Existence of God

[lovett]

He obviously can't decide to do something that violates his omnibenevolence. But if he doesn't have free will, how can he be omnipotent?

I think this is a misunderstanding of free will. Gods omnibenevolence does not mean he couldn't act in an evil manner, just that he never would. Free will is best understood as acting in a way according to your own wishes; the fact I never would jump off a cliff does not mean I don't have free will. I am acting according to my wishes.

Concurrently one can see that Gods omnibenevolence would not mean he had no free will.

 

[Leoreth]

Okay, I'm aware of that, but I'd like to see how a theologian is able to reconcile this reasoning with the argumentation that evil exists because of human free will.

If God can exist with a free will without the desire to do evil, why can't humans?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Is collective punishment benevolent (e.g. killing of all first born children in Egypt)?

 

[Leoreth]

One could always cop out by pointing out some "greater good", which is only identifiable with actual omniscience.

 

[lovett]

Okay, I'm aware of that, but I'd like to see how a theologian is able to reconcile this reasoning with the argumentation that evil exists because of human free will.

If God can exist with a free will without the desire to do evil, why can't humans?

I see your point.

But then, I have yet to see anything approaching a satisfactory answer to the problem of evil. I find it interesting that so many believers don't find this a problem.

 

[warpus]

I see your point.

But then, I have yet to see anything approaching a satisfactory answer to the problem of evil. I find it interesting that so many believers don't find this a problem.

Because they don't think about this rationally, but rather assume that God is "so powerful that he can do whatever he wants to, and it doesn't violate anything because he's so powerful and stuff"

 

[Terxpahseyton]

But then, I have yet to see anything approaching a satisfactory answer to the problem of evil. I find it interesting that so many believers don't find this a problem.

Hm... I'll give it a shot into the dark.

If there is no evil, there is no struggle.
If there is no struggle, their is no value ... to anything.
If there is no value, their is no meaning of live. Living becomes and end in itself. Soulless. Like a computer programming which creates an infinite line of 0, for no other purpose than to continue the line.

In conclusion, allowing evil God gave us the great blessing of being able to find meaning (and doing that God also finally gave himself meaning).

How does that sound?

 

[Ayn Rand]

If God can exist with a free will without the desire to do evil, why can't humans?

I'd like to know the answer to that question as well And also, whether God actually can have free will or whether the property "morally good" serves as a limit to the property "omnipotent" as Leoreth pointed out earlier.

 

[negZero]

I'd like to know the answer to that question as well And also, whether God actually can have free will or whether the property "morally good" serves as a limit to the property "omnipotent" as Leoreth pointed out earlier.

Well the story goes that humans ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil tainting all of mankind forever. Plus read the Old Testament God really liked the idea smiting people.

Now to the issue at hand. For those of you believe that some dude waved wand created everything in universe refute this . For everyone else lets burn Taxes.

 

[Gustave5436]

Astrophysicist Robert Jastrow, a self-described agnostic, stated, "The seed of everything that has happened in the Universe was planted in that first instant; every star, every planet and every living creature in the Universe came into being as a result of events that were set in motion in the moment of the cosmic explosion...The Universe flashed into being, and we cannot find out what caused that to happen
The universe has not always existed. It had a start...what caused that? Scientists have no explanation for the sudden explosion of light and matter.

The big bang was, for all intents and purposes, the beginning of time itself. "What came before time?" is a meaningless question, for the same reason that "what is north of the north pole?" is meaningless.

 

[Leoreth]

That's why everyone is free to fill the "cause" of the universe with whatever he likes. Although from a strictly scientific point of view, cause and effect require an order of time, and without time become meaningless. You can be content with this answer, but I understand if someone considers that as too abstract and likes to perceive it on more intuitive grounds.

Hm... I'll give it a shot into the dark.

If there is no evil, there is no struggle.
If there is no struggle, their is no value ... to anything.
If there is no value, their is no meaning of live. Living becomes and end in itself. Soulless. Like a computer programming which creates an infinite line of 0, for no other purpose than to continue the line.

In conclusion, allowing evil God gave us the great blessing of being able to find meaning (and doing that God also finally gave himself meaning).

How does that sound?

Nice try, and I've heard many arguments like this already.

And I always think that people who use this reasoning don't realise what "omnipotent" really means. It means God is able to do EVERYTHING. So just because we can't imagine a world where life can have meaning without struggle and resulting values (of course we can't because our imagination relies on this world we know), it doesn't mean that a omnipotent God isn't able to create one. In fact God MUST be able to create one, or it is a clear contradiction to his omnipotence.

By the way, please stop posting those internet sites with neat arrangements of arguments. That's a) not much fun because we want to discuss here and not beat each others with links and b) only shows that you're not able to formulate this argument yourself, which I take as a clue you haven't understood them as much as you claim to. That's for both "sides", by the way.

 

[cardgame]

Omnipotence is a contradiction though, leoreth.

Remember the rock he can't lift?



OK well, that's almost semantical (for lack of a better word) so here's something more substanciated:

If God is omnipotent then he could find a way to eliminate evil and not have life be meaningless, or w/e other arguments are used to support the existence of evil, whether it be satan or children starving to death in the 3rd world...

