A universe with God.

[elliotfc]

I do not believe in an omnipotent being, which is why I don't have a problem. The Theodicy problem can only be a thorn in the side of one who professes belief in an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent entity and who acknowledges the existence of evil, or at least suffering since many try to distance themselves from that word.

I've seen only two ways to avoid the problem. One is to be a Theidiot, and not even understand that it is a problem. The other is to redefine the terms involved until the problem disappears. This appears to be your way.

As for limiting God, that's not what I'm doing. My terms give God infinite control. You are the one playing silly buggers with the definitions. It seems to me that you are trying to limit God (to help him escape the Theodicy problem.)

Good, I'm glad we don't have a problem then. The word omnipotence, as defined in the dictionary, doesn't mean much more than the paper it is written on.

As for redefining words, I can't help it if a definition is useless. Heck it is useless to you as well, except for these arguments about something you don't believe.

God has control over the actions he performs, and chooses not to limit the actions of other creative beings. That choice of his we may disagree with, but that does not limit the ability for God to make that choice.

-Elliot

 

[exarch]

Originally posted by Iacchus
And the third option being?

There are only two options: you either deal with the problem or you don't. If you don't, it'sbecause you don't recognise the problem. If you do, you can either figure out why it would be a problem, or you fiddle around with the settings a bit until it appears there isn't a problem (which IT people would call "a work-around"), and you revert back to the first group. You didn't fix the problem, you just ignored it and avoid bumping into it again.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by elliotfc
God has control over the actions he performs, and chooses not to limit the actions of other creative beings.

Are we talking about the same God here? I thought we were talking about the hypothetical creator of the universe. The guy who made gravity, which limits my choice to fly unassisted. The guy who made the Laws of Thermodynamics, foiling my every attempt at free energy. The guy who only gave me one mouth, destroying my chance of choosing to talk coherently while eating peanut butter. That is the chap you're talking about right?

 

[CWL]

Re: Re: A universe with God.

If he was omnipotent to your liking, consider that you would be more powerful than God. Why should God conform to your standard of potency? That would limit God.

As far as I can see this "God" person does indeed seem to be limited - to the extent of non-existence in fact...

Anyhoo, you admit he is not "omnipotent to my liking". Should I interpret that statement as an admission that there is no such thing as an "omnipotent and benevolent God"?

Well, if that is the case, what is the point of wanting such an entity to exist so badly?

Niceness? There aren't many nice people on this forum.

I beg to differ. I would say that the unpleasant people on this forum are in a clear minority. Sorry if you don't feel the same.

Of course God doesn't force you to bow down, so you have nothing to worry about on that one.

I am not aware of any "God" doing anything actually as I have yet to see some evidence for such a thing as a "God".

Regarding evil...

God makes perfect choices. When he creates entities who can make choices as well, they can not make perfect choices because they are not perfect like God. Why did God then create entities who themselves can create and make choices? Well, we exist, don't we? Existence is God, even if we can't make perfect choices like God.

Where to begin...

What are your grounds for your claim that "God makes perfect choices"?

Which "God"?

How do you know that particular "God" to exist?

How do you know that particular "God" to make "perfect choices"?

What is a "perfect choice"?

Questions, questions. So many questions and so few answers...

You say "I want a refund", and you may be being smug, or being serious, or somewhere in between. I, like you, seek clarification. Redemption, to me, is the same thing as clarification.

Actually, I don't seek any clarification as to the "meaning of it all" or whatever. I am quite happy to discover what may be discovered through critical thinking and the scientific method (which is quite a lot actually...).

 

[Pahansiri]

God has control over the actions he performs, and chooses not to limit the actions of other creative beings. That choice of his we may disagree with, but that does not limit the ability for God to make that choice.

-Elliot

Greetings my friend.

Please know I respect you believe this and seek not to disrespect you or your belief but top only discuses it.

God has control over the actions he performs,

I respect that is your belief so I will not ask for you to
1- Prove God
2- Prove how you know what “he” does or thinks.

But may I say if God has control over what “he’ does how does this loving father allow a child/person to suffer when he knows it will happen and yet does nothing to stop it?

It is by this thinking his fault and makes him far from being a loving father.

and chooses not to limit the actions of other creative beings.

that will not be true, “he” allows the wishes to be safe and happy of the person being harmed by the being harming them or the natural disasters that harm people that he is in full control of and the beings being harmed by them have no control over. The same would be said for all many illnesses that the being does not seek but this God forces on them.

That choice of his we may disagree with, but that does not limit the ability for God to make that choice.

