Religion So God isnt really all-powerful?

[Teffy]

It will be a good day when there is no more need for such inane discussions.

5 star post.

I have no idea why such an inane subject attracts constant regurgitation.

 

[Malifice]

To me it's irrelevant which parts are true and which aren't. To me the most important thing to follow is the golden rule which Jesus said, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". That eliminates most of the problems in society.

You know what has always fascinated me with Christianity in the 'West'?

Like, Jesus was a progressive. He was anti death penalty, a socialist (the rich should give to the poor), anti war, anti revenge, challenged all the leading institutions of his time, was down with love and peace, allowed the Gentiles into the faith (thus being down with multiculturalism and against xenophobia and discrimination), etc etc.

Yet in the 'West' Christians are associated with the Conservative 'Right'; alongside the gun nuts, racists, and hard core capatalists.

Even more odd is when the Christians support the Death penalty citing an 'Eye for an Eye', despite the clear and unequivocal teachings of Jesus to the contrary, and the fact that Jesus's life and death is a perfect example of the problems with capital punishment (being executed - wrongly - himself).

Just bizzare.

It's fundamentalist Christianity which insists on taking the whole Bible as literal that I can't tolerate. I don't think the Bible was ever meant to be taken 100% literally. It's a guide to life, not an encyclopedia.

See I lean the other way. I actually have time for the position of the Fundies (despite loathing them personally). They at least are not as wishy washy as those that move the goal posts each time a new section of the Bible is found to be not actually true.

Genesis 2:2 states 'On the seventh day God was finished with his work which he had made, so he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.'

He rested as He had finished His good work.

Did he need to rest? Why would an all-powerfull God need rest?

Also, why would it take an all-powerfull God six whole days to create the Universe?

Surely He could have done it in an instant.

Interestingly the concept of 6 days work and 1 rest is also used in Jewish tradition to show that the world has been now in existance for 6000 years since the beginning of the Bible

I respect your literalism.

And even though I think you are mistaken on this point, I cant prove you wrong.

and that Jesus will rule on earth for 1 thousand years with His people.

When is that supposed to happen exactly?

Modern science doesn't allow us to make absolute statements of fact, as the door is always left open for a challenge to the theory.

Exactly. But the 'Goal posts' dont move re Falsification of a theory.

And science makes no statements of absolute objective 'truths'; only that which is probably true (unless proven otherwise).

With the possible exception of the 'external objective universe' of course.

Hang on - I just had an epiphany.

 

[Summer Nights]

But like, surely this is evidence he is not all powerful?

Unless I am mistaken, he also didnt forsee the war in heaven and Lucifers rebellion either.

So not really omnipotent either.

Pretty weak God if you ask me.

You already clearly know he doesn't exist, so why create a thread about it? Just trying to prove you can find another reason why the bible doesn't make sense?

 

[Malifice]

You already clearly know he doesn't exist, so why create a thread about it?

I dont 'know' He doesnt exist.

While Agnostic, I actually lean the other way.

 

[skilts]

I just thought it was interesting that is all! Just can't understand the press Dawkins gets and shit it would be rare for an athiest to condescend to Christians wouldn't it?

Dawkins is an embarrassment to those who think deeply about these issues. A splendid self-publicist though.

Prompted by his publisher, I think he may have realised that nobody would bother to read his thoughts about his boring area of interest. Because of this, he has over-reached.

 

[Malifice]

My current hypothesis on a logical proof of the existence of a 'God' comes from the finite universe, and creation ex nihlo.

If:

A) The universe is finite, then:

B) It logically follows that it went from a state of Nothing to... 'the Universe'

Then logically, the very fact that a universe (including the laws of nature) could spring from 'nothing' requires a supernatural (i.e. outside of nature) entity or force to happen.

Something 'natural' cant act in nothing and on nothing in no time to create or become on its own 'something'.

Conceptually it requires something outside of nature or the ability to comprehend to happen.

