there is mention of original sin.
St. Augustine argued that evil is in fact just a privation (lack) of good (like darkness is a lack of light) and when bad things happen it's because God is punishing us.
Do you have any empirical evidence that either good or evil predate humanity?
If not, then surely they are just abstract concepts invented by humanity to describe certain types of human behaviour?
Do you have any empirical evidence that either good or evil predate humanity?
If not, then surely they are just abstract concepts invented by humanity to describe certain types of human behaviour?
Almost certainly. But sometimes you've got to change your argument depending on who's going to dispute you.
Since the guy creating the debate is known to be very religious, I decided to frame the argument in a way he'd find more persuasive, using religious philosophy.
I'm not a theist and don't personally believe in an objective concept of good and evil.
Almost certainly. But sometimes you've got to change your argument depending on who's going to dispute you.
Lol. I really like you. I wrestled with the idea of not disputing your point for that reason alone. However, in the end I'm an argumentative bastard, which probably explains why I'm here.
Don't worry, I'm argumentative too. I spent years trying to find an active debate platform and I've been having the time of my life since I joined this website.
Call me strange but I get irrationally miffed when people DON'T dispute me at all, especially if I've spent a long time writing an argument... otherwise I never know if people have given in or they just don't think me worth debating.
I also like it when someone supports my argument with an extra point I hadn't thought of. It actually means more to me than an upvote does, but to be honest I just like people to engage in what I say so I can engage back and keep an interesting communication going.
Sometimes I don't have a strong opinion on a debate (like this one, I suppose), so I just choose a side to play devil's advocate or for fun. It doesn't mean I always agree one hundred percent with the side I've chosen. Don't worry, I don't dislike people who dispute me, unless they attack me as a person rather than attack my argument.
So, feel free to dispute away! Maybe we should debate sometime, as we might actually learn something from one another. It would probably also be more civil and rewarding than a lot of the debates on here.
I believe we can actually challenge one another on here, if you ever come up with a burning topic you'd like to discuss. :)
I'm sure I will Dermot, I just need to think of something good. Most of my debate topics are not particularly interesting. I also don't want to create dupes if I can help it.
Unfortunately many of them are either quite specific to my country or issues I've seen debated before.
I also feel like anything related to liberalism or atheism (or anything that can be interpreted as relating to it, such as the provision of universal healthcare or an issue regarding immigration) will cause a lot more trouble than it is perhaps worth and bring out a lot of people who want to insert propaganda into one or both sides of the debate.
I've also undergone a massive change in my belief system in the last six months, so I'm still establishing my views on a lot of issues.
I don't view the so-called "problem of evil" as a problem. Firstly without evil good would have no significance. In other words if one only ever had positive experiences then positive experience would cease to have meaning and life would be boring. The contrast between the negative experiences and the positive ones is what makes life a thrilling roller-coaster ride.
Further, one can give their life meaning by seeking to alleviate the unnecessary suffering of oneself and others and replace it with positive experience.
But it is a problem if you're a believer as the problem itself is stated simply as .....
A God that is all powerful would be able to prevent evil and suffering.
A God that is all knowing would know that evil and suffering happen.
A God that is all loving wouldn't want evil and suffering to happen and would take needed action to stop it.
Evil and suffering happen.
Since evil and/or suffering happen, these statements are contradictory. An all powerful, all knowing and all loving god cannot exist while suffering continues.
βIs God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?β
Since evil and/or suffering happen, these statements are contradictory. An all powerful, all knowing and all loving god cannot exist while suffering continues.
True. An attempt to explain this is called a theodicy and usually requires some tweak to established doctrine in order to make it work.
My statements were intended to reconcile the idea of a benevolent omnipotent God with the fact of evil. The "problem of evil" is the name of the philosophical issue you are raising. My point is that good has no significance without evil and pleasure has no meaning without suffering. It is only through the contrast between the two that either can exist. Further, it is only because of these stark contrasts that life is a thrilling adventure. Think about movies and TV-shows. There is always some conflict, some problem to overcome, even in happy comedies. If there was no problem and no conflict it wouldn't be entertaining. The same is true for life.
