i just dont believe the part when they said he is not responsible
Originally posted by S.gal83:
I believe he is competent. I just don't believe he is good.
I understand what you believe, but I think if you just take a careful look at what you believe... you might realize that there are some flaws in them.
That's a strange notion... you are saying that he's competent but yet not good?
Then we have to justify our position on good. Where does good come from? Is it a concept that is seperate from God or is God in fact, the source of all goodness and without Him there good of any sort is impossible.
I think that is the case. If we define good as a set of principles that are given from a transcendent source that is above all human beings and that all human beings have to appeal to it, for the Good given from this transcendent source to be valid, this transcendent source cannot contradict himself, or else the whole thing will be rubbish and really have no bearing on reality.
Basically what you are saying is very much akin to being in the room being lit by a light bulb and saying, I believe in light but I don't believe in the light bulb that provides it is lit up. It's like saying, daylight is good, but I don't believe in the sun is really providing it.
I submit it's impossible to say that God is competent, and at the same time believe that He is not Good. If He is not Good, the source of goodness, this desire for goodness then even our belief in goodness is totally rubbish, just a fancy of ours with no bearing in reality. Just as one cannot logically believe in evil and not believe in God, one cannot believe in a competent God and then think that transcendent good is not Him.
That is logically impossible.
To be honest, look at every good thing we have in our life and consider a lot of them... do you seriously think that we had any choice in having these good things provided to us?
A lot of the good things that we have in our lives are given to us beyond our control. The sun still raises and despite all it's troubles our earth and sun still sustains us and has not like gone supernova or the like. The truth is, if we look at this world and realize that despite all the things that have gone wrong dude to evil entering it, we can still see enough of it to realize that the original design and intention of this world is anything but to be fallen, and this tells you a lot about the character of it's maker.
Originally posted by laurence82:i just dont believe the part when they said he is not responsible
Not responsible for what exactly? The suffering in our world? We ended up at this state by our own doing and our choices to go against the nature of reality. As I pointed out, how is the maker of a car responsible for our car not running properly if we fill it up with water instead of petrol against his advice and wishes?
So no, I do not believe God is responsible for our suffering, but the curious thing is that Christians believe however, that God in this case chose to take responsibility for our suffering.
So if he created the world, the only other possible explanation is he has the ability to create the world but cant do anything else, making him less omnipotent than any book would say
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Not responsible for what exactly? The suffering in our world? We ended up at this state by our own doing and our choices to go against the nature of reality. As I pointed out, how is the maker of a car responsible for our car not running properly if we fill it up with water instead of petrol against his advice and wishes?So no, I do not believe God is responsible for our suffering, but the curious thing is that Christians believe however, that God in this case chose to take responsibility for our suffering.
if he choses to create a perfect world with no sufferings, no diseases, no natural disasters, no evil, then the world is a perfect world to live in.
but the crux of the issue is, is there even the existence of god?
Originally posted by marcteng:if he choses to create a perfect world with no sufferings, no diseases, no natural disasters, no evil, then the world is a perfect world to live in.
but the crux of the issue is, is there even the existence of god?
I think erm, the world was like that. In genesis the original world was described as a place without suffering, disease, disasters, or evil. It was indeed perfect.
The catch is that the choice of keeping the world that way was given to us humans, and unfortunately we made the wrong choice.
To the crux of the issue, does God even exist? My personal opinion at least, you can choose to believe that he does not exist, but then unfortunately you also have to then believe that suffering, disasters or disease and anything evil does not really make any more sense then being things we just happen to dislike, but there is really nothing "wrong" with them, for wrong or evil, does not exist.
Wrong, evil, good those values and concepts are things that we derive from a transcendent, objective source. And the crux of the issue, if this transcendent, objective source is just like the tooth fairy then there is no basis for believing that wrong, evil or good have any bearing in reality.
So you can disbelief in the existence of God, but then you cannot (logically) say evil is a problem because evil does not really exist.
And that's really my point.
In any case the crux of the issue is that if there's a God then we ought to be really paying attention to what He wants, and if there's no God then we really don't need to bother with anything and should just live our lives any way we please, as nonsenscially as possible. But don't give me any position that is inbetween... don't say you don't believe God exists but then demand that the world is unfair or evil, because without Him those concepts are as illusionary as Him.
As C.S. Lewis would say, Christianity if untrue is of no importance at all, but if true, is of the unmost importance. There is really no middle option.
there is one to point to contend
if he gave us the choices, then isnt he responsible for the consequences?
i still cant find people who is able to explain how he can be the one who creates all these and yet not be responsible
another point worth noting.
if genesis can be described as heavenly in the beginning, then what about the actual heaven? that means the heaven is like our world now?
Originally posted by laurence82:So if he created the world, the only other possible explanation is he has the ability to create the world but cant do anything else, making him less omnipotent than any book would say
I think you are having a rather common misunderstanding the concept of omnipotence, which is an oversimplification of the concept.
The only thing I think God can't do is to contradict Himself. If He could then the very laws of logic we use to understand anything, even rationality ought to be questioned and are meaningless to everything.
