Morning everyone. I've been thinking about this one for a while now, and I figured I'd post a new topic, though I don't do topics too often.
Anywho...

The common description of 'God' by the Judeo-Christian standard says that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. But is this true? Forgiving the whole debate on whether God exists or not, which is a pretty contentious debate, can God actually be omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect and fit into one religion? I'm going to ask for this debate that you assume that God exists. I know its a highly contentious statement, but this is sort of a what if scenario. If God really does exist, how can he be omniscient, omnipotent, and morally perfect and squeeze himself into one religion? Think about it. God's qualities are essentially infinite. He is all-powerful, all-knowing, and morally perfect. So if God's qualities are essentially infinite, then his motives must be of infinite complexity too. So if God is this infinite, 1. How can his motivations be understood by us, when they are clearly infinitely more complex than ours are, and 2. How can a being that is infinite in all his/her/its qualities fit into one tiny religion?

... and all-uncaring! If god does exist he has a lot of explaining to do. As to how he let this world get so bad for one thing!

But with my rant over...

I get the feeling that if god does exist then he's bored with mankind. Or he's just letting us get on with it to see how we do. And it's got to be said, mankind suck! We destroy everything. Destruction and death is like bread and water to us. I would turn my face away from some I created if it turned out so bad. But then again, even that is a reflection on what god is really like!

Divine indifference I suppose. I do believe in that, so to say. I don't think we can specifically label God. I think it can be shown that there was a creating, driving force behind the universe, but of that driving force or higher power, nothing can be said with any certainty. Anything else we know about God is assumed. I don't trust religious scripture, because it was written by human beings and, for me anyways, does not provide a satisfactory explanation of God. Its inconsistencies and the problems caused with specific religion doesn't help with the validity of certain religions either.

I think it really just comes down to truth. There can only be one truth, there for only one religion. Actualy, I dont even consider myself religious, I just feel I have a relationship with Christ.

How do you justify that as the truth?

I would ask what 'morally perfect' means, church?

Does that mean God has His own morals that we cannot attain in their perfection, or does it mean God is perfectly moral in the sight of all - meaning God has the perfect (and different) morals to suit everyone?

There is a huge difference in how each God might then be perceived, and perceive.

I don't necessarily attribute those qualities to the higher power of sorts that I believe in, but by morally perfect I think it is meant that God is (Theologically speaking) all good. I suppose I should have used the word omnibenevolent instead. I meant that God is all good.

In a way I agree. I don't know about indifference , but letting it run it's course and of course and all knowing God would have it's own reasons that we have no clue about.

and I agree with in bold above. being of limited capacity to understand such a higher power there is no way it could fit into one religion. nothing short of trying to pour 10 gallons of water in a gallon jug.

Understand now. Being that 'good' is relative, then God cannot be limited to one person's understanding of how He must be/behave. God must be good to all, not from the perspective of wider humanity, but from each individuals' perspective of what is good for them.

Unless we take the view we do not know what is 'good' for us, then I cannot see how this aspect of God is possible - even for an unlimited being. God, being 'good' for some, would not be 'good' for others and thus contradict His own nature.

I don't mean indifference as in "oh no, God created us and abandoned us", I mean that whatever this higher power is, we know nothing about it with any certainty, and one way or another, whether we can't know anything about it or whether it actually is omnipotent, omniscient, and omni-benevolent, we still cannot know what his/her/its motives are, because its either too complex (infinitely, in fact) for us to possibly be able to comprehend its motives, or its too unknowable. As such, in either scenario, since there really isn't any good physical evidence of a God, that higher power might as well be divinely indifferent.

Right, thats more or less my point. However, the distinction I want to make is that from a Theists perception of God being all-good, good is a defined quality someone can attain. You would be hard pressed to find a Theist who is a moral relativist. If one is a moral objectivist then a problem arises not so much with the omni-benevolence, but rather with the omnipotence and omniscience. With the problem of evil, if God actually has these qualities then he actually would remove evil, as he would not only have the motivation (omni-benevolence), but the knowledge and the power (omniscience and omnipotence, respectively).

Now, some Theists might say evil has to exist because without evil there can be no good. But to that I might respond like this:

We understand that God is supposedly the supreme being, the creator of the universe, omnipotent, omniscient, and omni-benevolent. On top of that, we also assume that God is infinite and eternal. Correct? From a Theistic stand point, one understands that there has not always been both evil and good. In Christianity, after the creation Satan did one of a number of things to anger God (whatever it was it all comes back to the mortal sin of pride). However, from this story we do understand that evil did not always exist. Lucifer was supposedly a good angel before the fall, in all the old stories. So if evil was eventually created (never mind by who, its irrelevant), what was God before evil created? Was he omni-benevolent? According to the dual approach of no good without evil, then no. Likewise, if God eternally proceeded all of creation, and on top of that, he created everything, then what was he before the creation? Was he the supreme being of the universe? Well, yes and no. Being the highest order of being implies that there has to be something that you are greater than, and before the creation there was nothing that God was greater than.

