Suffering

I'm just a little confused by a quote from LCMS Sprecher here: "Suffering is a result of the imperfection of the world." She claims the world is imperfect, but didn't God create the world? Wouldn't the imperfection of one of God's creations put God in a fallible light?

Click to expand...

My answer to this operates under the assumptions that the "imperfection" everyone is referring to concerns moral attributes, not mental or physical qualities, and that the proceedings that result from these attributes (e.g. - the fall of satan and the proneness of humans to sin) are judged by an absolute standard.

Your question carries an interesting implication: that God, if he were perfect, should have created us perfect as well. First consider the ramifications of this requirement if it were put into effect: a universe filled only of perfect beings. It doesn't sound so bad. But remember that these beings a perfect based on a standard, the standard of the cosmic force that created them. This standard only would allow these beings to function in the manner that pleased the creator. In other words, a programmed perfection would take free will entirely out of the picture.

What is so important about free will? First I would like to point out that love requires a choice. Secondly, what applies to evil also applies to love. While man has a great potential to do evil, he also has a potential to love that is directly proportional to this potential to do evil. Lucifer was the greatest of all creatures, not because he was actually good, but because he had the potential to do good. Along with this great potential for good came and unimaginable potential for evil. Everything starts with a choice.

So in conclusion I would say, no, god's creations do not put him in a fallible light because he only chose to give his creations a choice; it is his creations that choose to be imperfect. Additionally, humans may make mistakes but it is the measures we take to avoid mistakes that are really important. And again, from the Christian perspective, God is pleased even with our falls as long as the will to walk is really there.

Which leads us to another topic:

The idea you've presented (with a little help from C.S. Lewis ) basically states that god subjects us to pain and suffering, because it is during those times that we turn to him for help the most, and obviously that is what he wants. This concept disturbs me a little. Do you think that it's right for god to make people suffer, just so they'll stroke his ego? I don't mean to offend here, this is just what's going through my head. What are your ideas on this?

Click to expand...

You are nearly right, but you have one tiny misconception about these views. God does want us to turn to him. God does do whatever is in his power to get us there without violating his metaphysical laws. God wants us to come to him for his sake. But your list stops short. God also wants us to come to him for our sake (both the individual and human kind). The standards that god would have put forth would be for our own good. Following them would only make us better. If the ideas of sin were true, then being obedient could not hurt us, it could only help. That is why god would want us to come to him.

Brien,

Your question carries an interesting implication: that God, if he were perfect, should have created us perfect as well. First consider the ramifications of this requirement if it were put into effect: a universe filled only of perfect beings. It doesn't sound so bad. But remember that these beings a perfect based on a standard, the standard of the cosmic force that created them. This standard only would allow these beings to function in the manner that pleased the creator. In other words, a programmed perfection would take free will entirely out of the picture.

Click to expand...

I think that god already created us to be perfect. We are exactly how he wants us to be, and therefore perfect by our own individual standards devised by god. This also takes free-will out of the picture, but I believe free-will to be an illusion anyway, (although for different reasons than that).

Think about it though: do you not agree that there is nothing about us that god did not create? Do you not agree that we are perfect according to his 'blueprint' for us?

So in conclusion I would say, no, god's creations do not put him in a fallible light because he only chose to give his creations a choice; it is his creations that choose to be imperfect. Additionally, humans may make mistakes but it is the measures we take to avoid mistakes that are really important. And again, from the Christian perspective, God is pleased even with our falls as long as the will to walk is really there.

Click to expand...

I still think that god is responsible for our imperfections, because he created us with them. He created our personalities, our likes and dislikes. He created 'the plan' for our lives that we must follow. If we do wrong by god, it is because that is part of our nature which he created.

You are nearly right, but you have one tiny misconception about these views. God does want us to turn to him. God does do whatever is in his power to get us there without violating his metaphysical laws. God wants us to come to him for his sake. But your list stops short. God also wants us to come to him for our sake (both the individual and human kind). The standards that god would have put forth would be for our own good. Following them would only make us better. If the ideas of sin were true, then being obedient could not hurt us, it could only help. That is why god would want us to come to him.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, but I have a question. Why does god give us a choice? If good is what is best for us, and evil is harmful, why does he make us choose?

