PDA

View Full Version : omni potent AND just = not possible?



Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 12:09 PM
why do bad things happen?


hypothesis:
***If god was allpowerful and just, he wouldnt let mary susan get hit by a drunk driver which would mean her kids grow up motherless***

bad things like this happen sometimes:

>>>>explanation 1: God is just and wanted to save mary susan, but cannot break the objective rules of the universe to save her and therefore is not allpowerful

>>>>>explanation 2: God is allpowerful, but did not see it just to save mary, becuase she didn't "deserve" to live...well fine, lets say she didnt....but then why should the kids be punished by not having a mother? therefore he would be allpowerful but not just.

fine lets say the kids didnt deserve to have a happy life either and thus it was "justifiable" to kill their motgher. but what exactly would constitut death? she didnt kill anyone or murder anyone in her life...so why doesnt every mildly bad mother in america get the same punishment?

so that would leave the only explanation as weak faith or some failure to follow the christian rules. but again that begs the question as to why her?

to the question of why her:

"God is all powerful, nor did he want her to die, it was just chance."


But if god is just, then wouldnt he be bound to use all means necessary to save her? if he cannot save her, then he is not omnipotent, and if he just idly watches "chance" take her, then he was not being just by avioding the use of the omnipotence

thus i think there is a reasonable proof for why being both just and omnipotent is not possible with all that goes on in todays world.



discuss, critique, arguement?



please, lets keep this philisophical :) this is not an attack on anyone

ElderJefferson
11-27-2006, 12:26 PM
The story's not over yet
:cool:

God is allowing His character and His law to be vindicated (against satan's assaults). To allow this, He must allow sin to take it's course, in all of it's ugliness. I'm convinced that I want no more of it.

Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 12:42 PM
The story's not over yet
:cool:

God is allowing His character and His law to be vindicated (against satan's assaults). To allow this, He must allow sin to take it's course, in all of it's ugliness. I'm convinced that I want no more of it.


for the sake of helping me with this excerise in philosophjy can you more clearly state what you just said,
think what you mean is:

"god is letting his moral character be freed from guilt against satans assults"


can you please explain what this specifically entails or proves? thank you :)

Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 12:49 PM
im gonna go ahead n add this:


if god is omni potent, then he is all knowing to no end... agreed? ok.


so if he is all knowing then every action he makes, he must know the ultimate reactions and chain reactions that will follow that action. therefore every action would be creating and deciding the future. therefore when he created the angel lucipher he would of knowingly created a being that would become satan.

so if he already knows the end result what would be the point of trying to prove his morals to everyone if he already knows who is going to accept them? and what would be the point of creating satan in the first place if he knows what that entails?

so i conclude again, that it doesnt seem to follow that he can be just and omnipotent


this is not a flame fest between atheism and christianity....im trying to test this philisophical arguement....i think the premices are pretty solid. if not, please point out why.... it will only help further this debate as civil as possinly

Barry Bonds
11-27-2006, 01:11 PM
We don't know the beginning and the end of every story, and probably won't in this life. Hard to understand from a human viewpoint, but suffering serves God's purpose some times. I speak from very personal experience.

Lifting_Taurus
11-27-2006, 01:12 PM
im gonna go ahead n add this:


if god is omni potent, then he is all knowing to no end... agreed? ok.


so if he is all knowing then every action he makes, he must know the ultimate reactions and chain reactions that will follow that action. therefore every action would be creating and deciding the future. therefore when he created the angel lucipher he would of knowingly created a being that would become satan.

so if he already knows the end result what would be the point of trying to prove his morals to everyone if he already knows who is going to accept them? and what would be the point of creating satan in the first place if he knows what that entails?

so i conclude again, that it doesnt seem to follow that he can be just and omnipotent


this is not a flame fest between atheism and christianity....im trying to test this philisophical arguement....i think the premices are pretty solid. if not, please point out why.... it will only help further this debate as civil as possinly

I also asked this same question.. I added that if god is all knowing and the designer/creator of all things.. then when he told Eve not to eat the Apple, he knew she would, because he had already designed it.. How could he get mad at her for what he planned out... If that's not the case, and he didn't know, then he can't be all powerful...

Either Free will exists and god is not all powerful, or free will is a myth and we are just puppets... But both can't exist together.. Either god knows whats going to happen and should stop getting mad at us when we do the things he has already planned, or he isn't all powerful...

LeilaM
11-27-2006, 01:14 PM
There really isn't a paradox between omnipotence and justice. Assuming that God is all powerfull (which I do), does not fly against the notion of "bad things happening."

because first, you'd have to define what bad is.

I think of it this way, too- we as humans have limited knowledge fo what is going on outside of our own sensory spectrum. Something which may be seemingly bad may, in fact, be something good in the long run. And even if not, this doesn't negate omnipotence (all powerful)

The ability to do something doesn't necessarily mean that one does it. In fact, it may be just NOT to do prevent "bad things from happening." Why have free will, then?

Anyway, I don't think this is much of a paradox. Perhaps you could say instead "If God only did good things, then why does he let bad things happen?" And even then, you'd run up with the problems of both definition as well as our own limited knowledge and inability to predict the future outcomes of a "bad event"

Here's the main omnipotence paradox which has been adressed by most monotheistic faiths:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox

timbo81
11-27-2006, 03:19 PM
death is just a stage of life.

Sabatoge
11-27-2006, 04:16 PM
But if god is just, then wouldnt he be bound to use all means necessary to save her? if he cannot save her, then he is not omnipotent, and if he just idly watches "chance" take her, then he was not being just by avioding the use of the omnipotence...


Why is God "bound" to save a sinner?

Barry Bonds
11-27-2006, 04:36 PM
He sees the big picture, and this life is not a drop in the bucket to the whole picture.

Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 05:08 PM
Perhaps you could say instead "If God only did good things, then why does he let bad things happen?" And even then, you'd run up with the problems of both definition as well as our own limited knowledge and inability to predict the future outcomes of a "bad event"

well i would support the first, that yes, if god is just, he should only do good things....i mean after all if he;s all powerful he shouldnt have to ever do bad things to get the results he wants

you then say there is no paradox, becuase your saying that humans cannot define good or bad becuase we dont have a full scope of the future


it would be foolish to say that we know objectivley wat is good and bad....

but i would rather believe that there is good and bad independent of god.
-->if things are only good becuase god says so....then that just seems arbitrary....he could of made rape good if he had desired....if things are only good becuase he said so, that wouldnt make him just, that just make us his puppets wouldnt it?

instead, he could be a just being, if his beliefs were good because they inherently supported what is objectively good in this world....that would be just.

and if there is objectively good and bad things, then i would argue we dont necissarilly need a huge scope such as an omnipotent being to know wats good or bad

so even if in the huge scope of billions of years that act ends up a good thing (refering to comment on our inferior scope), the fact is there was a bad one. and if god is all powerful, then there shouldnt be a need to have a bad thing along the way to bring about good.

in effect he would be choosing to use a bad thing as a device for eventual good. that sounds like hes either omnipotent and unjust for choosing a good path with some bad devices along the way or he had no chioce and is just but not omnipotent. thus im back to the paradox :(

Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 06:37 PM
Perhaps you could say instead "If God only did good things, then why does he let bad things happen?" And even then, you'd run up with the problems of both definition as well as our own limited knowledge and inability to predict the future outcomes of a "bad event"

well i would support the first, that yes, if god is just, he should only do good things....i mean after all if he;s all powerful he shouldnt have to ever do bad things to get the results he wants

you then say there is no paradox, becuase your saying that humans cannot define good or bad becuase we dont have a full scope of the future


it would be foolish to say that we know objectivley wat is good and bad....

but i would rather believe that there is good and bad independent of god.
-->if things are only good becuase god says so....then that just seems arbitrary....he could of made rape good if he had desired....if things are only good becuase he said so, that wouldnt make him just, that just make us his puppets wouldnt it?

instead, he could be a just being, if his beliefs were good because they inherently supported what is objectively good in this world....that would be just.

and if there is objectively good and bad things, then i would argue we dont necissarilly need a huge scope such as an omnipotent being to know wats good or bad

so even if in the huge scope of billions of years that act ends up a good thing (refering to comment on our inferior scope), the fact is there was a bad one. and if god is all powerful, then there shouldnt be a need to have a bad thing along the way to bring about good.

in effect he would be choosing to use a bad thing as a device for eventual good. that sounds like hes either omnipotent and unjust for choosing a good path with some bad devices along the way or he had no chioce and is just but not omnipotent. thus im back to the paradox :(

DigitalMuscle
11-27-2006, 07:43 PM
why do bad things happen?


hypothesis:
***If god was allpowerful and just, he wouldnt let mary susan get hit by a drunk driver which would mean her kids grow up motherless***

bad things like this happen sometimes:

>>>>explanation 1: God is just and wanted to save mary susan, but cannot break the objective rules of the universe to save her and therefore is not allpowerful

>>>>>explanation 2: God is allpowerful, but did not see it just to save mary, becuase she didn't "deserve" to live...well fine, lets say she didnt....but then why should the kids be punished by not having a mother? therefore he would be allpowerful but not just.

fine lets say the kids didnt deserve to have a happy life either and thus it was "justifiable" to kill their motgher. but what exactly would constitut death? she didnt kill anyone or murder anyone in her life...so why doesnt every mildly bad mother in america get the same punishment?

so that would leave the only explanation as weak faith or some failure to follow the christian rules. but again that begs the question as to why her?

to the question of why her:

"God is all powerful, nor did he want her to die, it was just chance."


But if god is just, then wouldnt he be bound to use all means necessary to save her? if he cannot save her, then he is not omnipotent, and if he just idly watches "chance" take her, then he was not being just by avioding the use of the omnipotence

thus i think there is a reasonable proof for why being both just and omnipotent is not possible with all that goes on in todays world.



discuss, critique, arguement?



please, lets keep this philisophical :) this is not an attack on anyone
You are aware we are all going to die? So Susan will not live forever in the flesh no matter what arguement you bring up.

G-ds whole purpose is for us to be born again in the spirit so that when we do die in the flesh we do not face the second death in spirit.

ElderJefferson
11-27-2006, 08:37 PM
for the sake of helping me with this excerise in philosophjy can you more clearly state what you just said,
think what you mean is:

"god is letting his moral character be freed from guilt against satans assults"


can you please explain what this specifically entails or proves? thank you :)

I fear this post could get very lengthy, so I'll be brief.

God chose to create all life with the power to choose (that's another thread). One of those created beings (Lucifer) decided that he no longer wanted to obey the law of God, and even wanted to be worshipped for his own selfish reasons. God could have simply struck him dead on the spot, but what message would that send to the rest of creation? Here's what: God is a Monarch to be feared - One who exacts strict obedience from His subjects. So, in order for God to show that His character is flawless and that His law truly is perfect, He allowed Lucifer to keep living (though cast down to earth) and sin to continue. Why? Vindication. When all is said and done (we're not there yet), all of creation will bow before the King of Kings and declare that He truly is just, righteous, and loving, and that his law is perfect.

mr_oo3
11-27-2006, 09:00 PM
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus

If God is real, God is a cu nt.

Melkor
11-27-2006, 09:16 PM
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus

If God is real, God is a cu nt.

He is both willing and able, but doesn't because He knows it is for our own good not to. This life is a trial, and we learn and grow from it. Death is not the worst thing we can experience, far from it. Death is a part of life. People have freedom of choice so that someday they can be held accountable for their actions and either receive the blessings that come from right choices or the just punishment for their own sins.

mr_oo3
11-27-2006, 09:49 PM
He is both willing and able, but doesn't because He knows it is for our own good not to. This life is a trial, and we learn and grow from it. Death is not the worst thing we can experience, far from it. Death is a part of life. People have freedom of choice so that someday they can be held accountable for their actions and either receive the blessings that come from right choices or the just punishment for their own sins.

Why would anyone sentence the majority of humanity to eternal punishment?

Because that's what God is doing. He knows that people will go to hell, and basically sends them there. Sure he gives them free will, but if he really is omnipotent, he knows that they will make the wrong choices.

He has the power to change it, and doesn't. Thats pretty evil.

Melkor
11-27-2006, 09:53 PM
Why would anyone sentence the majority of humanity to eternal punishment?

Because that's what God is doing. He knows that people will go to hell, and basically sends them there. Sure he gives them free will, but if he really is omnipotent, he knows that they will make the wrong choices.

He has the power to change it, and doesn't. Thats pretty evil.

He's not. Anyone who experiences eternal punishment chooses it for themselves. That's the whole point... lol

God will make sure that everyone has the opportunity to hear the gospel and decide for his or her self. Whether now or later, everyone will hear it and choose.

mr_oo3
11-27-2006, 10:07 PM
He's not. Anyone who experiences eternal punishment chooses it for themselves. That's the whole point... lol

God will make sure that everyone has the opportunity to hear the gospel and decide for his or her self. Whether now or later, everyone will hear it and choose.

You think that every person in the world 'hears the gospel'?

This is going to be pointless.

Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 10:12 PM
but if god is all knowing

then any action he takes will instantly tell him the future based on that action. therefore by choosing that action...is choosing the future

thus negating freewill.....if god is indeed omniscent and omnipotent

so im seeing it as one or the other, freewill and a just, but not all powerful god...a god that is benevolent, but can only hope to persuade us to do the right thing in the face of evil.

or no freewill and a god that basically wrote a script and is watching it play out...he in fact chose a script that involves famine, disease, pain, murder etc

im not trying to disprove anyone;s existence...im merely trying to rationalize what is currently just based on faith



im getting the sense that people are arguing that god is indeed allpowerful and that its not that he;s malevolent, its that in the huge scheme of things, he is proving a point through these bad things... proving that eventaully he is above evil...

.but if he knowss the end result, then wats the point of subjecting everyone to the evil temptations? to test our faith. that makes sense, except that based on the arguement against free will (assuming he is omnipotent) he already knows who will make that chioce....then really this is just a big TV show that he;s directing/producing? i mean isnt it? if hes setting up this big drama between good and evil, even though he could of stopped it from the beginning....it sounds like its a short clip being drawn out into a movie using us as the actors

Melkor
11-27-2006, 10:12 PM
Yeah I do. Not necessarily while alive, but eventually yes. And yes, it is going to be pointless it seems, because you have already made your mind up and no one can change it but you. I'm not going to argue with you, but if you'd like to have a conversation feel free to continue to ask questions. Please keep as much of sense of superiority and arrogance out of it as possible though. I understand that atheists are vastly superior to us poor stupid little Christians already, and you won't have to prove any of that to me.

Vante
11-27-2006, 10:18 PM
Heres (http://www.lava.net/~hcssc/Omni-God_Challenge.html) an interesting article thats related to this thread. I dont agree with the author's tone, but he makes some good points...

Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 10:38 PM
Yeah I do. Not necessarily while alive, but eventually yes. And yes, it is going to be pointless it seems, because you have already made your mind up and no one can change it but you. I'm not going to argue with you, but if you'd like to have a conversation feel free to continue to ask questions. Please keep as much of sense of superiority and arrogance out of it as possible though. I understand that atheists are vastly superior to us poor stupid little Christians already, and you won't have to prove any of that to me.

i hope i dont come off as arrogant. im trying (emphasise trying) to keep tight following premices and arguements. i didnt intend it to be a bashdown...so please if there was a sentence or to that sounded arrogant, it was more frustration of the utter confusion that this debate entails. its why most people today simply dont even contimplate it, becuase its so damn hard to make up your mind and figure out what is the truth





but anyways how would the being given fair chance to choose God thing work out for this:

your religion is mainly based on geography. if your born in india your probly muslim or hindu,...if your american some kind of protestant or cathloc. middle eastern is going to be muslim, etc

so how would that be a fair chioce? if he grows up in india and is raised hindu from day one and never gets to read a bible? it doesnt seem like an omnipotent (which would ential that the chioce of the kid is predetermined anyways) god is making it possible for EVERYONE to decide???

Vante
11-27-2006, 10:51 PM
I fear this post could get very lengthy, so I'll be brief.

God chose to create all life with the power to choose (that's another thread). One of those created beings (Lucifer) decided that he no longer wanted to obey the law of God, and even wanted to be worshipped for his own selfish reasons. God could have simply struck him dead on the spot, but what message would that send to the rest of creation? Here's what: God is a Monarch to be feared - One who exacts strict obedience from His subjects. So, in order for God to show that His character is flawless and that His law truly is perfect, He allowed Lucifer to keep living (though cast down to earth) and sin to continue. Why? Vindication. When all is said and done (we're not there yet), all of creation will bow before the King of Kings and declare that He truly is just, righteous, and loving, and that his law is perfect.

How is God's desire to be worshipped any better then Lucifer's ?

Mismeasure
11-27-2006, 10:52 PM
but if god is all knowing

then any action he takes will instantly tell him the future based on that action. therefore by choosing that action...is choosing the future

thus negating freewill.....if god is indeed omniscent and omnipotent

so im seeing it as one or the other, freewill and a just, but not all powerful god...a god that is benevolent, but can only hope to persuade us to do the right thing in the face of evil.

or no freewill and a god that basically wrote a script and is watching it play out...he in fact chose a script that involves famine, disease, pain, murder etc

im not trying to disprove anyone;s existence...im merely trying to rationalize what is currently just based on faith



im getting the sense that people are arguing that god is indeed allpowerful and that its not that he;s malevolent, its that in the huge scheme of things, he is proving a point through these bad things... proving that eventaully he is above evil...

.but if he knowss the end result, then wats the point of subjecting everyone to the evil temptations? to test our faith. that makes sense, except that based on the arguement against free will (assuming he is omnipotent) he already knows who will make that chioce....then really this is just a big TV show that he;s directing/producing? i mean isnt it? if hes setting up this big drama between good and evil, even though he could of stopped it from the beginning....it sounds like its a short clip being drawn out into a movie using us as the actors

This also takes away free will from god. To take Leibniz’ point of view “god created the best of all possible worlds”. Every event has a cause and reaction that fits in to the best of all possible worlds. The principal of sufficient reason shows that god planed every little detail of this world, everything that we perceive as good and evil and also everything that seems arbitrary. Every event is already known to god so it would not makes sense for god to change his original plan because changing his original plan would mean it was imperfect.

What I am trying to say is once god created the universe he became powerless to his own creation.

Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 10:53 PM
Heres (http://www.lava.net/~hcssc/Omni-God_Challenge.html) an interesting article thats related to this thread. I dont agree with the author's tone, but he makes some good points...

when reconstructing arguements and such you are supposed to be sympathetic and not really arrogant....so i agree that the tone is a little harsh and winded...

but i also think that a lot of the points follow




i do not think though, that it means he doesnt exist. all it means is the basic question i brought up today. "he is either omnipotent and evil" or "benevolent and not all powerful"




but there is a third option. Voltaires Clock maker theory:

he was powerful enough to create a universe for us
and then stepped back to watch, knowing that like a pendulum, eventually the swing will stop in perfect balance....so now he waits through the millenia for that to come...knowing that interference isnt necessary and biology and such will get there....eventually....weeding out the bad

you could say, if he was all powerful, why didnt he just skip all the bad stuff in his path to "balance"...well then maybe he is simply just powerful enough to create the earth only to the objectibe laws of the universe:

i see its more than posible that morals are objective independent of god. (becuase if they werent, then god could of arbitrally made rape just etc)

so if those can be objective beyond god, then so can universal laws! so therefore, the clock maker designed the earth the best he could in keeping with natural laws....and the apparent mix ups are just being slowly worked out through evolution (at first there were some wierd ass creatues with 4 eyes and such....but evolution worked it out). so maybe the clock maker is just watching his creation through evolution knowing he cant and will not interefer....doesnt mean hes unjust.....hes just following the rules



i think thats kind of a happy medium




and allthough the human race may appear to show why the earth isnt perfect...

over billions of years earth has shown that it is incredibly effiecent at weeding out poor designs. Its possible that the human fallicies of corruption, murder etc are genetic defects that will eventually lead to the extinction....and thus the earth will continue on its path to eventual "perfection"

powerman2000
11-27-2006, 10:58 PM
why do bad things happen?


hypothesis:
***If god was allpowerful and just, he wouldnt let mary susan get hit by a drunk driver which would mean her kids grow up motherless***

bad things like this happen sometimes:

>>>>explanation 1: God is just and wanted to save mary susan, but cannot break the objective rules of the universe to save her and therefore is not allpowerful

>>>>>explanation 2: God is allpowerful, but did not see it just to save mary, becuase she didn't "deserve" to live...well fine, lets say she didnt....but then why should the kids be punished by not having a mother? therefore he would be allpowerful but not just.

fine lets say the kids didnt deserve to have a happy life either and thus it was "justifiable" to kill their motgher. but what exactly would constitut death? she didnt kill anyone or murder anyone in her life...so why doesnt every mildly bad mother in america get the same punishment?

so that would leave the only explanation as weak faith or some failure to follow the christian rules. but again that begs the question as to why her?

to the question of why her:

"God is all powerful, nor did he want her to die, it was just chance."


But if god is just, then wouldnt he be bound to use all means necessary to save her? if he cannot save her, then he is not omnipotent, and if he just idly watches "chance" take her, then he was not being just by avioding the use of the omnipotence

thus i think there is a reasonable proof for why being both just and omnipotent is not possible with all that goes on in todays world.



discuss, critique, arguement?



please, lets keep this philisophical :) this is not an attack on anyone

It's always interesting to watch another n00b in the R/P section attempt to cram God into his own little box.

Nic_Paul
11-27-2006, 10:59 PM
It's always interesting to watch another n00b in the R/P section attempt to cram God into his own little box.

ok....so maybe you dont agree....



the least you could do is add something of interest to the discusion, instead of being a dick about it....

powerman2000
11-27-2006, 11:03 PM
ok....so maybe you dont agree....



the least you could do is add something of interest to the discusion, instead of being a dick about it....

In case you didn't notice that was my critique. Which you requested.

Vante
11-27-2006, 11:06 PM
when reconstructing arguements and such you are supposed to be sympathetic and not really arrogant....so i agree that the tone is a little harsh and winded...

but i also think that a lot of the points follow




i do not think though, that it means he doesnt exist. all it means is the basic question i brought up today. "he is either omnipotent and evil" or "benevolent and not all powerful"




but there is a third option. Voltaires Clock maker theory:

he was powerful enough to create a universe for us
and then stepped back to watch, knowing that like a pendulum, eventually the swing will stop in perfect balance....so now he waits through the millenia for that to come...knowing that interference isnt necessary and biology and such will get there....eventually....weeding out the bad

you could say, if he was all powerful, why didnt he just skip all the bad stuff in his path to "balance"...well then maybe he is simply just powerful enough to create the earth only to the objectibe laws of the universe:

i see its more than posible that morals are objective independent of god. (becuase if they werent, then god could of arbitrally made rape just etc)

so if those can be objective beyond god, then so can universal laws! so therefore, the clock maker designed the earth the best he could in keeping with natural laws....and the apparent mix ups are just being slowly worked out through evolution (at first there were some wierd ass creatues with 4 eyes and such....but evolution worked it out). so maybe the clock maker is just watching his creation through evolution knowing he cant and will not interefer....doesnt mean hes unjust.....hes just following the rules



i think thats kind of a happy medium




and allthough the human race may appear to show why the earth isnt perfect...

over billions of years earth has shown that it is incredibly effiecent at weeding out poor designs. Its possible that the human fallicies of corruption, murder etc are genetic defects that will eventually lead to the extinction....and thus the earth will continue on its path to eventual "perfection"

Iam an agnostic, and I believe that IF there is a God, then he will probably be omnipotent, omniscient but not omnibenevolent... It makes perfect sense, and its a logically sound argument.

I also believe he doesnt give a rat's @ss whether we worship him or not...

Thats the conflict I have with religions such as christianity, these conflicts and contradictions... it just doesnt add up....

One argument I have come across though seems to justify God being omnibenevolent - It is said that God will make up for ur pains in the afterlife. Justice will be served. I wonder though, how God would justify the example given in my link...

Also, another contradiction I come across in christianity, is that no matter what kind of life u lead, no matter how moral u r, no matter the good u do, if u do not accept Christ as ur savior, u still goto hell. This seems like the design of a God thats hungry for attention, a selfish God. What then, is the difference between God and Satan ?

Vante
11-27-2006, 11:08 PM
ok....so maybe you dont agree....



the least you could do is add something of interest to the discusion, instead of being a dick about it....

Ignore him... There are plenty of coperative theists we can discuss with...

powerman2000
11-27-2006, 11:14 PM
Ignore him... There are plenty of coperative theists we can discuss with...

I can't have a discussion with such cluelessness and with such closed mindedness. The combination makes it impossible.

Vante
11-27-2006, 11:17 PM
I can't have a discussion with such cluelessness and with such closed mindedness. The combination makes it impossible.

very good... on ur way then... :rolleyes:

Melkor
11-27-2006, 11:24 PM
The problem that you seem to have is limited scope. You look at this life as all there is. I look at this life as a stepping stone to the next. Nothing that can happen in this life is as important as what happens in the next. Therefore, whatever suffering I go through I know it is temporary and it makes it much easier to smile through.


How is God's desire to be worshipped any better then Lucifer's ?
God created us, Satan merely tried to usurp God's power and authority for his own benefit.

You guys keep asking why doesn't God stop us from hurting, why does God let us suffer, He must be evil to let us go through life etc.

Do you plan on having kids?

Are you evil for doing so, knowing full well that throughout their lives they will suffer, feel pain, experience sadness and everything else that comes with life?

God made us so that we can live with Him in happiness, but in order for us to do so we need to learn and grow to be more like Him. Christ removes the mistakes we make so that we can be in His perfect presence when we die. Humility is required to accept that you can't do it on your own. God is not self serving when He asks us to accept and follow Christ, he is doing so for YOUR OWN benefit. Christ is the only way back to God, and true eternal happiness.

Nic_Paul
11-28-2006, 08:26 AM
It's always interesting to watch another n00b in the R/P section attempt to cram God into his own little box.

ya thanks for neg repping me???

critique usaully implies something constructive....

calling me a noob is hardly constructive

Nic_Paul
11-28-2006, 08:42 AM
The problem that you seem to have is limited scope. You look at this life as all there is. I look at this life as a stepping stone to the next. Nothing that can happen in this life is as important as what happens in the next. Therefore, whatever suffering I go through I know it is temporary and it makes it much easier to smile through.


God created us, Satan merely tried to usurp God's power and authority for his own benefit.

