Searching for GOD...

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

That is what many atheists claim, but it is not backed up by scripture.

Are you sure about that?

To be clear then, you're asserting a god powerful enough to create a universe but not powerful enough to take out one bat? Really?   

[Stranger]

That is what many atheists claim, but it is not backed up by scripture.

So which is your particular version of god missing? Omnipotence, omniscience, or omnibenevolence? Be specific.

[Sebastian Toe]

You seem to be implying that our Christian faith must presume God is in control of this earth.
The Christian bible makes it quite clear that God is not in control.

This is the same God who, if I recall correctly, according to you...."guided" evolution in order to end up with us?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Seb,

This is the same God who, if I recall correctly, according to you...."guided" evolution in order to end up with us?

AB's theology such as it is matches none that I've heard of - it's basically Sunday school stuff: naive, simplistic, prone to collapse as soon as you explain its consequences etc. He claims to be both a grown up and a member of Mensa etc, but it's all terribly infantile. Odd. 

[Alan Burns]

This is the same God who, if I recall correctly, according to you...."guided" evolution in order to end up with us?

Human creativity is guided by human will interacting with the otherwise physically predetermined universe.  This ability to create does not imply total control over nature - just a means of interacting with natural forces in order to bring about the consciously intended creation.   Similarly I believe that God has wilfully interacted with and manipulated natural forces in order to bring life into existence.  This would be a more plausible explanation for how such unfathomable complexity could have emerged than the alternative presumption that it could all be produced by the unintended consequences of unguided natural forces.  Such creativity does not imply or require total control - just a means of wilful interaction and manipulation of natural forces.  Nor does it imply that God did not create this universe - just that it was intentionally designed to be manipulated - by God's will or by human will.

[Nearly Sane]

Having posted this earlier and AB having missed it, interested in why he denies the RC catechism explanation!



http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p3.htm

[Sebastian Toe]

Similarly I believe that God has wilfully interacted with and manipulated natural forces in order to bring life into existence.

...and what would that entail?
An example or two might help.

[torridon]

Human creativity is guided by human will interacting with the otherwise physically predetermined universe.  This ability to create does not imply total control over nature - just a means of interacting with natural forces in order to bring about the consciously intended creation.   Similarly I believe that God has wilfully interacted with and manipulated natural forces in order to bring life into existence.  This would be a more plausible explanation for how such unfathomable complexity could have emerged than the alternative presumption that it could all be produced by the unintended consequences of unguided natural forces.  Such creativity does not imply or require total control - just a means of wilful interaction and manipulation of natural forces.  Nor does it imply that God did not create this universe - just that it was intentionally designed to be manipulated - by God's will or by human will.

This makes no sense.  Why would a God with unlimited creative powers not create the universe such that it naturally produced life in the first place ? As it stands it seems you think he made a universe that was so inherently anti-life such that he had to intervene and fix things up.

[Outrider]

You seem to be implying that our Christian faith must presume God is in control of this earth.

Not quite - it presumes that an omnipotent, omniscient deity COULD take control, and if it doesn't that's a conscious choice, and the consequences of that choice (made in the full and certain knowledge of all of the outcomes) is on the deity choosing to stand aside.

The Christian bible makes it quite clear that God is not in control.

The Christian Bible has far less of an impact on most of the believers I know than the posting here would suggest.

And in the same prayer we say "deliver us from evil". Evil is not God's will.

Evil is God's will, if you believe - he created it, along with everything else, he chooses not to end it.

God had to endure suffering and death through Jesus in order to free us from evil.

Why?  What was the point? Why does God need to sacrifice God to God in order for God to forgive me for something someone else couldn't realistically have done anyway?

O.

[Alan Burns]

Evil is God's will, if you believe - he created it, along with everything else, he chooses not to end it.

Evil is not God's will.
It is an inevitable consequence of the freedom of will given to beings which God brought into existence.
Without such freedom we would all be meaningless puppets of nature (which many on this thread apparently believe we are!).

Why?  What was the point? Why does God need to sacrifice God to God in order for God to forgive me for something someone else couldn't realistically have done anyway?

