- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Theists (specifically Monotheists) usually assume both the morality, omniscience, and omnipotence of God. With these in mind, that such a being would be aware of the objectively "best" (here meaning morally correct for all involved) course of events that could take place, and how to cause this chain of happenings to manifest. As this being is also moral and omnipotent, it possesses both the will and the means to do so. With these starting assumptions (and the assumed existence of God itself) in mind, it follows that all the events of history have been the objectively "best" possible for all involved.
Interesting thought. I had come to a similar conclusion, but my only problem is that we cannot know what God deems as "best". What if God believes that the existence of free will and the ability to exercise that will is "best"? This would mean that the "best" possible outcome for his creation is for them to make their own decisions regardless if they are against his commands and beliefs.
Also, following up with the ways people see God, what if God is not omniscient or omnipotent? What cannot test God's abilities or measure them (another reason why I question the faith sometimes). My reasoning above may be flawed and if it is do not be afraid to point it out or give your own thoughts about it. This is certainly an interesting topic.
I meant that someone can trust the media. You can trust them. Allow me to restate my position. You can place your trust in the media. That is an option anyone can make. All media isn't false. All media isn't truthful. You have to believe what you want and trust who you want. So yes, the media "can" be trusted.
That would depend on how you approach the question. If trying a new religion one could say that it opens minds. It opens the person to a new realm of beliefs, morals, new concepts, etc. It can also be said that religion blinds people to the world around them. It blinds people to primarily scientific based explanation of the world, but mostly to anything that doesn't even appear to align with their religion. Religion can blind people from the opinions of others and possibly even the person hood of another.
As I stated, cognition doesn't develop until late into the pregnancy. Are you suggesting a hypothetical situation where that isn't the case? If so, once cognition has developed I'm against abortion, regardless of how far along the pregnancy is.
I was curious if you were very strict on the line of cognition. I see you are. Thank you for your response. I typically hold the same belief.