A few of then don’t hold (the second one for example), but most are contradictions. And I didn’t see on this chart some contradictions I know.

It’s a book written by hundreds of different author in a 600 years span (and collecting far older traditions) in three different languages. It’s surprising there are not more contradictions.

I’d say it’s a universal tendency. But education can fight this tendency.

It’s a French fork of GGNOME?

no one knows
where the light comes from . . .
show me that butthole

But in reality, there can’t be two perfectly good options. Without evil at all, there’s always only one option. And God doesn’t give options, he gives freedom. In that allegory he gives a fork and money to buy lunch. Humanity chose instead to buy rope and use the fork to kill the neighbour’s child… God can’t be accused for that.

Imagine you have two meals before you, a pizza and a burger. You’re free to want either of them, you’re free to say what’s your preference is, but I physically restrain you and force you to eat the pizza whether you prefer it or not. Would you consider yourself free?

Evil actions are, but not will. Will is what command the choice between different physical actions, some good, others evil. If you retire evil from the equation, you have only one option and then, no choice, and then no will, thus no freedom.

That’s not what I said, and you’re anthropocentric again. Could the world have been less harsh? Possibly. The truth is that we have no way to judge that.

And we were given the means to fight evil, we could stop wars, hunger, a lot of epidemics… we choose as a species, not to. We should stop blaming God for.our shortcomings.

This makes no sense. To do evil is nothing like a physical ability.

That’s an anthropocentric vision. It’s hard for me to explain that in English, but what is free will essentially? The possibility for humanity to do things that God doesn’t want. The nature doesn’t have will of course, it doesn’t choose anything, but in order to live in a world free from God, it should follow rules that God chose not to control. Thus evil is not a reality per se, but the absence of Good, which is God.

The problem with your analogy is that it still supposes we can make analogies. Even saying « we can’t say anything about God » is saying something about God… Technically I can’t even say, even being Christian, that God exists. That’s why I have no problem with the existence of different religions and philosophyies, all, from gnostic atheism to the smallest and strangest cult, and including my own religious tradition, are infinitely wrong about God (but as in maths, there are bigger and smaller infinities).

So I can’t be suprised when I learn that God cares about us in Jesus. I can’t be surprised about anything about God, as any surprise would be coming from a preconception of mine.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. God is by definition unknowable (and doesn’t care if you touch yourself or like anal stuff or like to do sexual things with consenting people of your own gender).

But the whole point of Christianity is that this still unknowable God came to us in Jesus as we can’t go to him. So knowing Jesus is to know as much as we can about God (which is not much, but still more than nothing).

It depends on your definition of power. Is not being able to do something impossible not being all-powerful?

If he created a world without the possibility of evil, when we wouldn’t have free will. You can’t eat the cake and still have it.

FUCK YEAH!

I love my Manjaro. I always come back to it… but I may not be in my right mind.