If I personally were a benevolent omnipotent God I would create a universe that included an abundance of both pleasure and suffering, much like this one.
But how can you reconcile them to do so one has to admit that god is not morally perfect .......
If god is all knowing that means god knows all the terrible things they will happen in our world ; if god is all powerful he could do something about all the evil and suffering and if god is morally perfect he would surely want to do something about it .
Our world is filled with evil and suffering so how can theists say their god is morally perfect ?
You say good has no meaning without suffering yet when Christians die and if they get to heaven there is no evil or suffering as it's a place of perfect happiness and joy , so if it works in heaven why not on earth ?
Let me be clearer. To quote your accurate description of the "problem of evil":
"A God that is all powerful would be able to prevent evil and suffering.
A God that is all knowing would know that evil and suffering happen.
A God that is all loving wouldn't want evil and suffering to happen and would take needed action to stop it."
I accept the first two premises and reject the third. A God that is all loving would permit evil and suffering, and in fact would build them into reality, for the reasons explained above.
"You say good has no meaning without suffering yet when Christians die and if they get to heaven there is no evil or suffering as it's a place of perfect happiness and joy , so if it works in heaven why not on earth ?"
While I wasn't necessarily speaking of the Christian God, I can also explain it in reference to them. Firstly the suffering of life is supposed to be a trial to determine the righteous. Secondly the suffering of life provides a contrast with the pleasure of heaven, much like the well earned rest sleep grants at the end of a hard day. It's also possible that the whole notion of heaven is allegorical and that heaven is what earth would be like if everyone was righteous.
You say ......I accept the first two premises and reject the third. A God that is all loving would permit evil and suffering, and in fact would build them into reality, for the reasons explained above......
Well if you reject the third you have to accept that the god you speak of is not morally perfect and therefore cannot exist .
"Well if you reject the third you have to accept that the god you speak of is not morally perfect and therefore cannot exist ."
I've already explained twice why evil and suffering are necessary for good and pleasure to have significance. In addition, I stated that it is the reduction of one's own suffering and the suffering of others that gives one's life purpose. Can you name a singular good movie or TV-show that lacked conflict and problems? If not it would appear that mankind as a whole unconsciously agrees that evil and suffering are necessary.
Yes I know you have I'm not disputing that , what I'm saying is that a morally perfect god cannot then exist if you reject the third .
If you claim evil and suffering are necessary why would a morally perfect god not put a limit on evil and suffering ? There are some evil acts and suffering that are beyond comprehension .
You and I are not perfect but if we had the power to stop a child from being abused or dying of cancer would we even hesitate in our decision to stop the suffering ?
So how come we who are not morally perfect but would prevent a child suffering are more moral than the morally perfect god you speak off ?
Also I said Christians believe in heaven why are evil and suffering not necessary in heaven for good and pleasure to have significance ?
"Yes I know you have I'm not disputing that , what I'm saying is that a morally perfect god cannot then exist if you reject the third ."
I dispute this because I believe evil and suffering to be necessary, for the reasons outlined above.
"If you claim evil and suffering are necessary why would a morally perfect god not put a limit on evil and suffering ? There are some evil acts and suffering that are beyond comprehension . "
The in-built suffering of this universe seems somewhat small in magnitude relative to the suffering caused by the actions of humans. Since people have free will it makes sense for atrocities of the highest order to be possible by those evil people who hold existence itself in disdain. Besides, who knows the amount of suffering that is necessary? There is after all an abundance of pleasure and happiness to be had in this world, therefore it makes sense for the opposite to also be true.
"You and I are not perfect but if we had the power to stop a child from being abused or dying of cancer would we even hesitate in our decision to stop the suffering ?
So how come we who are not morally perfect but would prevent a child suffering are more moral than the morally perfect god you speak off ? "
If I created the system I wouldn't meddle in such affairs. Otherwise, in my need for consistency, I would have to stop all evil, or all evil of a certain order.
"Also I said Christians believe in heaven why are evil and suffering not necessary in heaven for good and pleasure to have significance ?"