None of us can claim to be perfect in God's eyes - we are all sinners.
In sacrificing Himself He is taking upon Himself all the sins of the world in order to reconcile anyone who accepts Him as their Lord and Saviour.
Without such sacrifice, there would be no recognition of the importance of reconciliation, and evil would reign supreme.

[Roses]

If god exists it created evil, so of course it is its will. It is the Biblical god which is far from perfect and worse than any human! 

[torridon]

Evil is not God's will.
..

It is God's will.  If God created Satan and Satan's will is evil, then God created evil.

[Stranger]

Evil is not God's will.

If god exists and is omnipotent and omniscient, then evil obviously is its will, otherwise it wouldn't exist.

It is an inevitable consequence of the freedom of will given to beings which God brought into existence.

Firstly, that doesn't mean it's not god's will, it just means that your god thought evil was a price worth paying for having beings with "freedom".

Secondly, we are still waiting for the first hint of a rational reason to take your self-contradictory notion of freedom or your god at all seriously.

Without such freedom we would all be meaningless puppets of nature (which many on this thread apparently believe we are!).

Daft assertion and an appeal to consequences fallacy. Why don't you care that you rely on logical fallacies?

None of us can claim to be perfect in God's eyes - we are all sinners.

Which totally contradicts the idea of freedom. If everybody fails a test, that can't be a free choice. That isn't freedom, it's a design flaw.

In sacrificing Himself He is taking upon Himself all the sins of the world in order to reconcile anyone who accepts Him as their Lord and Saviour.
Without such sacrifice, there would be no recognition of the importance of reconciliation, and evil would reign supreme.

It's incredible that this is so embedded it Christian culture that people don't see how utterly bizarre and unjust it is. We're supposed to believe that this god's weird sadomasochistic act of becoming human and arranging to be tortured to death, somehow means that we can be forgiven for being the way god made us in the first place, but then only if we believe this ludicrous nonsense.

And BTW, even if we ignore all this nonsense and accept for a moment that evil is the "inevitable consequence of the freedom", then what's going to happen in heaven? Are people no longer going to be free, or will there be evil there too?

[Alan Burns]

Having posted this earlier and AB having missed it, interested in why he denies the RC catechism explanation!

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p3.htm

There is nothing in this text that I disagree with.
Yes, God is all powerful, but He has created freedom, both in human will and in the working of nature.  He cannot override this freedom, because it would no longer be freedom.  Freedom exists because it is God's will - and it allows us to exist as individual beings, each with our own will.  And the forces of nature are free to be used and manipulated by human will and by God's will - but not overridden.  I accept with wonder and awe the marvels of God's creativity and its reflection in human creativity.

As I said in an earlier post, I believe this universe was designed to be manipulated by conscious creative willpower.  Over a period of just a few hundred years, a treasure trove of unused hidden gems have been discovered and put to use by humans after laying dormant for millions of years - fossil fuels, metallic ore, cotton, electricity, radio waves, magnetism, antibiotics, X-rays, cathode rays, silicon properties, light emitting diodes - all consciously and creatively manipulated by human will in order to create our current civilization.  Were these in existence through God's own creative powers, intended to be used and manipulated by humans' creative free will?

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Yes, God is all powerful, but He has created freedom, both in human will and in the working of nature.  He cannot override this freedom, because it would no longer be freedom.

These two sentences contradict each other. If this god is "all powerful" then he can override freedom; if he can't override freedom, then he's not all powerful.

Which one are you plumping for?   

[Outrider]

Evil is not God's will.

God created everything, knowing the outcome.  Evil is part of that creation.  Therefore, evil is part of God's will.

It is an inevitable consequence of the freedom of will given to beings which God brought into existence.

God created that set of circumstances in which those individuals manifested that evil - that's on God for choosing that creation.  Your failed attempts to justify a claim to free will do not remove that onus from God.

Without such freedom we would all be meaningless puppets of nature (which many on this thread apparently believe we are!).