What do you think?

I agree.

I think your signature sums it up nicely: If God is God then how can he be shoved into one religion?

Is the Creation of Evil an act of Evil? If so, and God created all Evil, then He must have been Evil before the Creation (to have conceived creating Evil) thus the theological position of there not always being evil and good looks a little shaky. Thus even before the actual creation of evil, we cannot say God was omni-benevolent, unless we consider the conception and creation of evil to have been a benevolent act.



Supposedly, before the Creation there was nothing but God (although the bible is a little vague on that), thus He was the only order of being and there was no universe to be greater than. However I think those who wrote the bible didn't have these kinds of sophisticated concepts in mind when writing it (despite the protestations it was inspired by the most sophisticated being in the Universe). They were simply using the creation myth to impress upon the other cults/religions in their neighbourhood how important their guy-in-the-sky was.

I can't agree with the use of moral objectivity coinciding with any use of "omni-" with respect to the nature of God's benevolence. "Omni-", when used in conjunction with benevolent, implies "all, to all" and moral relativity is implicit in that. If we invoke a morally objective pov then we have to drop the "omni-" and just say God is benevolent.

I think that maybe the problem is people think in terms of good or bad concerning God intead of the term of just 'is'.

Hi CandD,

Religions are inventions by Mankind; there is no indication that God ever intended, or brought into existence any religion. As I see it, God put forward one very specific Way, and told Mankind to either choose or reject it. -- Mankind rejected this Way.

God's motivations are revealed in Bible Scriptures. To understand these motivations, one must read the Scriptures with the intent to discover these intentions, as I see it.


The answer is the same as in my first paragraph.

Sorry I was not of more help,
Karlis

Logical is good.
Illogical is evil.

That might be about as close as we still are to understanding God's motives for both intervention and non-intervention, and as stated early on in the postings, on a galactic scale God's actions would be incomprehensible to us. An action that would appear to be logical and good to us and one that should be done could lead to a series of actions and consequences that we cannot grasp.

We are only the people of one small planet peeking out through scopes and probes at the rest of the universe and we really do not know anything at all about any intelligence greater than our own yet, we are just guessing based upon what we have already learned about ourselves.

karlis by wwhat means does one discover gods intent by reading scripture... we filter through our own exeprinces and color what we see on the pages my freind... I would be interested in how this would work????

Before I respond to this, does the italicized quote include Christianity, from your perspective?

Hi Sheri -- that's a good question. Sadly, there is no "quick-fix" answer to it.

Reading the Bible cover-to-cover is pretty well a waste of time, in my opinion; one would only gain a superficial overview of its content, without gaining ANY deep insights.

However, I think you are in error -- and you will fail to gain insight into "God's intent" -- if you filter your own experiences, etc., in attempt to gain understanding of what is revealed in the Bible.

What I am saying, is that *if* one really and honestly desires to gain an insight into what God reveals in the Bible, then one MUST leave ones perceptions of life-as-it-is-coloured-through-ones-experiences aside, and read the books of the Bible with a mind free from pre-conceptions, beliefs, convictions, etc., etc.

How is one to read the Scriptures with such an open mind? That's the tough question. ...

Regards,
Karlis

How do we know that God's word is revealed in the Bible?

Most certainly!

The many religions of "Christianity" are Man's inventions. Jesus did not come to start a new religion; Jesus amplified *the way of life* which had been presented to Man from the very beginning of Mankind. Mankind went forth and invented religions, including "Christianity".

Mind you, though ... "overall", the basic simplicity of God's salvation for all Mankind has been preserved in these christian religions; even though buried under mountains of dross.

Regards,
Karlis

Well CandD -- only you and God can resolve that conundrum, is my best answer.

Sorry for not being able to give a more helpful reply,
Karlis

I do heart you for honesty K. thankyou it is a good question which then will lead to other good questions....


Ah, but if one leaves behind all preconcieved notions, convictions, how would we discern fact from fiction?? if someone said leave all your precionceptions and biases behind and jump off a very hihg a bridge would you and why not????

Who is asking anyone to jump into the unknown? Nobody is asking that, as I see it. However, if one sincerely wishes to "learn" rather than "study" God's teachings -- then ipso facto, leave preconceptions outside the door.