I said in reply to this that the suffering of life may be sufficient to provide the pleasure in heaven with significance. This particularly holds true if heaven is timeless. Further I suggested that heaven may be allegorical, though as I'm not well versed in the bible I can't substantiate such a suggestion.
Yes I know but then the god we are talking about cannot exist ; the problem of evil as stated by Epicurus .....
βIs God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent (all-powerful). Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent (wicked). Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?β -Epicurus
In this quote it is easy to see why it is impossible for the Christian God and evil to exist at the same time. A good god would not allow evil to exist.
If you created the system you wouldn't meddle in it ?
I would if it meant stopping a child suffering a dreadful death .
We have suffering according to the Christian tradition because we fell from grace before that happened we were indeed meant to live in a world free of suffering so the contrast between good and evil wasn't always part of the plan so therefore not necessary. .
I completely disagree with the premise that a benevolent omnipotent God wouldn't allow suffering. If you've truly read and understood my points on why evil is necessary then I don't see us getting anywhere on that point.
"If you created the system you wouldn't meddle in it ?
I would if it meant stopping a child suffering a dreadful death . "
The problem is then you logically should stop all evil and suffering. Further even if you weren't to do so your creation (the universe) would be constantly subject to your whims rather than being free to express and actualize itself. This would mean free will would only exist to the degree you permitted it.
"We have suffering according to the Christian tradition because we fell from grace before that happened we were indeed meant to live in a world free of suffering so the contrast between good and evil wasn't always part of the plan so therefore not necessary. ."
The garden of Eden is regarded by a significant number of Christians as allegorical (perhaps even the majority, given the alternative is contrary to popular scientific opinion). I did re-read Genesis 2-3 and didn't find anything about there being a lack of good and evil (or suffering), simply that mankind had no knowledge of the distinction.
I know you do but then the god you speak off is not morally perfect .
I've read and understood your points perfectly ; an all powerful god could design humans to enjoy a life free of suffering without the need for evil as a contrast as you put , if you disagree with this they you're admitting god has limited powers which means he's not all powerful ; if you agree with this it means god is ignoring this option when he has a morally better one to make .
Regards free will well why then do we have horrendous natural disasters how does free will factor into that ?
The garden of Eden is now seen as allegorical when I was a child it certainly wasn't in the Catholic tradition, but that is immaterial to the argument I'm saying the Christian tradition is based on mans falling from grace and in my religious upbringing we were told we brought evil into the world by our fall from grace .
Incidentally I'm an atheist so all this is to me nonsense I don't know if you're a believer or not but it always amuses me the amount of mental gyrations believers make to shoehorn a morally perfect supernatural entity into existence
"I've read and understood your points perfectly ; an all powerful god could design humans to enjoy a life free of suffering without the need for evil as a contrast as you put , if you disagree with this they you're admitting god has limited powers which means he's not all powerful ; if you agree with this it means god is ignoring this option when he has a morally better one to make . "
My argument has always been that suffering and evil are necessary for good and pleasure, not optional. I've reiterated my related points many times so as aforementioned we clearly aren't getting anywhere on this point. When one accepts my points on this matter your point that "God wouldn't allow evil and suffering" does not hold.
"Regards free will well why then do we have horrendous natural disasters how does free will factor into that ? "
I mentioned this too, there is suffering built into this existence, for the reason that suffering is necessary.
"The garden of Eden is now seen as allegorical when I was a child it certainly wasn't in the Catholic tradition, but that is immaterial to the argument I'm saying the Christian tradition is based on mans falling from grace and in my religious upbringing we were told we brought evil into the world by our fall from grace . "
I somehow have a more intimate understanding of the extremely short chapters of Genesis 2-3 than whoever taught you that. There was no mention of bringing evil into the world, merely that the knowledge of good and evil were revealed by eating the fruit.
"Incidentally I'm an atheist so all this is to me nonsense I don't know if you're a believer or not but it always amuses me the amount of mental gyrations believers make to shoehorn a morally perfect supernatural entity into existence"
I've already told you I'm not a Christian when we had another discussion. I don't believe it, I just don't see any proof that Christianity cannot be true.