Ergo God exists. Unless the universe is infinte of course.

I just hope he is a nice guy.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

My current hypothesis on a logical proof of the existence of a 'God' comes from the finite universe, and creation ex nihlo.

If:

A) The universe is finite, then:

B) It logically follows that it went from a state of Nothing to... 'the Universe'

Then logically, the very fact that a universe (including the laws of nature) could spring from 'nothing' requires a supernatural (i.e. outside of nature) entity or force to happen.

Something 'natural' cant act in nothing and on nothing in no time to create or become on its own 'something'.

Conceptually it requires something outside of nature or the ability to comprehend to happen.

Ergo God exists. Unless the universe is infinte of course.

I just hope he is a nice guy.

I'll throw this at you - where does a single-cell amoeba come from? Imagine our universe is a single-cell amoeba writ large. You don't know that the natural order OUTSIDE the universe isn't so huge your hair would turn white and you'd go insane just by getting a glimpse of it.

God dosen't dictate that one plus one equals two.

The universe and what's outside it would all obey natural laws too, but these laws are not as we understand them because our current level of knowledge is so limited. I'd bet them lot at CERN know a tenth of one percent about the universe and beyond.

If even that.

 

[HARKER]

My current hypothesis on a logical proof of the existence of a 'God' comes from the finite universe, and creation ex nihlo.

If:

A) The universe is finite, then:

B) It logically follows that it went from a state of Nothing to... 'the Universe'

Then logically, the very fact that a universe (including the laws of nature) could spring from 'nothing' requires a supernatural (i.e. outside of nature) entity or force to happen.

Something 'natural' cant act in nothing and on nothing in no time to create or become on its own 'something'.

Conceptually it requires something outside of nature or the ability to comprehend to happen.

Ergo God exists. Unless the universe is infinte of course.

I just hope he is a nice guy.

You're just being provocative, Mal.
The universe can't be infinite, but God can?

Just because we currently can't take up the full scope of a universe that may be subject to dimensions beyond our current understanding doesn't mean we have to resort to the most primitive of fall-backs
You're a funny fellow that must have fun arguing with himself.

 

[Malifice]

I'll throw this at you - where does a single-cell amoeba come from? Imagine our universe is a single-cell amoeba writ large.

Your example is flawed.

It presumes there is something outside of the amoeba/ universe.

My position assumes there is nothing outside of the amoeba/ universe.

And the amoeba cant exist in nothing. Its conceptually and logically impossible.

You don't know that the natural order OUTSIDE the universe isn't so huge your hair would turn white and you'd go insane just by getting a glimpse of it.

It almost certainly is so huge.

To quote Douglas Adams - Mind bogglingly huge.

But finite.

God dosen't dictate that one plus one equals two.

Im not saying he does.

I am simply saying that in order for nothing (no space, no matter, no energy, no laws, no chaos and no time) to become something it logically requires a force outside of nature to happen.

Im not suggesting what that 'force' is, what its intentions are (if any), or what form it takes aside from the fact that it must exist for the universe to emerge from nothing, and it must be supernatural in order to exist 'in' (and act upon and create something from) nothing.

In a finite universe, pre big bang, nothing exists. And nothing natural can exist in nothing.

You're just being provocative, Mal.
The universe can't be infinite, but God can?

Logically 'God' has the power to exist outside of the laws of the universe (i.e. exist in nothing).

Ergo, as pesky universal laws and causation dont apply to him, he equally logically also has the power to be infinite.

Logically, the concept of 'infinity' doesnt really bother a being /entity/ force whom is not troubled by nothing.

 

[Malifice]

Remember, nothing natural can exist in nothing, and nothing natural can turn nothing into something.

Logically, creation ex nihlo requires something outside of nature to be possible.

Otherwise we wouldnt be here right now debating it.

 

[cancat]

Logically 'God' has the power to exist outside of the laws of the universe (i.e. exist in nothing).