Karlis

Why?? and how does this help one understand the bible????

Of course you wouldn't jump off a very high bridge , its not unknown what it will lead too, its clear......'splat'

So do I have any logical reason for believing that God is revealed in the Bible, or is it merely a principle of faith?

Why one must leave their preconceptions about currently-held beliefs "outside the door", is because the Scriptures will probably reveal completely different values and basic principles than one holds now.

Trying to reconcile God's teachings with what is accepted elsewhere is like mixing clay with iron, and expecting a solid structure to be the result.

It basically boils down to whether one accepts God's teachings -- teachings that are incompatible with the world's views -- as opposed to previously held beliefs.

God does not compromise with what God reveals, is the key ... as I see it, anyway,

Karlis

I think only you can make that decision.
Karlis

Ha ha ha, I see your point. Thanks Karlis.

I was hoping to look at this from a philosophical angle, as in is there any philosophical argument that would say I should look at the Bible in such a way, but I think you hit the nail on the head here, ultimately.

Push aside my gripes about god..i'll answer this as if I am a believer...

God doesn't push himself into one religion or one faith...NO...MAN pushes god into one religion and one faith

I think the reason as to why they do this, is because they feel there is only ONE way to worship god and follow god and one right way....thats why I believe there are so many faiths..each one all claiming their way is the only way

How many have had to die over it?? too many, and its man thats killing over it. So it makes me ask myself............is it really worth being a part of one faith? why should I?

What has happened to those that claim they no longer wish to hold faith and are brave enough to state WHY?? <---think about it...is it really fear god or fear the humans that want to hurt you for saying so??

Wouldn't that put God as being more omnipotent? If so, then that can have some serious implications of him not
being perfect. Personally, I think if God can do as he pleases; then I would have to say thats not a very good
quality as far as what is being said about the greatness of God.

how would it have implications of God not being perfect ?

I believe in predestination. and God being perfect.

plenty of things we go through don't make sense until some time later. I just think of that on a grander scale.
( that doesn't mean in human terms and understanding I agree, or don't get angry , ect ....)

You are right there...indeed it does put god as being omnipotent

I always saw that god could do as he pleases...they dont call him the almighty for nothing.........yet so many when it suits will make god out to be powerless when they cant answer as to why certain things happen....I dont find that clever

Fate is a personal belief for people. So, I will not try to debate that, as it is personal.

I've always held that the belief in predestination/fate ultimately removes free will. If God knows everything, then he knows what we are going to do, which means our decisions have basically already been decided for us.

AHA once again you have a point


well said

Again, that makes us seem like some kind of puppet predetermined by God. I still don't find that to be a flattering quality.

Thanks BM. The concept of predestination, omniscience, and free will has always been a tricky one for theologians. You can't be an omniscient omnipotent God without predestination, and predestination takes away free will.


Thats exactly why I don't believe it.

iNDEED IT SURE DOES oppse the caps LOL

yes. actually until the mid 1800's that's how most christians believed ( I'm not a christian btw). I'll try to explain. I'm kinda tired.

I believe we are spiritual beings having a human experience. that choice is actually an illusion that allows us to lead , for the lack of a better word , an ignorance . Kinda like being actors in a play where we are so into the part , so immersed that reality ( in this sense the spiritual) melts away. It is the human perception we are left with.

in any given moment you can only pick 1 of 2 ( or more ) choices - the one you were suppose to pick . a second later that may change , but that again is an entirely different point in time .
All of us are interconnected. like a puzzle or painting. everything effects something else. that butterfly effect stuff. like an elaborate plan that being human we are too close to see.

kinda like God is the director and we the actors and life the script except no rewrites . lol.to change one thing can have huge effects down the line.

Why we need the experience ? I don't know. I think one can believe in the lack of free will and not be a fatalist.

While as a human with limited thinking I can get mad or not understand it all. I do believe it all happens for a reason even if I don't agree. I also realize I can't see the bigger picture either.

Yes ma'am. In fact, the concept of predestination and an omniscient God, from a purely Christian perspective, leads us to a lot of theological problems, not the least of which is that if the Christian God were in fact omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent then he would have known that both Lucifer and Man would have fallen, thus God would have known of the creation of Evil and Sin... and did nothing about it. So, in a way, God indirectly created evil and sin, which is not something I think a benevolent being would ever do.

Understood. I was talking about the problems of the Christian idea of predestination. I know you have your own Theology Lt. Ripley, one which I would say I generally agree with

It's not just the christians...