Yes I know your arguments all I'm saying several times now that the god you put forward cannot then exist given the criteria we mentioned .
So natural disasters are there for god to give further demonstration of contrast .
You may say you have a more intimate understanding of Genisis well going from your particular viewpoint maybe , but I told you I'm from the Catholic tradition and I know chapter and verse of what I speak , evil was brought into the world because of sin according to what I was taught .
I just don't see any proof that Christianity can be true .
Natural disasters are just a part of the built-in suffering of this reality. I'm not sure what would debunk such a God if the premise that evil and suffering are necessary is accepted.
I read the chapters 2-3 of genesis yesterday, they're very short, though then again there are all manner of things that aren't in the bible that Christians believe.
"I just don't see any proof that Christianity can be true ."
I don't see any conclusive proof it is true. I don't see anything that conclusively proves it isn't true either though.
Yes natural disasters are to supply further contrast maybe π what I'm debunking is the idea of a morally perfect god which is what we were talking about and a god that behaved in the way you suggest would not be morally perfect .
Yes you don't which is fine , I would disagree as I've found enough to demonstrate to me it's nonsense .
We may have to leave it there because I disagree that a morally perfect God would intervene and/or that a morally perfect God wouldn't create suffering. My reasoning for this is outlined above. I don't mind continuing but we're both just reiterating.
That's ok that you disagree , I will say in closing I find it remarkable that your definition of a morally perfect god is one that would allow the most dreadful suffering and the most inhuman crimes which he could prevent if he wished to .
If I believed in a god I would expect him to be morally perfect .
Well you're the one that holds that view no one else does as far as I know ; but maybe you can back it up by showing where according to gods word he says evil is necessary ?
If one holds the view that evil is necessary then their their view is incorrect as an all powerful god could make evil unnecessary unless he isn't all powerful .
I don't need God's word, I have information, logic and reason of my own. If there were any problems with my logic that evil and suffering is necessary I'm sure you would have pointed them out. Also I would question anything claiming to be God relentlessly. If a super being appeared before me, how would I know it was God and not a super-advanced alien, for example?
"If one holds the view that evil is necessary then their their view is incorrect as an all powerful god could make evil unnecessary unless he isn't all powerful ."
Well first of all we're talking about a hypothetical "could". How can one determine whether a reality where evil and suffering weren't necessary would be better than the one we currently have? Note that good and pleasure require evil and suffering. As such consciousness itself seems to require evil and suffering. A universe without consciousness has, as far as I can tell, no purpose or meaning. Though let's assume for the moment that an all-powerful deity decided to make a universe where evil and suffering wasn't necessary for pleasure, goodness and consciousness (or different phenomena replaced them). Since we cannot even imagine such a reality how are we to judge that such a reality would be better or worse than this one?
In addition, if we follow traditions such as Buddhism, Gnosticism, Christianity etc. which assert that this life is a test of sorts then the existence of suffering and evil would make sense too.
But if you don't need gods word to dictate what a god thinks then you're merely making it up as you go along how do people know in any Christian tradition what god wants unless it's through his word as in the bible ?
But I've pointed our several times the flaw in your logic as in the god that you imagine as being morally perfect cannot exist using just basic logic .
So you honestly think a reality with peace ,harmony and love would be possibly worse than one with evil and suffering because without those that's what left is it not ?
Good and pleasure do not require evil and suffering you honestly think we could not enjoy a life free of pain and suffering yet the goal of Christianity is to spend time in heaven with god in perfect happiness .
What has consciousness got to do with it if evil and suffering are missing some Buddhist monks its claimed have reached a state of enlightenment which is a state of pure bliss do they require evil and suffering ?
So you cannot imagine a reality without evil and suffering ?
How could a reality without torture , rape , murder , addictions , disease be worse than one with an absence of evil and suffering ?
And you cannot imagine this but yet Christians constantly talk about such a place as in heaven so it seems it's easily imagined .