So tell me about this God thing. What does it look like? What are its properties? Where did it come from?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

But you're only applying what you understand of the universe at this very moment. There was a time where the earth was flat and the moon was just the sun at night. Human knowledge creeps ever forward and science reveals what religion hides I know, but HOW MUCH is out there that we don't understand?

Logic may NOT be a fixed thing. There may be other life forms that breathe in methane and fart pure oxygen with a DNA we couldn't possibly work out. Maybe DNA isn't even a universal constant amongst life forms.

There are things we'd like to think we know, but like you all I can do is suppose on these matters.

 

[EagleMan87]

I am simply saying that in order for nothing (no space, no matter, no energy, no laws, no chaos and no time) to become something it logically requires a force outside of nature to happen.

Im not suggesting what that 'force' is, what its intentions are (if any), or what form it takes aside from the fact that it must exist for the universe to emerge from nothing, and it must be supernatural in order to exist 'in' (and act upon and create something from) nothing.

In a finite universe, pre big bang, nothing exists. And nothing natural can exist in nothing.

And that's the $64,000 question. Even the most skeptical of us have to admit the beginning of the 'universe'(more specifically, the matter that comprises our concept of the universe) cannot be natural.

This is based on the theory that nothingness has always been so and that 'something' somehow came into existance and gradually expanded to become everything we encorporate and comprehend.

We will never truly know the answer, but damn it's fun to speculate.

 

[Malifice]

But you're only applying what you understand of the universe at this very moment.

Logically it doesnt matter what we find out about the universe.

The only possible thing that can act outside of the natural world is the supernatural.

There is not a particle, a quark, a photon, a wave function or a super string that is going to make one iota of difference.

They dont exist in nothing. And they cant come into being from nothing.

Same with any other law or observation made by physics. Laws of physics dont (and cant) work in nothing.

There are no physics in nothing.

Human knowledge creeps ever forward and science reveals what religion hides I know, but HOW MUCH is out there that we don't understand?

Tons of stuff that we dont understand.

But its stuff we dont know about the universe. No amount of hunting back in time, and mathmatecal equasions is ever going to grant us the ability to look before the universe into nothing.

We'll simply find what we are looking for - nothing.

And for that nothing to become the universe (space, matter, time, energy, physics) it requires something that can exist and alter nothing.

And only something supernatural can do that without violating the existence of nothing.

There may be other life forms that breathe in methane and fart pure oxygen with a DNA we couldn't possibly work out. Maybe DNA isn't even a universal constant amongst life forms.

There almost certainly are.

There are things we'd like to think we know, but like you all I can do is suppose on these matters.

Im not using supposition, im using logic.

Something cannot (conceptually or logically) come from nothing.

The universe came into being, despite there being nothing for the universe to exist 'in' and no time in which to exist or to form.

Logically the universe requires something supernatural in order to be here.

So tell me about this God thing. What does it look like? What are its properties? Where did it come from?

Again, I make no claims as to the nature, properties or appearance of 'God', I only offer logical proof of the existence of a supernatural force capable of creating the unverse.

The one property this 'Supernatural force/ God' does have, is it is not constrained by by concepts of time, matter, energy or space.

It was perfectly able to not only exist in, but also create a universe from, nothing - despite the fact that nothing natural can possibly do either.

 

[Hello Newman!]

Did he need to rest? Why would an all-powerfull God need rest?

Also, why would it take an all-powerfull God six whole days to create the Universe?

Surely He could have done it in an instant.

I already answered that. Re-read my previous post. He didn't need to rest, He chose to rest and demonstrated a much greater aspect about Himself through doing this, and what He was going to do in history through Jesus for us. Primarily He loves us and wants nothing more from us than relationship with Him.

I appreciate your honesty

 

[Malifice]

I already answered that. Re-read my previous post. He didn't need to rest, He chose to rest and demonstrated a much greater aspect about Himself through doing this, and what He was going to do in history through Jesus for us. Primarily He loves us and wants nothing more from us than relationship with Him.

