God is either evil, not god, not the creator, or nonexistent

[tzor]

tzor, what exactly are you having trouble understanding here?

I don’t have any trouble, I see an inherent trouble; definition trouble. It is always easy to define something so loosely as to have that definition be worthless. Consider the arguments that are in other threads; some people seemingly define “racist” as anyone who disagrees with a progressive, no matter what the race of the one who disagrees or the race of the one whom they are disagreeing with. If you are going to argue that way, you might as well argue that pigs can fly, as long as you define flying as rolling around in the mud. Yes, many people define “good” as “what I am doing that I like” and “evil” as “what you are doing that I don’t like.” Doesn’t mean it’s a reasonable definition to base a discussion on.

[BigBallinStalin]

tzor, what exactly are you having trouble understanding here?

I don’t have any trouble, I see an inherent trouble; definition trouble. It is always easy to define something so loosely as to have that definition be worthless. Consider the arguments that are in other threads; some people seemingly define “racist” as anyone who disagrees with a progressive, no matter what the race of the one who disagrees or the race of the one whom they are disagreeing with. If you are going to argue that way, you might as well argue that pigs can fly, as long as you define flying as rolling around in the mud. Yes, many people define “good” as “what I am doing that I like” and “evil” as “what you are doing that I don’t like.” Doesn’t mean it’s a reasonable definition to base a discussion on.

So since truth is subjectively defined, then where does that bring us, tzor?

[Calidus]

Let us suppose that there is free will.

Let us further suppose that this free will has been given to me by God, the creator of all things.

Now comes the question: Why have I been given free will? There are two possible answers:


1) I have been given free will to choose my actions and suffering or enjoying the consequences of those actions. I am a free being. This interpretation seems plausible, if you believe in the premise of God's existence.


2) God has given me free will but does not want me to use it. Instead he wants me to choose to do what he wants me to do. In other words, by giving me free will, God was basically saying: "Do you feel lucky? Well do you, punk?!" What does this tell us about God?

He doesn't really care whether I will do the right thing, be good, do no evil etc. If those things were important to him, he would either make me do it or alternatively make it obvious to me why it is important to do those things. But, he didn't. It follows that he really doesn't care what I do.

However, should I fail to uphold the standards of being good, God shall either smite me or, better yet, allow me to do all the evil I wish to do and the make me suffer for eternity for doing what he allowed me to do (in fact, for doing what he created me to do). This means that God is basically a big bully who has created me to be not-perfect so that he could point out my faults (the same faults that he created) to me and punish me for them.

Also, God is vain and rewards those who stroke his ego (which is, of course, infinite). Thus, you can be as useless a moron as you like, as long as you play by God's rules and tell him how great he is and how much you love him. In fact, you can cause as much suffering, misfortune and death as you like as long as your intentions are good and you are not breaking any of God's rules, not intentionally at least. As long as you are a good pet, you may pee all over God's creation and it doesn't matter.


If you believe that answer 1) makes more sense, then you can go through your life not knowing whether God exists or not, because it has no impact on your life. As wise Frigidus once wrote (and I apologize in advance if I'm misquoting you): "Just because God exists that doesn't mean that I should be his sheep."

If you believe that answer 2) is correct, but God should still be loved and respected the all can say to you is...........nothing. This isn't Flame Wars.

I agree with answer 1 you gave the result of either you or a person in general not knowing whether God exists or not as an option, or a choice. This is one choice that we have as part of free will. I am religious, but I still have some doubts. However, one could take the view that they indeed know that God exists. This is another choice we have if we have free will. I am not at that point yet, because I feel that this is something that takes ones whole life to figure out. If I were an Atheist, I would believe in no God, but I feel it would take my whole life to confirm it.

Anyways, If you know God exists you would realize that God gives us free will and he DOES want us to use it, unlike answer 2. I have come far enough in my religion to know that God created people in his vision and that we are given the choice to subdue the earth. How we go about it is our choice. This leads to what you said about consequences, which either are enjoyable or involve suffering (or somewhere in between).

In the Old Testament God seems to portray this idea of a "harsh God".
You stated "However, should I fail to uphold the standards of being good, God shall either smite me or, better yet, allow me to do all the evil I wish to do and the make me suffer for eternity for doing what he allowed me to do" you might be right if you lived in this time period. However, if we are going to talk about God we have to look at the New Testament.