Of course that is a belief and to be respected but it does limit the love of this being please refer to my thread http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=35055

You have also said God does not force you to respect him. That would not be the case in most God based beliefs as you either respect and believe in him or you will forever suffer.

This is like stand before your child with a bat telling them they need not respect you but if they do you will beat them to death with the bat.

Do you believe God has unconditional love?

 

[CWL]

Evil has to exist for Jesus as God incarnate to exist.

Evil exists because God created creative beings who are not perfect. You say that God is cruel, in this way, yet your ability to say that depends on your existence.

God does care about dealing with evil. Jesus. Incarnate God.

-Elliot

Would have been simpler not to create "evil" at all.

Now what would Occam and his trusty old tool say about that?

 

[elliotfc]

But may I say if God has control over what “he’ does how does this loving father allow a child/person to suffer when he knows it will happen and yet does nothing to stop it?

It is by this thinking his fault and makes him far from being a loving father.



that will not be true, “he” allows the wishes to be safe and happy of the person being harmed by the being harming them or the natural disasters that harm people that he is in full control of and the beings being harmed by them have no control over. The same would be said for all many illnesses that the being does not seek but this God forces on them.



Of course that is a belief and to be respected but it does limit the love of this being please refer to my thread http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=35055

You have also said God does not force you to respect him. That would not be the case in most God based beliefs as you either respect and believe in him or you will forever suffer.

This is like stand before your child with a bat telling them they need not respect you but if they do you will beat them to death with the bat.

Do you believe God has unconditional love?

Hi Panhasiri.

I think that parents have to allow children to do things, you know?

Suffering is a necessary result of free will. If your will is independent of God, and is not perfect like God, you will experience suffering. You say God can, apparently, not allow suffering. But then that would obliterate free will.

The thesis, then, is you can't have suffering without free will and vice versa. More later.

-Elliot

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by elliotfc
I think that parents have to allow children to do things, you know?

I've heard this one before, and I always figure the people who say it don't really think through all the implications of it. True, to some extent, kids have to learn for themselves, to experience things and grow from that experience. Should a parent, then, stand idly by while their toddler plays in the street? It would be a good learning experience about objects of relatively large mass travelling at relatively high velocities. If a parent were to walk in and see their teenaged child with a gun in his mouth, should they let him pull the trigger? He has to make his own mistakes after all.

 

[El Greco]

Suffering is a necessary result of free will. If your will is independent of God, and is not perfect like God, you will experience suffering.

What's the place of congenital diseases and random mutations in this "free-will" edition of suffering ?

 

[Graham]

Hi Panhasiri.

I think that parents have to allow children to do things, you know?

Suffering is a necessary result of free will. If your will is independent of God, and is not perfect like God, you will experience suffering. You say God can, apparently, not allow suffering. But then that would obliterate free will.

The thesis, then, is you can't have suffering without free will and vice versa. More later.

-Elliot

Hi elliot,

I know we've been around this mill before but you have yet to adequetly explain the validity of this to me.

To reiterate some of the points where I get stuck:

1) How is anything impossible for an all-powerful god?

2) Why can suffering not be optional? Further, if we do not have the option not to suffer, then our will is not free, is it?

3) How can there be free will in a universe created and maintained by an all-knowing god?

And so on . . .

Graham

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by El Greco
What's the place of congenital diseases and random mutations in this "free-will" edition of suffering ?

Sins of the father (and mother, presumably). By exercising their free will to procreate, mummy and daddy are saddling you with the reprecussions of their evil, which were saddled on them by their parents, all the way back to Adam and Eve.

If I were omnibenevolent, that's how I'd do it anyway.

 

[Iacchus]

Would have been simpler not to create "evil" at all.

Now what would Occam and his trusty old tool say about that?

Occam probably wouldn't have been born.

 

[CWL]

Suffering is a necessary result of free will. If your will is independent of God, and is not perfect like God, you will experience suffering. You say God can, apparently, not allow suffering. But then that would obliterate free will.

Again I ask: How can earthquakes and HIV be a necessary result of free will ?!?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

......

You say God can, apparently, not allow suffering. But then that would obliterate free will.

.....

-Elliot

Stock answer..

Perhaps you can explain why the concept of free will boils down to ' suffering ' or ' not suffering '... Or at least when it comes to a supposedly benevolent God. Can't people be free to make bad decisions, and not worship God on a full stomach and free from the threat of earthquakes, hurricanes and space heaters setting the trailer on fire in the middle of the night..

Taking God out of the picture solves the problem... i.e. Stuff happens ... Some people are good , some people are bad..

