God is not moral and the Problem of Evil logically says he does not exist.

Sorry if there are some typos, had to write this up in a hurry.|Constructive| Argument I(A): The two premises do not contradict. (logic of problem of evil) Tell me, you got the gun (the power), the knowledge of the crime, and a disposition to do good by stopping it, but a crime still happens, so logically you don’t exist, right? No.Just because evil exist doesn’t mean that good people can’t exist. And your conclusion is wrong, as it should be asking the question is the christian God the same as the abrahamic God? But you're not actually disproving his existence, you're just arguing that our interpretation of him being good is inaccurate. This isn’t a problem from logic, but a problem from emotions. Your emotionally hurt because God didn’t show up to stop a crime, not because he logically does not exist. Argument I(B): There is Scripture evidence that says he does exist in a universe with evil. Pro seemed to skip this response. So I assume he agrees with it. Argument II(A): There are exceptions to the “rules”. According to the bible comment. No the bible is very clear that capitol punishment is good. And you're taking that out of context, as this is the context of adultery. All men are adulterous. Heck, they frequently rape women inside their heads, and have all sorts of ungodly fantasies. Not all men are murderers, which is why its different. If you spill man’s blood, your blood should be spilt. Objective morality does exist. The holocaust was immoral no matter that the nazis might of liked it. And no, the reason why God had Israel wage war was to drive out its inhabitant as they did all manner of ungodly things (e.g. sacrifice their children to gods) When we ask what is the actual right conduct (objective morality), the question is right conduct relative to what? This would be God, because he decides what is right. You are incorrect in saying humans could never kill, because this doesn’t mean that objective morality does not exist, it would mean people are immoral. Which the Bible is very very clear on. Also capital punishment is not subjective, its biblical. Also not honoring God is immoral. Argument II(B): God is the basis for Objective Morality The problem with your argument is that your case actually needs Objective Morality to exist to reject God being good, for if it is not objective then you can’t possibly claim that God does not factually exist because you have an opinion that he isn’t moral not an actual fact (an objective moral argument), because in his view he is moral and so he exists So regardless you may or may not derail my arguments, you got the problem that you can’t can’t prove that God is not moral without an objective moral argument. When I say objective morality what I mean is “actual right conduct” meaning what is right regardless of what other people think. When I say God is the basis of objective morality. I’m more or less saying “God is always right.” If God commands thou shalt not kill, you should not kill, and then after that god says kill whoever, you should do so. For whatever he tells you to do is the actual right conduct (objective morality). So because objective morality is based on a God, then there can be cases where God calls you do do something depending on what comes up. It also means that its impossible for God to be Immoral. The problem with explaining it through evolution is that you can’t possibly say anything is objectively moral. For is sexual cannibalism wrong? You might say yes, but then a praying mantis might disagree with you. So who’s right, the mantis or you? Both and neither. For you evolved differently. Morality relative to evolution is more or less whatever you feel like doing, for morality is all but an illusion. If it were by evolution then you got a problem with evil, because it doesn’t really exist, it’s an illusion, so you can’t truly refute god’s existence because evil doesn’t exist! Argument III: God does exist Premise 1: Everyting that exist has an explanation to its existence. Its been over 14 billion years, so far science hasn’t said anything. I’m getting tired of waiting. (BTW I say 14 billion yrs out of sarcasm not personal belief) And you also assume that science will explain the origins, which probably won’t happen anytime soon, or ever. But the problem is, we do know God exists, you can observe nature that there is structure, and complex systems that shows evidence of a designer. If science truly is based off of observation than an intellectual designer (GOD) seems more scientific than the big bang. Premise 2: If the universe has an explanation for its existence, the explanation is God. A)No, everything does not need a creator, because not everything is created, some things just exist from the nature of what they are. An example might be numbers, Its impossible for numbers