Intergalactic Summit

Where as the Gallenteans have nothing wrong ever happen to them really which goes to show you that there is no need to try to corrupt them, they are already lost!

Since the Amarr have the truth the forces of evil seek to destroy it all the more.

Your arguments prove nothing other then bad things happen to good people. As for her ladyship there is no evidence that I'm aware of that she is a clone and even if she is the council has validated her reign after investigating the matter. Since you have no issue with cloning or interest in our laws you personal feelings on the matter are null & void because I strong doubt you invest any time or effort into study of Divine interpretation. Ergo the matter is closed.

I'd ask you to try again but I find you are embarrassing yourself with your half baked straw man arguments and vague interpretations of Amarrian law or scripture without any true invested time to learn them.

Go home and enjoy your free little life, in your free little federation, with your free little male lover. Leave the scriptures to those who have the experience to study it and the wit to understand them.

I ask you nicely but I doubt you'll listen.

I'll try to avoid the sniping and bickering and provide you with some possible answers. Some of these possibilities may not line up well with traditional interpretation, others might be down right heretical, but you asked for answers and I'll try to provide some. Naturally it is up to you to accept or deny the correctness of any of them.

God does not need us. God simply set the task before one group of humans rather than another. Call it a choice based upon Divine Whim.

God does need us, but does not directly act because at this point in creation the direct interaction with the Divine would sully creation to the point that creation itself would not fulfill its intended purpose. In short, meaning God is unwilling to directly act within the universe.

God does need us, but does not directly act because God cannot. God cannot act against Divine Precedent and break rules already put in play by itself.

Now those are only a few possible answers, and I'm not going to go holding up any particular one, in fact I'll point out others that I'm sure must be rolling around in the head's of others. Perhaps God doesn't act because God no longer cares. Perhaps God doesn't act because God is gone and the Amarr were charged with keeping God's last will and testament around after God ceased to be. And I'm willing to bet this will be a fan favorite; God never existed and therefore cannot act.

So, take whichever answer you like. Come up with your own if you wish, it isn't as if I'll come to your house and slap a collar around your neck and force any particular answer upon you.

Well, the 'caring and loving' God isn't necessarily nice to us Amarr either. In general, the idea that he's a white-bearded and similarly robed big man who likes to throw lightning bolts at heathens isn't something that pertains to the Amarrian God. Those that act against him are already punished enough by their own actions. That doesn't mean that others should stand by and let them do it again. It's good to stop people from sinning against the Lord and His creation, because it's better if such actions don't take place. Even better though is it, if humans don't do these deeds out of free choice. For that to be the case they need to be free to choose.

Either way, he doesn't need us. If humanity at large constantly act against His will, it will be humanities demise. Not because the Lord will throw lightning bolts, but just because that's how he structured the cosmos. He doesn't need to do anything to punish.

The Question "Why does God need x?" is an erratic question, because by definition there's nothing that God is in need of - quite the contrary: everything needs God.

God is omnipotent and therefore doesn't need Amarrians, but that is not to say that we cannot please Him.

I'm not a theologian, but it seems to me that God gave us all free will and He respects that - therefore He won't go around changing people's minds for them or directly interfering in their affairs.

However, that doesn't mean that He doesn't have an opinion on things, and it pleases Him to see His followers carry out His will.

So let me get this straight, right.

God - a supposedly perfect, infinitely powerful, all-knowing, entirely benevolent immortal being, mark me - created mortal humans who were by their very nature imperfect. Having thus created an imperfect being (let's not even go into the impossibility of a perfect being creating imperfection, I don't want to strain your limited cognitive capabilities), it was ultimately God's fault that they committed the supposed Original Sin. It, a benevolent being, thusly decided to create a punishment for this Sin - a Sin for which it was ultimately responsible - and inflict it upon all those who did not choose - because it had given its creations free will for no apparent reason - to go to the trouble of saying "I'm really very sorry" in a needlessly specific and ritualistic manner.

Yet at no point did this supposedly infinitely benevolent and infinitely patient being think to shrug its divine shoulders and say "Oh, right, well, they were imperfect, so this was bound to happen. Fair cop I suppose. All is forgiven!" as any truly infinitely benevolent and infinitely patient being would do?

Seriously, the holes in the logic of your religion are so large I could fit half the Domain fleet in them and still have room enough for Vaari's ego.

By "spanked", you mean "repeatedly systematically dismembered without anaesthesia and flash-regrown" and by "hand" you mean "entire body", right?

Providing God Is God (which He is but roll with me here) He would be such a complex creature of immense majesty that can not be premised properly with human logic in the way you provided much less in the brief method you provided.

So to put it simply the day you can put God under a microscope and believe in Him I'll be the atheist.

God doesn't have to make sense that's not a requirement for belief. Sure you can argue that since God can not be logically argued then He is a logical impossibility. That very well sounds good on paper but paper is also used for cleaning my backside and only has as much value as it does at that moment and none later. Your witty argument is charming and I'm sure draws a crowd but doesn't solve the remaining burning questions about God and therefor is where the argument falls apart.

Those being since we are on the topic is the questions of how order came from chaos or what is the ultimate truth. Regardless of point of view there is a truth. One can argue that truth is subjective but that is the same as arguing that a tree falling and no one hearing does it make a sound? It does as the pressure waves that are the power behind sound are still created. Any debates that doesn't support this is based on the brain in a jar. The idea that reality is only was perceived and if it is not perceived it doesn't exist which again a major fallacy as what is outside the brain and the Jar?

REGARDLESS of perception that is The Truth.

But I don't want to stress your mind to much there because I need you to keep up before we are done here.

Well, I did say that I'm not a theologian

But ultimately, what it boils down to is this. God is perfect, and humans are imperfect. As such, it's impossible for humans to directly comprehend everything about God and his ineffable plans.

Allow me to step in to correct a fundamental flaw in your premises, Captain Ixiris.

You have used the arguement that God cannot be All Knowing, All Powerful, and Infinitely Benevolent. This would be correct, except that no Amarr has ever claimed that God is all three.

I no longer share their faith, but if you are going to engage in these continual, senseless, pedantic arguements, at least do the courtesy of arguing against the position they actually hold.

No what you have done is taken a stance that since God is unknowable he is therefore a logical impossibility without erecting anything in its place.

Hence your point has no staying power because all you did was take away an answer, the question is still there.

My point is God can only be God because He is not knowable by our limited perspective of the universe and if someone could know Him He (being the entity in question) can't be God.

Which is something you are still not addressing.