You guys keep asking why doesn't God stop us from hurting, why does God let us suffer, He must be evil to let us go through life etc.

Do you plan on having kids?

Are you evil for doing so, knowing full well that throughout their lives they will suffer, feel pain, experience sadness and everything else that comes with life?

God made us so that we can live with Him in happiness, but in order for us to do so we need to learn and grow to be more like Him. Christ removes the mistakes we make so that we can be in His perfect presence when we die. Humility is required to accept that you can't do it on your own. God is not self serving when He asks us to accept and follow Christ, he is doing so for YOUR OWN benefit. Christ is the only way back to God, and true eternal happiness.

good job....solid arguement...

>>>>>>>see power3000 this is more of what i was expecting when i said "critique" :) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<







i guess the only issue i have with it melkor, is that well all we can be really sure of is that we are consciosly thinking/imagining this world....not any other

i cant believe in the tooth fairy and so i only concern myself with the tooth. our conscious presense in this world is all that we are "sure" of, so im not sure how to concern myself with everythingt justififed after.


so that might make it seem that im aetheist.....
but actaully, i refuse to believe our lives are that meaningless, so i keep hope that one day il find a rational explanation for deity and what exactly he is about.....that may turn out to be impossible though....


the best example ive found so far is the clock maker theory.... i guess it allows for everything to make sense (no contradictions)...yet leaves room for a system of after life that he may or may not have created?


we might just have to leave it as who the hell knows.,...

Vante
11-28-2006, 10:15 AM
The problem that you seem to have is limited scope. You look at this life as all there is. I look at this life as a stepping stone to the next. Nothing that can happen in this life is as important as what happens in the next. Therefore, whatever suffering I go through I know it is temporary and it makes it much easier to smile through.

This is the argument I mentioned earlier... Since there is no way to refute or prove this, it leaves us with a stalemate.



God created us, Satan merely tried to usurp God's power and authority for his own benefit.

You guys keep asking why doesn't God stop us from hurting, why does God let us suffer, He must be evil to let us go through life etc.

Do you plan on having kids?

Are you evil for doing so, knowing full well that throughout their lives they will suffer, feel pain, experience sadness and everything else that comes with life?

First of all ur analogy doesnt make sense. God creating humans, and humans having babies are not the same thing.
God is supposedly omnipotent, therefore HE CAN CONTROL the good and the bad, and exact justice on humans in this world... Why do babies die, why do innocents suffer while criminals prosper ?
Humans on the other hand have neglegible control over their own lives, much less the life of their offsprings.

Also, my desire to procreate is by instinct, a human desire. This analogy does not work because God would need a similiar desire to make it work. And if he is susceptible to the desire to create children, maybe he is susceptible to other human desires aswell... Essentially u just opened a whole new can of worms by comparing God to humans...



God made us so that we can live with Him in happiness, but in order for us to do so we need to learn and grow to be more like Him. Christ removes the mistakes we make so that we can be in His perfect presence when we die. Humility is required to accept that you can't do it on your own. God is not self serving when He asks us to accept and follow Christ, he is doing so for YOUR OWN benefit. Christ is the only way back to God, and true eternal happiness.


Why cant a person be moral, modest, kind, giving without accepting Christ ?
If he can, what further benefits would accepting Christ have ?

Nic_Paul
11-28-2006, 10:33 AM
Why cant a person be moral, modest, kind, giving without accepting Christ ?
If he can, what further benefits would accepting Christ have ?



i kind of have the same question. if god is truely benevolent then it shouldnt matter wether or not your a christian if you lead a life in a "what would christ do" type of way.

i mean all those people in india that are hindu never had a chance to "accept christ", yet im sure there are great people that live there. so am i to belive that they are to perish simply becuase they dont bow down? that sounds like the point is to worship rather than be a good person....im not sure how much i like the sound of that

i dont think religion is needed to be a good person...as ive already pointed out, i think there can be objective morals independent of god. if there werent, then things being good would simply depend on gods word, which just as easily could of arbitrarily made rape good....

so if there are objective morals, then does one really need religion to be a good person? most of the wars of the world have some sort of disagreement between two races or religions or ideas etc...

so if the real goal of religion was peace, wouldnt it make sense to abolish organized "official" reliogon that only divide us and create fighting? (im including aethisism as a religion in this...in that im saying just maybe everyone should explore it for themselves without big masses of organized '--isms'...and just get rid of anything for the masses)

Galactus
11-28-2006, 11:52 AM
If you really believe what the bible says than yes God really wants to be worshipped. He created whole tiers of angels who do nothing but PRAISE HIM!!! Also I god wasn't worried about being worshipped why would not worshipping other things be a central commandment?

I agree with the bad analogy about creation/having children. Yes if we had the power to make sure our children would be free of suffering, but chose not to excersise that power, yes that would be kinda evil.

I have a hard time reconciling free will with allpowerfull/omnipotence. If by God's own decree we are allowed free will then he has given up some of his/her own power and is no longer all powerful. I mean maybe he/she still has the power to stop our decisions but doing so would go against his/her own decree proving him/herself fallable. Either God is not all powerfull or he/she can change his/her mind at will (which the bible suggests as he/she made more than one covenant with the Jewish tribes) which means the 'deal' with God can keep changing as time goes along. That is not a very satisfying idea.

This isn't meant to prove or disprove anything. Just some ideas I had while reading this thread and hoped it would keep discussion moving along. I am agnostic am fully open minded if anyone cares.

Sabatoge
11-28-2006, 12:15 PM
Heres (http://www.lava.net/~hcssc/Omni-God_Challenge.html) an interesting article thats related to this thread. I dont agree with the author's tone, but he makes some good points...

And you quoted this before for which I responded and you had nothing to say, so I'll post it again for your pleasure


Sure.

The example of the little girl, though horrible takes nothing away from God being omni-benevolent.

The argument is "Why didn't God intervene?" He knows, he should have stopped it right? Wrong.

To intervene is to violate mans free will, to do that would dicredited God as being righteous which would mean God is capable of sinning. But God cannot sin because what is sin? Sin is the absence of good, its not a tangible thing; its a no-thing. So for God to sin he'd have to be absent from himself which he cant be.

The article in reference to intervening says "according to Chrstian theology, "God" can do anything he chooses to do."

And thats right, God can do any"thing" but he cant do a non-thing which is sin.

The article continues with "If "God" did act as alleged in this incident, then "He" must be immoral and evil."

See, this is a sinful man trying to comprehand a God of pure righteousness and perfection. Basically the author is saying that this isn't fair and instead of pointing the finger at Man and our sinful desires the author blames God. But again, God cant be evil since that would require him to be absent from himself.

The author then says, "He" supposedly has omnipotent power, but using "His" free will "He" deliberately chose not to act in any way to prevent the little girl's suffering.

Again, the author fails to understand that God cannot contradict himself and/or go against himself.

This argument is a very tired one that people use to discredit God. Before they would use the example of why didn't God stop Adam from disobeying thus sin. Or why didn't God prevent Abel from being murdered by Cain? Or why didn't God________________

Its a very simple truth. God gave man free will and to force man to make a different decision violates the very notion of God being righteous and perfect. God would be inperfect - flawed, he would cease to exist.

Lastly the author comments "God" choose instead to kick back and watch. Does "God" get "His" thrills watching rape and torture?"

What like say Stephen is the book of Acts?

56And [Stephen] said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
57Then they (the priests) cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,
58And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.
59And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.

Not only was Stephen being stoned to death, but he saw God watching him. But Stephen knew what awaits him in heaven and the article indicates that the girl prayed to God in the name of "our Lord Jesus Christ, Amen"

If the girl knew Christ as her Savior then she would know that heaven is her true home.

Matthew 10:28
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Romans 12:19
Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Psalm 58:10
The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=945356&highlight=sabatoge

Nic_Paul
11-28-2006, 01:42 PM
so maybe...in response to the above....

at one time he was omni potent, but after he created natural laws etc
he gave up omnipotence and omniscient powers to preserve free will above everything else.

it doesnt mean we can stop respecting god, or that there is no god. it doesnt even mean that we wont be judged or repaid for faith in an afterlife.



it just means that god must of created the system of faith, heaven, hell, earth and then to preserve free will he must of given these up.....for to not give them up would negate free will (if he knows the future result of every action, then any action he took in the begining of time would determine a certain future)

so im still thinking the clock maker theory is the only one that makes rational sense, that leaves room for afterlife, judgement etc, creation, evolution, benevolence, free will... simply becuase that omni potence was there, but then given up to preserve everything as it is? i think its plausible

Vante
11-28-2006, 09:31 PM
And you quoted this before for which I responded and you had nothing to say, so I'll post it again for your pleasure


Iam sorry for not responding... Back then I got tired of the R/P section for awhile and just didnt feel like debating ... But Iam back in form now.. :)



Sure.

The example of the little girl, though horrible takes nothing away from God being omni-benevolent.

The argument is "Why didn't God intervene?" He knows, he should have stopped it right? Wrong.

To intervene is to violate mans free will, to do that would dicredited God as being righteous which would mean God is capable of sinning. But God cannot sin because what is sin? Sin is the absence of good, its not a tangible thing; its a no-thing. So for God to sin he'd have to be absent from himself which he cant be.

The article in reference to intervening says "according to Chrstian theology, "God" can do anything he chooses to do."

And thats right, God can do any"thing" but he cant do a non-thing which is sin.

The article continues with "If "God" did act as alleged in this incident, then "He" must be immoral and evil."

See, this is a sinful man trying to comprehand a God of pure righteousness and perfection. Basically the author is saying that this isn't fair and instead of pointing the finger at Man and our sinful desires the author blames God. But again, God cant be evil since that would require him to be absent from himself.

The author then says, "He" supposedly has omnipotent power, but using "His" free will "He" deliberately chose not to act in any way to prevent the little girl's suffering.

Again, the author fails to understand that God cannot contradict himself and/or go against himself.

This argument is a very tired one that people use to discredit God. Before they would use the example of why didn't God stop Adam from disobeying thus sin. Or why didn't God prevent Abel from being murdered by Cain? Or why didn't God________________

Its a very simple truth. God gave man free will and to force man to make a different decision violates the very notion of God being righteous and perfect. God would be inperfect - flawed, he would cease to exist.

Lastly the author comments "God" choose instead to kick back and watch. Does "God" get "His" thrills watching rape and torture?"

What like say Stephen is the book of Acts?

56And [Stephen] said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
57Then they (the priests) cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,
58And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.
59And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.

Not only was Stephen being stoned to death, but he saw God watching him. But Stephen knew what awaits him in heaven and the article indicates that the girl prayed to God in the name of "our Lord Jesus Christ, Amen"

If the girl knew Christ as her Savior then she would know that heaven is her true home.

Matthew 10:28
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Romans 12:19
Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Psalm 58:10
The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.

lol, i see, Do u believe in miracles ?
Have a look at this... (http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html)

I guess ur God is as sinful as any of us, then .... :D

mr_oo3
11-28-2006, 11:29 PM
so maybe...in response to the above....

at one time he was omni potent, but after he created natural laws etc
he gave up omnipotence and omniscient powers to preserve free will above everything else.

it doesnt mean we can stop respecting god, or that there is no god. it doesnt even mean that we wont be judged or repaid for faith in an afterlife.



it just means that god must of created the system of faith, heaven, hell, earth and then to preserve free will he must of given these up.....for to not give them up would negate free will (if he knows the future result of every action, then any action he took in the begining of time would determine a certain future)

so im still thinking the clock maker theory is the only one that makes rational sense, that leaves room for afterlife, judgement etc, creation, evolution, benevolence, free will... simply becuase that omni potence was there, but then given up to preserve everything as it is? i think its plausible

God is defined by omnipotence isn't he? Surely if he gave it up he would just be some sort of spirit or ghost or spaghetti monster?

farmerlee
11-28-2006, 11:42 PM
why do bad things happen?


hypothesis:
***If god was allpowerful and just, he wouldnt let mary susan get hit by a drunk driver which would mean her kids grow up motherless***

bad things like this happen sometimes:

>>>>explanation 1: God is just and wanted to save mary susan, but cannot break the objective rules of the universe to save her and therefore is not allpowerful

>>>>>explanation 2: God is allpowerful, but did not see it just to save mary, becuase she didn't "deserve" to live...well fine, lets say she didnt....but then why should the kids be punished by not having a mother? therefore he would be allpowerful but not just.

fine lets say the kids didnt deserve to have a happy life either and thus it was "justifiable" to kill their motgher. but what exactly would constitut death? she didnt kill anyone or murder anyone in her life...so why doesnt every mildly bad mother in america get the same punishment?

so that would leave the only explanation as weak faith or some failure to follow the christian rules. but again that begs the question as to why her?

to the question of why her:

"God is all powerful, nor did he want her to die, it was just chance."


But if god is just, then wouldnt he be bound to use all means necessary to save her? if he cannot save her, then he is not omnipotent, and if he just idly watches "chance" take her, then he was not being just by avioding the use of the omnipotence

thus i think there is a reasonable proof for why being both just and omnipotent is not possible with all that goes on in todays world.



discuss, critique, arguement?



please, lets keep this philisophical :) this is not an attack on anyone

Why are you blaming god for the actions of a drunk man?
God takes us all seriously, he respects our free will. If a man decides he wants to drink and then go driving thats his free choice to do so. The justice of god ensures that no sin will go unpunished, no crime will be overlooked.