I don't follow any traditions Winston I find them all equally ridiculous and the amount of mental gyrations believers go through to talk a god into existence are absurd
"But if you don't need gods word to dictate what a god thinks then you're merely making it up as you go along how do people know in any Christian tradition what god wants unless it's through his word as in the bible ?"
I don't think a priori reasoning is just making things up. I'm pretty sure since you use it too you don't think this either. In the Christian tradition, sure, they need the Bible to understand things, though that doesn't preclude them from making logical deductions either.
"So you honestly think a reality with peace ,harmony and love would be possibly worse than one with evil and suffering because without those that's what left is it not ? "
A world of boredom where pleasure and goodness don't exist either (or have no significance) doesn't sound that appealing. As aforementioned, if further alterations to make pleasure and goodness significant again were made we cannot even conceptualize it. As such, we cannot make any grounded assertion that such an existence would be preferable.
"Good and pleasure do not require evil and suffering you honestly think we could not enjoy a life free of pain and suffering yet the goal of Christianity is to spend time in heaven with god in perfect happiness . "
I've already explained that it may be possible that the suffering of life provides sufficient contrast to give the goodness of heaven meaning, particularly given that heaven, being eternal, may be timeless. I also gave an allegorical heaven on earth as a potential explanation. Interestingly I just did a search of Bible verses pertaining to heaven and didn't find any reference to pleasure in heaven/paradise, merely eternal life and the absence of suffering (Source 1).
"What has consciousness got to do with it if evil and suffering are missing some Buddhist monks its claimed have reached a state of enlightenment which is a state of pure bliss do they require evil and suffering ?"
I don't understand Buddhism anywhere near as well as I understand Christianity (and I'm no expert on that either!) However as far as I'm aware such a state is also timeless (one of the goals of meditation is to achieve a timeless state) and so my explanation regarding heaven may apply. As far as I see it also, Buddhist meditation is concerned with achieving experiencing nothing. Therefore it doesn't seem there would be pleasure in such a state, merely the absence of suffering. Further, when one attains Buddhahood they will not be reincarnated and will cease to exist. I apologize if I got any of this wrong, I did some further reading on it to reply but I am incredibly ignorant on the subject of Buddhism.
"So you cannot imagine a reality without evil and suffering ?
How could a reality without torture , rape , murder , addictions , disease be worse than one with an absence of evil and suffering ?"
A reality without evil and suffering where consciousness, goodness and pleasure still exist and have significance is paradoxical. As such, I cannot imagine such a reality. Other tweaks to reality may make this possible, however such a reality is also unimaginable, I don't even know what changes would make it possible. I'm not denying it's possible, I'm denying that one can truthfully assert that they know such an unknown reality would be better than this one.
"I don't follow any traditions Winston I find them all equally ridiculous and the amount of mental gyrations believers go through to talk a god into existence are absurd"
By follow I meant read, it was a poor choice of words.
Atheists lack a belief in god or gods , atheists do not ' complain ' about why god would let evil things happen they challenge theists reasoning as in why do theists believe their god let's evil happen ?
This leads us to the logical problem of evil which poses a serious challenge to the theists position as in ......
If god is all knowing that means god knows all the terrible things they will happen in our world ; if god is all powerful he could do something about all the evil and suffering and if god is morally perfect he would surely want to do something about it .
Our world is filled with evil and suffering so how can theists say their god is morally perfect ?
You need to back your claim up about the planet being ruled by the devil ; regarding the bible it says many things mostly nonsense and why would an atheist accept what's written in a book of nonsense ?
Life in Venezuela can not be the same as China , wow ! thanks for that ' insight '
You close with ...... Enough of the tantrums . Grow up Atheists .
Hilarious ..... you post up a debate topic and attempt too force your opinion down everyone's throat because you don't want debate you just want to hear yourself ; you accuse Atheists of throwing tantrums after posting up your personal .... tantrum
If God exists, Satan exists Atheists don't know separation of powers.
It looks more like it's the other way around. Or perhaps I am confused. Is Satan not a fallen angel of God? Meaning God created him and is more powerful than he is? If God has no power over Satan then why does the Catholic Church sanction exorcisms of demons? It appears that even God's servants have power over Satan, so in this Christian fantasy of yours God is more powerful than Satan is.
