Oh this should be REALLY interesting. how about you show her these passages from the Quran. But do us ALL a favor an SHOW THE WHOLE PASSAGE not just a piece of it that can easily be taken out of context. because believe me i could show her some passages that she would be rather proud of. So let's go Zamien do your usually copy and paste hack job on the Quran so i can clarify it an save us all some time an unnecessary reading.

Yes show me Tran... I want to see the evidence that you have. Oh and if you want me to have ANY respect for you then you better start respecting me first, you can start by stop calling what I say yapping. You're the moral chrisitian but acting like a b!tch but the muslims on here haven't shown me any disrespect at all so why should I be angry at them? Doesn't make much sense does it? Change your ways first, understand?

You have to give him a minute Sweet. He doesn't actually know the Quran he just goes to websites and copy and pastes whatever he finds

Well, why don't you rub the crystal ball and tell me the name of the website you accusing me that I copy and paste articles from?

SWEETNTWIST: Like I said early, if you nice to me, I'll be nice to you. You don't talk junk to me, I'll respect you. My promise.

WOMEN IN ISLAM FAITH

Tabari IX:113 “Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an.”

Tabari I:280 “Allah said, ‘It is My obligation to make Eve bleed once every month as she made this tree bleed. I must also make Eve stupid, although I created her intelligent.’ Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid.”

Qur’an 4:15 “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death [by starvation] claims them.”

In some Islamic countries, if the man wants to divorce his wife, all he needs to send the simply text through phone: "I d4c U, I d4c U, I d4c U." like in Malaysia. He can also send you an email or letter to make the offical divorce statement.

At the dawn of Islam religion, non-Muslims girls were capture as slaves. These poor girls became their Muslims and their prophet Mohammad (R.I.P)'s sex toys and beaten.

Qur’an 33:59 “Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters and all Muslim women to draw cloaks and veils all over their bodies (screening themselves completely except for one or two eyes to see the way). That will be better.”

Not only Muslim women must wear the veils. But also non-Muslim women: Christians, Jews, Atheists, Hindus... In some Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, etc, non-Muslims women are forced to wear veils. If you don't cover yourself, you will become a victim of hatecrimes.

Feminists like you, SWEETNTWISTED can't live in the Islamic countries. Either you will get shot or hiding yourself under the black veils. Female politicans'voices can only whisper. Women professionals have to work and live in the shadow of the man world. Women journalists are easy targets and victimes for terrorists, Islamic insurgents.

Who knows how many Hindu girls, Christians, Jews or Non-Muslim girls are being kiddnapped by Islamic insurgents to use them as lab mices for their testing weapons and bombs or sex toys?

Oh, no birth control pills for women in Islam world. So I don't think abortion is allowed here and there.

That's all for ya today!

"Catholic priests are not perfect. They have to live in very stricted lifestyle. "
That is untrue sistuation in Italy and Vatican!


"But God is God. I don't just drop my faith off because of these men. Nope."
But we have to be very causion for his follows becuase they hold the God's stick and direct our faith.

"The law will taken care of those priests and they will face the Judge at the end of their lives."
So far we don't see the priests who harmed my friend are being punished instead they are being protected by the church.

That is true!

1st of all what Tabari wrote was not the hadith,he wrote 30 volumes of tafsir(commentary) on the Qur'an, based on the Hadith,Therefore, his tafsir(comments) rests on hadith, as does his history and i know that the verse u posted here is not in its natural condition,it is totally mispronounced.We all know what bad translation can cause, take the Bible as an example



Chapter 4(Al-Nesaa) Verse 15:"Those who commit adultery among your women, you must have four witnesses against them, from among you. If they do bear witness, then you shall keep such women in their homes until they die, or until GOD creates an exit for them."

It means,If a woman witnessed by four people in the act of committing adultery on four different occasions, with four different partners, represents a danger to public health. Such a woman is a depository of germs, and a health quarantine protects the society from her.A good example of an exit that saves a quarantined woman is marriage,someone may wish to marry her, and thus protect her and the society.
The Noble Quran makes it almost impossible to prove a woman guilty of lewdness, because the court needs at least four reliable witnesses to prove that she actually committed a sin by having illegal sex. The reason for that is because Islam recognizes the woman’s honor as something very serious and holy, and it must not be tampered with or joked with. The woman is innocent until 4 witnesses are presented to prove that she is guilty of sin.Islam takes any charge against women very seriously and doesn't forgive those who lie about it or even don't look 100% truthful about it .Read chapter 24 Verse 4
"And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations) flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after,for such men are wicked transgressors."