I once saw god as the all mighty, nothing could ever come close to god........I didnt wish to beleive in the bible, because on how it made god look..the killings and vengefulness...all of that and how they say god doesnt like it when you sin like IE - being gay ...how often did I lay myself on the line to take a stand? did I do it because I was gay?? no...I did it because I felt it was stupid <--so many got at me for saying it was stupid...OR what about other things that I believe sounded stupid when said to be sinful? like sex before marriage? or how it was said that if you are left handed you are a sinner??? im like WTF?

So I didnt wish to see god in that light..to me he was ALL LOVING and that included gays, leftys and those that like to give in to their sexual nature....WHY? because those things dont harm anyone

I wanted to believe god did not discriminate against you, even if you were a non believer...I beleived god understood this.......I believed the lot

but then there comes a time when something jumps out and says LOOK HERE..he is not the all loving being you think he is...for if he were then he would understand that not everyone can understand him and understand how it all goes, so they need his help....trouble is...do they get it?

How long will I go on pretending he was all that? I cant answer t and I doubt anyone else can....but when people are willing to hurt you over a god then I dont beleive that faith is for me

Well I agree with that, which is why I feel that religions are to only be interpreted as signs on a road. They point you in different directions, but all the roads lead to the same God. I feel all religions have truth in them. I think just by living with the mentality 'do unto others....' is living a godly life, regardless of which religion you actually practice. God is bigger than all of our beliefs, certainly.

yes it's a problem for christianity. but in the old testament - there is no devil or Lucifer. there is no embodiment of evil who tempts . and 'Satan' ( the translation ) is nothing more than an errand boy really for God. 'Satan' in Jewish faith is still an angel of God , who can't do anything that doesn't come or is directed by God.

Some say that Isaiah 14:12. "How are you fallen from heaven, O bright star [or shining one], son of the morning [or son of dawn]! how are you cut down to the ground, you who ruled the nations!" is about the "devil". Part of this is due to the fact that the term bright star or shining one is translated in Latin to lucifer, which means shining one. Now, the context of the verse and a bit of knowledge of history reviels that this is about the Babylonian empire. One of the main dieties of Babylon was "Ishtar", who was the "god" who was the morning star. Shining one, son of dawn is the morning star. The prophet was avoiding the use of the name of the not-god Ishtar. Reading verse 4, "That you shall take up this proverb against the **king of Babylon,** and say, How has the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!", it becomes clear that this is the king of Babylon and his nation that is being spoken of here. There is no Lucifer, no devil in the Tanach, but there are many, many adversaries and accusers of the Jewish people.

http://www.geocities.com/~Alyza/Jewish/satan.html

For a detailed account of my beliefs on the physical nature of god see the thread.........."What is 'God'? "

However, to me it is clear that god created us like himself, with free will, and thus eventually with the potential to become god like ourselves.

Evil is not a physical thing.

Thus not even god could create it.

Evil is one option available to any sentient beings with free will.

If you follow the bible story, evil did not exist prior to the fall, only because no sentient creatures had chosen to follow evil (the one biblical exception was satan and the fallen angels).

So what is evil?


Evil is when a sentient being, who has the knowledge of what is good and what is evil(define those as you will), and also has the capability of free will to chose any course of action along a spectrum of absolute good to absolute evil, decides to chooose evil.

At the moment of choice, evil in the form of sin, enters the world for that person and that choice.

If the person decides further to act on his decision and do real harm, or another form of evil, then the sin becomes realised and true evil enters the person and the world at that point. These choices occur every second of the day, all over the world, bringing sin into existence; and when the thoughts become deed, evil into existence.

Natural calamities etc are not related to si nor evil, although more primitive societies who saw them as acts of god equated them as such. However bilically, there is some arguement that before the earth was damaged by sin and particularly by the flood ,such natural calamities did not exist ,or did not affect humanity because we were protected directly by god.

Is God everything, or does he have boundaries?

If he is everything wouldn't that mean that he is just the universe? Like for something to exist it must have other things that stand in contrast to it. Things that aren't it If God is everything, why are we giving him human characteristics - wouldn't he in the simplest terms just be existence?

And if he does have boundaries - how does he affect the universe, what is the interaction?

I am just kinda thinking out loud......

I often dwell upon that same question Belle. It's a question like most others when it comes to these kind of beliefs, it's personal and it takes faith more than anything.

If God has boundaries, then I don't think he would be perfect, limitless, benevolent, omnipotent etc. You also have to take into concideration what would be those boundaries; and again thats personal, everyone has a different opinion.

If God is everything, then I think that would put him? "it" at being some kind of energy source. Possibly inter/extra-dimensional, unlike anything we can even begin to comprehend.