Assuming God Exists, Could an Omnipotent God,

[Foster Zygote]

Don't worry, if he actually is who he is alleged to be, then you really will have your chance to tell him face-to-face.

And if Cthulhu is real then we're all in trouble.

 

[citizenzen]

If he's not, then it doesn't matter, and you're about to have an aneurysm for nothing.

See? That what I love about Christians ... they're always so compassionate.

Jesus really made an impression on you, JB, didn't he?

 

[Giordano]

Just for the sake of discussion, assuming an Almighty Creator God exists, and it turns out that He really did have a Book for you to take seriously while you were yet among the living, do you think that excuse would justify your rejection of it as reasonable to you or to Him? You would reject "God's Word" because Joseph Smith was a con-man and expect God to say "Yeah, good thinking, good point."?! Hypothetically speaking, of course.. if God is able, if God can, if God did, if God does, if God is...

Okay, Jude here I am, a humble human, trying to please the one and only omnipotent God. I want to learn of His Word and Book. But instead of God using his omnipotence to provide us with one clearly correct account (perhaps in giant letters carved into the Alps) he decides to do it by divinely inspiring a series of human beings to write a mix of different, overlapping and contradictory accounts. And then allows different people over the ages to piece together different parts of these accounts (all under divine, but apparently inconsistent guidance), so that now different Christian bibles differ from one another. And don't forget, He also allows his adversary, Satan, to dispersal hundreds of false, but otherwise indistinguishable accounts of God's wishes.

Remember, as you yourself have pointed out, I am only a human- I can't judge God and I don't have any innate way of telling the true Word of God from the false ones. How do I chose, because the wrong choice risks eternal damnation?

Sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it? God could have preserved freedom of will, but still have made the real Book self-evident: the true Word of God could glow with a pale fire, yet say, 'This is the True Book, reject it or not, your choice." And remember, God knows all too, so he could predict that a thousand false religions would arise on Earth. But rather than prevent it, He decides to subject all of the souls he loves to a random guess that determines how they will lead their lives on Earth, and whether they go to hell or to heaven.

Jude, you seem to feel the choice of the correct Word of God is obvious. The Book of Mormon must be wrong because John Smith was once a con man, even though many of Jesus's followers were reformed sinners. The Old Testament is obviously incomplete. The Koran (which claims to be more complete than the Old and New Testaments) is obviously wrong because YOU don't believe some of the stories in it. And so on.

Step back for a minute and get a perspective: you have chosen the book you consider to be truth through the use of your own judgement, even while telling us we can not judge whether the stories in it make sense or not. Hundreds of millions of equally intelligent and moral people have chosen other books. If one day we will stand before God and be judged for our choice of book, then there is no reason for you to feel any more smug than I.

 

[Giordano]

How you figure?
I explained how I "figured in the very post you quote.


Can there exist a theism so benign that it's pointless to argue someone out of it?

In real life I don't go around attempting to convince people they are wrong- it violates simple rules of politeness. I also believe in "live and let live" as a very practical core on which to build a society. But I do feel that believing in any falsehood is not benign.

 

[Giordano]

See? That what I love about Christians ... they're always so compassionate.

Jesus really made an impression on you, JB, didn't he?

What you see in this post is JudeBrando's soft and gentle side. If you want to see him mad, you should check out some of his posts in other threads.

 

[Leumas]

Don't worry, if he actually is who he is alleged to be, then you really will have your chance to tell him face-to-face.

If he's not, then it doesn't matter, and you're about to have an aneurysm for nothing.

I am glad that you have doubts.....UNLESS.... you are wishing HELL for me?

How TYPICALLY Christian! No doubt you are sorely envious of the Moslims….at least they can do more than just passively wish for me to end up in hell sooner or later. They can actually make it sooner right here on earth with no need for any doubts about their God’s mythological status interfering with their actions.

I now can understand why you and your ilk keep protesting against the moslims…. It is not so much out of disgust or disapproval of their morals which your God and religion in reality share much with…. It is more out of ENVY…. It is like a pathetic person who belittles something he cannot acquire….if he can’t get it then it is bad and not worth having.

If he's not, then it doesn't matter, and you're about to have an aneurysm for nothing.