Chapter 33(Al-Ahzab) Verse 59: "O prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the wives of the believers that they shall lengthen their garments. Thus, they will be recognized (as righteous women) and avoid being insulted. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful."
draw cloaks and veils all over their bodies ,screening themselves completely except for one or two eyes to see the way??? 2


Where you got this Bull$hit from ??? I was in the so called Islamic countries (Morocco,U.A.E,Pakistan,Kenya/Mombasa,Turkey). I saw there "western women" wearing bikinis and playing Beach Volleyball!!! and ur telling me that "non Muslim" women are forced to wear veils


again a load of Bull$hit!!! An example,the Islamic female leader Benazir Bhutto,she served as the prime minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan


Who knows how many girls are being kidnapped by Hindus,Christians,Jews,Atheists ect. and are used as "sex toys" ???

2

ZamienTran NO, I don't need to show respect to YOU first, you must prove yourself to me first, that's how that's going to work. You never replied to skeptic's post about evolution but you enjoyed continuing to attack me. It made you seem sexist and that's not really helping you, not when you're trying to get me to agree with you. 2
And I’m well aware of what’s happening in the some islamic countries today so you can save your efforts in trying to get my "girly azz" to be in pretend scenarios to try to shock me.

Sweetntwisted I don't want to disrespect you or your replies, but maybe Skeptic gives stronger answers than you do. Maybe that's why Zamien doesn't reply to Skeptic. Maybe Zamien is a bit afraid of the strong and funny answers of Skeptic?
I don't mean to say that your answers aren't that good, because they are.
But Skeptic and Gicheru are very good in debating with difficult guys.

That's because I'm a difficult guy, too! Takes one to know one, ya know?

I hope I can learn from you and Gicheru when I stay long enough in AF 2

lol 2


I like this part.

I like Benazir Bhutto a lot.

About the abortion issue, ATL mentioned b4 in another thread that in the Quran, It says the woman has the right to choose, can someone please give me the verse. I like to learn about it. Thanks

@Calista B
Thanks for your opinion but I already know why Zamien doesn't reply to skeptic or gicehru, but I'll continue to say what I have to say also.

P.S. Him talking about my girly azz and telling me to be a good little girl indeed make him sexist.

Sweetntwisted keep on going with your good job in here!

Maybe ATL was talking about birth control(birth control is allowed in Islam) ? Islam generally does not approve of abortion.Abortion is forbidden as a means of birth control.The only circumstances that are agreed upon are, if the mother's life is in danger, as this is seen as destroying a potential life to save one already existent,or if the newborn might be sick (deformities,mental retardation etc.), abortion can also be permitted in cases of rape.But you should wait for ATL's answer,maybe he knows more then me.

And skeptic has given up almost all hope on the difficult guys.

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Skeptic asked me the similar question on my other topic. And I told him/her/whatever that I don't have to time to talk back and forward with ABNORMAL PEOPLE. Sweetntwisted and ATL are enough.

Tell you the truth, it's really wasting time to argue with Atheists and Skeptic persons. They don't believe on anything and everything is a joke them.

And SWEETNTWISTED, WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE THAT YOU ASK ME TO SHOW MY RESPECT TO YOU FIRST? BECAUSE I AM A CHRISTIAN? 2 HOW MANY TIMES I TOLD YOU THAT YOU ASK TO THE WRONG CHRISTIAN. THIS CHRISTIAN WILL ONLY BE NICE TO ANYONE THAT NICE TO HIM. SO GET REAL.

Religious differences are always difficult to overcome. There's really no point in getting pissed over it.

Oh come on, you are in denial, Pun. If we show something bad related to your Qu'ran, you people always giving some lame excuses that "mispronounced" or "bad translation". So when you finger point at our Bible, can we say you Muslims are being paranoid?

Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari is Sunni historian. Although his works are not hadiths but most of Muslim scholars still use his works as sources like Baghawi and Suyuti or the Zanj. I think most of Muslims do agree with me that Tabari's works are Qur'anic.



You know what your Muslim fundamentalists treat women in the Islamic world. The woman in Africa was accused for adultery. She was forced to lick the red heat metal stick three times. If she is innocent, her tonge won't get burned. If she got burned, she will be condemn to death by stoning her. Lucky her and amazing that she didn't get burned. I watched this clip on Believe or Not show.

Beating and raping or gang rape women are often happened in some countries like Pakistan or Iran. I guess you didn't read or watch the news huh? A Saudi woman name is Rania al-Baz and the recently news about the Iran (?) gurl was gang raped by the males in her hometown. Do they bring the bell?




2 So you saying the Saudi women are not forced to wear veils? Even the nurses have to wear to cover herself in black and then her white uniform outside. Morocco is the Western-friendly modern Islamic country. Its city has the best casinos in the world and the most richiest place on earth. And I know you Muslims hate that place every second of your faithful life.

And you claimed that non-Muslims are not forced to wear veils in some Islamic countries. Check this article out, Some Iraqi Christians Feel Threatened



And this Benazir Bhutto's speech: "I found that a whole series of people opposed me simply on the grounds that I was a woman. The clerics took to the mosque saying that Pakistan had thrown itself outside the Muslim world and the Muslim umar by voting for a woman, that a woman had usurped a man's place in the Islamic society. I found that my opponents reduced themselves to verbal abuse rather than discuss issues, the very mere fact that I was a woman seemed to drive them into a frenzy. So that was the biggest challenge. I don't know how to deal with that, I can deal with political differences, but how do you deal with it when someone says I don't like you because you're a woman and you've taken a man's place."

And what happended to that Muslim woman politician, her husband is still in jail for corruption and accused of murdering her brother. She was removed from her government on all accusations. Now she is living exile in UK. Sad huh?

And you didn't argue with me about the Muslims' instant divorce statement, I guess it's true huh?

Anyway, this is Susan and other atheists' playing ground. If you want to argue more with me, please join me in "I AM A MOSLEM WOMAN" topic. Chao!

yup, agree.

^actually freefallz is probably referring to you, since you were the one getting angry. 2

AND I ASKED YOU TO BE NICE TO ME FIRST B/C YOU'RE THE ONE THAT'S GOT TO PROVE YOUR ARGUEMENT TO ME, SINCE I'M THE ONE THAT'S SKEPTICAL OF YOUR RELIGION. And since you're trying to prove to me that islam is bad for women, why don't you stop being an @$$? B/c the only one putting a woman down on here is you. I would have joined you in your other thread "I AM A MOSLEM WOMAN" topic but I don't think I will now.



ANYHOW...I'm waiting for ATL's response about the pro-choice thing but maybe he's busy.

When I made my reply to Sweetntwisted, it was not meant for you Zamien.
Why are you debating in a forum if you don´t want to waiste your time in bedating with skeptics and atheist. Go to another forum where you can debate with religious persons only 2

Oh come on, Zamien.Show me some "proofs" from the Qur'an or the Hadith.
We all know how losers are ,they think like this: "I know Im beat I got no arguments , the only thing,I can do now, is to insult you (personality, parents ect.) ;just like your doing it with Sweet (everybody is calling you Sweet...it sounds so Gangsta ).

First of all, I didn't check your profile when I started to talk with you. So, I had no idea you are woman or a man. Please don't give youself a title here. Just because you are a woman and you can be a b!tch and I have to be nice to you first. It doesn't work that way, SWEETNTWISTED. You respect me and I'll do the same. You keep attacking my faith. Don't expect me to be nice with you.

What kinda "proofs" do you want me to show you from your holy Qu'ran or the Hadith? I quoted you some verses from your Qu'ran. But you are still in denial. Sad huh?

Religion is really a non-ending debate!!