Sorry this is late...

"If god were perfect by his own standard then I don't see a reason why he would need to change his nature. In fact this could only be done by violating his standards, or changing his standards. The former would make him no longer perfect and the latter would not be logical since his standards would already be perfect."

Exactly, so his nature should not allow evil to exist at all. And there would be no need to change his nature, to allow it even if it is a means to good. For if god were omnipotent and solely good, he could make a means to good that does not involve evil.

"I would probably agree with you here when you say that nothing god creates should be evil. If god does exist I don't think that he created evil, but merely a metaphysical law that allows it to exist. Human beings are not evil; they possess the potential to perform evil acts. These are two very different things. If a human being performs an evil act the human has not become evil because he still has the potential of doing good."

But even if something god creates brings about evil, god in fact created it. For everything is created by god is it not. And if god was omnipotent and solely good, nothing god created would bring about evil.

Everything is made by god, or whatever you want to call it. Therefore everything that happens is also made by god. Good, evil, suffering, joy, love, hate, it is all made by god. However, to say that god is omnipotent (CAN DO ANYTHING!!!!) and solely good (HATES EVIL!!!!!!!) than it is illogical to believe that a being like that could exist if evil exists. Therefore I do not believe god to be solely good. An omnipotent being could very well make a being that has a choice but always chooses good, has a choice but always chooses him, has a choice but never does evil. But this is not the case. Therefore evil must come from somewhere. It comes from a perfect being that is both good and evil.

Good say Master Vigil. I agree.

To help the flow of my reasoning I will address Master Vigil's questions/concerns first, then Ceridwen's. But since your questions were very similar it may help you to understand my stance clearer if you read both responses.


:: Master Vigil,

Exactly, so his nature should not allow evil to exist at all. And there would be no need to change his nature, to allow it even if it is a means to good. For if god were omnipotent and solely good, he could make a means to good that does not involve evil.

Click to expand...

Consider the spacetime continuum for a moment. Human beings can only perceive the past and present, while god can observe past present and future, at least to a degree that is much better than human understanding. Thus, who are we to decide what is best? Sure, he could have created a universe only with good. Obviously he had something different in mind and I believe he created the universe this way for a reason. If evil exists for some purpose, why should his nature not allow evil to exist?

But even if something god creates brings about evil, god in fact created it. For everything is created by god is it not. And if god was omnipotent and solely good, nothing god created would bring about evil.

Click to expand...

The assertion that I made was that god created all things, not all actions, intentions and determinants. If humans truly have free will, then god did not create the causalities of our will. By this logic, god cannot be held directly responsible for creating evil that stems from the human heart.

An omnipotent being could very well make a being that has a choice but always chooses good, has a choice but always chooses him, has a choice but never does evil.

Click to expand...

I hope you see the apparent contradiction within this statement. If they were programmed to always choose good, created to be capable of only making one choice, then they would really not have a choice at all. Contradictions cannot exist in the universe that god created. Can you imagine a universe in which they could? In a world where contradictions existed, nothing else could exist.

Therefore evil must come from somewhere. It comes from a perfect being that is both good and evil.

Click to expand...

This is not part of my argument, just a general question: what qualifies the being to be perfect if it consists of both good and evil?



:: Ceridwen,

Do you not agree that we are perfect according to his 'blueprint' for us?

Click to expand...

I would agree that we are as he wanted us to be, beings with free will. I think that he could do that.

I still think that god is responsible for our imperfections, because he created us with them. He created our personalities, our likes and dislikes. He created 'the plan' for our lives that we must follow. If we do wrong by god, it is because that is part of our nature which he created.

Click to expand...

To a degree, yes, he is responsible for our nature. Various people have various moral issues. But it is the Christian belief that god judges us based on the abilities we were given. Sure, god created our personalities. Certain "sins" are harder for certain individuals to overcome. But the ability to overcome them still exists, regardless of the challenge it presents. I hope that explains what I meant when I said, "God is pleased even with our falls as long as the will to walk is really there."

Why does god give us a choice? If good is what is best for us, and evil is harmful, why does he make us choose?

Click to expand...

