Quite. You might apply that rule to your own assertions, you've not supplied one shred of evidence other than your own opinions.
I am not asserting anything, saying that something is unquestionably true when I ask,
ask mind you if Christians are monotheistic. I am giving my opinion, Thomas not asserting this as fact. It was something that I had been pondering, and I wanted to see others views on my opinion.
Thank you for yours by the way, I've quite enjoyed this debate.
It would be called good.
The opposite of good is bad ... bad things are not evil things.
Evil could also be called the opposite of Good. All that you are doing here is trying to confuse the concept with semantics. You missed my point entirely.
My point, was that if not for evil, there would be nothing to measure good works against. There would be no perspective, and when you loose perspective of something, it looses meaning. When meaning is lost, a concept goes into the realm of the metaphorical. It looses all potency.
So we're discussing not things, but intentions ... the intention determines the 'good' or 'evil' of a thing. One does not have to do the evil thing to understand evil intention, one knows instinctively that is is wrong, without actually doing it. So we don't need the existence of evil to know that to defy the will of God is wrong ... so your argument collapses.
Well then, the old saying that 'the path to hell is paved with good intentions' means nothing.
People quite frequently do bad things, even evil things, with the best of intentions, as illustrated in the saying above. Sometimes what people think is good is really very bad. So people
don't know instinctively what is wrong, especially morally.
Look to the way that slaves were viewed in America as an example. It was morally wrong to view people the way that those slaves were viewed, and treated, but in that case it was considered culturally right. Culture frequently wins out over morals without people even
knowing that what they do is wrong. Because everyone else is doing the morally bad thing too, and they were raised by their culture to think of something that is morally wrong, as right.
I'm not trying to tell you what you believe, either. I'm simply pointing out that what you think we believe is wrong.
Do you mean by this the opinion that Christians aren't really monotheistic? Well, if you mean that, then in your opinion, my opinion is wrong, and it is as simple as that.
If you mean something else by this, then please specify the beliefs that I have gotten wrong. I took those beliefs from the Congregational/Presbyterian church that I have attended with my family more or less since I was a child, and from other Christians that I have talked to that have attended churches of many other denominations. I have stated that not all Christians believe the same things that I use as examples. I have put forth an opinion based on the things that I have learned at my church, and from the bible, through other Christians, and based on beliefs that are commonly known to be held by mainstream Christianity. I really don't see where the argument is about that, so I assume that you disagree with the former.
If you disagree, please quote the references of our teachers that prove your point. Please show where, according to our doctrines, we are taught polytheism — I mean our words, not your assumptions about what our words mean.
Thomas, you have stated yourself that you personally believe that God is responsible for and created only the good in this world. I take this, which apparently I have correctly assumed is a widespread Christian belief, and I ask this:
If God is responsible for and created only the Good in this world, then where did the evil come from? If God isn't responsible for and didn't create the evil, then who did create it? Who is responsible for it?
I then state my opinion, that if the one God isn't responsible for, and did not create, everything in this world, and there is another being in charge of what God is not, and Christians recognize this being as the being that is in charge of what God is not, that they are not strictly monotheist.
I never said that Christians were taught to be polytheist. I attend a christian church regularly, and share many of my beliefs with Christians. I
know that Christians are not directly taught polytheism.
But I see from personal experience what others of the Christian faith believe, even if they are not directly taught it, and I can't help but formulate an opinion on the matter.
That is all that I have done here. Please don't make it into something it is not, and get angry. That was not the intention of my post.
Might I note also that to assume you have made some fundamental discovery about Christianity which we haven't noticed for some 2,000 years, and by 'we' I include some of the world's greatest philosophers and mystics ... that we've all had it wrong, all along ...
I have not assumed any such thing. It was merely an opinion, based on the data that I had taken in over my life.
Are you trying to say here that you frown on innovative thinking? That if no one has thought of something in the last 2,000 years, then it must not be worth thinking about? If so, then I'll note that this kind of thinking is what will lead to a standstill of growth. This kind of thinking leads to a lack of creativity and thinking for one's self.
Do you think that by formulating my own opinion, that I place myself above others? Think myself above the worlds greatest philosophers of the last 2,000 years?
It was not my intention to portray myself that way, not in the least, and I feel like you are saying this simply to make me look foolish. You may not agree with my opinion, but there's no reason to be rude.
But do you see why this kind of thinking is dangerous? What did those world famous philosophers do? They looked at the world around them, and formulated opinions, formulated theories, asked questions. Telling me that I should not do the same, because they already have, goes against the idea that there can be philosophy in the modern age.
Annoyed? Please, you assume too much. Don't let my formal tone confuse you. Amused, perhaps, astonished that anyone could make such a crass assumption ... But if I was annoyed, I'd nail you on the fallacy of your philosophical arguments and hammer that home with relentless and forensic precision, rather than try and point you in the right direction.
I meant that it seemed as if my farewell (See ya!) annoyed you, because of you're, 'Wouldn't wanna be ya' comment. It was kind of a joke.
Over analyze much? lol.

It's kinda like what you said, don't let my serious tone color everything I say. I do joke around sometimes, there just aren't enough emoticons to make it clear.
That's it, I'll blame it on the smiley faces. It's all their fault...
Take your first premiss:
If God is in charge of everything, as you say,
then no-one else is in charge of anything.
So there is no such thing as personal responsibility.
So whatever I choose to do, I am blameless,
for God is in charge of, and responsible for,
all my actions.
I am but an instrument of His will.
None of this is down to me.
It's not my fault.
But people
rarely take responsibility for their own actions, even without my help. This argument doesn't magically make free will right. From my viewpoint, it simply puts into perspective just how much about God and the way that he operates we don't know. After all, seeing this through my filter of beliefs, I could just say that if they think that way, then they were meant to, and God had it planned all along.
Evil is only a factor if you believe that God did not create it, and has no control over it. So, could people take my views, and come to those conclusions? Yes. But then, from my viewpoint, if they do, then God meant for them to do so all along.
It is mainly an argument against straight predestination anyways, the kind where God directly guides people through every decision and move they make, which is not a belief of mine. Here are my beliefs on free will, condensed, and such. Just so you know.
"If God is omniscient, and created man, he would have known before creating him the outcome of every decision that every human would face until the end of time. God made his entire creation knowing how it would unfold. When he had created it, he said that it was good. If he didn't want things to be the way that they are, he could have made them different, but he didn't.
We as people can only make decisions based on who we are, and he created us that way. If we do evil or good it is because of who we are, and God created us that way.
We have free will from our perspective, we make our own decisions, and steer the course of our own lives. But God, who created us, already knew the outcome of that course from his omniscient perspective before the beginning of his creation.
We both do and do not have free will.
I say that neither predestination or free will as concepts are entirely right.
I propose the free will paradox as stated above." *
*quoting myself from the 'they speak with a forked tongue' thread.
See? If such were true, man would never grow beyond spiritual childhood. Adulthood, spiritual or otherwise, is taking responsibility for one's actions — that is what Christianity is all about.
In
your opinion.
In
my opinion, spiritual growth is attained through learning from experiences. You grow through dealing with, and becoming wiser from those experiences. I believe that we are here to learn more than simply right and wrong. We are here for a higher purpose than learning to take responsibility for our own actions. And the idea of incomplete free will doesn't cause me to stumble, because it is God's plan that I'm following, and he created me.
I'm just trying to explain where I'm coming from.
Thank you for continuing to post.
See ya!