I appreciate your honesty

Why the six days?

Why not just do it in a picosecond, or in no time at all?

 

[cancat]

Again, I make no claims as to the nature, properties or appearance of 'God', I only offer logical proof of the existence of a supernatural force capable of creating the unverse.

The one property this 'Supernatural force/ God' does have, is it is not constrained by by concepts of time, matter, energy or space.

Are you using logic to prove something that lies outside the realm of logic?

 

[Monniehawk]

Are you using logic to prove something that lies outside the realm of logic?

Could it be argued that the only thing that lies outside the realm of logic is irrationality?

 

[Contra Mundum]

NS: Back to issues of faith and reason—your position reminds me of Stephen Jay Gould’s model of “non-overlapping magesteria.” Gould himself was not a believer, though he wrote about religion and science, and sometimes he has been accused of having a position that is only possible if you’re not really taking belief seriously.

TE: I think that Gould was right in that particular position. What is interesting is why it makes people like Dawkins so nervous. They misinterpret that position to mean that theology doesn’t have to conform to the rules and demands of reason. Then theologians can say anything they like. They don’t have to produce evidence, and they don’t have to engage in reasonable argument. They’re now released from the tenets of science. Traditionally, this is the Christian heresy known as fideism. But all kinds of rationalities, theology included, have been non-scientific for a very long time and yet still have to conform to the procedures of reason. The new atheists think this because they falsely identify the rules of reason with the rules of scientific reason. Therefore if something is outside the purview of science, it follows for them that it is outside the purview of reason itself. But that’s a false way of arguing. Dawkins won’t entertain either the idea that faith must engage reason or that the very idea of what rationality is is to be debated.

 

[cancat]

Could it be argued that the only thing that lies outside the realm of logic is irrationality?

So God is female after all

 

[Hello Newman!]

Why the six days?

Why not just do it in a picosecond, or in no time at all?

As I mentioned, He did it to bring out the significance of the Sabbath. God doesn't do things without a reason. The Sabbath was a foreshadow of Jesus. The whole point of much of the Old Testament is to show that we can never live up to God's standards. That's why He sent Jesus so He could live up to them, and then we can live in Him and reap all the benefits ie eternal life. It is very good news!

 

[Monniehawk]

So God is female after all

Only the one I married!

 

[Summer Nights]

I dont 'know' He doesnt exist.

While Agnostic, I actually lean the other way.

Yes you do. You know that the god described in the Bible doesn't exist. As for an 'actual' god, that's something else, and I agree about the agnostic thing. So why create a thread about it?

 

[dumb]

So God isnt really all-powerful?

seeing as you've said it a couple of times, it's actually 'ex nihilo'

the definition of omnipotent/all-powerful is also subject to its own interpretation according to a few theologists.

god can do anything. or
god can do anything that is possible. that way He escapes such problems like square circles, or other paradoxes. all the while nobody really knowing what is possible.

A) if the universe is finite, then:

B) It logically follows that it went from a state of Nothing to... 'the Universe'

Then logically, the very fact that a universe (including the laws of nature) could spring from 'nothing' requires a supernatural (i.e. outside of nature) entity or force to happen.

Something 'natural' cant act in nothing and on nothing in no time to create or become on its own 'something'.

Conceptually it requires something outside of nature or the ability to comprehend to happen.

Ergo God exists. Unless the universe is infinte of course.

i would quote spinoza or something if i properly understood his ideas. what of pantheism? isn't god himself infinite and so any universe he created he could never be 'seperate' from? an infinite universe can not possibly disprove the existence of an all powerful god. i mean, there is matter itself to consider. an infinite universe still has to come into creation itself too.

then there's the whole idea of regressive gods, the god creating the universe must have got there somehow. is this god infinite? he has to be otherwise he had to be created.

 

[evo]

A Spinozan God is perfectly reasonable. Unfortunately very few theists believes in that type of God.