Because THEY WEREN'T FROM THE QURAN lol. damn dude do you ever listen to what people say. The stuff you quoted from was an excerpt from the Tabari WHICH IS NOT THE QURAN it was written hundreds of years AFTER THE DEATH OF THE PROPHET.

and to Calista. The comment I made about a women's right to choose in regards to an abortion was regarding contraceptives. In Christianity a women is forbidden to use contraceptives but she is also forbidden to have an abortion. in Islam abortion is strictly forbidden unless it can be justified. Such as rape or something like that. But a women also has a right to use a contraceptive.

It is a non-ending debate because we stil have people who refuse to accept the fact that somebody can be a different religion then you are (not you per se lol). We have people on here like Zamien who continually attempt to treat Islam the same way they treat Christianity. When it is a simple fact that the bible was written YEARS AFTER the death of Jesus(pbuh) so they could say whatever they wanted to say about him and what he did. The Quran was written during the life of the prophet Muhammad(pbuh) so there was no way anything could have been changed. Christians know this an since it is too easy to show contradictions in the bible due to the fact that it was written after the death of the prophet Jesus(pbuh) they have to find some way to try to refute the Quran. However when you actually read the Quran you will see that the supposed 'contradictions' they come up with is so trivial it's almost borderline laughable. So they then have to try to use the works such as the Tabari, Bukhari, and Isqah which were written hundreds of years after the death of the prophet Muhammad(pbuh) but when a muslim says that these cannot be used because they cannot be verified then we are just 'in denial' when the Quran clearly teaches all muslims that everything you learn you MUST verify to show that it is accurate.



since the Bukhari, Tabari, and Isqah cannot be verified they are not allowed into Islamic doctrine. this is the biggest difference between Christians and Muslims is that we do not accept ANYTHING into doctrine that cannot be verified thru either the Quran itself or the Hadith.

Now where the problem comes in is that we have radical muslims in the middle east who base their belief off of these unverifiable sources merely to keep themselves in power. So we now have idiots like Zamien who want to label ALL muslims in the same category. which is not only unfair but just plain stupid. He wants to show how ALL of Islam is based off of these unverified books when it is not.

If this was actually the case an this is what Islam was truly about then why is Islam becoming if not ALREADY the number 1 religion in the world today????

Why is the majority of the world turning to this 'terroristic and unjust' religion?? 2

I can tell you why. because ever since these 'terrorist' started attacking the US people have been doing research about Islam to find out what it is about. and they have been slowly but surely learning that the actions of these terrorists is NOT what actual Islam teaches. and as sad as it is that it had to happen this way but the added bonus is that they are LEARNING THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM and beginning to convert. they are finding answers to their questions that Christianity could not answer. In essence they are learning the truth.

You need to watch some Monty Python my friend. Christianity does not prohibit the use of contraceptives, that is almost exclusively the Catholic church. Protestantism does nothing of the sort.

Uh huh sure you didn't know that I was a girl... that's why you kept telling me the muslims are going to beat my girly @$$. So worthy of respect aren't you? On second thought, I think I'll to continue to attack your faith.

no

Have you guys considered below issue?

Westerners claim that there is a God for them(or for the whole human beings), while Asian countries do not have the existence of this God. Why?

Contradiction ?!!

Have you guys considered below issue?

Westerners claim that there is a God for them(or for the whole human beings), while Asian countries do not have the existence of this God. Why?

Contradiction ?!!

Have you guys considered below issue?

Westerners claim that there is a God for them(or for the whole human beings), while Asian countries do not have the existence of this God. Why?

Contradiction ?!!

^ I dont' get your point.

Are you simply wondering why Western religions have a universal god while Eastern religions do not?

Contradiction exists if the overall "right and wrong" consensus is abolished.

Whether people believe or not has no bearing on whether there is a God or not, so there is no "contradiction".

UNIVERSAL god
Oxford dictionary meaning of UNIVERSAL - connected with, done by or affecting everyone in the world.

This God don't even exist in the mind of Asian. This God does not affect the lives of Asian. How can it be UNIVERSAL??!!!


How could you use the word " Universal" , if Asian(Population: almost 4 billion human inhabitants, about 60 percent of the world's population ) do not even know about the existence of this God?

Asian population link
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/asia.htm

That is what I mean Contradiction regarding to the western claim about their God!