Are you PRAYING for it? How characteristically Christian..... fortunately for me your God is a useless meaningless MYTH albeit a heinously vile one. Lucky too that the Christian Taliban do not have power any longer.


Or...wait.......are you now dabbling in VOODOO across the internet?

 

[welshdean]

This is one of the very, very many reasons why fundies annoy the hell out of me. They ask us to read their 'Book of Childrens stories' and warn us to be amazed at it's incredible insights.

It would seem that a good place to start might be the first book of the New Testament of the Bible. Read "The Gospel According to Matthew" in any or all of the contemporary English translations/versions. Not a thousand pages. Just thirty pages or so. Then please share some insights and tell if it was in any way illuminating.

When we do and report back to them the absurdity of it all ...

Yes.... a very good example....Matthew....right from the start.

How about the genealogy list of Jesus' lineage?

Wasn't Jesus supposed to be the SON OF GOD? So why is he now the son of Joseph?

Why is the list given WRONG.....many of the names given in the list are in DISAGREEMENT with the Tanakh.....many of the sons' names are WRONG and some of the ones that are right are not in fact the sons of the parents listed.

Why is Jesus portrayed as an ignorant magic trickster, a servile coward, a bigoted racist, a Hypocrite and a FALSE PROPHET?

Of course that is not to mention the fact that Matthew contradicts John and Mark in some of the most important aspects of the story...e.g. Number of women that went to the Tomb and what they saw there and who they told and what happened afterwards. Also the last words of Jesus on the cross and what happened after he croaked.


So yes....let's take Matthew and see how much of a testament it is to the IMBECILITY and INABILITY of God and how VILE he is.


Do you have any other suggestions....maybe Acts? Where Jesus kills a man and his wife without any chance for repentance afforded them because they did not give ALLLLLLL their MONEY to Peter?


Or Like Galatians which shows how the Followers of Jesus were fighting among themselves because they could not make heads or tails of the faith they are supposed to have and how to practice it and what it is all about RIGHT FROM THE INCEPTION.


If Paul, Peter and James could not AGREE or HARMONIZE on what the Jesus message was all about and about what should and will occur then what makes YOU or any person centuries later be sure that THEY DO????

If Jesus was not such a MORON he would have made sure that at the very least Paul and Peter and James could agree on the FAITH he is supposed to have expounded to them PERSONALLY.

... they make thinly veiled threats of eternal damnation and they always ignore the objections we then raise. I guess that's because they don't want to see the absurdities contained in their 'twisted life guide' for themselves. They prefer the 'La la la, I'm not listening' approach to common-sense and thinking for oneself.
Usually they also include some sort of childish attempt at a put down too ...

Don't worry, if he actually is who he is alleged to be, then you really will have your chance to tell him face-to-face.

If he's not, then it doesn't matter, and you're about to have an aneurysm for nothing.

Way to go JudeBrando. Way to go.

 

[JudeBrando]

Assuming God Exists, Could an Omnipotent God,
an all-knowing and all-powerful Creator of the Universe and everything in it,
could such a God handle everything necessary to being able to get a Book delivered to us as He intends?
Or stated another way- Is there any reason to believe that God could not get a Book to us as He intends?

If he INTENDS something and then he cannot do what he intends then he is not a GOD.

Oh...and the answer to the OP is yes-what do YOU think"all powerful" means?

A God "could" "get A Book to us as he intends",

Of course. It's right there in the definition you gave. All powerful.

Why not?

I don't see why not.

He could.

Based on that assumption, yes such a god could do anything

Of course.

A truly omnipotent god, assuming one existed, if he, she, or it decided to provide us all with a book of rules, could be presumed capable,

Look up the word "omnipotent" in a dictionary.

Yes, he jolly well could.

An omniscient, omnipotent being can't be countered.

Of course, assuming God exists, as an all-powerful, all-knowing Creator of the Universe and everything in it, God would be able to get a Book to us. Of course.

Again, yes, if we assume the existence of an omnipotent god we can imagine that it would be able to get a book delivered.

Sure,

We agree, of course.
Of course an Almighty Creator God could get a Book to us.
By definition. A self-evident truth.
If God had a Book for us, God could deliver a Book to us.
Of course.