not to exist because they aren’t contingent on anything. For if you wiped the entire universe out of existence, you have 0 universes, and zero is a number. They exist eternally, and out of necessity of their own nature. Likewise the abrahamic god would also exist out of necessity because he is eternal. God is like this too, its really impossible for him not to exist logically. It’s undeniable that the universe does show intelligent design, because of people, animals, nature etc. The question isn’t how can you prove his existence, but how can you not prove his existence. B)as to intelligemt design being ridiculous. You're assuming that the entire universe is designed for mankind if it were intelligently designed. This obviously is an incorrect view. As mankind was designed with having dominion over the earth in mind, so the entire universe does not need to be suited for them. Also the Bible does state that the heavens and earth would pass away, so you expect to find evidence that earth will pass away too. Premise 3: The universe exists! Conclusion: Therefore God exists. |Rebuttals| Case 1: The Rape story Hmm, rebel? no, that would be stupid. When someone does evil, we often think about the victim only instead of the wicked as well. For if God came down and instantly killed every person that sinned then no one would be alive. If you look at the results of Joseph’s case, even his brother were given hope even though they did evil by beating him and selling him into slavery. So to answer your question, bigger picture does include hope for the wicked and good. And Joseph was a little bit more then an adviser, as he was set over all the land of egypt. (Gen 41:41). And there does exist some evidence that Joseph did exist because of the Bahr Yusef canal in Egypt, as it literally translates into “Waterway of Joseph”. As to the Indonesia Hmm, I can see as an atheist why you would be bitter at God. Death to you is more or less the ultimate evil because its the end of life. But for me, there’s an afterlife that is better, And I believe that infants aren’t going to hell. So they get to get raised in a better life, where there are no more bad people and have life everlasting. The tsumani incident tells us something, it tells us that our world is broken. For it wasn’t God that killed them, it was the earth. We try to keep throwing God out, and saying we don’t want him, especially when we really need him. For if we humbled ourselves prayed, seeked his face, and turned from our wicked ways, He would heal our lands. And this catastrophe would not happen. CASE 2: God created sin through inaction Your analogy about the baby is tremendously flawed about the baby. As Adam & Eve were full-grown adults. In fact, as far as we know they could've been 800 years old. they had long life-spans back then (Adam died at age 930). And they already knew a basic form of right and wrong, because God told them not to eat the tree. Eve was an adult capable of making adult decisions, she’s was not a child when speaking to the snake. CASE 3: Evil Against Sodom & Gomororrah Well there is an assumption that children and babies did exist in this city, which we can’t really say what is possible in a city this wicked (who would want their kids born their anyway?) Fairly gay cities aren’t exactly that common. But lets assume there were babies, in my belief system I think that we’ll see them in the afterlife. So in a sense one could say that he was saving them by giving them paradise. If you’re planning on giving someone a heart-attack, I think its alright to turn them into a pillar of salt, or rain brimstone and fire, after all, heart attacks are just as bad. But the best way is head loppings. ----- As to them not knowing about the rules. Tell me, when you murder or rape someone and are taken to the judge and say you didn’t know it was wrong, does this mean you’re off the hook? It’s irrelevant if you’re stupid or not. So as judge, god had the right. CASE 4: Evil against Egypt I say skip jail and lop off the child murderer’s head! He didn’t have a problem with killing kids, why should we have a problem killing him? God doesn’t stand up to Human morals? Aren’t the egyptians humans? And didn’t they think it was right to drown jewish babies? So this is human morals! Why are you judging God for using human morals when you yourself use human morals? As I said before, In my belief is that babies do go to heaven. So in a sense he is sparing them from this life. CASE 5: Evil Against Ananias & Sapphira Most likely to remind christians that He doesn’t tolerate lying to him, So don’t lie to him. Why did God kill them? They were testing what happpens when you do evil to God, in this case in the form of a lie. They were wanting to find out if they could get away with it. They got their test results back, death. Learn this, and don’t test the spirit that your life will proceed.