Hence, we are back to square one. Why does God let evil happen?
Exactly, god is supposed to be all mighty and powerful AND made everything including Satan and hell. Meaning God has all the power to stop Satan from having any kind of power. It's less a separation of powers ,and more one power giving another ability to have power. Like the dude above said, God is letting evil happen.
If you accept to play, then you must be willing to play along the adam and eve part.
God created men without fear of evil.
He created them gloriously and everything was under them. Absolutely nothing could harm them.
They had Freewill, and just couldn't obey only one rule which led them vulnerable to evil.
God knew evil existed, and he created them prone to evil until that one easy rule was broken.
They became vulnerable. God's plan had been destroyed.
He abandoned the project to the fate of it's remains.
Men gained absolute freewill beyond that one rule.
Men ever since were no longer God's responsibility.
Satan was glad to take over the responsibility as the god of this new era.
2 Corinthians 4:4New Living Translation (NLT)
4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who donβt believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They donβt understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
He sprayed evil in the air. freewill and perversion. Leading to consequences people must accept as their own and a result of their fault.
God broke relationship with man.
After sometime, men again wanted to have a relataionship with a supernatural being to understand their world and also to gain favour from the superiors.
They started with idoltry......Then emerged Abraham who was disgusted in the desperate methods people tried to have a relationship with a superior being. It was petty, peurile and lame; idoltry. Carving non living objects not worthier than man himself. So he started thinking big. Looking at the sky and how magnificent other creations were.
He began to pray to that creator whoever he was and wherever.
God had gotten a little over his anger.
(Abraham and the rest of the world)
He replied abraham, he become his God and he promised Abraham a method of reconciliation between him and man again.
That was jesus.
Jesus is the only deal made to save men from the god of evil in his world.
John 14: 6
New Living Translation
Jesus told him, "I am the way(reconciliation method), the truth, and the life(life adam and eve lost). No one can come to the Father except through me.
You don't come to the father who no longer the God of this world except through his direct ambassador jesus christ.
If jesus doesn't know you, you're not recognised by God.
Without jesus, you have no God any where you expect a shoulder from from evil.
Without jesus, you're a equivalent to the antelope being devoured by the lion in the jungle. You're just a bag of meat. No significance; Per the deal.
Some people are not just that, they blaspheme the who they want to complain to about evil.
The new era is a equivalent to the jungle. No worth , just straight condemnation.
1 Peter 5:8
English Standard Version
Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.
Revelation 12:12
"For this reason, rejoice, O heavens and you who dwell in them Woe to the earth and the sea, because the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, knowing that he has only a short time."
It doesn't matter how good you're. If God ever helps you out of anything, then it's pity breeding favour or his plan is about being tampered with if you're a key role in it though you may not have discovered it yet.
Heaven rejoiced when satan left. He was a threat heaven how much more earth lol.
God does not allow bad things to happen. It simply ain't his responsibility anymore.
Because an atheist like you would then be pissed that people had it good in utopia yet were never tested or proven. Pause... okay now go back to atheist circular logic. Reboot...
4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who donβt believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They donβt understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
He got it from you(catninja), did he miscommunicate it? Correction?.................. .....γγγγγγ...................................................
You're atheist, i am not asking you to believe in paul...................................................................................................................
The entire 2 Corinthians 4 is talking about God being the truth and you take the one line out of context to think that Satan rules the planet. Your quote is only saying Satan distorts the truth any way. So, like I said, your claim is not supported by the bible.
I will not argue any further if you are not able to capture the sense. I won't tie my self to your dunderheadness.
Again;
The planet is ruled by the devil. Why do yous never see that in the bible?
Then;
2 Corinthians 4:4New Living Translation (NLT)
4 Satan, who is the god of this world(the answer), has blinded the minds of those who donβt believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They donβt understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
You really shouldn't speak about bible verses and what they mean because as usual you're incorrect ; it you ask nicely I will tell you what the passage actually means from a Christian perspective as you haven't a clue have you ?