The reason why I believe this is because God wants us to use our free will to be like him, and to connect with him in a everlasting relationship. So God made his only son, Jesus. This is the human form of God, someone we as humans (with freewill) can relate to. In fact trying to be like God without Jesus means that you want to be able to judge and so on, this is not intended for humans, so Jesus is God that we can relate to.

We all at least know the story of Jesus (interesting that billions do), that he died on the cross. He suffered for us, he is the one who took all of the suffering for the sins of the people then AND even now! So, you see, there is no need for God (who yes allows you to do evil) to smite you down. So how do we connect with God now that Jesus is gone? You guessed it! The Holy Spirit... God's third form for future generations to use as the link to building their relationship.

I point all this out to show that answer 2 is not a great view on the discussion, and if you feel that what I said about actually knowing God exists should be a 3rd answer, then so be it. God it is not some big bully, I think you’re creating this scenario in your head without knowing who God is. In my opinion, just as religious people have some sort of duty to help others understand them, Atheists probably have just as hard of enough job to get others to follow them.

[Calidus]

Also to finish my thoughts,

If you have not read the whole Bible, (and all the scriptures for other religions if you want to disprove those "gods" too) then you really can't point out all the "flaws". For me, I have not read the whole Bible but I am able to see some "weird" things in it, but I can make the big distinctions that are important. In other words you really need the whole picture to make a point. Personally I feel only God has the whole picture and that is why I follow such a wise source.

If you don't know whether God exists or not, then it comes down to belief. Belief that he does or doesn't. This brings me back to my earlier statement, that the truth can take a long time to reach, for me it is a lifelong process.

To finish up, I think that God has given free will and that he wants us to use it so that we can connect to him. Basically temptations to do evil lead you on the path toward the Devil and choices to do good lead you in the direction of God.

Let me ask you this, if everyone on earth has freewill, and everyone chooses to do good (like the Beatles song Imagine) then do you think that God would be pissed off just because people reached peace, love and harmony before getting to heaven? My answer is no, again God gives us freewill and he wants us to use it wisely.

[MeDeFe]

Also to finish my thoughts,

If you have not read the whole Bible, (and all the scriptures for other religions if you want to disprove those "gods" too) then you really can't point out all the "flaws". For me, I have not read the whole Bible but I am able to see some "weird" things in it, but I can make the big distinctions that are important. In other words you really need the whole picture to make a point. Personally I feel only God has the whole picture and that is why I follow such a wise source.

If you don't know whether God exists or not, then it comes down to belief. Belief that he does or doesn't. This brings me back to my earlier statement, that the truth can take a long time to reach, for me it is a lifelong process.

To finish up, I think that God has given free will and that he wants us to use it so that we can connect to him. Basically temptations to do evil lead you on the path toward the Devil and choices to do good lead you in the direction of God.

Let me ask you this, if everyone on earth has freewill, and everyone chooses to do good (like the Beatles song Imagine) then do you think that God would be pissed off just because people reached peace, love and harmony before getting to heaven? My answer is no, again God gives us freewill and he wants us to use it wisely.

"And no religion, too."

Quite apart from the fact that there still is no workable definition of "free will" in this thread and that explaining the problems inherent in any concept of a self-determined actor is a topic that fills lectures, your point is irrelevant. The problem is not god not minding if we do what god likes with of our own free will. The problem is god not liking certain things we might do of our own free will. If a god gives us free will this god must, in order to remain just, refrain from making any judgement about how we use this free will.

[tzor]

Quite apart from the fact that there still is no workable definition of "free will" in this thread ...

If you want one, I can give you a simple definition (to get a complex one it is necessary to argue with Einstein on why it really is necessary for God to play dice with the universe): Given a series of sensual inputs, as well as a vast array of stored information and memory, the intellect with free will can choose from a variety of options. This choice is not simply a straight function that can only yield one result. Only one result is yielded because it is only done once, as there is only one universe, but the result is a consequence of the intellect, not a consequence of all the previous inputs to that intellect to that point.

[Snorri1234]

Quite apart from the fact that there still is no workable definition of "free will" in this thread ...

If you want one, I can give you a simple definition (to get a complex one it is necessary to argue with Einstein on why it really is necessary for God to play dice with the universe): Given a series of sensual inputs, as well as a vast array of stored information and memory, the intellect with free will can choose from a variety of options. This choice is not simply a straight function that can only yield one result. Only one result is yielded because it is only done once, as there is only one universe, but the result is a consequence of the intellect, not a consequence of all the previous inputs to that intellect to that point.