 

[Drachasor]

Given the OP's premise, if this god wanted to, sure. We must also remember that this god is demonstrably not good. It lets Earthquakes and disease exist and kill people among other things. So it is an open question how malicious and deceitful it is.

 

[Lowpro]

Assuming God Exists, Could an Omnipotent God,
an all-knowing and all-powerful Creator of the Universe and everything in it,
could such a God handle everything necessary to being able to get a Book delivered to us as He intends?
Or stated another way- Is there any reason to believe that God could not get a Book to us as He intends?




We agree, of course.
Of course an Almighty Creator God could get a Book to us.
By definition. A self-evident truth.
If God had a Book for us, God could deliver a Book to us.
Of course.

You realize that you're arguing for a fictional character, and there is no proof OF such a Creator.

I mean all you've done is try to prove what "all powerful" means, we can abandon the word "God" altogether because it's unnecessary. There so far is no proof that "all powerful" exists. It continues "can an all-powerful thing prevent himself from giving a book delivered by himself"

Such an occurrence could not happen because an all-knowing creator would have to eliminate choices to prevent him from delivering a book, and this would not make him all powerful if such a being is limited by choice in the first place.

It's an easy exercise to prove that an "all powerful" cannot possibly exist anyways. Basically, if you think that a being can be all-powerful, you're an idiot. If you attribute God to being all powerful, you have a neat imaginary character AND you're an idiot.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Assuming God Exists, Could an Omnipotent God,
an all-knowing and all-powerful Creator of the Universe and everything in it,
could such a God handle everything necessary to being able to get a Book delivered to us as He intends?
Or stated another way- Is there any reason to believe that God could not get a Book to us as He intends?

We agree, of course.
Of course an Almighty Creator God could get a Book to us.
By definition. A self-evident truth.
If God had a Book for us, God could deliver a Book to us.
Of course.

How terribly dishonest of you. Why did you omit important parts of the replies made to your query?

Again, yes, if we assume the existence of an omnipotent god we can imagine that it would be able to get a book delivered. But then if we assume the existence of a jolly, magical elf with flying reindeer, we can imagine that he could deliver toys to all the good little boys and girls in a single night. So just what is it that you think you've demonstrated?

 

[Halfcentaur]

Assuming God Exists, Could an Omnipotent God,
an all-knowing and all-powerful Creator of the Universe and everything in it,
could such a God handle everything necessary to being able to get a Book delivered to us as He intends?
Or stated another way- Is there any reason to believe that God could not get a Book to us as He intends?










We agree, of course.
Of course an Almighty Creator God could get a Book to us.
By definition. A self-evident truth.
If God had a Book for us, God could deliver a Book to us.
Of course.

So why are there so many versions of this book and contradictions, Jude?

 

[Lowpro]

So why are there so many versions of this book and contradictions, Jude?

Would God have the foresight to deliver it in e-Book format?

Omnipotent my ass...

 

[JudeBrando]

How terribly dishonest of you.

Stop lying.

Why did you omit important parts of the replies made to your query?

You know what's funny? When I was doing that compilation, I almost quoted you entirely and apart because I knew you were going to say that and do this again. I knew you would impute some evil intent... I should've bet somehow, or sent a pm to somebody else first... so predictable.

Obviously, I quoted the fundamental and obvious agreements with my premise.

Excellent work, detective!

So I did not include every incidental additional stipulation and condition and qualification and objection and but, and, and, and...

You want proof that I was thinking of you and that I knew you would do this?

In that long list, notice the post that immediately precedes your own (the second time). It's mine! Huh! How 'bout that?!

And this is your "important part" omitted that you were so concerned about that you had to repeat and then highlight?

But then if we assume the existence of a jolly, magical elf with flying reindeer, we can imagine that he could deliver toys to all the good little boys and girls in a single night. So just what is it that you think you've demonstrated?

Well, since we are "Assuming God Exists," we really don't have to talk about Santa here and now, do we? Is that important?

So then, your "important part" that you think I surely must have some reason for excluding is the question "So just what is it that you think you've demonstrated?"

In other words, so what's the point or conclusion?

Well, in fact, you might notice if you look again, that my demonstrated conclusion after that long list is deliberately made to closely resemble my prior post, to answer you with the same thing again.