Nic_Paul
11-29-2006, 12:24 AM
God is defined by omnipotence isn't he? Surely if he gave it up he would just be some sort of spirit or ghost or spaghetti monster?

if he doesnt give it up, then how can we have free will?



if he is all knowing, then he knows the futures that come with any action....and therefore any action he took was choosing the future...



if we have free will, somehow he must of given up omniscence at some point? i mean that seems to be the only logical explanation? is it not?

Nic_Paul
11-29-2006, 12:27 AM
Why are you blaming god for the actions of a drunk man?
God takes us all seriously, he respects our free will. If a man decides he wants to drink and then go driving thats his free choice to do so. The justice of god ensures that no sin will go unpunished, no crime will be overlooked.

im gonna admit that my original example has flaws...


so heres an example that i think is more what i was trying to come up with:

http://www.lava.net/~hcssc/Omni-God_Challenge.html

the actaull argueing style is pretty biased i admit....but the example he gives is none the less one that would better my arguement.

mr_oo3
11-29-2006, 01:12 AM
if he doesnt give it up, then how can we have free will?



if he is all knowing, then he knows the futures that come with any action....and therefore any action he took was choosing the future...



if we have free will, somehow he must of given up omniscence at some point? i mean that seems to be the only logical explanation? is it not?

There is no logical solution to a paradox. The only way free will can exist is with a non-deterministic universe, and that cannot coincide with an omnipotent all knowing God.

Another type of omnipotence example: Can God create a rock so big even he can't lift it? If he can't lift it he isn't all powerful, but if he can't create that rock is isn't omnipotent.

Logic often breaks down with absolutes.

mr_oo3
11-29-2006, 01:15 AM
He's not. Anyone who experiences eternal punishment chooses it for themselves. That's the whole point... lol

God will make sure that everyone has the opportunity to hear the gospel and decide for his or her self. Whether now or later, everyone will hear it and choose.

But he knows that most people won't make the right choice. He KNOWS that, so he is condemning them to hell, just in a roundabout way.

Sabatoge
11-29-2006, 09:58 AM
lol, i see, Do u believe in miracles ?
Have a look at this... (http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html)

I guess ur God is as sinful as any of us, then .... :D

I'm not following you here. You post a pro-God website and say that God is sinful. The article doesn't imply such a thing.

Please clarify

Sabatoge
11-29-2006, 12:08 PM
so maybe...in response to the above....

at one time he was omni potent, but after he created natural laws etc
he gave up omnipotence and omniscient powers to preserve free will above everything else.

At one point he was?

Malachi 3:6
For I am the LORD, I change not;

Nope.

BMF_Dallas
11-29-2006, 12:51 PM
but anyways how would the being given fair chance to choose God thing work out for this:

your religion is mainly based on geography. if your born in india your probly muslim or hindu,...if your american some kind of protestant or cathloc. middle eastern is going to be muslim, etc

so how would that be a fair chioce? if he grows up in india and is raised hindu from day one and never gets to read a bible? it doesnt seem like an omnipotent (which would ential that the chioce of the kid is predetermined anyways) god is making it possible for EVERYONE to decide???

We will each be judged based on what was revealed. God knows the heart of man. For those that have been raised a certain way and have never been exposed to the Gospel, they will be judged accordingly...by what they know and what they did with it. However, God reveals himself in many ways and for us to say that we never knew him because we were never told isn't a true statement. This is the very reason that God is just...God will judge each of us accordingly.

BMF_Dallas
11-29-2006, 01:01 PM
Why cant a person be moral, modest, kind, giving without accepting Christ ?
If he can, what further benefits would accepting Christ have ?

A person can be moral, modest, kind, and giving without accepting Christ.

The benefit of accepting Christ is accepting the gift he provided in dying for your sins. Accepting Christ doesn't automatically make you moral, kind, giving, and modest...accepting Christ covers your sins so that you won't be separated from God. We all sin, and without Christ we would have to face eternal punishment for those sins.

farmerlee
11-29-2006, 04:39 PM
There is no logical solution to a paradox. The only way free will can exist is with a non-deterministic universe, and that cannot coincide with an omnipotent all knowing God.

Another type of omnipotence example: Can God create a rock so big even he can't lift it? If he can't lift it he isn't all powerful, but if he can't create that rock is isn't omnipotent.

Logic often breaks down with absolutes.

Free will can easily exist alongside an all knowing god. Just because god knows what you will decide does not take away your freedom to make that decision.

JAGERBOY
11-29-2006, 04:52 PM
At one point he was?

Malachi 3:6
For I am the LORD, I change not;

Nope.

Then why did he change his mind from the OT to the NT?

JBDW
11-29-2006, 04:52 PM
Why are you blaming god for the actions of a drunk man?
God takes us all seriously, he respects our free will. If a man decides he wants to drink and then go driving thats his free choice to do so. The justice of god ensures that no sin will go unpunished, no crime will be overlooked.

So do you ever give thanks to your god for things which are actually the result of actions by humans? Say a kindness done to you by a stranger, a promotion at work, etcetcetc. I would assume that you disagree with the friend of the poster in the other thread who, when he got fired, said that it was 'God's will'?

Forge3
11-29-2006, 05:59 PM
What a tangled mess it seems when we try try to separate the will of God from man...and yet say nothing happens except by the permitting or directing will of God. For me it is like the provebial cat chasing its tail (intellectually) at times.

I wonder that what really matters is trust in God through thick and thin. In a commited relationship that is how it is. God may calm the storm inside us or outside us. Or he may not. My faith teaches me that if He leads us to it he will lead us through it. I can't figure out all of God's mysteries and I don't judge anyone for trying to plumb the depths of them. I just have'nt satisfied my intellectual queries completely yet but I have chosen to walk the journey of faith and doubt.

Sorry if I've gone way off topic.

Nic_Paul
11-29-2006, 07:18 PM
ok i think i've found a few answers on the net and through some thinking:

the creating a rock too heavy to lift paradox:

answer 1. God cannot stop being God. he cant be illogical. square circles and such just cant be fathomed and such arent a valid thing that he would ever desire to do....along the lines of god cant cease being god

or

answer 2. forces are never stopped. when we lift up wieght, we are not stopping gravity, but simply acting against it with a stronger force. so it seems possible that miracles and doing things like lifting a rock so heavy no can lift are simply applications of force that are strong enough to act against physics and maybe even logic


the paraodox of god being inherently good, yet creates things with the capacity of evil knowing through omniscence that they will be used for evil (thereby creating evil).

1. this paradox could be solved by possibly accepting that god did not create crack cociane ingredients or satan as evil...only with the capacity for evil. besides the point that he created these knowing their use, bottom line he created them only with the capacity


i still dont like that arguement against the second paradox....it seems illogical compared to the arguement of if you know ever actions future, then you are choosing the future when you act. but o well....

im trying to make logical arguements...but who knows :(

JBDW
11-29-2006, 07:32 PM
ok i think i've found a few answers on the net and through some thinking:

the creating a rock too heavy to lift paradox:

answer 1. God cannot stop being God. he cant be illogical. square circles and such just cant be fathomed and such arent a valid thing that he would ever desire to do....along the lines of god cant cease being god

or

answer 2. forces are never stopped. when we lift up wieght, we are not stopping gravity, but simply acting against it with a stronger force. so it seems possible that miracles and doing things like lifting a rock so heavy no can lift are simply applications of force that are strong enough to act against physics and maybe even logic

You're not being consistent here. First you argue that God is logical, then you argue that God acts against logic?


the paraodox of god being inherently good, yet creates things with the capacity of evil knowing through omniscence that they will be used for evil (thereby creating evil).

1. this paradox could be solved by possibly accepting that god did not create crack cociane ingredients or satan as evil...only with the capacity for evil. besides the point that he created these knowing their use, bottom line he created them only with the capacity


i still dont like that arguement against the second paradox....it seems illogical compared to the arguement of if you know ever actions future, then you are choosing the future when you act. but o well....

im trying to make logical arguements...but who knows :([/QUOTE]

Nic_Paul
11-29-2006, 08:46 PM
You're not being consistent here. First you argue that God is logical, then you argue that God acts against logic?



im trying to look at both sides. im not going to be consistent for the sake of being "faithful" to aethism or christianity

im trying to realistically investigate and explore both sides :) .
earlier in the thread i tried coming up with the aethist side. now im trying to come up with rational arguements that the other side might advance.
investigating opposite opinions will as you point bring up a few contradictions

i was simply submiting these arguements for discussion. I cant honeslty say what i believ is to be true (im pretty confused :( )

Vante
11-29-2006, 10:00 PM
I'm not following you here. You post a pro-God website and say that God is sinful. The article doesn't imply such a thing.

Please clarify

This is what u posted -


To intervene is to violate mans free will, to do that would dicredited God as being righteous which would mean God is capable of sinning. But God cannot sin because what is sin? Sin is the absence of good, its not a tangible thing; its a no-thing. So for God to sin he'd have to be absent from himself which he cant be.

The link (http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html) I provided gives an explanation for miracles and reasons for why it is logical for a christian to believe in them. Since u r a christian, I assume u believe in miracles too (atleast the ones in the bible). Since this pro-god site defines a miracle as



A true miracle is an event in the external world brought about by the immediate agency or the simple volition of God, operating without the use of means capable of being discerned by the senses, and designed to authenticate the divine commission of a religious teacher and the truth of his message (John 2:18; Matt. 12:38).

It is an occurrence at once above nature and above man. It shows the intervention of a power that is not limited by the laws either of matter or of mind, a power interrupting the fixed laws which govern their movements, a supernatural power.

Using ur own argument, which I have already quoted above, if miracles are true (like the bible says) then God has intervened and has thus violated Mans free will, and therefore he is a sinner, like the rest of us.

Vante
11-29-2006, 10:07 PM
A person can be moral, modest, kind, and giving without accepting Christ.

Does this person deserve to goto hell then ?



The benefit of accepting Christ is accepting the gift he provided in dying for your sins. Accepting Christ doesn't automatically make you moral, kind, giving, and modest...accepting Christ covers your sins so that you won't be separated from God. We all sin, and without Christ we would have to face eternal punishment for those sins.

Why does Christ need this acceptance ? Why is it so important to him ? Why can he not make the judgement solely on the person's character, his deeds and his repentence for the wrong things he did ?

Why is acknowledgment so important to him ?

When u say 'accepting christ covers your sins', it sounds like a bargain... Accept christ and repent for ur sins and goto heaven... Why not just repent just as much without the involvement of God ?

How is this different from a deal with the devil ?

mr_oo3
11-29-2006, 10:38 PM
Free will can easily exist alongside an all knowing god. Just because god knows what you will decide does not take away your freedom to make that decision.

God can know exactly the choice we WILL make, and yet we have free will?

Really?

Melkor
11-29-2006, 10:43 PM
God can know exactly the choice we WILL make, and yet we have free will?

Really?

His foreknowledge does not affect our freedom of choice. It merely means that He knows the choices we will make. I can't figure out why that is such a popular argument for atheism.

mr_oo3
11-29-2006, 10:43 PM
ok i think i've found a few answers on the net and through some thinking:

the creating a rock too heavy to lift paradox:

answer 1. God cannot stop being God. he cant be illogical. square circles and such just cant be fathomed and such arent a valid thing that he would ever desire to do....along the lines of god cant cease being god

But omnipotence means you can do anything. That is how it is defined. How you do everything if two things are in direct conflict (the rock paradox)?

The only rational solution is that it is a paradox. It ISN'T an argument for or against God, just that we CANNOT understand an omnipotent being.

It is pure arrogance to think that we humans can understand perfection. We aren't built for it.


the paraodox of god being inherently good, yet creates things with the capacity of evil knowing through omniscence that they will be used for evil (thereby creating evil).

1. this paradox could be solved by possibly accepting that god did not create crack cociane ingredients or satan as evil...only with the capacity for evil. besides the point that he created these knowing their use, bottom line he created them only with the capacity


i still dont like that arguement against the second paradox....it seems illogical compared to the arguement of if you know ever actions future, then you are choosing the future when you act. but o well....

If you make a gun, and know 100% for sure that it will kill an innocent person, is that not creating that murder?

ie. that murder wouldn't have happened if you didn't create that gun. So you ARE causing that murder, you are causing evil, just indirectly.

mr_oo3
11-29-2006, 10:45 PM
His foreknowledge does not affect our freedom of choice. It merely means that He knows the choices we will make. I can't figure out why that is such a popular argument for atheism.

If he knows what choice you are going to make, then how can you choose a different choice?

Melkor
11-29-2006, 10:49 PM
His knowledge does NOT affect the choice.

I gave this example earlier.

If I offered you a choice between a million dollars or an excruciatingly painful death did I make the choice for you or simply know what choice you were going to make?

His knowledge is seperate from my choice. You choose so that someday when you meet God He can show you your life and you will say "yes, those are my mistakes". It's on you, not Him.

mr_oo3
11-29-2006, 10:57 PM
His knowledge does NOT affect the choice.

I gave this example earlier.

If I offered you a choice between a million dollars or an excruciatingly painful death did I make the choice for you or simply know what choice you were going to make?

His knowledge is seperate from my choice. You choose so that someday when you meet God He can show you your life and you will say "yes, those are my mistakes". It's on you, not Him.