How is the choice made?

[Lionz]

Snorri,

Maybe I'm not sure if you meant to suggest there would be no sense in Him creating beings with free will earlier, but who wants to exist alone without love?

Snorri and MeDeFe,

a) If you were a supreme ruler over an entire 3-dimensional realm and..

b) There were some people who jumped in front of bullets to save a little girl in lifetimes and some people who raped little girls in lifetimes...

c) You would naturally desire to be a righteous judge perhaps. Would you not?

Who knows what He personally is going to do either way? Ask yourself how merciful Yahushua (sp?) apparently was and is?

PLAYER,

Scripture might say He's omniscient, but where does it say that if so? You will find Psalm 7:9 and Psalm 33:15 and Proverbs 21:2 to help defend one or more current position of you maybe, but is there any scripture that claims He created beings with an intent of them rebelling against Him?

Manda,

If the universe has already been created and there has been massive rebellion with intent on causing pain and suffering on others, then who do you suggest has the right to judge individuals at this point? Anyone?

Also, you basically asked if He created a universe in which every being must answer for his/her/its mistakes to Him maybe. What if He actually died for mistakes of all others?

Frigidus,

Did I say I felt Yah was not an omnipotent or omniscient Creator at any time? I can enjoy discussing things and I throw stuff up in the air quite a bit perhaps. If He does know everything now, what does that really say in regards to whether or not He always has? What if He's powerful enough to be wonderfully surprised if He chooses to be and He's powerful enough to create rocks that He Himself can't lift?

Iliad,

What is death ultimately in a long run if we have spirits and flesh bodies are simply material vehicles? And who knows how much physical or emotional pain another besides themself has felt at any time? And who knows what will happen on the ultimate judgement day if there will be one?

Naxus and really general thread brethren?,

What if there is a Creator of the heavens and the earth and He is outside of time and knows all now and yet He did not create anyone with an original intent of them rebelling against Him? What if He created a variety of creatures without knowing what He would gather later on?

Someone care to discuss a section called Matthew 13:47-50?
http://yahushua.net/scriptures/matt13.htm

[Snorri1234]

Snorri,

Maybe I'm not sure if you meant to suggest there would be no sense in Him creating beings with free will earlier, but who wants to exist alone without love?

No I mean to suggest that it would be absolutely pointless for God to create anything. Like it's the definition of pointless for a omnipotent, omniscient being to create things.

[Rocketry]

Can God create a boulder to heavy for him to lift?

If you could get back to me asap that would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Rocket.

[InkL0sed]

Can God create a boulder to heavy for him to lift?

If you could get back to me asap that would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Rocket.

My friends says yes - he can define it to be liftable if he wants, at which point he can.

I say he's full of shit.

[MeDeFe]

Quite apart from the fact that there still is no workable definition of "free will" in this thread ...

If you want one, I can give you a simple definition (to get a complex one it is necessary to argue with Einstein on why it really is necessary for God to play dice with the universe): Given a series of sensual inputs, as well as a vast array of stored information and memory, the intellect with free will can choose from a variety of options. This choice is not simply a straight function that can only yield one result. Only one result is yielded because it is only done once, as there is only one universe, but the result is a consequence of the intellect, not a consequence of all the previous inputs to that intellect to that point.

How is the choice made?

Thank you Snorry, you nailed it.

[tzor]

Can God create a boulder to heavy for him to lift?

I love infinity jokes. There once was a time when every room in the infinity hotel (known for an infinite number of rooms) was occupied. That day, an infinite number of guests arrived. The hotel owner was able to (after an infinite amount of time) accomodate everyone. How?

God can do all things that are possible (Matt. 19:26). He cannot do what is, for him, impossible, including to sin or to create logical impossibilities (e.g., square circles, mathematical errors, rocks too heavy for him to lift). While God can do things that are impossible for man (Luke 18:27), he cannot do what is impossible for himself. This does not mean that God is not omnipotent; it means only that his power does not negate itself.

[Woodruff]

Snorri,

Maybe I'm not sure if you meant to suggest there would be no sense in Him creating beings with free will earlier, but who wants to exist alone without love?

No I mean to suggest that it would be absolutely pointless for God to create anything. Like it's the definition of pointless for a omnipotent, omniscient being to create things.