Let me show you something which I learnt from my Logic course at Stanford University. Then you will learn how the logicians think about the existence of God.

Logic is the study of arguments. We often prove whether an argument is valid or invalid by deriving it. No emotion and bias is involved!

In the below question, all premises are based on the Bible. In the other words, premises are TRUE ACCORDING TO BILBLE.
According to the premises , then a logician use symbols to derive the validity of its conclusion.

Here is how the logician derive the question regarding to the fact of existence of God.

GE = God eixsts
P=God is omnipotent
S=God is omniscient
B=God is benevolent
Q=God can prevent evil
GK=God knows evil exists
Gp=God prevent evil
L=evil exists

premise 1. (GE ->P) & (GE -> S)
Premise 2. GE-> B
Premise 3. Q->GK->NOT GP ->NOT B
Premise 4. (P->Q) & (S ->L->GK)
premise 5 . (GP -> not L) & L
conclusion NOT GE


Let me put them back into English language:
If God exists, then he is omnipotent, and if God exists, then he is omniscient.
If God exists then his benevolent.
If God can prevent evil, then if he knows that evil exists, then he is not benevolent if he does not prevent it.
If God is omnipotent, then he can prevent evil, and if God is omnicient, he knows that evil exists if it does exist.
Evil does not exist if God prevent it, and evil exists.
Therefore, God does not exist.


Now, let's SEE how a logician decide whether or not it is sentential valid.
When an argument is valid, and the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true.

=========================================
Proving argument whether or not sentential valid by logician way:
premise 1. (GE ->P) & (GE -> S)
Premise 2. GE-> B
Premise 3. Q->GK->NOT GP ->NOT B
Premise 4. (P->Q) & (S ->L->GK)
premise 5 . (GP -> not L) & L
conclusion NOT GE

1CJ2 (6) GE ->S
WP (7) GE (7)
6,7AA (8) S (7)
4CJ2 (9) S->L->GK
8,9AAQ (10) L->GK (7)
5CJ (11) GP ->NOT L
5CJ2 (12) L
10,12AA (13) GK (7)
3,7AA (14) GK->NOT GP->NOT B (7)
13,14AA (15) NOT GP -> NOT B (7)
WP (16) GP (16)
11,16AA (17) NOT L (16)
16,17,12IP (18) NOT GP
15,18AA (19) NOT B (7)
7,2AA (20) B (7)
7,19,20IP (21) NOT GE

From the derivation, we must admit that the argument is perfectly valid, and that anyone who believes the premises must also believe the conclusion (Therefore, God does not exist) .



P.S. welcome to name my typos

Whether people believe or not has no bearing on whether there is a God or not, so there is no "contradiction".

If you say mankind can't question about RELIGION BELIEF, then there is no contradiction.

Contradiction exists if the overall "right and wrong" consensus is abolished.

Would it be possible??

A contradiction in religious belief is not the same thing as a contradiction in the existence of God. It is a contradiction to say that a theist and an atheist can both be correct objectively but nobody is claiming that both sets are correct.



Not relevant.
The existence of God is not dependent upon knowledge of him.

It is a contradiction to say that a theist and an atheist can both be correct objectively but nobody is claiming that both sets are correct.


Logician supports atheist as shown in the below derivation.
Soon will be the scientists...

Logic is the study of arguments. We often prove whether an argument is valid or invalid by deriving it. No emotion and bias is involved!

In the below question, all premises are based on the Bible. In the other words, premises are TRUE ACCORDING TO BILBLE.
According to the premises , then a logician use symbols to derive the validity of its conclusion.

Here is how the logician derive the question regarding to the fact of existence of God.

GE = God eixsts
P=God is omnipotent
S=God is omniscient
B=God is benevolent
Q=God can prevent evil
GK=God knows evil exists
Gp=God prevent evil
L=evil exists

premise 1. (GE ->P) & (GE -> S)
Premise 2. GE-> B
Premise 3. Q->GK->NOT GP ->NOT B
Premise 4. (P->Q) & (S ->L->GK)
premise 5 . (GP -> not L) & L
conclusion NOT GE


Let me put them back into English language:
If God exists, then he is omnipotent, and if God exists, then he is omniscient.
If God exists then his benevolent.
If God can prevent evil, then if he knows that evil exists, then he is not benevolent if he does not prevent it.
If God is omnipotent, then he can prevent evil, and if God is omnicient, he knows that evil exists if it does exist.
Evil does not exist if God prevent it, and evil exists.
Therefore, God does not exist.