 

[Ayn Rand]

Well to be fair my links were extremely sarcastic parodies, albeit based on logical arguments

God's cool designs and the falsehood of evolution explained fully here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcrq5OOkQdk

and God's design for the World proved here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P591Yt6dIHY

 

[Lillefix]

And I always think that people who use this reasoning don't realise what "omnipotent" really means. It means God is able to do EVERYTHING.

Nononono. Not even an omnipotent being can he create a married bachelor. Right?

 

[Truronian]

Nononono. Not even an omnipotent being can he create a married bachelor. Right?

Which is why the idea of an omnipotent being is so contradictory. God can be potent, just not omnipotent.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Well to be fair my links were extremely sarcastic parodies, albeit based on logical arguments

God's cool designs and the falsehood of evolution explained fully here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcrq5OOkQdk

and God's design for the World proved here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P591Yt6dIHY

You can embed youtube videos using [ youtube ] and [ /youtube ] tags (remove space), copy the bit from after v= between the tags (and remove any &feature... whatever gubbins).

You stoled's my links though And there was I linking only the less obvious parodies and you go and post the obvious ones...

 

[Trev]

If he programmed us with the ability to maim and rape and allows us to do these things then he is not an omni-benevolent being.

He allows us because He chooses not to interfere with our free will at this time, and He has never claimed to be omni-benevolent, and I do not believe Him to be that.

If he lacks the power to stop us doing these things then he is not omnipotent.

Him choosing not to intervene at this time has nothing to do whether He is Omnipotent or not, it is just a choice He is making.

If he doesn't know that we do these things, or indeed if he didn't know that this would result from his act of Creation, then he is not omniscient.

He does know, and also did know from the beginning this would all happen, but for reasons beyond our comprehension, it was more important to Him that humans could choose right or wrong, choose to serve Him or not to serve Him, than that everything stay perfect.

He doesn't intervene, yet he sent down his son to intervene.

He doesn't want to intervene, yet he plans to eventual stage a grand intervention (rapture).

True. God is holy and because of that holiness He can only accept people whose sins are forgiven. It required a sinless person to be the sacrifice that allowed God to forgive humans, the only sinless human is Jesus Christ, so God allowed His Son to become human and die for us. It is an intervention that truly shows how much He cares and loves us, having sacrificed His Son. That intervention has given humans the ability to accept God's forgiveness and make the right choices, He still will not force us to make the right choice though and never will. That is why those who fail to make the right choice are separated from Him at the end of time. His intervention at the end of time is based solely on our decision and actions, so even though we get our will, life with Him as forgiven humans or life without Him.
Omni-benevolent means always acting to the benefit of a person.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

but for reasons beyond our comprehension, it was more important to Him that humans could choose right or wrong, choose to serve Him or not to serve Him, than that everything stay perfect.

Reasons beyond our comprehension.

I'm sorry, but that doesn't cut it for me. I refuse to accept this as an valid response and consider it a cop-out. Mysterious ways my furry little butt.

Why would God want his Deist ego stroked by his very creation? There just is no reason for this.

True. God is holy and because of that holiness He can only accept people whose sins are forgiven. It required a sinless person to be the sacrifice that allowed God to forgive humans, the only sinless human is Jesus Christ, so God allowed His Son to become human and die for us. It is an intervention that truly shows how much He cares and loves us, having sacrificed His Son.

Having sacrificed his Son, who he created to be sacrificed and who is God himself.

That intervention has given humans the ability to accept God's forgiveness and make the right choices, He still will not force us to make the right choice though and never will.

So, all that talk of Heaven and Hell is just bunk made up by the Church?

Unconditional love is not unconditional if there's a stick or a carrot at the end.

 

[negZero]

He allows us because He chooses not to interfere with our free will at this time, and He has never claimed to be omni-benevolent.

If he doesn't stop evil then hes not omnipotent

Him choosing not to intervene at this time has nothing to do whether He is Omnipotent or not, it is just a choice He is making.

Then hes malevolent

He does know, and also did know from the beginning this would all happen, but for reasons beyond our comprehension, it was more important to Him that humans could choose right or wrong, choose to serve Him or not to serve Him, than that everything stay perfect.

We can only do evil because we ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.(Whence cometh evil?)

True. God is holy and because of that holiness He can only accept people whose sins are forgiven. It required a sinless person to be the sacrifice that allowed God to forgive humans, the only sinless human is Jesus Christ,

Wrong Jesus Christ died with sin, thats why it had to be human son, not an angel

It is an intervention that truly shows how much He cares and loves us, having sacrificed His Son. That intervention has given humans the ability to accept God's forgiveness and make the right choices

Or you know he could start forgiving people without having to kill his son

He still will not force us to make the right choice though and never will.

Then why call him God?

That is why those who fail to make the right choice are separated from Him at the end of time.

More like he picks 144000 and leaves the rest to rot.

His intervention at the end of time is based solely on our decision and actions, so even though we get our will, life with Him as forgiven humans or life without Him Omni-benevolent means always acting to the benefit of a person.

No he comes after 14 years and tosses everyone into lake of fire for 1000 years only to be let out for the real final battle.

Again anybody willing to come up with an argument that can't be debunked with the Epicurus Riddle?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Question: Does a perfect being have the ability to feel desire?