Is God willing but not able?

lightgigantic said:
the issue is that we are not created with omnipotence, etc

IOW we are not created as god .... and there are very good reasons for that

;)
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: And what would those reasons be?
*************
M*W's Friendly Atheist Quote of the Day:

"I have too much respect for the idea of God to hold him responsible for such an absurd world." ~ Georges Duhamel
 
Arsalan said:
What happens if theres constant floods? We build dikes. What happens if we keep getting stung by insects? We make protective clothing. We adapt because we suffer from certain things and that allows us to move on.

.
Click to expand...

I don't suppose you'll bother but can I suggest you read Candide bu Voltaire.
Candide is being tutored by a philosopher who has agrees with Leibnitz's view that god created the best of all possible worlds. The book abounds in examples such as the one you give above.

Voltaire would most likely have included your floods and dikes argument had he been aware of it. But he does put similar arguments into the mouth of Pangloss, Candide's mentor. For example, Pangloss explains why god gave us noses; in his divine wisdom he foresaw that we would need a support for our eyeglasses. I won't spoil your fun by telling you any more. I'm sure you can't wait to read it.

One thing puzzles me. As I understand it. the purpose of a dyke is to prevent floods. It follows that if god sent no floods there would be no need for us to build dykes. This would give us more time to spend in worship.This explains two things about god.

1 He is humble and does not want to be excessively worshipped.

2. He has a senseof humour of a kind. I can see him sitting on his throne thinking what he can do next. How about a plague of locusts ? That would teach people to eat less; more obeisance less obesity.

A Message From Our Sponsors

Don't delay, rush to a fine bookstore and get yourself a copy of Candide. It's a unique book. 27.5 % more unique than Tom Sawyer

Or how about writing a bookof your own. I have a title for you:

"101 Ways to Put the Cart Before the Horse"
 
Last edited:
lightgigantic said:
polytheism (or having numerous omnipotent gods) makes being the cause of all causes (an attribute of god) untenable
Click to expand...

Thank you for explaining what polytheism means. I have often wondered ,but not sufficiently so as to motivate me to look it up in a dictionary.

How and by whom has it been established that what you call god is the cause of all causes ?

There is also the problem as to why I should stop believing A because it makes some other position , B, untenable. Wouldn't a a ploytheist argue that your position is untenable. How would you seek to refute his argument ?
 
Last edited:
lightgigantic said:
it becomes philosophically difficult to entertain how numerous independent omimax personalities can co-exist




]
Click to expand...
Are suggesting that if one is faced with a difficult philosophical problem , the best course of action is to throw in the towel ?
 
Last edited:
Myles said:
Thank you for explaining what polytheism means. I have often wondered ,but not sufficiently so as to motivate me to look it up in a dictionary.

How and by whom has it been established that what you call god is the cause of all causes ?
Click to expand...
in short, all information about god is established by qualified persons (saintly persons) - ie persons who are not merely moralists or philosophers but who have actually attained an elevated state of consciousness - commonly such information is also compiled into scripture
There is also the problem as to why I should stop believing A because it makes some other position , B, untenable.
Click to expand...
generally if persons finds believing something that is untenable ok (like say that a circle has three sides) that is a problem in itself (anyone vaguely familiar with the newspaper headlines from the past 6 years can understand why religion that departs from reason is a cause of concern )

Wouldn't a a ploytheist argue that your position is untenable. How would you seek to refute his argument ?
Click to expand...
well first they would have to actually offer an argument before a response could be suggested

Myles said:
Are suggesting that if one is faced with a difficult philosophical problem , the best course of action is to throw in the towel ?
Click to expand...
only if it is indicated by use of a higher philosophy that one is operating out of a lower philosophy - and even then its not so much an issue of throwing in the towel but rejecting the lower to accept the higher
 
Last edited:
lightgigantic said:
in short, all information about god is established by qualified persons (saintly persons) - ie persons who are not merely moralists or philosophers but who have actually attained an elevated state of consciousness - commonly such information is also compiled into scripture

generally if persons finds believing something that is untenable ok (like say that a circle has three sides) that is a problem in itself (anyone vaguely familiar with the newspaper headlines from the past 6 years can understand why religion that departs from reason is a cause of concern )


well first they would have to actually offer an argument before a response could be suggested


only if it is indicated by use of a higher philosophy that one is operating out of a lower philosophy - and even then its not so much an issue of throwing in the towel but rejecting the lower to accept the higher
Click to expand...

Saintly people and elevated states of consciousness. Who confers saintliness upon them ? How would I recognize such a person, given that my criteria might be different from yours.I might conclude that such people were deluded.


Elevated states: That is a claim often made by people who take drugs. How about the tribes who eat peyote ( mescalin ) and subsequently have visions, just to take one of numerous examples. I can cite dozens more if you wish. Are you not just saying that you choose to believe some but not others, or do you regard all who make such claims as saintly.

Religion departing from reason: Many would say that all religion departs from reason because the available evidence suggests that religion is based on blind faith.

Offering an argument: It is sufficient for someone to say " I don't believe you, now prove me wrong " As you have made claims about the nature of god, the onus is on you to support those statements with evidence.

Higher and lower philosophy: I am not aware that there are different levels of philosophy. Please explain what you mean. No prizes for guessing who gets to define which is higher and which lower.

I think you are practising what I would call "PHILOSOPHISTRY "
 
Myles said:
Looking at the state of the world, if I believed in a creator, it would be a malevolent, sadistic one who got a perverse kick out of watching us suffer.
Click to expand...

It does surprise me that people haven't really discussed the gnostic view in this thread--that the god/demiurge/devil who created this world allows evil to exist because he is himself evil or at least highly imperfect. It does seem to make a lot more intuitive sense than the whole garden of eden story.
 
Myles said:
How do you know "he", if he exists OBVIOUSLY hadn'y a choice. Pleas give us an argument, not a statement to bolster an opinion whichothers may not share.
Click to expand...
nobody can choose their own existence, not even god, because you have to exist to be able to choose. and if you don't choose your own existence, nothing in your life is your choice.
 
maxg said:
It does surprise me that people haven't really discussed the gnostic view in this thread--that the god/demiurge/devil who created this world allows evil to exist because he is himself evil or at least highly imperfect. It does seem to make a lot more intuitive sense than the whole garden of eden story
Click to expand...

Or how about the stance taken by a deist. God created the world but he takes no further interest in it ?
 
Yorda said:
nobody can choose their own existence, not even god, because you have to exist to be able to choose. and if you don't choose your own existence, nothing in your life is your choice.
Click to expand...

So who exactly made the choice that god should exist ?
 
Myles said:
Or how about the stance taken by a deist. God created the world but he takes no further interest in it ?
Click to expand...

That was actually my first response on this thread--if God exists, we're probably too insignificant for him/her/it to bother about.
 
maxg said:
That was actually my first response on this thread--if God exists, we're probably too insignificant for him/her/it to bother about.

[/QUOTE

Well said, if you will allow me to say so.

If there is a creator, I can't imagine why he botherd . What did he lack that he needed to create this mess ?

There is a hint in the Bible that he got it wrong first time.So what did he do ? He drowned all humans with the exception of Noah and co. before going back to the drawing board. They say practice makes perfect The available evidence suggests that he didn't get enough.

So, the end might well be nigh. He might be planning to try again....third time lucky !
Click to expand...
 
Nikelodeon said:
I dont. But its possible.
Click to expand...

Do you often talk about things of which you know nothing ? Nexttime , try a little humilityy and qualify your answewr with something like....I believe.

The corollary of what you say is that he might not have come into existence at all. Why choose one possibility over another ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top