I choose the excruciatingly painful death. Was that the choice you thought I would make?

Omnipotence isn't probability, it's certainty.

If God knows that I will choose to walk rather than drive, how can I ever choose to drive?

Hasn't the choice already been made?

Melkor
11-29-2006, 11:00 PM
I choose the excruciatingly painful death. Was that the choice you thought I would make?

Omnipotence isn't probability, it's certainty.

If God knows that I will choose to walk rather than drive, how can I ever choose to drive?

Hasn't the choice already been made?

Yes, it has. By you. God just knew with absolute certainty which choice it was you would make.

Vante
11-29-2006, 11:04 PM
I understand both point of views here...

(separate from my argument with Sabotage) According to Melkor we DO have free-will, its just the God already knows what we are going to choose. he doesnt intervene in our choice making process in any way. This is how free-will works in the presence of omniscience.

But then mr_oo3 has an interesting point.. What good is such free-will? Do we truly have free-will if God already knows?

When u think about it, if God is omniscient, then essentially free-will becomes an illusion.

Melkor
11-29-2006, 11:08 PM
God knows the outcome of every one of every possible choice you could make. If you have a choice in front of you that has one billion different potential choices to make, He knows the end result to infinity of each choice. He doesn't just know the choice you will make, He knows everything that ever was, or ever could be. You and I can't comprehend that type of knowledge (yet) and so the argument is really like 2 year olds arguing about quantum physics.

Vante
11-29-2006, 11:21 PM
God knows the outcome of every one of every possible choice you could make. If you have a choice in front of you that has one billion different potential choices to make, He knows the end result to infinity of each choice. He doesn't just know the choice you will make, He knows everything that ever was, or ever could be. You and I can't comprehend that type of knowledge (yet) and so the argument is really like 2 year olds arguing about quantum physics.

It certainly is thought provoking...

Its funny though, this reminds me of a certain dialog in one of my favourite video games I played as a kid...

The game was called Legacy Of Kain : Soul Reaver 2. Its about a vampire (named Kain) who discovers time portals, and a soul sucking entity (a former Vampire named Raziel) in the mythical land of Nosgoth. U play as the soul sucking entity.. :D

Here is the dialog I was reminded of ...

Kain:
To know the future, Raziel - to see its paths and streams tracing out into the infinite...
As a man, I could never have contained such forbidden truths.
But each of us is so much more than we once were. Do you not feel with all your soul how we have become like gods?
And as such, are we not indivisible? As long as a single one of us stands, we are legion...
Our futures are predestined -
Moebius foretold mine aeons ago. We each play out the parts fate has written for us.
Free will is an illusion.

I really have no point actually, its just something I wanted to share. If anybody here is interested in gaming I strongly recommend the whole LOK series, and if anybody just likes a good read, then I would recommend checking the script out here (http://www.dark-chronicle.co.uk/info/index.php)...

The story is quite thought provoking....

farmerlee
11-30-2006, 03:30 AM
So do you ever give thanks to your god for things which are actually the result of actions by humans? Say a kindness done to you by a stranger, a promotion at work, etcetcetc. I would assume that you disagree with the friend of the poster in the other thread who, when he got fired, said that it was 'God's will'?

I do my best to give thanks to god in all things. If my boss gives me a raise at work i thank god because i realise all things given to men come from god. If my boss fires me of course i would probably be shocked but i would still do my best to give thanks for the blessings i still have.
I will admit that in no way do i have it all figured out, i do not fully understand god. But i do realise that i don't have to fully understand god to know god. As i said in another thread, when i cannot trace his hand i can still know his heart.

JAGERBOY
11-30-2006, 06:19 AM
I just read the last pages of arguments and Ive drawn a conclusion...

Melkor is an illogical thinker.

JBDW
11-30-2006, 09:01 PM
I do my best to give thanks to god in all things. If my boss gives me a raise at work i thank god because i realise all things given to men come from god. If my boss fires me of course i would probably be shocked but i would still do my best to give thanks for the blessings i still have.
I will admit that in no way do i have it all figured out, i do not fully understand god. But i do realise that i don't have to fully understand god to know god. As i said in another thread, when i cannot trace his hand i can still know his heart.

Let me try to understand this, because right now I'm feeling that there's a discrepancy. If man has free will, then by definition God cannot interfere with it, neither can he be said to be a part of it. If that is the case, any decision made by any human is independent of God. Then, how can you actually give thanks to God for something like a promotion at work?

Weightaholic
11-30-2006, 09:07 PM
God knows the outcome of every one of every possible choice you could make. If you have a choice in front of you that has one billion different potential choices to make, He knows the end result to infinity of each choice.

If that is true, then God is not omniscient.

farmerlee
11-30-2006, 09:33 PM
Let me try to understand this, because right now I'm feeling that there's a discrepancy. If man has free will, then by definition God cannot interfere with it, neither can he be said to be a part of it. If that is the case, any decision made by any human is independent of God. Then, how can you actually give thanks to God for something like a promotion at work?

As i said before i give thanks because i realise that all things given to men come from god. If it were not for god the man would not have been in the position to give me a promotion.

Melkor
11-30-2006, 10:14 PM
If that is true, then God is not omniscient.

Please explain.

JBDW
12-01-2006, 01:35 AM
As i said before i give thanks because i realise that all things given to men come from god. If it were not for god the man would not have been in the position to give me a promotion.

Okay. Then, to be consistent, do you blame god for evil? Because the evil caused by men also comes from god, no?

Vante
12-01-2006, 01:41 AM
Okay. Then, to be consistent, do you blame god for evil? Because the evil caused by men also comes from god, no?

lol.... Check and mate....

BMF_Dallas
12-01-2006, 09:36 AM
Does this person deserve to goto hell then ?

Based on Christianity, if this person has knowledge of the Gospel and rejects the word of God they are choosing eternal separation from God. It is not for me to say whether this person will go to Hell, that will between them and God




Why does Christ need this acceptance ? Why is it so important to him ? Why can he not make the judgement solely on the person's character, his deeds and his repentence for the wrong things he did ?

Why is acknowledgment so important to him ?

Christ doesn't need this acceptance...we do. It is through the sacrafice of Jesus Christ that we are able to receive forgiveness from repenting.



When u say 'accepting christ covers your sins', it sounds like a bargain... Accept christ and repent for ur sins and goto heaven... Why not just repent just as much without the involvement of God ?

It is a bargain. We don't deserve the gift of salvation. God has provided this to us in spite of what we deserve. We are all sinners and therefore separated from a sinless God. The sacrafice of Jesus made it possible for us to saved and made clean of sin. We are only human, our repentance is meaningless without the work of God.



How is this different from a deal with the devil ?

Heaven and Hell...pretty different. Eternal existence with God or eternal separation from God...I choose to make my deal with God.

Nic_Paul
12-01-2006, 12:18 PM
quetsion:

im confirmed in the catholic church so its not like i never paid attention....but anyways i have a question

i want to know IN PLAIN ENGLISH...not bible/shakespearian/yoda talk....but in plain english:


why exactly christ needed to die for our sins?

and why did he have to die for our sins, when we STILL have to beg for forgiveness even though he apparently died to get rid of our sins? so couldnt he have just skipped the dieing part and God could of just granted forgiveness based on the repentance we already have to do anyways even with christ dieing? (il try and explain it again if i didnt explain it well, just ask me)


it seems to me like someone in India has an easier time getting into heaven than we do simply becuase: they will be judged on merits of character (they arent exposed to the gospel), while we have to pass all these test like things?
how is this fair that a non christian has an easier time getting? (assuming that my logic is correct)

the OT was written with the knowledge and profecy of the new testament (omninesence), however it seems that God changes his mind after christ and the new covenenant stuff. suddenly we go from a God who advocates stoning people that are of sin and seling your daughter as a slave to a god that is forgiving and does not advocate stoning sinners?

but if god is all knowing and perfect how can he admit he was wrong in OT by it suddenly changing around for the new testament?

BMF_Dallas
12-01-2006, 01:47 PM
quetsion:

im confirmed in the catholic church so its not like i never paid attention....but anyways i have a question

i want to know IN PLAIN ENGLISH...not bible/shakespearian/yoda talk....but in plain english:


why exactly christ needed to die for our sins?

Prior to Christ living, dying on cross, and rising again, God's children were forgiven through a series of sacrafices. Man is sinful and not able to follow the God's law to perfection. Also, over time man made it more about the law than about God. God, not wanting to lose a soul was merciful and took human form as Jesus, God's only son to share free man from the OT laws and start a new covenent. Christ was the ultimate sacrifice...taking on all sin for mankind so that man did not have to die a physical and spiritual death. Jesus came to show that he was the way. This was all foretold in the OT, so nothing changed...everything was fulfilled by this action.


and why did he have to die for our sins, when we STILL have to beg for forgiveness even though he apparently died to get rid of our sins? so couldnt he have just skipped the dieing part and God could of just granted forgiveness based on the repentance we already have to do anyways even with christ dieing? (il try and explain it again if i didnt explain it well, just ask me)

We had to beg for forgiveness prior to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. In OT times, this was accomplished via sacrafices. God did what he did because he is God and his understanding is not our own. His life, death, and resurrection was the perfect sacrafice for our sins. All we need to do is accept that gift. This was an act of mercy to save all souls. The choice is ours. Jesus showed us that it wasn't about the rituals and what you could eat and could not eat, and whom you could and could not associate with...it was about him and the love for God and to live your life for God.



it seems to me like someone in India has an easier time getting into heaven than we do simply becuase: they will be judged on merits of character (they arent exposed to the gospel), while we have to pass all these test like things?
how is this fair that a non christian has an easier time getting? (assuming that my logic is correct)

How much easier can it be to recognize that you are sinner and ask Jesus into your heart as your savior. Accept the gift of salvation so that you will not experience an eternity separate from God. Those in your example do not have a free pass. They will be judged on what was revealed to them. We all sin and fall short of the grace of God. Those without the saving grace of Jesus Christ will be judged on how they used their free will to always choose what was right and good. It is much harder for one that does not have Christ. They will be judged based on how they followed the letter of their law. As I said, we all fall short and it is by the mercy of God that we are saved. Jesus grants us that salvation.


the OT was written with the knowledge and profecy of the new testament (omninesence), however it seems that God changes his mind after christ and the new covenenant stuff. suddenly we go from a God who advocates stoning people that are of sin and seling your daughter as a slave to a god that is forgiving and does not advocate stoning sinners?

but if god is all knowing and perfect how can he admit he was wrong in OT by it suddenly changing around for the new testament?

I will take a stab at this one...I am still faily new at all of this, so others may want to chime in. God did not change his mind. God had punishments set up for different offenses...we still have that today just carried out differently. It is society that has changed over time. Slavery of the OT times was not what we view slavery as today. I don't see where God has admitted he was wrong. The NT is about God's love and mercy for us to send us a savior. This was done to right the wrongs of man...not the wrongs of God. To demonstrate our love for God and for it to mean something it has to be done freely. God has given us that choice through Jesus.

Nic_Paul
12-01-2006, 01:59 PM
ok so heres one more quetsion,


so apparently we all had a debt...say x number of credits of sins or whatever

and jesus paid it for us. well it doesnt seem logical that we have to acknowlegde he already paid off the debt if you use this anaology:

i have a 250$ ticket. my dad pays it off. wether i emotional accept it was paid off or not....the fact is the debt has been paid and the state wont punish me...so why is the acceptance part so important?

heathershubby
12-01-2006, 02:29 PM
This is what u posted -


The link (http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html) I provided gives an explanation for miracles and reasons for why it is logical for a christian to believe in them. Since u r a christian, I assume u believe in miracles too (atleast the ones in the bible). Since this pro-god site defines a miracle as



Using ur own argument, which I have already quoted above, if miracles are true (like the bible says) then God has intervened and has thus violated Mans free will, and therefore he is a sinner, like the rest of us.

In the above it talks about God's Intervention in a situation he can intervean in our lives just not at the expense of our free will which we have because we are made in his image.

heathershubby
12-01-2006, 02:33 PM
I understand both point of views here...

(separate from my argument with Sabotage) According to Melkor we DO have free-will, its just the God already knows what we are going to choose. he doesnt intervene in our choice making process in any way. This is how free-will works in the presence of omniscience.

But then mr_oo3 has an interesting point.. What good is such free-will? Do we truly have free-will if God already knows?

When u think about it, if God is omniscient, then essentially free-will becomes an illusion.

if he never chooses to intervein then no it is true free will.

heathershubby
12-01-2006, 02:42 PM
[QUOTE=Nic_Paul;12907610]quetsion:

im confirmed in the catholic church so its not like i never paid attention....but anyways i have a question

i want to know IN PLAIN ENGLISH...not bible/shakespearian/yoda talk....but in plain english:


why exactly christ needed to die for our sins?

God = pure good Sin = Evil these things can not exist together so without forgivness no eternity with God.

Vante
12-01-2006, 09:30 PM
In the above it talks about God's Intervention in a situation he can intervean in our lives just not at the expense of our free will which we have because we are made in his image.

But there is no consistency here...

For eg - Thousands of ppl die of cancer, yes ? Little innocent girls die in accidents, or are murdered, raped etc ... yes ?

All of the above is fact, and it has happned at sometime or the other...