To answer this question let me ask you another. Would you rather have a choice to be good or evil, and be ready to suffer the consequences of your decisions... or would you rather lack all judgment and ability to reason - being nothing more than a primitive, subordinate species? I would choose choice. I would rather be a human that suffers than a bacterium that feels nothing. Would living without choice really be living? I appreciate the liberties that have been granted to me.

Of course arguments that I have previously suggested are important to keep in mind as well. Love requires choice. To me it seems that god would rather have beings be capable of loving him and one another than be incapable of doing so. I would also think that you would like to have the ability to love and would like others to have the ability to love you. Also our potential to do evil is directly proportional to our ability to do good.

I'll leave you with a question, too: why do you not believe in free will?

Christ Michael said:

Evolutionary man finds it difficult fully to comprehend the significance and to grasp the meanings of evil, error, sin, and iniquity. Man is slow to perceive that contrastive perfection and imperfection produce potential evil; that conflicting truth and falsehood create confusing error; that the divine endowment of freewill choice eventuates in the divergent realms of sin and righteousness; that the persistent pursuit of divinity leads to the kingdom of God as contrasted with its continuous rejection, which leads to the domains of iniquity.

The Gods neither create evil nor permit sin and rebellion. Potential evil is time-existent in a universe embracing differential levels of perfection meanings and values. Sin is potential in all realms where imperfect beings are endowed with the ability to choose between good and evil. The very conflicting presence of truth and untruth, fact and falsehood, constitutes the potentiality of error. The deliberate choice of evil constitutes sin; the willful rejection of truth is error; the persistent pursuit of sin and error is iniquity.

[from The Urantia Book]



There is no denying that we live in an EVOLUTIONARY and EXPERIENTIAL creation. That is the NATURE of this time-space universe in which we live. There is NO original sin and there NEVER was. Perfection exists only on Paradise,but this universe of time-space, in which we live, couldn't exist if there were no contrasts. Ours is an eternal ascension towards God so that, through EXPERIENCE, we might get to know, understad and be like him.



Cheers

Click to expand...

Cerdiwen018 asked :

Christ Michael,

I don't see how all that ties into suffering.

Click to expand...

Maybe the post below can help :





THE FATHER'S SUPREME RULE


In his contact with the post-Havona( Heaven ) creations, the Universal Father does not exercise his infinite power and final authority by direct transmittal but rather through his Sons and their subordinate personalities. And God does all this of his own free will. Any and all powers delegated, if occasion should arise, if it should become the choice of the divine mind, could be exercised direct; but, as a rule, such action only takes place as a result of the failure of the delegated personality to fulfill the divine trust. At such times and in the face of such default and within the limits of the reservation of divine power and potential, the Father does act independently and in accordance with the mandates of his own choice; and that choice is always one of unfailing perfection and infinite wisdom.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Father rules through his Sons; on down through the universe organization there is an unbroken chain of rulers ending with the Planetary Princes, who direct the destinies of the evolutionary spheres of the Father's vast domains. It is no mere poetic expression that exclaims: "The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof." "He removes kings and sets up kings." "The Most Highs rule in the kingdoms of men."

In the affairs of men's hearts the Universal Father may not always have his way; but in the conduct and destiny of a planet the divine plan prevails; the eternal purpose of wisdom and love triumphs.

Said Jesus: "My Father, who gave them to me, is greater than all; and no one is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." As you glimpse the manifold workings and view the staggering immensity of God's well-nigh limitless creation, you may falter in your concept of his primacy, but you should not fail to accept him as securely and everlastingly enthroned at the Paradise center of all things and as the beneficent Father of all intelligent beings. There is but "one God and Father of all, who is above all and in all," "and he is before all things, and in him all things consist."

The uncertainties of life and the vicissitudes of existence do not in any manner contradict the concept of the universal sovereignty of God. All evolutionary creature life is beset by certain inevitabilities. Consider the following:

1. Is courage--strength of character--desirable? Then must man be reared in an environment which necessitates grappling with hardships and reacting to disappointments.

2. Is altruism--service of one's fellows--desirable? Then must life experience provide for encountering situations of social inequality.

3. Is hope--the grandeur of trust--desirable? Then human existence must constantly be confronted with insecurities and recurrent uncertainties.