Such a position is self-defeating, we are using reason to refute reason. If we want to enquire into omnipotence in a logical manner then we have to keep our inquiry within the boundaries of logic.
Are there any questions that God cannot answer? Of course, nonsense. Things like "what is the smell of blue" or "can you do something you cannot do?"
Omnipotence is a logical concept, it does not entail being able to transcend logic. Hence God can do things which seem impossible, but not things that are illogical.
To have free will and our own individual choice means to have the ability to reject Him, this is something that to remain valid, that even Omnipotence cannot overcome because it is logically impossible. You cannot make free-willed individuals and then leave them no options to possibly rebel, or then leave their actions with no consquences so that all outcomes only plays out in your favour.
To understand this principle simply look at how you understand your own arguments. You'll realize the way you understand the world is built upon actually a few basic principles that you cannot reduce any further, meaning that you can't find out the reason behin them, you simply have to accept them as they are.
These principles are called first principles. The law of non-contradiction applies, we cannot say that God grants us free will to choose as we like but yet aspect Him to make all the outcomes of our choices play out in Him will and yet call it free will. Such an argument against God kills itself on it's own logic.
ever wonder if god was created by humans in the beginning, in regards to the concept and religion.
Originally posted by marcteng:another point worth noting.
if genesis can be described as heavenly in the beginning, then what about the actual heaven? that means the heaven is like our world now?
Hmmm that's not my point of expertise, I think someone else can answer this question better. But if I hazard a guess I think heaven is quite different from what our world was like.
I think you need to understand the concepts of heaven and hell, unfortunately the popular culture depiction and understanding of it is quite different and probably not true, though they are helpful analogies. Unfortunately when I think of heaven I think of that cloudly white place I see on TV, which of course isn't true...
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
I think you are having a rather common misunderstanding the concept of omnipotence, which is an oversimplification of the concept.The only thing I think God can't do is to contradict Himself. If He could then the very laws of logic we use to understand anything, even rationality ought to be questioned and are meaningless to everything.
Such a position is self-defeating, we are using reason to refute reason. If we want to enquire into omnipotence in a logical manner then we have to keep our inquiry within the boundaries of logic.
Are there any questions that God cannot answer? Of course, nonsense. Things like "what is the smell of blue" or "can you do something you cannot do?"
Omnipotence is a logical concept, it does not entail being able to transcend logic. Hence God can do things which seem impossible, but not things that are illogical.
To have free will and our own individual choice means to have the ability to reject Him, this is something that to remain valid, that even Omnipotence cannot overcome because it is logically impossible. You cannot make free-willed individuals and then leave them no options to possibly rebel, or then leave their actions with no consquences so that all outcomes only plays out in your favour.
To understand this principle simply look at how you understand your own arguments. You'll realize the way you understand the world is built upon actually a few basic principles that you cannot reduce any further, meaning that you can't find out the reason behin them, you simply have to accept them as they are.
These principles are called first principles. The law of non-contradiction applies, we cannot say that God grants us free will to choose as we like but yet aspect Him to make all the outcomes of our choices play out in Him will and yet call it free will. Such an argument against God kills itself on it's own logic.
god cant contradict himself but humans can
hence it is possible for you to say god is not resposible for disasters, mishaps, and most importantly our wrong choices and decisions, which of course all this is contradictory to reality and reason
its time to accept that god is responsible for all these despite his omnipotence
the second step of course is to discard the notion of choices as espoused by christians
Originally posted by laurence82:there is one to point to contend
if he gave us the choices, then isnt he responsible for the consequences?
i still cant find people who is able to explain how he can be the one who creates all these and yet not be responsible
That's an interesting question. It depends on what you mean by responsiblity.
If you gave someone a choice, as well as spelt out in very clear details what the consquences would be... are you responsible of the consquences of their actions?
If I was a policeman who is facing off with a criminal who is pointing a gun at me. I give the criminal a choice to surrender or else I would have to shoot him. He decides to fire on me anyway and I have to shoot him dead. Am I responsible for his death? In action yes. But am I morally responsible for his death? Then that would be no.
If we give somebody a knife and tell him to use it properly and then he goes out to stab someone... are we responsible for stabbing that person? We are only responsible if that person is of unsound mind and has made his intention clear on stabbing other people. But if the person is in perfect understand that the knife is to be used for cooking, and that murder is a misuse of it, then it the responsibility of that choice would have been handed to him.
But then we go back to logical impossibility. If we have choice then we have the ability by definition, to defy God. So is He responsible for us defying him if we choose so?
I would fault God if He gave us free will without giving us the terms of it and then everything messes up. But we can't fault Him if He does. He tells us our actions and the consquences that will result from them, that if we choose not to follow his plan for this creation then there will be issues and consquences (namely we will die and suffer) if we did so.
We must know how to tell between causality and responsibility, confusing the two concepts will make us have a lot of wacky ideas. My mom is responsible for all the wrong things I did because she choose to bring me into the world, because she put me in the position where I could grow into a sentient being and make all these choices. Car makers are responsible for the deaths that result from reckless driving because they gave a means towards reckless people to wreck havoc.
