• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Questions about this "god" thing

MattusMaximus

Intellectual Gladiator
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
15,948
Let us assume there is a "god". Here are some obvious follow up questions:

1. Why assume one "god" as creator of the universe?
2. From whence came this "god"?
3. If "god" created everything, then did "god" create itself?

Inquiring minds want to know. Of course, this all assumes that such a thing (or things) exist in the first place - something of which I am quite doubtful.
 
1) cause the Bible says there's one god
2) god has always been here, and works in mysterious ways
3) fook if I know

Applying logic to religion and/or asking questions like this doesn't work out so well...
 
Sort of in line with the Marquis' comment, why would a "god" as we commonly describe this being create anything?
Being perfect and all, omnipotent, omniscient.... What would be the point?
 
Edited by chillzero: 
Edit for civility and flooding of the same post type repeatedly
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My question for those who believe in god(s):

Who is wrong, the polytheists, or the monotheists?

Who is wrong, Jews or Christians (is Jesus god/son of god, and must you accept Him as your savior; or is he a false prophet)?

Why must god be loving and kind and benevolent? Yes, you can find this in the Bible. But you can also find there a jealous, homicidal, apparently cruel god (also see last question: Christians might say, "that's the OT--Jesus did away with that," which I would respond to by saying, "OK, but the Ten big ones are found in the OT, and The Holy Bible is 2/3 or 3/4 OT, so what gives? And what's wrong with the Jews, why don't they believe in the NT/Jesus? Why should I believe Christians but not Jews, or vice versa?

OK, I'm rambling here...
 
Sort of in line with the Marquis' comment, why would a "god" as we commonly describe this being create anything?
Being perfect and all, omnipotent, omniscient.... What would be the point?

A God that cannot experience imperfection is not perfect - that God is incapable of experiencing anything negative, and has no free will. So he created people through whom to experience such imperfection, and to experience the exercise of free will.
 
Let us assume there is a "god". Here are some obvious follow up questions:

1. Why assume one "god" as creator of the universe?
2. From whence came this "god"?
3. If "god" created everything, then did "god" create itself?

Inquiring minds want to know. Of course, this all assumes that such a thing (or things) exist in the first place - something of which I am quite doubtful.
I think its pretty much a natural process.

Assume you lived three thousand years ago. You saw earthquakes, volcanoes, disease, lightning/thunder, etc....and had absolutely no way to control it, or even understand it. You could make fire, sure...but you couldn't cause fire to spew from the ground, or fall from the skies. So, you came to assume that there must be higher powers -- spirits, gods, demons, etc. -- that were responsible.

Those beings were on a higher plane than you...more powerful than you. But they were still fallible. So it was not too great a leap of logic to assume another level beyond them...beings that were even more powerful. Take this a few steps further, and eventually you reach a point where you posit the existence of an 'ultimate' god...the original god, the one from whom all other gods came. This god is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent...it is impossible for a higher or more powerful god to exist than this one, because this god is infinitely perfect.

Actually, from a purely practical standpoint, this kind of god makes one's beliefs much easier. It does away with philosophical issues of infinite regression -- an infinite chain of gods, each more powerful than the previous one. It does away with the moral/ethical difficulties of following gods who are themselves imperfect, and make mistakes.

In truth, I am not at all surprised at the development of the concept of a 'perfect' god...only thing that surprises me is that it didn't arise in more cultures. It is far simpler to deal with on both philosophical and moral grounds; and also allows for far greater control of the populace in general (you can doubt an imperfect god; but you can't doubt a perfect one).

The questions of who created such a god, or where it came from, are pretty much irrelevant. Such a god could not have been created by any other being, since such a being would have to be even more perfect or powerful than an infinitely perfect/powerful god...which is impossible. Pretty much by definition, such a god must either never have existed, or always have existed. For it to have been created would be to create limitations on both its existence, and its power.
 
Last edited:
Believing one omniscient, omnipotent being screwed up this royally is bad enough. Believing two or more did it is unbearable.

It at least introduces the possibility of imperfection in one or more, as well as a lack of omnipotence, both of which jibe better with the reality around us than that one omnipotent, perfect, kind, good god exists who, because they are perfect and omnipotent and kind and good, allow babies to be raped to death.