Now, let's SEE how a logician decide whether or not it is sentential valid.
When an argument is valid, and the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true.

=========================================
Proving argument whether or not sentential valid by logician way:
premise 1. (GE ->P) & (GE -> S)
Premise 2. GE-> B
Premise 3. Q->GK->NOT GP ->NOT B
Premise 4. (P->Q) & (S ->L->GK)
premise 5 . (GP -> not L) & L
conclusion NOT GE

1CJ2 (6) GE ->S
WP (7) GE (7)
6,7AA (8) S (7)
4CJ2 (9) S->L->GK
8,9AAQ (10) L->GK (7)
5CJ (11) GP ->NOT L
5CJ2 (12) L
10,12AA (13) GK (7)
3,7AA (14) GK->NOT GP->NOT B (7)
13,14AA (15) NOT GP -> NOT B (7)
WP (16) GP (16)
11,16AA (17) NOT L (16)
16,17,12IP (18) NOT GP
15,18AA (19) NOT B (7)
7,2AA (20) B (7)
7,19,20IP (21) NOT GE

From the derivation, we must admit that the argument is perfectly valid, and that anyone who believes the premises must also believe the conclusion (Therefore, God does not exist) .

I happen to agree with you and I don't think anybody can plausibly argue the existence of the God of Judeo-Christian faith (that which is as you stated, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and omnibenevolent) as inherent contradictions appear with the character that only an idiot can't see.

These contradictions appear most notably in the form of the problem of evil and the problem of free will.

There are however Christians who argue that God is either not omnipotent or not omniscient which get away from these problems.


Oh and another thing...I studied formal logic for three years and your original setting out of the argument was a little faulty.



In premise 3, Q has no bearing upon GK. GK is caused by S. You should also have a simple premise of "Premise (x). L" early in the argument stating that evil does in fact exist.

I agree with your terms in English but when written in propositional calc, it's a little mixed up. Is it your own work or somebody else's?

Sorry, I do not agree with you at all according to my current knowledge of Logic.
Those premises are my professors' work. I dare to challenge them because I love my university.
If you still insist you are right, go to this link http://www.stanford.edu/ and find my logic professors. Send them an email to challenge their work. Maybe they will grant you a PHD in Logic!!

By the way, which university did you graduate?

Ok, I realize I'm dealing now with someone who cannot comprehend plain English.

Westerners believe in a "universal" god insofar as they believe their god has universal sovereignty over every living and non-living thing in existence. This is especially true of the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It matters not one whit to these believers that there are people in Asia (and in the West) who do not share this belief. The lack of belief has no affect on this God's universal sovereignty.

Again, I don't see the contradiction of your opening statement. Simply because there are different religious beliefs, that does not necessarily make a contradiction. For there to be a contradiction, both of these beliefs would have to be true at the same time. It could be the case that one of these beliefs is true and the other false. In that sense, there is no contradition, just wrongly held belief. Certainly there is a contradiction of beliefs, insofar as that means two contradictory beliefs cannot both be true at the same time; but I don't think that was the thrust of your original post.

Regardless, I see I would have great difficulty in dealing with someone whose communication skills are like yours. I leave you to others on this board who don't mind suffering through interpreting your meanings. I've run out of that kind of patience.

Well unfortunately I am not in Stanford and don't have direct contact with your professors so I'll have to make do with you. It's easy to present what others provide us with whilst not understanding it ourselves isn't it? Whether or not you love your professors has no bearing upon the quality of their work.

Of course I could be wrong about you if you can now explain to me how Q has any bearing upon GK.

For those keeping score at home (that includes you Skep), Q -> GK is the proposition that God can prevent evil therefore God knows evil exists.

Hmmm...I have to respectfully disagree.

I thought this was Q:

^ Q knows that evil exists.....and he'd do something about it if he could. Q is not omnipotent.