Then u have claims such as the ones in this thread (http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=932192&highlight=Miracles)... If these actually are miracles, then 2 things become very clear -

1) God plays favourites... If he helps one sinner, he should help the other aswell... Therefore he is not omnibenevolent...

2) He can intervene in our lives, rather directly... What sort of free will is that ?

So let me ask u, do u believe in day to day miracles, to true christians advocate day to day miracles ? Is it in the bible ?

farmerlee
12-01-2006, 09:32 PM
Okay. Then, to be consistent, do you blame god for evil? Because the evil caused by men also comes from god, no?

No, the evil caused by men comes from their free will.

Vante
12-01-2006, 09:48 PM
Based on Christianity, if this person has knowledge of the Gospel and rejects the word of God they are choosing eternal separation from God. It is not for me to say whether this person will go to Hell, that will between them and God


I see...



Christ doesn't need this acceptance...we do. It is through the sacrafice of Jesus Christ that we are able to receive forgiveness from repenting.

So basically u r saying that my repentence does not mean anything without accepting Christ ?
Does the sorrow not count simply because of my beliefs?



It is a bargain. We don't deserve the gift of salvation. God has provided this to us in spite of what we deserve. We are all sinners and therefore separated from a sinless God. The sacrafice of Jesus made it possible for us to saved and made clean of sin. We are only human, our repentance is meaningless without the work of God.

But is it not God that created us ? If God created all and knows all then he knew we would sin... So basically he made us underserving of salvation and now desires to be worshipped as a price for a ticket to heaven ? Sounds alot like what the British colonies in India did in the 1800s... (ie they bought cheap raw material, shipped it off to Britian, made goods and sold them back in India for a higher price..)

It is a bargain, afterall...




Heaven and Hell...pretty different. Eternal existence with God or eternal separation from God...I choose to make my deal with God.

I dont mean to sound cynical or harsh, but I feel that u r trying to blanket the nature of God while Iam trying to uncover it... I really wish to see clearly, as Iam truly undecided if whether I would like to be in such a God's presence at all...

farmerlee
12-01-2006, 09:52 PM
ok so heres one more quetsion,


so apparently we all had a debt...say x number of credits of sins or whatever

and jesus paid it for us. well it doesnt seem logical that we have to acknowlegde he already paid off the debt if you use this anaology:

i have a 250$ ticket. my dad pays it off. wether i emotional accept it was paid off or not....the fact is the debt has been paid and the state wont punish me...so why is the acceptance part so important?

Because acceptance is a necessary part of reconciliation. By not accepting that Jesus has paid your debt you are saying to god, "i still owe you".
The god of the bible tells us salvation is for all, NOT that all are saved.
A person must take Christ as his saviour, or else his death means nothing.
Just as a man could die of thirst beside a spring of water if he refuses to drink from it.

adilrockstar
12-01-2006, 09:56 PM
why do bad things happen?


hypothesis:
***If god was allpowerful and just, he wouldnt let mary susan get hit by a drunk driver which would mean her kids grow up motherless***

bad things like this happen sometimes:

>>>>explanation 1: God is just and wanted to save mary susan, but cannot break the objective rules of the universe to save her and therefore is not allpowerful

>>>>>explanation 2: God is allpowerful, but did not see it just to save mary, becuase she didn't "deserve" to live...well fine, lets say she didnt....but then why should the kids be punished by not having a mother? therefore he would be allpowerful but not just.

fine lets say the kids didnt deserve to have a happy life either and thus it was "justifiable" to kill their motgher. but what exactly would constitut death? she didnt kill anyone or murder anyone in her life...so why doesnt every mildly bad mother in america get the same punishment?

so that would leave the only explanation as weak faith or some failure to follow the christian rules. but again that begs the question as to why her?

to the question of why her:

"God is all powerful, nor did he want her to die, it was just chance."


But if god is just, then wouldnt he be bound to use all means necessary to save her? if he cannot save her, then he is not omnipotent, and if he just idly watches "chance" take her, then he was not being just by avioding the use of the omnipotence

thus i think there is a reasonable proof for why being both just and omnipotent is not possible with all that goes on in todays world.



discuss, critique, arguement?



please, lets keep this philisophical :) this is not an attack on anyone


You are wrong, plain and simple.

Vante
12-01-2006, 09:58 PM
No, the evil caused by men comes from their free will.

Ah... Cherry picking are we ?

Let me quote what u said


As i said before i give thanks because i realise that all things given to men come from god. If it were not for god the man would not have been in the position to give me a promotion.

Now let me rephrase ur statement so that it fits into context...



As i said before i give thanks because I realise that all things given to men come from god. If it were not for god the man would not have been in the position to do evil.

U cant have it both ways, my friend... If evil comes out of free will, then good can too.
OR
If everything given to man comes from God, then evil is part of the package...

God is omnipotent, he made the universe. Evil exists in this universe, thus he made evil, or atleast gave it the capacity to do evil.. Evil is not a by product, God is omniscient and thus he knew exactly what he was doing when he made the universe, he knew it would turn out like this...

Vante
12-01-2006, 09:59 PM
You are wrong, plain and simple.

No, u r.... thats final...

Vante
12-01-2006, 10:03 PM
Because acceptance is a necessary part of reconciliation. By not accepting that Jesus has paid your debt you are saying to god, "i still owe you".
The god of the bible tells us salvation is for all, NOT that all are saved.
A person must take Christ as his saviour, or else his death means nothing.
Just as a man could die of thirst beside a spring of water if he refuses to drink from it.

Why is ur God in such a desperate need for attention ?

My sorrow, my repentence dont count because my beliefs are different ?

Does my not being a christian make my repentence any less sincere then urs ?

Melkor
12-01-2006, 10:11 PM
There is a penalty for each sin, and unless you pay or ask Jesus to pay it it isn't paid. YOU have to ask Christ to pay the penalty for your sin, or you can just pay it yourself.

JBDW
12-02-2006, 03:07 AM
No, the evil caused by men comes from their free will.

Vante already covered this, but anyway...

Earlier, from you: "As i said before i give thanks because i realise that all things given to men come from god."

You are being inconsistent if you say that evil is not given by God.

USMARINE8152
12-02-2006, 04:39 AM
to clear all this up just watch The Devils Advocate..great movie..sorry i thought this would lighten up the mood in here.

NicVJ
12-02-2006, 06:48 AM
God is omnipotent, he made the universe. Evil exists in this universe, thus he made evil, or atleast gave it the capacity to do evil.. Evil is not a by product, God is omniscient and thus he knew exactly what he was doing when he made the universe, he knew it would turn out like this...

Assuming God does provide Man with the capacity to do evil via free choice, and then?

Sabatoge
12-02-2006, 07:12 AM
Using ur own argument, which I have already quoted above, if miracles are true (like the bible says) then God has intervened and has thus violated Mans free will, and therefore he is a sinner, like the rest of us.

God intervening in nature has nothing to do with man. If God coherced or forced man to do/think in a certain way then yes. But God hasn't done and cannot do that, thus God is not a sinner.

Vante
12-02-2006, 07:28 AM
Assuming God does provide Man with the capacity to do evil via free choice, and then?

Maybe free choice is a necessary evil...

But if it is, then christian, Islam and any other similiar theology is flushed down the toilet...

Vante
12-02-2006, 07:33 AM
God intervening in nature has nothing to do with man. If God coherced or forced man to do/think in a certain way then yes. But God hasn't done and cannot do that, thus God is not a sinner.

But does not God's intervention in nature have an effect on man ? Man is a part of nature after all... His actions have an effect on our free will by limiting our choices... Therefore we really do not have free will, its just an illusion...



But God hasn't done and cannot do that, thus God is not a sinner.

Ahh, so God isnt Omnipotent afterall... Gotcha... ;)

Sabatoge
12-02-2006, 07:41 AM
But does not God's intervention in nature have an effect on man ? Man is a part of nature after all... His actions have an effect on our free will by limiting our choices... Therefore we really do not have free will, its just an illusion...

Like what choice? You are free to believe whatever you want. If God changes something or intervenes in nature, you dont have to believe. So you still have free will.


Ahh, so God isnt Omnipotent afterall... Gotcha... ;)

Nope, because God can only do "things" God cannot do a no-thing. You or somebody mentioned a square-circle. God cannot draw that because a squared-circle is not a thing - its a no-thing.

Same with sin. Sin is the word we use to describe the absence of good. Sin is not a thing - its a no-thing. God is good. For God to sin he'd have to be absent from himself which *gasp* he cant do.

Nic_Paul
12-02-2006, 01:36 PM
god cannot stop being god.

thats the best example i can think of to counter the people that claim the square circle thing.....


im not saying im sure of it either way...just the best example...

Weightaholic
12-02-2006, 06:48 PM
Please explain.

I accidentally chopped off the part of your quiote that I really was after.


He doesn't just know the choice you will make

If this holds true, God is not omniscient, as there is something he does not know.

Melkor
12-03-2006, 01:13 AM
I think you read that wrong. I said "He doesn't just know..." as in "He doesn't only know what choice you'll make, He also knows . . ."

farmerlee
12-03-2006, 04:31 AM
Vante already covered this, but anyway...

Earlier, from you: "As i said before i give thanks because i realise that all things given to men come from god."

You are being inconsistent if you say that evil is not given by God.

No evil is not given by god. Evil is defined by god.

farmerlee
12-03-2006, 04:35 AM
Ah... Cherry picking are we ?

Let me quote what u said



Now let me rephrase ur statement so that it fits into context...



U cant have it both ways, my friend... If evil comes out of free will, then good can too.
OR
If everything given to man comes from God, then evil is part of the package...

God is omnipotent, he made the universe. Evil exists in this universe, thus he made evil, or atleast gave it the capacity to do evil.. Evil is not a by product, God is omniscient and thus he knew exactly what he was doing when he made the universe, he knew it would turn out like this...
As i stated above evil is 'defined' by the living god. He has set moral absolutes. Free will does not cause us to do evil, it gives us the position of choice.

JBDW
12-03-2006, 06:28 AM
As i stated above evil is 'defined' by the living god. He has set moral absolutes. Free will does not cause us to do evil, it gives us the position of choice.

Exactly. It puts humans in the position to do evil as well as good. If you can praise God for putting humans in the position to do good, you should blame god for putting humans in the position to do evil. You can't have it both ways.

NicVJ
12-03-2006, 07:53 AM
Maybe free choice is a necessary evil...

But if it is, then christian, Islam and any other similiar theology is flushed down the toilet...

What do you mean necessary evil?

And what would these religions be flushed down the toilet? I assume you mean obsolete here.

Vante
12-03-2006, 08:28 AM
Like what choice? You are free to believe whatever you want. If God changes something or intervenes in nature, you dont have to believe. So you still have free will.


Well, lets take an example of a recent event... A woman was shot 6 times in the head and the bullets didnt penetrate through her skull.. She survived.. This is currently unexplanable by modern science. Religious ppl believe its a real life, day to day miracle, and proof for the existance of God.

Now if this was a miracle, wouldnt u say that God intervenned directly here to save the life of this woman, and directly had an effect on the choice of the killer to kill ?

Where did the free will go ? He intervenned directly, by ur argument he did a no-thing, how is he not a sinner ?
Where is the consistency, why doesnt God stop every bullet ? Therefore, how is he omnibenevolent ?



Nope, because God can only do "things" God cannot do a no-thing. You or somebody mentioned a square-circle. God cannot draw that because a squared-circle is not a thing - its a no-thing.

Same with sin. Sin is the word we use to describe the absence of good. Sin is not a thing - its a no-thing. God is good. For God to sin he'd have to be absent from himself which *gasp* he cant do.

Does the definition of Omnipotence mention things and no-things ?
Is Satan omnipotent then, considering that doing good is a no-thing for him ?

Vante
12-03-2006, 08:37 AM
What do you mean necessary evil?

And what would these religions be flushed down the toilet? I assume you mean obsolete here.

Well since evil is a product of free will, and God gave us free will, he gave us the capacity to do evil... Being omniscient, he knew this would give rise to evil, but he did it anyway, effectively creating evil...

One would think he did this because he felt it was a better option then the alternative (ie forcing us to be good) in the grand scheme of things.

And so God is responsible for both good and evil. Free will is required to do good, but it can also do bad.. Therefore making it a necessary evil.

This theory would only work for a Deist God, ie Clockwork theory and religions like Hinduism...
Christianity, in this case does not hold true, thus metaphorically speaking, is flushed down the toilet...

NicVJ
12-03-2006, 08:38 AM
Well, lets take an example of a recent event... A woman was shot 6 times in the head and the bullets didnt penetrate through her skull.. She survived.. This is currently unexplanable by modern science. Religious ppl believe its a real life, day to day miracle, and proof for the existance of God.

Now if this was a miracle, wouldnt u say that God intervenned directly here to save the life of this woman, and directly had an effect on the choice of the killer to kill ?

Where did the free will go ? He intervenned directly, by ur argument he did a no-thing, how is he not a sinner ?
Where is the consistency, why doesnt God stop every bullet ? Therefore, how is he omnibenevolent ?

Vante, you're not making sense. The killer chose to shoot, maybe we can even assume he chose to kill, but that in no way guarantees that he WOULD HAVE killed. Whether or not the consequence was intended, his intention was fulfilled, and that is an expression of choice.

Why doesn't God stop every sin from happening does not in any way dispute free will. Clearly you're putting up a strawman.

