Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Reply to Jon Gallagher
Message-ID: <1733@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Sep-85 12:22:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1733
Posted: Wed Sep 18 12:22:43 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Sep-85 04:07:43 EDT
References: <317@drutx.UUCP> <320@pyuxn.UUCP> <222@ptsfb.UUCP> <343@pyuxn.UUCP> <1711@pyuxd.UUCP> <1167@wucs.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 28

>>>If you claim that it didn't create us but merely tortures us, you ignore the
>>>possibility of there being another power, one that is good and creative by
>>>nature (as opposed to evil and destructive). And if such a power exists, it
>>>will of necessity be at odds with the destroyer. It seems more likely that
>>>the damager-god is an alias used by Satan than that Satan is an alias used by
>>>the damager-god. [SWOPE]

>>Why does it seem "more likely"?  Don't you mean "equally likely"?  If not,
>>why not? [ROSEN]

> It is more likely because of the existence of the greater power (see my
> original argument).  The damager-god alias would be used by Satan to slander
> this higher power, which Christians refer to as God.  Attributing evil to
> God advances Satan's goals in that it gives a false image of God's nature.
> If there were only a damager-god, the taking of an alias would seem
> irrelevant. [SWOPE]

That makes no sense at all.  It assumes that this "greater power" must be
good, if indeed a greater power exists.  It is at least equally likely
(perhaps more likely) that Paul's scenario is correct, since you presume
much more than he does.  Besides, if there is this greater power that IS
good, why is the lesser evil power still around?  Any explanations you might
give for that (and a few have been postulated---to keep us honest, to give
free will, to let us learn in life, ad somniem...) would be at least as
presumptive as Paul's explanations, if not more so.
-- 
Popular consensus says that reality is based on popular consensus.
						Rich Rosen   pyuxd!rlr