I think it's funny that someone would try to speak for what would be pointless to an omnipotent, omniscient being.

[tzor]

How is the choice made?

I assume that is a rhetorical question. Use your brain; that analog computational device.

[naxus]

Naxus and really general thread brethren?,

What if there is a Creator of the heavens and the earth and He is outside of time and knows all now and yet He did not create anyone with an original intent of them rebelling against Him? What if He created a variety of creatures without knowing what He would gather later on?

Someone care to discuss a section called Matthew 13:47-50?
http://yahushua.net/scriptures/matt13.htm

You contradict yourself

[Frigidus]

Frigidus,

Did I say I felt Yah was not an omnipotent or omniscient Creator at any time? I can enjoy discussing things and I throw stuff up in the air quite a bit perhaps. If He does know everything now, what does that really say in regards to whether or not He always has?

Is that what you are asserting? Well, whether or not you actually believe that, if that were the case I would have to wonder how it went from pretty smart to omniscient. Did something act on it? Also, some seem to feel that God exists outside time. Would you put yourself in this camp? It doesn't really matter when it comes down to it, but if you are then what would it mean to say that it wasn't always omniscient?

What if He's powerful enough to be wonderfully surprised if He chooses to be

This again raises serious questions. For the person that isn't omnipotent, if you have somehow learned about, say, a surprise party being thrown for you, you can't just forget about it. Are we saying that God is powerful enough to remove knowledge from its omniscient mind? If so, I would say that following the removal it isn't omniscient. I suppose that it could just put the knowledge back in at some point, but the being outside time thing would again kind of render the question meaningless. Again, though, I'm not suggesting you feel that way. Either way, this would take one of the few concrete things we know about God and remove it. If it can remove its powers whenever it wants to, we would have to say that it is omniscient when it wants to be, omnipotent when it wants to be, omnipresent when it wants to be, omnibenevolent when it wants to be, etc. We'd basically be saying that it is nothing in particular, but it can be anything at all. Which is silly, because it means that the only thing you know for certain about it is that it is omniabstract.

and He's powerful enough to create rocks that He Himself can't lift?

This idea has always been silly to me. It supposedly isn't a thing of matter unless it wants to be, and is basically "perfectly" telekinetic. It certainly couldn't create enough matter that it couldn't move. If it could even create enough matter that it would have to strain to move, questions would be raised about its omnipotence.

I get that these are just theoretical questions, but the key here is whether you believe these things. I could argue

[dwilhelmi]

Wow, quite the thread. A few points I would like to make:

1. For the purposes of this discussion, I would define free will only in the context of how it relates to God: saying that God gave us free will means simply that God will never force a human to make a particular decision. How that decision is made is outside of the current context - all that matters is that God did not make the decision Himself.

2. One possible example of knowing everything without forcing a decision: God can see and know everything that would happen from every single decision ever made. He sees all possibilities, in an infinitely branching tree. He sees what the world would look like if you choose to turn left, and at the same time he sees what the world would look like if you choose to turn right. He does not need to know what choice you will make in order to know everything.

3. God's judgement is not specific. In order to get into heaven, you must be absolutely perfect. Period. Those are the rules He set out from the beginning. You swear or you murder, makes no difference - into heaven you will not go. Incredibly unfair, I agree. The cool thing, though, is that so does God. That is why He gave us Jesus. If we choose to believe in Jesus, then through that single choice, we become perfect. He wanted to make it as easy as possible for anyone to get into heaven, so He makes it as simple as a choice. Believe, and you get in, regardless of what else you may have done. In the face of that awesome fact, saying that He sends you to hell for eternity due to you doing something He allowed you to do makes no difference. In fact, you are in hell not for what you did, but for what you did NOT do.

4. As to the original posting, the flaw in your logic resides in the third and fourth lines. If God is able, but not willing, to stop evil, that does not logically lead to the conclusion that He is malevolent. There have been examples given, claiming that not stopping a murder when you are able to do so is wrong. However, in any reasonable court, it would not be determined to be wrong until you have exhausted all possible reasons for the lack of action. If there is a good reason for you to not stop a murder, then it is not wrong for you to allow it to continue. We cannot possibly fathom all of the reasons God may have for not stopping things from occurring. Therefore, it is not possible to judge that in fact he should have stopped them.

