Originally posted by sumydid
Ok, so in at least Judas' case... it was better not to have been created. Does that apply to the common, everyday person who rejects the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Serious question and I don't think there are any wrong answers. (gee, I'd make a perfect progressive Elementary School teacher)

Sumy,
Yes, you are right in the case of Judas.
But I believe it was applicable on to Judas.

No one else can betray Jesus Christ anymore, so it doesn't apply to the "rejecters"

Originally posted by karoly aczel
SHORTENED....I've told this story to some of my friends who say that I shouldn't have taken my
kid there as they knew this guy was a jerk but I say that if I didn't go then all this would not have come out.
BTW,I dont take my kid to see his mum anymore as this guy has totally ruined her life.

Karoly,
What's your problem with loving women or "girlies" as you call them?

I am sorry to hear about the incident with your ex. Your friends are right though, not only should you not have put your child through that but it could have easily gone the other way. The guy can make up a story and you would end up with a police record that says somewhere that you had assaulted someone even when you hadn't done so.

Originally posted by karoly aczelIn regards to have being "created and destroyed", I do believe it is better.

Ok karoly, thank you for submitting an answer. Not the easiest of questions and not the most comfortable thing to ponder.

So with you I can now take it a step farther.

For the sake of argument, let's say a Creator of all things exist. The Creator creates somethings for the specific reason that it will have a normal existence with all the good and all the bad, and then its existence will end.

Is that necessarily a bad thing?

In other words. You said it is better to have existed and have your existence end, than to never have existed. All I'm adding to it is, does it make a difference in your assessment, if the Creator has foreknowledge that your existence will end before you are created?

Originally posted by shahenshah
Sumy,
Yes, you are right in the case of Judas.
But I believe it was applicable on to Judas.

No one else can betray Jesus Christ anymore, so it doesn't apply to the "rejecters"

Right. I don't think anyone can literally betray Jesus anymore, so it seems that the verse applies to Judas and Judas alone. But I wonder what RJH thinks about it.

Originally posted by shahenshah
Karoly,
What's your problem with loving women or "girlies" as you call them?

I am sorry to hear about the incident with your ex. Your friends are right though, not only should you not have put your child through that but it could have easily gone the other way. The guy can make up a story and you would end up with a police record that says somewhere that you had assaulted someone even when you hadn't done so.

I dont have any problem with loving women, what makes you say that?

Also my child was not present when this stuff went down.
The point i was trying to make was that if I had not acted (and I was acting out of love, so that my child could visit his mum), then none of this would have come out. The new boyfriend would not have kicked my car and tried to fight me. It's like I was a "poultice' that was drawing out the negative energy out of the situation, or at least that's the way I see it. I would never put my child in a dangerous,(or even a potentially dangerous situation), as is evidenced by the fact that since that episode I have not let my child visit his mum.

Originally posted by sumydid
So with you I can now take it a step farther.

For the sake of argument, let's say a Creator of all things exist. The Creator creates somethings for the specific reason that it will have a normal existence with all the good and all the bad, and then its existence will end.

Is that necessarily a bad thing?

First of all, your original question in the OP would obviously be answered in the affirmative by most people (or they would probably be suicidal).

But now you seem to be intending to incorrectly try and use it to make a case for an evil God being good.

So, let me ask a counter question, then you will have your answer:
Take two scenarios:
1. I murder your wife, your parents, your children, and everyone you know.
2. The same as 1. except I murder you as well.
Which would you prefer? Do you pick 1.?
Now, is 1. necessarily a bad thing?

Originally posted by twhitehead
First of all, your original question in the OP would obviously be answered in the affirmative by most people (or they would probably be suicidal).

But now you seem to be intending to incorrectly try and use it to make a case for an evil God being good.

So, let me ask a counter question, then you will have your answer:
Take two scenarios:
1. I mur ...[text shortened]... urder you as well.
Which would you prefer? Do you pick 1.?
Now, is 1. necessarily a bad thing?

No I think most people would actually say it's better to have never existed than to exist and have your existence ended.

As for your strawman of what I intended and the usual "God is evil" stuff followed by some mass murder scenario only you could cook up... whatever.... pointless drivel.

Originally posted by sumydid
No I think most people would actually say it's better to have never existed than to exist and have your existence ended.

Can you find me a single person who says that? I don't believe you would. I certainly wouldn't.

As for your strawman of what I intended and the usual "God is evil" stuff followed by some mass murder scenario only you could cook up... whatever.... pointless drivel.
I see you don't want to answer the question. Did it highlight the flaw in your argument too well?

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I dont have any problem with loving women, what makes you say that?

Karoly,
Yes, I see your point and I can sympathise with you. I don't know how you maintained your cool.

The other comment was on what you had originally posted, I have copied it for your ease of reference, below. Not that you need to reply, I got your meaning, so it is ok.


"(With reference to loving girlies, I do believe it is better to have loved and lost than not to have loved at all. Also some are "unlucky in love" )
But that's not what you asked, I know

In regards to have being "created and destroyed", I do believe it is better.
The thing is though how would we know the alternative,ie If you never created at all, then how would you anything at all? "

Originally posted by twhitehead
[
But now you seem to be intending to incorrectly try and use it to make a case for an evil God being good.

Whitehead, your words are confusing me. I know you don't believe in God.
But are you trying to say that if God exists, then He is evil?

Originally posted by shahenshah
Whitehead, your words are confusing me. I know you don't believe in God.
But are you trying to say that if God exists, then He is evil?

No.

Sumydid is responding to the thread "The 'Horrific God' Charge"Thread 143234 in which it is charged that the God of the Bible is horrific (or evil).

He is trying to argue that an evil God is preferable to a more evil God and therefore the less evil God is good.

I am not saying that God is necessarily evil.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No.

Sumydid is responding to the thread "The 'Horrific God' Charge"Thread 143234 in which it is charged that the God of the Bible is horrific (or evil).

He is trying to argue that an evil God is preferable to a more evil God and therefore the less evil God is good.

I am not saying that God is necessarily evil.

Whitehead,
Thanks I understood now.