4. Is faith--the supreme assertion of human thought--desirable? Then must the mind of man find itself in that troublesome predicament where it ever knows less than it can believe.

5. Is the love of truth and the willingness to go wherever it leads, desirable? Then must man grow up in a world where error is present and falsehood always possible.

6. Is idealism--the approaching concept of the divine--desirable? Then must man struggle in an environment of relative goodness and beauty, surroundings stimulative of the irrepressible reach for better things.

7. Is loyalty--devotion to highest duty--desirable? Then must man carry on amid the possibilities of betrayal and desertion. The valor of devotion to duty consists in the implied danger of default.

8. Is unselfishness--the spirit of self-forgetfulness--desirable? Then must mortal man live face to face with the incessant clamoring of an inescapable self for recognition and honor. Man could not dynamically choose the divine life if there were no self-life to forsake. Man could never lay saving hold on righteousness if there were no potential evil to exalt and differentiate the good by contrast.

9. Is pleasure--the satisfaction of happiness--desirable? Then must man live in a world where the alternative of pain and the likelihood of suffering are ever-present experiential possibilities.

Throughout the universe, every unit is regarded as a part of the whole. Survival of the part is dependent on co-operation with the plan and purpose of the whole, the wholehearted desire and perfect willingness to do the Father's divine will. The only evolutionary world without error (the possibility of unwise judgment) would be a world without free intelligence. In the Havona ( Heaven )universe there are a billion perfect worlds with their perfect inhabitants, but evolving man must be fallible if he is to be free. Free and inexperienced intelligence cannot possibly at first be uniformly wise. The possibility of mistaken judgment (evil) becomes sin only when the human will consciously endorses and knowingly embraces a deliberate immoral judgment.

The full appreciation of truth, beauty, and goodness is inherent in the perfection of the divine universe. The inhabitants of the Havona worlds do not require the potential of relative value levels as a choice stimulus; such perfect beings are able to identify and choose the good in the absence of all contrastive and thought-compelling moral situations. But all such perfect beings are, in moral nature and spiritual status, what they are by virtue of the fact of existence. They have experientially earned advancement only within their inherent status. Mortal man earns even his status as an ascension candidate by his own faith and hope. Everything divine which the human mind grasps and the human soul acquires is an experiential attainment; it is a reality of personal experience and is therefore a unique possession in contrast to the inherent goodness and righteousness of the inerrant personalities of Havona.

The creatures of Havona( Heaven ) are naturally brave, but they are not courageous in the human sense. They are innately kind and considerate, but hardly altruistic in the human way. They are expectant of a pleasant future, but not hopeful in the exquisite manner of the trusting mortal of the uncertain evolutionary spheres. They have faith in the stability of the universe, but they are utter strangers to that saving faith whereby mortal man climbs from the status of an animal up to the portals of Paradise. They love the truth, but they know nothing of its soul-saving qualities. They are idealists, but they were born that way; they are wholly ignorant of the ecstasy of becoming such by exhilarating choice. They are loyal, but they have never experienced the thrill of wholehearted and intelligent devotion to duty in the face of temptation to default. They are unselfish, but they never gained such levels of experience by the magnificent conquest of a belligerent self. They enjoy pleasure, but they do not comprehend the sweetness of the pleasure escape from the pain potential.


[from The Urantia Book]


What else is there to say ??


Cheers

"Consider the spacetime continuum for a moment. Human beings can only perceive the past and present, while god can observe past present and future, at least to a degree that is much better than human understanding. Thus, who are we to decide what is best? Sure, he could have created a universe only with good. Obviously he had something different in mind and I believe he created the universe this way for a reason. If evil exists for some purpose, why should his nature not allow evil to exist"

The point I'm trying to make is that the single idea of god being both omnipotent and solely good makes it illogical that evil would be neccesary. Or if it is, than god is not a loving god for he give some of his precious children eternal damnation. God may be a hateful god because of that. However, even the simple idea of god being solely good and omnipotentm I don't believe evil should exist in any way. If my imperfect mind can fathom a world that is full of choices but people only choosing good. Than surely an omnipotent being can surely do it.