Of course, both are still completely unwarranted, as there is no evidence to suggest one needs god(s) to explain anything seen around you.
 
Let us assume there is a "god". Here are some obvious follow up questions:

1. Why assume one "god" as creator of the universe?

Because Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Constantine decided it and destroyed any alternative opinions.

2. From whence came this "god"?

The Torah.

3. If "god" created everything, then did "god" create itself?

Yes, according to Origen, if I remember correctly.

Nick
 
I'm arguing with a Christian at the moment about the age of civilisation, along the lines of if I can prove the existence of human civilization further ago than 6,000 years then the bible creation story is no good. So I do a bit of research (ie google) and find a site for an archeological dig in Turkey of a town called Catalhoyuk, dating back 9,000 years.

The response: that 9,000 years is based on Carbon dating, which nobody trusts due to cosmic ray fluctuation and Noahs flood leaching carbon into the oceans blah blah blah.

So I do some research on carbon dating and learn that it's part of a whole suite of Radiometric dating techniques and that carbon dating in particular is calibrated with tree rings and ice cores and "varves" and so on, to produce a dating method with a +\- 2-3% margin of error. (figs from memory, don't quote!)

Response: If it disagrees with the bible it must be wrong.

Um, so the point of all that ranting is that it really annoys me that there are all these scientists working their butts off to provide a rational argument for the way things are, but the sum total of the believers argument is "God did it".

Conclusion: Omnipotence ruins everything!
 
2. From whence came this "god"?

The Torah.

Which in turn got it from some proto-Judaism similar to the Canaanite pantheon, which apparently included Yahweh and his girlfriend Ishtar. He was some mountain god or something.

As Judaism was forming, a group split off who claimed Yahweh wasn't just the greatest god, but the only one. There are still indicators of this through the OT, such as "Thou shalt have no other gods before me", which is deliberately misinterpreted to mean things like money, or gold idols, or something, just not other actual gods.

Or Yahweh's battles with Behemoth and Leviathan, still mentioned in Psalms, but exorcised from Genesis as part of the well-known creation myths at that time.

Or Pharoah's priest's turning of a stick into two snakes, which is frequently retconned into being some kind of prestidigitation or maybe the Devil teleported them in, but not the actual creation of life, because only gods can do that, and there's only one actual god.
 
IIRC, there were roughly 300 voting at the council of Nicea. Why blame it all on Constantine?

DR

Well, I think Irenaeus is the chief "whipping boy" for all things evil about Christianity these days, certainly after reading Pagels' latest. Then again, Dan Brown blames Constantine, and lots of people have read that, though I don't think he stuck too much with historical fact. I guess if you need to blame someone then the irate Bishop of Lyon probably is a good candidate.

Nick
 
Last edited:
Which in turn got it from some proto-Judaism similar to the Canaanite pantheon, which apparently included Yahweh and his girlfriend Ishtar. He was some mountain god or something.

As Judaism was forming, a group split off who claimed Yahweh wasn't just the greatest god, but the only one. There are still indicators of this through the OT, such as "Thou shalt have no other gods before me", which is deliberately misinterpreted to mean things like money, or gold idols, or something, just not other actual gods.

I've heard that, historically, the change from polytheism to monotheism often followed this pattern. I think also Allah was originally just one of a range of deities, complete with wife, who struck the big-time and got singled out to be the one, true God.

Nick
 
Last edited:
Those beings were on a higher plane than you...more powerful than you. But they were still fallible. So it was not too great a leap of logic to assume another level beyond them...beings that were even more powerful. Take this a few steps further, and eventually you reach a point where you posit the existence of an 'ultimate' god...the original god, the one from whom all other gods came. This god is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent...it is impossible for a higher or more powerful god to exist than this one, because this god is infinitely perfect.

Some of the gnostic texts list a hierarchic of gods just as you describe. Check out the Gnostic Library http://www.gnosis.org/library.html for some of the texts.
This concept of greater and greater levels of gods is the source of the expression "Seventh Heaven."
 

Back
Top Bottom