• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    2 months ago

    True. He even admits it in Isaiah:

    Isaiah 45:7 - I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

    • LennethAegis@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      Can’t have light without dark. Can’t have good without evil. Otherwise you just have boring stagnation. God likes chaos and excitement, not boring safety.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Why can’t you have light without dark? If you sped up all the molecules in the universe to the point that they were all radiating heat, you would have light without dark.

        • NielsBohron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          2 months ago

          Plus, admitting that God cannot create light without dark or good without evil means admitting God is not omnipotent.

        • button_masher@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Radiation is vibration which is subject to destructive interference which means there will always be some dark spots, relatively speaking.

          Unless God just had a single source with absolutely no barriers or observers. I can see why that God would get bored and invent some drama 😆

        • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          How would you know it’s light if there was no dark to contrast it ? Light only exist because dark surrounds it, and dark only exists because light surrounds it. One cannot exists without the other.

          If I show you a black circle on a white paper you would point at the black and say “this is the thing that is drawn on the paper”. If I were to show you a white circle on a black paper, you would point at the white instead with the same statement. If I showed you an all white paper and told you there is a white circle on it, you would tell me I’m an idiot and that there is nothing there. Contrast is why something exists.

            • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              I understand you want to counter this statement with physics, and we could have a rich debate about what we know of the universe and how light and it’s absence exists in it. But I think you misunderstood what we are talking about.

              This statement is about philosophy, light and dark are metaphorical here. We could just as well say “up cannot exists without down”, or “day cannot exists without night”. The next step to this philosophical thinking is to realise that since one cannot exists without the other, therefore they are the same thing.

        • ChocoboRocket@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Only if that heat radiation would be evenly distributed - otherwise you would have a gradient which still results in duality of light/dark

          There are also places that are relatively empty, which would result in a more typical darkness

          Also, speeding everything in existence up to the point of luminance is kind of tricky, what with natural law and all

      • radix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        Christians: God is Lawful Good.
        God: Actually more like Chaotic Neutral.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        A judge might have a “right” to punish people for things they didn’t know were wrong, but this is a judge who created those people without giving them the capacity to know right from wrong in the first place and then punishing them for doing the wrong thing anyway.

        And of course a Christian apologetics website is going to give the kindest possible interpretation to that passage.

        I’d also note that it’s part of the Jewish half of the Bible, so maybe finding out what Christians think about what it means is the wrong way to go about convincing people of your point. Maybe consult a Rabbi’s interpretation instead.