Omnibenevolent? You know, one can simply say benevolence doesn't have to be enjoyed here in the human dimension. Such a statement may be assertive, but it may also be right. At the end of the day, the point is that questions revolving the concept of "omni" usually is unprofitable and does not in any way further an argument or cause.




Does the definition of Omnipotence mention things and no-things ?
Is Satan omnipotent then, considering that doing good is a no-thing for him ?

Once again, that's not the point. The point that was made is the argument that God cannot draw a square circle and is therefore not omnipotent is invalid from the very beginning, simply because a square circle is a "no-thing" in Sabotage's words. You obviously failed to see the relationship otherwise there is no reason to bring Satan in here because Satan would first and foremost have to fulfill the other more important aspect of omnipotency, which is to be able to do all "things".

NicVJ
12-03-2006, 08:39 AM
Well since evil is a product of free will, and God gave us free will, he gave us the capacity to do evil... Being omniscient, he knew this would give rise to evil, but he did it anyway, effectively creating evil...

One would think he did this because he felt it was a better option then the alternative (ie forcing us to be good) in the grand scheme of things.

Therefore God is responsible for both good and evil. Free will is required to do good, but it can also do bad.. Therefore making it a necessary evil.

This theory would only work for a Deist God, ie Clockwork theory and religions like Hinduism...
Christianity, in this case does not hold true, thus metaphorically speaking, is flushed down the toilet...

Why wouldn't it work for religions like Christianity and Islam? :confused: Please explain further.

Lager1
12-03-2006, 08:43 AM
Guys, debates like this are never-ending circles. You will accomplish nothing, and you will change no-one's belief. Just thought you should know.

Vante
12-03-2006, 08:54 AM
As i stated above evil is 'defined' by the living god. He has set moral absolutes. Free will does not cause us to do evil, it gives us the position of choice.

But where does free will come from ?

Regardless of cause, our immoral actions are a product of free will, and this free will comes from God.... God gave us the choice knowing which one we would pick, he knew he was creating evil.. He did it purposely.


EDIT - u have still to respond to post no. 94.

Vante
12-03-2006, 09:13 AM
Vante, you're not making sense. The killer chose to shoot, maybe we can even assume he chose to kill, but that in no way guarantees that he WOULD HAVE killed. Whether or not the consequence was intended, his intention was fulfilled, and that is an expression of choice.


U fail to see that the expression of choice does not dictate whether u have free will. Say u were running in one direction, u kept running, but God using his omnipotence prevented u from moving and thus u never reached ur destination.
Did u express ur choice? sure...
Did u actually have a say in where u wanted to run ? Hell no...
So tell me, do u have free will ?



Why doesn't God stop every sin from happening does not in any way dispute free will. Clearly you're putting up a strawman.

Omnibenevolent? You know, one can simply say benevolence doesn't have to be enjoyed here in the human dimension. Such a statement may be assertive, but it may also be right. At the end of the day, the point is that questions revolving the concept of "omni" usually is unprofitable and does not in any way further an argument or cause.


But then why does he intervene sometimes when he can clearly deal with these sinners in the afterlife ? Why do some ppl get the benefit of God's miracles and some dont ? I thought we were equal in front of his eyes...

Besides, the example in the Omni-god challenge is graphic enough, what justification could there be to this girl ? Perhaps it is incomprehensible to us, but bear in mind there are others on earth who have not suffered as much as her but still get to goto heaven... Why the discrimination ? Why does she have to endure a greater test of faith ? Is there a hierachy in heaven ? Will the girl get a better reward for 'being raped' ?

If the girl indeed gets a better reward then how would this be fair to the others ? If they were never in a situation which tested their faith to the same extent, how would God justify giving them a lesser reward ?

Where is the omnibenevolence ?



Once again, that's not the point. The point that was made is the argument that God cannot draw a square circle and is therefore not omnipotent is invalid from the very beginning, simply because a square circle is a "no-thing" in Sabotage's words. You obviously failed to see the relationship otherwise there is no reason to bring Satan in here because Satan would first and foremost have to fulfill the other more important aspect of omnipotency, which is to be able to do all "things".

But in this case 'all things' become subjective. If for eg. God is by definition all good, and thus all bad things become no-things for him, the exact opposite could be said for Satan. My question still stands...

Vante
12-03-2006, 09:18 AM
Why wouldn't it work for religions like Christianity and Islam? :confused: Please explain further.

Because Christians claim that God did not create evil. U have various examples of christians in this thread saying that God is not to be blamed for evil... Iam not so sure about muslims...

kassit
12-03-2006, 09:20 AM
Iam an agnostic, and I believe that IF there is a God, then he will probably be omnipotent, omniscient but not omnibenevolent... It makes perfect sense, and its a logically sound argument.

That's true according to Islam,as God does not love everyone. Check this post as it illustrates well the point: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=12350095&postcount=19


I also believe he doesnt give a rat's @ss whether we worship him or not....

It wouldn't matter to God if all of His creations worshiped or turned against Him. He has prepared this life as a test,if you succeed you go to Paradise. Besides,it doesn't matter what you nor I think of what God does or thinks because it has no bearing on reality.


One argument I have come across though seems to justify God being omnibenevolent - It is said that God will make up for ur pains in the afterlife. Justice will be served. I wonder though, how God would justify the example given in my link....

The little girl is being tested to see whether or not she will serve God even when He has allowed something awful to happen to her,to see whether or not she turns away from Him or not.

Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, "We believe", and that they will not be tested?(Qur'an,29:2)

He will not be questioned as to that which He doeth, but they will be questioned.(Qur'an,21:23)



Also, another contradiction I come across in christianity, is that no matter what kind of life u lead, no matter how moral u r, no matter the good u do, if u do not accept Christ as ur savior, u still goto hell. This seems like the design of a God thats hungry for attention, a selfish God. What then, is the difference between God and Satan ?

God has vowed to put everyone who rejects the Truth into hell,so study Islam. Those whom Islam hasn't reached will be tested on the Day of Judgement,they will be asked to enter Hell as a test of obedience. God doesn't need any of your attention,but He has decided that He will either put you in Hell or Paradise depending on your level of obedience. Satan on the other hand wants you to go to Hell because he wants to take as many people out there with him.

Vante
12-03-2006, 09:25 AM
@ Kassit..


So the Islamic God does not claim to be omnibenevolent ?


If so, I like Islam because it makes a helluva lot more sense then christianity and far less contradictions...

kassit
12-03-2006, 09:28 AM
@ Kassit..


So the Islamic God does not claim to be omnibenevolent ?


If so, I like Islam because it makes a helluva lot more sense then christianity and far less contradictions...

You are right,He doesn't say that He is all-loving.

You should check these threads out:

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=6992301&postcount=4<br%20/>
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=6982231&postcount=1<br%20/>

and then this:
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=892594&highlight=Islamic

1dayIWillBeBig
12-03-2006, 09:38 AM
You are wrong, plain and simple.
WOW!!! :eek:

Huge rebuttal...

Vante
12-03-2006, 09:54 AM
WOW!!! :eek:

Huge rebuttal...

He has us all stumped... :rolleyes:

kassit
12-03-2006, 10:19 AM
why do bad things happen?


hypothesis:
***If god was allpowerful and just, he wouldnt let mary susan get hit by a drunk driver which would mean her kids grow up motherless***

bad things like this happen sometimes:

>>>>explanation 1: God is just and wanted to save mary susan, but cannot break the objective rules of the universe to save her and therefore is not allpowerful

>>>>>explanation 2: God is allpowerful, but did not see it just to save mary, becuase she didn't "deserve" to live...well fine, lets say she didnt....but then why should the kids be punished by not having a mother? therefore he would be allpowerful but not just.

fine lets say the kids didnt deserve to have a happy life either and thus it was "justifiable" to kill their motgher. but what exactly would constitut death? she didnt kill anyone or murder anyone in her life...so why doesnt every mildly bad mother in america get the same punishment?

so that would leave the only explanation as weak faith or some failure to follow the christian rules. but again that begs the question as to why her?

to the question of why her:

"God is all powerful, nor did he want her to die, it was just chance."


But if god is just, then wouldnt he be bound to use all means necessary to save her? if he cannot save her, then he is not omnipotent, and if he just idly watches "chance" take her, then he was not being just by avioding the use of the omnipotence

thus i think there is a reasonable proof for why being both just and omnipotent is not possible with all that goes on in todays world.



discuss, critique, arguement?



please, lets keep this philisophical :) this is not an attack on anyone

First you have realise that everything that happens in this life is because God allows it to happen,in other words,wills it to happen. Second,you have to realise that this life is a test,so if God decides to let Mary Susan die it would mean that He willed her test time to be over(totally if she had rejected Islam) and to test her kids. God doesn't need to justify His actions,since He makes the Law,He is the Judge and will not be questioned. Existance is God's courtroom,therefore He is Just and allpowerfull at the same time.

Melkor
12-03-2006, 10:55 AM
Evil to you is not the same as evil to God. Breaking God's commandments is evil, and God cannot break His own commandments...

In other words, God in not constrained by the same boundaries as man.

Nic_Paul
12-03-2006, 08:04 PM
U fail to see that the expression of choice does not dictate whether u have free will. Say u were running in one direction, u kept running, but God using his omnipotence prevented u from moving and thus u never reached ur destination.
Did u express ur choice? sure...
Did u actually have a say in where u wanted to run ? Hell no...
So tell me, do u have free will ?


when someone lifts up a wieght, you are not stopping gravity, but simply acting against it with a greater force. miracles do not intervene with free will or physics becasue they are not stopping anyones free will or natural laws, but only acting against them with a greater force (God's force).

humans are not omnipotent, free will does not garuntee that we can run anywhere and kill anyone simply becuase we desire it so (refering to your examples). by your examples, gravity and laws that mandate how much matter can occupy space (we cant walk through walls) are "limiting our free will". i call bull****. gods forces acting against the kinetic force of the bullets is an example on par with how gravity acts against our force of jumping in the air. are you going to tell me i dont have free will becuase I cant fly? lol








But then why does he intervene sometimes when he can clearly deal with these sinners in the afterlife ? Why do some ppl get the benefit of God's miracles and some dont ? I thought we were equal in front of his eyes...


the christian faith states that we are all equal only after you are born again. and until you are born again you are a sinner and are not deserving of being saved. therefore being a good person has nothing to do with any of it becuase you can be a good person but not born again.



Besides, the example in the Omni-god challenge is graphic enough, what justification could there be to this girl ? Perhaps it is incomprehensible to us, but bear in mind there are others on earth who have not suffered as much as her but still get to goto heaven... Why the discrimination ? Why does she have to endure a greater test of faith ? Is there a hierachy in heaven ? Will the girl get a better reward for 'being raped' ?

mathmatically when you are finding limits h towards 0 or h towards infiniti.... h is tending towards 0 or infiniti in a way that makes other numbers such as 1 effectively insignificant. so in this sense, its possible that the rewards and feelings are so great that it does not matter if susy had to endure a level 10 test and jon had a level 3 test:

3/h and 10/h can practically be equal if h is infiniti.

3/infiniti is tending towards 0 as in h limit-> inifiti.... as does 10/inifiti is also tending towards 0 as in h limit-> infiniti




If the girl indeed gets a better reward then how would this be fair to the others ? If they were never in a situation which tested their faith to the same extent, how would God justify giving them a lesser reward ?Where is the omnibenevolence ?


she doesnt get a better reward. heaven is such a spiritual thing that things like rewards and parties and such are not the type of happiness it refers to. orgasms and huge spikes of seratonin is an earthly thing and we have no idea as to the great extent of what exactly happiness will be in heaven.





But in this case 'all things' become subjective. If for eg. God is by definition all good, and thus all bad things become no-things for him, the exact opposite could be said for Satan. My question still stands...

no-thing is refering to things like a square traingle, it simply is not a thing... evil is not a no thing...evil has a logical and rational definition, a square circle does not.

NicVJ
12-04-2006, 04:58 AM
U fail to see that the expression of choice does not dictate whether u have free will. Say u were running in one direction, u kept running, but God using his omnipotence prevented u from moving and thus u never reached ur destination.
Did u express ur choice? sure...
Did u actually have a say in where u wanted to run ? Hell no...
So tell me, do u have free will ?

Basically, free will is about exercising YOUR choice, regardless of whether the choice made actually results in the consequence desired. Take for instance you made the choice to commit suicide by jumping off a 100 story building, but did not die from the act. Does that mean you didn't act your free will? No. Assuming that God indeed saved you from dying, does that mean God prevented you from exercising free will? No, because simply, the circumstances under which you made your decision did not involve the prescence of God.

Even if I grant you your argument, you're assuming that God did indeed acted against your free will. Humans will never have the privilege of knowing this, so I think your point is effectively moot.



But then why does he intervene sometimes when he can clearly deal with these sinners in the afterlife ? Why do some ppl get the benefit of God's miracles and some dont ? I thought we were equal in front of his eyes...

That's irrelevant. It's as good as asking why did God create us with 2 hands instead of 4.


Besides, the example in the Omni-god challenge is graphic enough, what justification could there be to this girl ? Perhaps it is incomprehensible to us, but bear in mind there are others on earth who have not suffered as much as her but still get to goto heaven... Why the discrimination ? Why does she have to endure a greater test of faith ? Is there a hierachy in heaven ? Will the girl get a better reward for 'being raped' ?

