DebateReligion

I believe that if God is truly omnipotent and omnipotent, he will be able to find ways to forgive free will while not allowing the outcome of evil.

This is not necessary. Today's atheromologists are focusing on "evil of nature" such as "natural disasters that give pain to non-human animals".

God, because he is omnipotent and omnisci, there are reasons to allow us. Because we can not be seen as living creatures that are omniscient and not omniscient. Must exist

This is a view called "skepticism". It has many problems. Before seeing this, we need to make your claims more general. Because the free will itself is easily avoided by referring to evil of nature.

Therefore, as a human being, we can not reliably judge that certain kind of evil has not been paid. That is evil that God can prevent without sacrificing equal or higher profits.

Skeptical theology threatens our moral judgment. If you saw a child drowning in a shallow pond, I can easily save money for myself. At least, now, one problem is whether the death of a child is actually a versatile one. Maybe I should go.

Skeptical theology threatens our own judgment. I suppose I remember its existence 10 minutes ago. If our unpaid decision can not be trusted, why can we trust our memory judgment (or judgment of recognition)? At least, defenders of principle are here in principle thanks to our differences. (Instead, skeptics should generally deny evidence of appearance at first glance, but if there is no trust on the surface, skepticism about the validity of the skepticism itself, including global skepticism Suspect of theology may be self - destructive.

For some hidden reasons, God can show us that there is a superficial moral reason for revealing h 0, or at least clearly telling us that there is such a reason I can do it. You can reapply skepticism to quote the hidden reason that h1 may not reveal h0, but the advocate of theology needs hidden reasons such as h2.

Even in the second experiment, I think the reasons are similar. I feel the reaction of the bowel when most people (about 99%) appear with children, but this intuitive reaction is "This is wrong." In the second experiment, I choose to obey the behavioral policy caused by my emotional reaction. This emotional response may evolve, but empathy seems to be the key to any cooperative species, and it seems to be the heart of a life worth living. In all human cultures, the "other-oriented" adage exists in some way; this is what I accept naturally and rationally.

Humans are emotional creatures. Emotions are the value of our lives. Without them, there is no pleasure, love, sports, art, movies, comedy, music, friends, lovers, partners. Emotions are not just robots and machines. Therefore, the problem here is not emotions themselves, but how to interpret them and then take action. For example, in a crisis situation, "I am very frustrated with this situation, I think I must be very weak", but the more realistic idea is as follows. This shows my values ​​and important things to me, so I will use these emotions to decide what action I want to take to create what I want. "

Sorrow is a human emotion that everyone feels at some point in their life. Feeling sadness is a natural reaction to situations that cause emotional confusion and pain. There are various degrees of sorrow. However, like other emotions, sorrow is temporary and disappears over time. In this way, sorrow is different from depression. When you are sad, it can sometimes feel completely inclusive. But when you can laugh or you can earn comfort, you should also have time. Depression is different from sorrow. Your mind affects every aspect of your life. It can be hard or impossible to find anything fun, including activities and people you liked in the past. Depression is a mental illness and not an emotion.