Again with this argument of 'but I don't like the implications'... how comfortable you are with the findings isn't an argument.  I don't like the apparent randomness of quantum mechanics, but I'm not expecting them to revise the textbooks because of it.

None of us can claim to be perfect in God's eyes - we are all sinners.

If the rules of 'sin' are written to make human nature 'sinful' then that's just a pejorative way of saying that we're all human.  I couldn't give a fig for 'sin' claims until someone can justify the concept of 'sin' in the first place.

In sacrificing Himself He is taking upon Himself all the sins of the world in order to reconcile anyone who accepts Him as their Lord and Saviour.

If he took all the sins of the world on himself, how come I'm still sinful?  If he came back after three(ish) days how is that a 'sacrifice' and not 'a weekend away'?  Why does there need to be blood spilt for him to forgive me for something someone else did?

Without such sacrifice, there would be no recognition of the importance of reconciliation, and evil would reign supreme.

How is there 'reconciliation' when I've not done anything to reconcile and he won't talk to me?

O.

[ProfessorDavey]

Yes, God is all powerful, but He has created freedom, both in human will and in the working of nature.  He cannot override this freedom, because it would no longer be freedom. 

But if god is all powerful he is able to override freedom. If god is unable to override freedom then he/she/its power is limited and therefore god is not all powerful.

You cannot have it both ways.

Oh and by the way - regardless of the gaping logical flaws in your argument, your whole post is unevidenced assertion start to finish.

[Alan Burns]

God created everything, knowing the outcome.  Evil is part of that creation.  Therefore, evil is part of God's will.

No.
By delegating the power of free will to other beings, the resulting outcome is the will of those beings, not the will of God.

[Alan Burns]

But if god is all powerful he is able to override freedom. If god is unable to override freedom then he/she/its power is limited and therefore god is not all powerful.

By overriding freedom, the concept of freedom would be destroyed.
Why would God wish to destroy what He has created?
The freedom delegated to other beings must be part of God's plan.
None of us can envisage the full picture of God's plan.
So I put my faith and trust in God's love for what He has created.

[Sebastian Toe]

Similarly I believe that God has wilfully interacted with and manipulated natural forces in order to bring life into existence.

...life in general or humans or a bit of both?

[torridon]

As I said in an earlier post, I believe this universe was designed to be manipulated by conscious creative willpower.  Over a period of just a few hundred years, a treasure trove of unused hidden gems have been discovered and put to use by humans after laying dormant for millions of years - fossil fuels, metallic ore, cotton, electricity, radio waves, magnetism, antibiotics, X-rays, cathode rays, silicon properties, light emitting diodes - all consciously and creatively manipulated by human will in order to create our current civilization.  Were these in existence through God's own creative powers, intended to be used and manipulated by humans' creative free will?

If this simplistic narrative were true,  then God also created ebola, coronavirus, malaria, smallpox, parasites, anthrax and innumerable other pathogens to bring about unnecessary suffering.  You can't praise a creator for the good things in life without blaming said creator for all the terrible things.  At least, not without donning a massive pair of blinkers, you can't.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Firstly any argument blaming God is not an atheist argument.
God blaming with science responsible for the good not the bad is an argument which abounds.

[Gordon]

Firstly any argument blaming God is not an atheist argument.

That would be self-evident, Vlad, since I've yet to encounter an atheist who thinks there could be a God that could be blamed for anything.

God blaming with science responsible for the good not the bad is an argument which abounds.

Since you've already concluded that God-blaming isn't an atheist argument, and I'd agree with you there, who are the non-atheists who are making this argument?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That would be self-evident, Vlad, since I've yet to encounter an atheist who thinks there could be a God that could be blamed for anything.

Since you've already concluded that God-blaming isn't an atheist argument, and I'd agree with you there, who are the non-atheists who are making this argument?

Your mistake here was to conclude that atheists do not use God blaming argument. Torridon managed to worm it in in his previous post. God giving babies cancer is a prime fave argument employed by celebrity atheist in chief S. Fry.

[Roses]

I think Vlad puts, vodka, gin, brandy and whisky on his cornflakes instead of milk.