If the girl indeed gets a better reward then how would this be fair to the others ? If they were never in a situation which tested their faith to the same extent, how would God justify giving them a lesser reward ?

Where is the omnibenevolence ?

Read above. And I've already responded sufficiently in the previous post addressed to you.




But in this case 'all things' become subjective. If for eg. God is by definition all good, and thus all bad things become no-things for him, the exact opposite could be said for Satan. My question still stands...

I don't see what you're getting at. The argument was about omnipotency, not about who is doing good or evil. You seem to shift your case pretty regularly.




Because Christians claim that God did not create evil. U have various examples of christians in this thread saying that God is not to be blamed for evil... Iam not so sure about muslims...

Did God create darkness? Can you create apathy? I'm not so sure about this. If you can come up with a good answer, I'm all ears. God, as far as I can argue, allowed for the pervasion of evil through the avenue of free will, simple as that.

JumpyTwoLegs
12-04-2006, 06:51 AM
hypothesis:
***If god was allpowerful and just, he wouldnt let mary susan get hit by a drunk driver which would mean her kids grow up motherless***

As a Christian, I need to know did mary susan have sexual intercourse before marriage or after marriage

If she had sex before marriage, she committed fornication/pre-martial sex which is condemned in the bible

fine lets say the kids didnt deserve to have a happy life either and thus it was "justifiable" to kill their motgher. but what exactly would constitut death? she didnt kill anyone or murder anyone in her life...so why doesnt every mildly bad mother in america get the same punishment?

The Bible's condemnation of fornication is as clear and plain as the Bible's condemnation of murder and homosexuality

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals shall inherit the kingdom of God.

The blue words are my replys

P.S. She died because God allowed it to happen.

JumpyTwoLegs
12-04-2006, 07:12 AM
No, the evil caused by men comes from their free will.A Christian wrote: "God did not create evil. Evil is simply the state where God is not present."

If "God did not create evil" then what of the following?

Holy Bible Quote


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

Isaiah 45:7 affirms that God creates darkness and disaster. It is not a creation of mankind, nor of fallen beings or Satan. God creates these things directly. Any argument that stats that evil is a result of Human free will must first get over the fact that the Christian Bible states that God creates evil and disaster itself. Not only does this God create darkness and disaster, but it actively "does" them too. It doesn't merely create them as possibilities for other people, it actively chooses to do them itself.

The Book of Lamentations confirms that free will cannot stop evil, when evil comes from God, nor can man stop goodness, when goodness comes from God:


Lamentations 3:37-38
Who is he that can speak, and it happens, when the Lord command it not?
Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not both evil and good?

Lamentations 3:38 seems to suggest that God speaks both good and evil.

Vaper
12-04-2006, 09:00 AM
Lamentations 3:37-38
Who is he that can speak, and it happens, when the Lord command it not?
Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not both evil and good?

Lamentations 3:38 seems to suggest that God speaks both good and evil.

Whole lamentations 3 is just poetry :)

Vaper
12-04-2006, 10:07 AM
Perfect example of why an atheist should never quote the bible

Sabatoge
12-04-2006, 01:29 PM
Then why did he change his mind from the OT to the NT?

God didn't change his mind. God is still the same God and the Law still applies but the convenant with Israel in the OT does not since it was broken hence we get Jeremiah 31:31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

God can changed/anull covenants if the other party breaks them. These passages can also be found quoted in Hebrews 8 and 10.

Sabatoge
12-04-2006, 02:41 PM
Well, lets take an example of a recent event... A woman was shot 6 times in the head and the bullets didnt penetrate through her skull.. She survived.. This is currently unexplanable by modern science. Religious ppl believe its a real life, day to day miracle, and proof for the existance of God.

Now if this was a miracle, wouldnt u say that God intervenned directly here to save the life of this woman, and directly had an effect on the choice of the killer to kill ?

First of all, you made the mistake of generalization. I believe in God so am I one of these "religious ppl" according to you? So I just without question believe that that someone who "should have" died but lived is a miracle? No, thats foolish. Why not think it a miracle that I don't slip and die in the shower ever day or get into a car accident, or get robbed. The list can go on which brings me to my second point. You mistakenly assumed God intervenned. Just because "religiouls people" say that its a miracle they dont actually know it or not. The Lord doesn't speak to people face-to-face like Moses.

And you know what. The killer can still believe if he wants to that she actually died. See, the killer in his mind can believe whatever he wants; heck, maybe he thought the woman was a vampire and he shot her in self defense? Its the taking away of those thoughts that is against free will, taking away of the physical action is not because the person can still believe it happened.


Where did the free will go ? He intervenned directly, by ur argument he did a no-thing, how is he not a sinner ?
Where is the consistency, why doesnt God stop every bullet ? Therefore, how is he omnibenevolent ?

Again, you cannot say God intervenned because you don't know and neither do "religious people" Even if God directly saved that woman its still not sinning for God because the shooter still shot her. If God forced the man to not shoot her, if God put thoughts other than shooting her in his mind then yes that would be a violation of free will. You see, the killer still had the choice of shooting or not; again if God forced the shooter to not have that choice then it would be against his free will.

Think of it like this. The shooter wanting to kill her (thats his will - to kill her), yet he shot her in the foot. %99.99 of the time that person is going to survive. The cops came and he fled. It was his will to kill her, he tried but failed. Are you going to say the the cops violated his free will because they didn't give him enough time actually kill her? Of-course not.

Violation of free will is taking away choice/thoughts (cognitively) and forcing something else. Understand that its the thought that God cannot touch not the physical action.


Does the definition of Omnipotence mention things and no-things ? Is Satan omnipotent then, considering that doing good is a no-thing for him ?

No, doing good is just something satan doesn't do; good is still a thing. Satan just tries to replace good with evil - that is, trying to remove good, trying to make good less appealing and making something else "look good" but its evil. Basically satan perverts good.

scrizu
12-04-2006, 08:26 PM
No, doing good is just something satan doesn't do; good is still a thing. Satan just tries to replace good with evil - that is, trying to remove good, trying to make good less appealing and making something else "look good" but its evil. Basically satan perverts good.

God created Satan with the knowledge that Satan would work to pervert good. That's always weird to me. People constantly attribute all sorts of misdeeds to Satan, as if this reason for evil somehow vindicates God. Yet if God is all-knowing, and if Satan is a created being, God created Satan knowing full-well everything that Satan would do. And yet, he still created him? So odd. Guess it's God and his mysterious ways again.

enjoyincubus
12-04-2006, 08:42 PM
I also asked this same question.. I added that if god is all knowing and the designer/creator of all things.. then when he told Eve not to eat the Apple, he knew she would, because he had already designed it.. How could he get mad at her for what he planned out... If that's not the case, and he didn't know, then he can't be all powerful...

Either Free will exists and god is not all powerful, or free will is a myth and we are just puppets... But both can't exist together.. Either god knows whats going to happen and should stop getting mad at us when we do the things he has already planned, or he isn't all powerful...


god is all-powerful and just, and they go hand in hand. god will not do anything that directly interferes with our free will because doing so would violate the angelic conflict(and since god is just he will not violate it). while god does not cause pain he allows such pain to take place because intervening would once again be stepping over the bounds. god can intervene but dosent.

god is also all knowing. he knows what will happen and when. god knew lucifer would rebel, but god is just so he creates lucifer anyway in order to give him the chance not to.

scrizu
12-04-2006, 08:50 PM
god is all-powerful and just, and they go hand in hand. god will not do anything that directly interferes with our free will because doing so would violate the angelic conflict(and since god is just he will not violate it). while god does not cause pain he allows such pain to take place because intervening would once again be stepping over the bounds. god can intervene but dosent.

These supposed constraints--i.e. the "angelic conflict" (whatever that is) and free-will--they are only constraints because God attached such a value/meaning to them. Therefore, only your last statement is really worth stating, "God can intervene but doesn't." Doesn't seem very much like an all-loving God to me.



god is also all knowing. he knows what will happen and when. god knew lucifer would rebel, but god is just so he creates lucifer anyway in order to give him the chance not to.

Nice antinomy...I wonder how many people (in addition to yourself) actually fall into believing this statement actually says something (besides that something which it really says, namely, that God is in contradiction with himself).

enjoyincubus
12-04-2006, 09:15 PM
These supposed constraints--i.e. the "angelic conflict" (whatever that is) and free-will--they are only constraints because God attached such a value/meaning to them. Therefore, only your last statement is really worth stating, "God can intervene but doesn't." Doesn't seem very much like an all-loving God to me.



Nice antinomy...I wonder how many people (in addition to yourself) actually fall into believing this statement actually says something (besides that something which it really says, namely, that God is in contradiction with himself).


im suprised someone who seems so interested in the subject has never heard of the angelic conflict before. basically its the name for satans appeal, once again god being just. however i dont see how self imposed constrants arent worth mentioning. does a loving god not grant free will? does a loving god not grant justice through constrant? it seems to me you are looking for arguments to validate your preconcieved conclusions. you offer no further explanation why you ignored my message.

as for your second paragraph, it was a nice attempt to evade having to put up any real response. your post pretty much is a wordy attempt to say nothing, with a little consdescension sprinkled in for good measure.

theres really no point for any christian to discuss this with you people since you all have negative violition. my first post was merely intended to awnser what i thought to be an honest question. now i see that it is not a question asked with an objective mind. my mistake.....

JBDW
12-04-2006, 09:33 PM
A Christian wrote: "God did not create evil. Evil is simply the state where God is not present."

Then he is not omnipresent..

Vaper
12-04-2006, 09:37 PM
what if god isnt omnipotent, omniscient all knowing bla bla bla ?

so what, deal with it, no one has a set of rules saying God has to be certain things except in our brains and dictionaries wich dont mean anything when it comes to God.

or what if he is all knowing but there are exceptions ?
maybe God has some limitations, it doesnt matter one bit.

I never thought of God not having any limitations in the back of my head i always thought God does have some certain limitations for some reason, maybe some self set ones ? no one knows these things and its not important.

everyone tries to understand Gods actions, its not possible, our brains are like a spec of dust compared to God.

JBDW
12-05-2006, 01:56 AM
what if god isnt omnipotent, omniscient all knowing bla bla bla ?

so what, deal with it, no one has a set of rules saying God has to be certain things except in our brains and dictionaries wich dont mean anything when it comes to God.

Well, considering it's something that theists like to put forth as part of the god concept, it really is something worth arguing against. Unless of course you're saying that these descriptions by theists are useless, in which case I might be inclined to agree.


or what if he is all knowing but there are exceptions ?
maybe God has some limitations, it doesnt matter one bit.

I never thought of God not having any limitations in the back of my head i always thought God does have some certain limitations for some reason, maybe some self set ones ? no one knows these things and its not important.

Oh, but it does matter. If your god concept is not omniscient or omnipotent, he is hardly as powerful as many theists would like to believe that he is.


everyone tries to understand Gods actions, its not possible, our brains are like a spec of dust compared to God.

It's like saying that we can't understand the universe because our brains are like a speck of dust compared to the universe. This kind of attitude is what impedes progress. Defeatism.

NicVJ
12-05-2006, 02:00 AM
It's like saying that we can't understand the universe because our brains are like a speck of dust compared to the universe. This kind of attitude is what impedes progress. Defeatism.

Strawman.

Vaper
12-05-2006, 02:01 AM
It's like saying that we can't understand the universe because our brains are like a speck of dust compared to the universe. This kind of attitude is what impedes progress. Defeatism.

Can bacteria understand human actions ?

Vaper
12-05-2006, 02:03 AM
would a piece of mould be able to comprehend humans ?

JBDW
12-05-2006, 02:03 AM
Can bacteria understand human actions ?

This will essentially be opening a can of worms, and I'm not sure where this will lead to, but: Can bacteria think? If it can, does it have the potential to increase it's scope with regards to mental faculties?

Vaper
12-05-2006, 02:06 AM
This will essentially be opening a can of worms, and I'm not sure where this will lead to, but: Can bacteria think? If it can, does it have the potential to increase it's scope with regards to mental faculties?

not at all the answer is simple No , the only way for a piece of mould to comprehend the human is if the human took form and body like the piece of mould just like God did for us humans (imo)

JBDW
12-05-2006, 02:12 AM
not at all the answer is simple No , the only way for a piece of mould to comprehend the human is if the human took form and body like the piece of mould just like God did for us humans (imo)

Thanks for the imo bit.

Well, then you've answered your own question. If the mould has zero capacity for thought as well as no potential for progress, then there's nothing to discuss. Even if humans were to turn into mould there would be no understanding by the mould because it simply does not possess the faculties required.

I'm talking about humans with capacity for thought, which can arguably be developed further as our knowledge increases. If according to your religion, we can even glimpse the nature of God through his taking human form, there is really no reason to believe that we cannot continue to progress and eventually gain a fuller understanding of what you consider to be 'god'.

Weightaholic
12-05-2006, 02:16 AM
Can bacteria understand human actions ?

Do you see yourself as bacteria?

Vaper
12-05-2006, 02:21 AM
Do you see yourself as bacteria?

do you understand the definition of analogy ?

/sarcasm off

Melkor
12-05-2006, 01:10 PM
It's not that we will NEVER understand that type of thing, it's just that it is currently beyond our capability. I fully expect to comprehend the Nature of God someday.

There are many things science will NEVER know. Does that mean science is useless?