In any case the Christian narrative of things believes that God is not responsible for the suffering of the world, but yet He chose to do something about it. If not we are all screwed and we don't need to really bother with this annoying thing called Christianity.
I hope I didn't use too much christianese, as in christian lingo that is hard to understand. I personally find that annoying when people use it on me. Do tell me if I am.
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
That's an interesting question. It depends on what you mean by responsiblity.If you gave someone a choice, as well as spelt out in very clear details what the consquences would be... are you responsible of the consquences of their actions?
If I was a policeman who is facing off with a criminal who is pointing a gun at me. I give the criminal a choice to surrender or else I would have to shoot him. He decides to fire on me anyway and I have to shoot him dead. Am I responsible for his death? In action yes. But am I morally responsible for his death? Then that would be no.
If we give somebody a knife and tell him to use it properly and then he goes out to stab someone... are we responsible for stabbing that person? We are only responsible if that person is of unsound mind and has made his intention clear on stabbing other people. But if the person is in perfect understand that the knife is to be used for cooking, and that murder is a misuse of it, then it the responsibility of that choice would have been handed to him.
But then we go back to logical impossibility. If we have choice then we have the ability by definition, to defy God. So is He responsible for us defying him if we choose so?
I would fault God if He gave us free will without giving us the terms of it and then everything messes up. But we can't fault Him if He does. He tells us our actions and the consquences that will result from them, that if we choose not to follow his plan for this creation then there will be issues and consquences (namely we will die and suffer) if we did so.
We must seperate causality and responsibility, confusing the two concepts will make us have a lot of wacky ideas.
In any case the Christian narrative of things believes that God is not responsible for the suffering of the world, but yet He chose to do something about it. If not we are all screwed and we don't need to really bother with this annoying thing called Christianity.
I hope I didn't use too much christianese, as in christian lingo that is hard to understand. I personally find that annoying when people use it on me. Do tell me if I am.
true, if you give someone a choice and an opporunity to make wrong, hence you are responsible for whatever the consequence that happens
expand it to the responsibility a god who creates the universe and give choices to people to accept christ or not, for example, whether we do or not can be linked back to him because he gives us the choice and predefine the consequence of not doing so
as to your point on stabbing it has been debated before in form of parents responsible for their son's crimes, i already shown before that neither parents nor us who give the knife has the power god has, so it is an invalid point to compare god and humans on same level
ask an adult to take a candy from baby and another kid to take a candy from the baby, who would have better chances?
since the creation of the universe and those events in our history, god sending jesus, miracles etc have been linked to god, causality and responsibility now lies in the hands of god
him choosing something to do about it even points out his guilt further
That's where we differ in worldview then, my friend. Unfortunately we've reached the first principle of the law of non-contradiction.
My position is that such a position is flawed that fundemental misunderstanding of omnipotence and what powers God actually has. Your position is that my understanding of omnipotence is flawed as well and as to what powers God should have.
Additionally we are arguing on the premise that of course the evil in the world, and that each and every single action in the world will not be put to task and answering at some point. As in, the acts that happen now should and only should be solved now and justice will be pleased.
Should that be our premise?
not really, there is only one premise in discussion and that is whether god has the ability to change events or behaviour of humans
if he is, i would say yes, he is duly responsible for everything that is to happen and our choices, right or wrong
it is absurd to say he who creates us and create miracles have no link in any way to how we make our choices, of course in christian sense, it is to accept christ
if not, i would say his powers is only limit to creation of this world, and of course that creation issue would be another topic
Originally posted by laurence82:not really, there is only one premise in discussion and that is whether god has the ability to change events or behaviour of humans
if he is, i would say yes, he is duly responsible for everything that is to happen and our choices, right or wrong
it is absurd to say he who creates us and create miracles have no link in any way to how we make our choices, of course in christian sense, it is to accept christ
if not, i would say his powers is only limit to creation of this world, and of course that creation issue would be another topic
have you ever wonder that it was humans who created the god concept and religion, not vice versa.
Originally posted by marcteng:have you ever wonder that it was humans who created the god concept and religion, not vice versa.
you are right
for all we know, there could be no god and there is something else we wouldnt be able to explain
It might be better to be agnostic..hehe
Why do you think being agnostic is so popular? lol
hehe, could be apathy
i am agnostic, who care if there is god or not
life goes on, or until meteor strikes ala Deep Impact
Originally posted by laurence82:hehe, could be apathy
i am agnostic, who care if there is god or not
life goes on, or until meteor strikes ala Deep Impact
Actually Deep Impact was a comet, the difference between comet and meteor strike is quite significant...
Do you think Nietzsche's Will to Power is important?
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Actually Deep Impact was a comet, the difference between comet and meteor strike is quite significant...Do you think Nietzsche's Will to Power is important?
I would say WIll Smith Man in Black is cheesier
What about Mee Pok Man?
Originally posted by marcteng:have you ever wonder that it was humans who created the god concept and religion, not vice versa.
Always ^^