[Calidus]

Ya, your third point doeas a good job I think of summing up part of my explination in my first post here. What I want people to realize is that there is a reason for God making himself three in one. I would like to know how many people believe in just God, or the whole trinity as well.

[Frigidus]

Snorri,

Maybe I'm not sure if you meant to suggest there would be no sense in Him creating beings with free will earlier, but who wants to exist alone without love?

No I mean to suggest that it would be absolutely pointless for God to create anything. Like it's the definition of pointless for a omnipotent, omniscient being to create things.

To clarify even further, there would be very little difference between an omniscient being thinking about creating something and creating something. Just thinking about it, he would know everything there would be to know about a potential creation. Actually, now that I think about it, being God would be a unique hell, as in one instant you would be able to do anything you would ever want to do and think about anything you ever would want to think about. You then have nothing to do and are eternal.

[Calidus]

The problem is not god not minding if we do what god likes with of our own free will. The problem is god not liking certain things we might do of our own free will. If a god gives us free will this god must, in order to remain just, refrain from making any judgement about how we use this free will.

Yeah, I'm sorry if I was a bit off topic, but my post was in response to mandalorian when he said that answer 2 started as "God has given me free will but does not want me to use it. Instead he wants me to choose to do what he wants me to do." So yeah, he IS saying God minds what we do with our free will. To me the phrase "minding this or that" means you like this or you don't. So I'm confused, because the two first sentences sound the same. If your last sentence is what you're trying to sum up the second sentence, then I would say the following:

Free will to me basically is that you can choose to do whatever you want within your own power (even God can't decide for you). Would you agree with me that with free will you could choose to sin or not (do something bad or not)? If so your saying God should refrain from making any judgments about if we sin or not (part of our free will...like a square is part of the family of rectangles). So, I said earlier that Jesus (Human form of God) died for our sins.... this IS the judgment or rather the decision God already made about if we sin or not. So, when we die and God makes his judgment call about getting into heaven or not, it is about what we chose to do about the sins we made.

I see life as mainly two possibilities when it comes to God. Keep in mind we do the following with free will. 1. We sin, but then confess our sins and get into heaven. 2. We sin, but then we don't confess our sins and we don't get into heaven. Again, both choices are part of free will.

What I'm trying to say here to simplify is, if you choose to do bad things and are happy with that choice then God says "I will respect your choice, after all you have free will, but you are not welcome in my house (heaven) a place filled with love and forgiveness."

Bottom line is: If you recognize that God gives free will but don't use it properly don't be surprised by the possible response mentioned above. Free will is one of the greatest powers we have as humans, but like in the movie Spider Man ... his uncle states that with great power comes great responsibility.

[BigBallinStalin]

So a mere confession is all I need to get into heaven? What if I sinned and forgot to confess about it? Am I denied access and the Gestapo Angel Force kicks my ass into the Hell-bound train or fire and brimstone and more fire?

Oh, there's probably some convenient clause or phrase in your book that you can pull out to assuage such fears, right?
_____________________________________________

Besides, how are we to know what's good and what's evil? God's not going to give a play-by-play on this issue. We've gone right back to that tzor-Snorri-BBS-MeDeFe situation a page or two earlier, and you haven't gotten any clearer or closer from there.

[dwilhelmi]

A confession is absolutely NOT all you need to get into heaven. Jesus is what you need to get into heaven. Period. As for the convenient clause, take Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast". Faith in Jesus, not the works of confession, get you into heaven.

Nobody is good enough to get into heaven on their own. No list of good deeds, no sheer number of confessions or praying or kneeling or conversions, nothing that anyone does, myself included, earn them a spot in heaven.

[Calidus]

I agree that a mere confession is not going to get you into heaven. Actually, I believe you need to have both the confession as well as faith and love, and in fact if you died and God confronted you, and all you said was that you had faith in Jesus and believed in him all along, but that you don't confess your sins if he gave you the option. I would say God wouldn't let you into heaven. He might not send you to hell either, he might let you rethink for a bit, he is quite the forgiving God. But yes, I would say faith is more important, but there is not just one thing that gives you the ticket.

[Calidus]

BigBallinStalin: Again, it comes down to belief. If you believe in God then yes, he gives you the Bible and the teachings of Jesus to tell you what's good or evil and furthur more the Bible does have statements about situations like you mentioned. If you die without being able to confess...no matter how silly you think it sounds it does include these situations.