All I've demonstrated, and emphasized again, thus far, is:

We agree, of course. Of course an Almighty Creator God could get a Book to us. By definition. A self-evident truth. If God had a Book for us, God could deliver a Book to us. Of course.

Just like:

Of course, assuming God exists, as an all-powerful, all-knowing Creator of the Universe and everything in it, God would be able to get a Book to us. Of course.

 

[TimCallahan]

Could a God, a truly omnipotent and omniscient God get a book to us, inspired by him, that wasn't full of contradictory doublets?

As an example of what I mean, did the resurrected Jesus first appear to Peter (according to Paul - if it really was Paul - in 1 Corinthians), nobody at all (according to Mark), two guys on the road to Emmaus (according to Luke) two women, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (according to Matthew) or Mary Magdalene alone (according to John)?

Further, did the resurrected Jesus meet his disciples in Galilee, as per his instructions to the women (according to Matthew); in Jerusalem, as per his instructions not to leave Jerusalem (according to Luke); or first in Jerusalem, then later in Galilee (according to John)?

Did Jesus drive the money changers out of the Temple after he arrived in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, in his last week before the Crucifixion (according to the Synoptic Gospels) or did he drive them out early in his ministry, a bit after the wedding feast at Cana (according to John)?

Was Jesus so weakened by his scourging that he couldn't carry his own cross, so Simon of Cyrene had to carry it for him to Golgotha (according to the Synoptic Gospels), or did he carry it all the way, himself (according to John)?

Did the Roman troops mock Jesus, or was it the troops of Herod Antipas, as Luke alone claims?

If this book is from God, why can't he get his story straight?

Then there's the Exodus and conquest (Book of Joshua) - which doesn't match either history or archaeology, whether you date the Exodus ca. 1450 or in the 1200s.

If there is a God, He (or She) clearly had nothing to do with this error ridden compendium of books we call the Bible.

 

[Drachasor]

If this book is from God, why can't he get his story straight?

Doesn't wanna?

 

[Giordano]

I'm confused as to what you are hoping to communicate by quoting a bunch of people out of context and ignoring their actual replies to your question. They are your audience here, and they know what they actually said. If you are just trying to be annoying, you aren't even succeeding at that. It just seems....weird.

But back to your argument: let's accept your premise that an all powerful God could get an accurate book to us as he intends (you can even quote me). Then doesn't the lack of such a book prove the lack of existence of an all powerful God? If you don't believe that, then prove that we do have such a book, that it is unique, that it is clearly the work of God, and that it cannot be mistaken for any false book. Alternately, I suppose, you can argue that God never intends to provide such a book and prefers having people confused as to what God seeks to teach them.

When you get a chance, now that you are back in this thread, you might answer my post #123. I want to get right with God, and I need advice as to how to identify the correct book.

 

[Halfcentaur]

Apparently since the bible exists, and we admit a god could have a book get to us, this means something. And judging by Jude's smug remarks, it's validating to his position.

 

[Giordano]

Apparently since the bible exists, and we admit a god could have a book get to us, this means something. And judging by Jude's smug remarks, it's validating to his position.

Jude, like God, is always testing us. He will start an OP, lurk to collect distorted snippets of other peoples comments, and then post that they fell into his trap by saying exactly what he expected them to say. I presume it makes him happy.

 

[Lowpro]

Jude the problem is you aren't arguing for God, you're arguing just for what "all powerful" means. The very fact that you attribute it to God is irrelevant.

And then, your logic fails because let's say a God "could" get a book to us, as self evident by being "all powerful" that's just as likely as a God NOT wanting to give us a book, or misleading with a LIE. It means NOTHING!

You run into a problem with "all powerful" so you need to determine God to not be "all powerful" to avoid the obvious problems; that "all powerful" makes no sense.

And by the way, I take issue with you claiming that Foster lied when he said you were dishonest. I agree with him that you are dishonest, and I can find nothing in your intent to prove otherwise. You've blatantly and willingly ignored the multitude of this thread explaining WHY your argument is stillborn, as evident by your cherrypicking which Foster even pointed out. Foster pointed out how the term "God" your using is EXACTLY as plausible as Santa, and that you cannot draw a conclusion in reality from what your arguing. All-powerful God is as ridiculous as Santa. Stop ignoring that.