With God as the creator you need to explain why a God finds it necessary to allow all the horrible things to happen, that most of us, as his creations, would not tolerate for a moment from our fellow human beings...

 

[Iacchus]

There are only two options: you either deal with the problem or you don't. If you don't, it'sbecause you don't recognise the problem. If you do, you can either figure out why it would be a problem, or you fiddle around with the settings a bit until it appears there isn't a problem (which IT people would call "a work-around"), and you revert back to the first group. You didn't fix the problem, you just ignored it and avoid bumping into it again.

But then again maybe it wasn't a problem in the first place, and you're just working yourself up over nothing? ... at least in terms of your pointing the finger at the other person.

 

[Pahansiri]

Hi Panhasiri.

I think that parents have to allow children to do things, you know?

Suffering is a necessary result of free will. If your will is independent of God, and is not perfect like God, you will experience suffering. You say God can, apparently, not allow suffering. But then that would obliterate free will.

The thesis, then, is you can't have suffering without free will and vice versa. More later.

-Elliot

Greetings Elliot


May I ask you give me the respect I show you and go back and answer my questions?

I think that parents have to allow children to do things, you know?

Yes I know and such parents are considered bad and lose rights and often are sent to jail. I am not sure what your point is.

Suffering is a necessary result of free will.

My friend you are avoiding answering my questions and points.

Why is suffering a necessary result of free will and what does this have to do with what I asked?

Why is the free will of the child harmed worth less then the one harmed. The child harmed was not exercising her free will he was, her will was not to be harmed.

If your will is independent of God, and is not perfect like God, you will experience suffering.

First of course God is a belief not fact. So would be God being perfect.

Now to the statement. The child’s will not to be harmed was perfect but was over ruled by the will of the one who harmed her so your statement is irrelevant and illogical.

If God was perfect “he” would have no anger nor ego, i.e. the need to be worshiped or needs placed before the happens of it’s children.


You tell your child not to be selfish yet call it perfect in a God.???

You say God can, apparently, not allow suffering. But then that would obliterate free will.

I do not believe in a God so say such a thing can do nothing in my view, we are speaking about your belief.


You believe a God can do anything yet you do not believe a God can protect the free will not to suffer by innocent beings. No being through free will desired to be killed by an earth quake.

The thesis, then, is you can't have suffering without free will and vice versa. More later.

Illogical as I have demonstrated. I have free will to choose to sit here and smile, by such no suffering.

It is my free will not to want to suffer an attack by a killer, it is his free will to kill me so in God’s plan only evil actions are worth protecting?

Please answer my questions my friend. I respect you and your beliefs let us carry on a respectful conversation.

Please do go bact to my first post to you and Answer each point and question as I have done for you. Thank you and be well.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by Iacchus
But then again maybe it wasn't a problem in the first place, and you're just working yourself up over nothing?

How is the existence of evil not a problem for the hypothesis that the universe was created by an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent deity? You raising the possibility that it's not a problem and never was is all well and good, but this thread is full of posts showing how it is a problem. Can you show how it is not?

 

[exarch]

Originally posted by Iacchus
But then again maybe it wasn't a problem in the first place, and you're just working yourself up over nothing? ... at least in terms of your pointing the finger at the other person.

Ehm? Nope, the problem still exists. God is all-powerful, and loves us, but he doesn't have the power to save us, his beloved children, from evil. Or he doesn't really love us at all, and can save us but chooses not to, because he likes to see us suffering. Yet he still demands we worship him, for no other reason than his own vanity most likely because those who worship him still suffer from evil, except they have stopped realising it because they have stopped thinking about it.

 

[Iacchus]

How is the existence of evil not a problem for the hypothesis that the universe was created by an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent deity? You raising the possibility that it's not a problem and never was is all well and good, but this thread is full of posts showing how it is a problem. Can you show how it is not?

Of course I thought you were referring to dealing with someone else's problem here.

And yet either way you still have to deal with it. If there is no afterlife that's the end of it. And if there is, the truth will be sorted at that time.

 

[Iacchus]

Ehm? Nope, the problem still exists. God is all-powerful, and loves us, but he doesn't have the power to save us, his beloved children, from evil. Or he doesn't really love us at all, and can save us but chooses not to, because he likes to see us suffering. Yet he still demands we worship him, for no other reason than his own vanity most likely because those who worship him still suffer from evil, except they have stopped realising it because they have stopped thinking about it.

If He had the power to save us outright what would be the point? Things have to happen as a matter of course, in order to allow other things to happen as a matter of course. Otherwise there would be no consequences, good or bad.