"The assertion that I made was that god created all things, not all actions, intentions and determinants. If humans truly have free will, then god did not create the causalities of our will. By this logic, god cannot be held directly responsible for creating evil that stems from the human heart."

But here is that problem with that assertion... God creates EVERYTHING!!! And our actions are only products of our nature, and the nature of our surroundings and the nature of the situation we are put in. Those things were created by god, therefor our actions were created by god.

"I hope you see the apparent contradiction within this statement. If they were programmed to always choose good, created to be capable of only making one choice, then they would really not have a choice at all. Contradictions cannot exist in the universe that god created. Can you imagine a universe in which they could? In a world where contradictions existed, nothing else could exist."

But if an omnipotent being can do ANYTHING!!! Than it is possible. An omnipotent being could make it so they were no longer contradictions. And do you realize that no matter how many choices you have, you always choose ONE. So what choice do you have anyway. You will inevidably choose one, why doesn't god make that one always a good one. We would never know the difference. What if it is that way already, and good and evil are only subjective terms that have no bearing on our will at all. Maybe we have no will. Hmmm...

"This is not part of my argument, just a general question: what qualifies the being to be perfect if it consists of both good and evil?"

The Tao is the perfect balance between all opposites. Something perfect cannot be good, and not evil. Light and not dark. That is illogical. Therefore the perfection of the Tao comes from its perfect balance.

Brien,

I have to admit that I found your answer very satisfying, and if I believed in God, I would be quite content to go along with it. But my questions in reguards to suffering still have not been answered. As you have pointed out, a requirement for the ability to do good, is a countering ability to do evil. We are still in agreement. But unrelated to this is why God created diseases in the first place. Because humans did not develope such diseases, their ability to do good or evil does not come into play. These diseases had to come come from somewhere. I am still wondering where you think they came from. Did God create them? Because whether it's Down's Syndrome, Progeria, or Osteogenesis Imperfecta (Samuel L. Jackson's character from 'Unbreakable'), humans just can't be held responsible for things they are born with.

Brien,

By this logic, god cannot be held directly responsible for creating evil that stems from the human heart.

Click to expand...

But god created the human heart. To say that god did not create evil, is to imply that someone else did. Was it Satan? Well, god created satan, did he not?

You could say that god did indeed create satan, only he gave him free-will, and therefore it is satan's fault for choosing the 'wrong' path...but wait a minute--if god did not invent evil, then what did satan have to choose between? Only good of course, because that is all that god invented. That doesn't make sense though. Number one, you would argue that evil is necessary for free will, therefore satan wouldn't have had free will, and so would have acted evilly out of god's command. On the other hand, for satan to have had free-will, god would have had to have created evil as well as the good so that satan would have a choice.

I hope you see the apparent contradiction within this statement. If they were programmed to always choose good, created to be capable of only making one choice, then they would really not have a choice at all.

Click to expand...

The way I see it, is that in our present state, we only have two things to choose between: good and evil. Only two! I'm sure (well, maybe not sure) there are mentally advanced aliens out there with tons of 'states of being' to choose between, who pity us for our severly hindered free-will. Does the lack of one more choice really make that big a dent?

Contradictions cannot exist in the universe that god created. Can you imagine a universe in which they could? In a world where contradictions existed, nothing else could exist.

Click to expand...

Here I would say that If god were all-powerful, he could make contradictions work, because it is by the rules he invented that they are contradictory in the first place. Defining the all-powerfulness of god seems to be much debated, however. What is your personal definition of god's all-powerfulness?

I have to stop here, but I'll finish later!

:: Ceridwen,

But god created the human heart. To say that god did not create evil, is to imply that someone else did. Was it Satan? Well, god created satan, did he not?

Click to expand...

Either you didn't entirely grasp the ideas I tried to convey or you are taking my words a little out of context. I was not referring to the heart in the literal since. Satan, just like a human, was capable of choosing his way over god's way.

As for the "creation" of evil, let me try to explain things a little differently than I have previously and it might begin to make more sense. Here is a pretty good analogy: What exactly is heat? It is a material property used to describe the molecular motion within an object. What about cold? Well it is just a different adjective used to describe a material's lack of heat. A material can contain "heat;" A material cannot contain "cold." An even better example is the terminology of light and dark. Light is a physically existent particle, the photon. Darkness only describes areas that lack these photons relative to areas that contain them in abundance. I would say the concept of evil is very similar. It is a term that explains a lack of good. Evil exists because people choose not to do good. Thus a person's choice can be better described as a choice between good and something else besides good.

The way I see it, is that in our present state, we only have two things to choose between: good and evil. Only two! I'm sure (well, maybe not sure) there are mentally advanced aliens out there with tons of 'states of being' to choose between, who pity us for our severly hindered free-will. Does the lack of one more choice really make that big a dent?

Click to expand...

YES!!! :lol: It makes all the difference! If you can only do one thing you have no choice. More than one possibility is the only way a choice can exist. How many more choices do you want? Imagine all of the decisions you have to make in every facet of your life. You see, free will extends to much further than our ethics. And choices are not only two dimensional; if you choose to do good you can also choose how you want to do good.

You say there should be additional states of being, but by what standard do you claim this? What proof of reason can you offer to substantiate your view? How can you expect to receive something you cannot perceive? The statement is totally arbitrary.

Here I would say that If god were all-powerful, he could make contradictions work, because it is by the rules he invented that they are contradictory in the first place. Defining the all-powerfulness of god seems to be much debated, however. What is your personal definition of god's all-powerfulness?

Click to expand...

I agree that god could make a contradiction exist. But why would he want to create a universe founded on an illogical premise? If contradictions could exist then nothing else could, including logic. If god is a perfect and logical being then there is no reason that he would do this.

Defining the all-powerfulness of god seems to be much debated, however. What is your personal definition of god's all-powerfulness?

Click to expand...

I would define omnipotence as a state of possessing unlimited universal power and authority.

Of course god's nature places several delimiting agents on this general definition. I believe that god would be perfect, thus be incapable of performing imperfect actions. I also believe that god is logical, thus is incapable of making illogical decisions. As a result I would define the type of omnipotence god possesses to be unlimited universal power and authority to the extent that his nature allows. So that is what I think.



:: Leader,

I have to admit that I found your answer very satisfying, and if I believed in God, I would be quite content to go along with it. But my questions in reguards to suffering still have not been answered. As you have pointed out, a requirement for the ability to do good, is a countering ability to do evil. We are still in agreement. But unrelated to this is why God created diseases in the first place.

Click to expand...

I believe I did answer your question, just not as clearly as I should have. Let's take a closer look at what I said and I will explain what I meant:

I believe that if god created a metaphysical law that allowed beings to have free will, it would not be limited to physical beings. [...] Thus the physical universe may be a battlefield, of sort, for the non-physical realm.

Click to expand...

Consider for a moment all of the decisions that you make in your life. Don't many of these decisions (if not all of them) have some effect on another individual, whether directly or indirectly? If a physical being could have the power of affecting someone through actions then couldn't a non-physical being as well? I am not going to attempt to explain how these non-physical beings could screw around with nature but I believe it is a possibility (the evidence that Christians have to hold to their particular theological principles constitute grounds for believing this). Let me know what you think about it.

Let me also note that I believe this does not happen often, at least relative to the quantity of events that occur as the result of perfectly normal physical principles. Most diseases can be attributed to human negligence (most cancers, heart diseases, birth defects, even colds) or human immorality (STD's, malnourishment, and again cancer).



:: Vigil,

I will make another post replying to you in a couple hours, but I have to run a few errands right now.

Even before you reply, I want to say that our ideas of omnipotence differ. For I believe omnipotence cannot be limited by anything. Even if you say that gods nature limits his omnipotence, than god is in fact not omnipotent. For an omnipotent being would have an omnipotent nature without any limits.

Brien,

"If a physical being could have the power of affecting someone through actions then couldn't a non-physical being as well? I am not going to attempt to explain how these non-physical beings could screw around with nature but I believe it is a possibility."

My question now is what is a non-physical being? Without understanding what one of these non-physical beings is, I can't understand how it relates to suffering, or who created diseases.

In terms of the cause of these diseases, we are almost in agreement. Humans are the cause of, and can be blamed for, a lot of diseases. But I've been very careful to name examples that humans can not cause. One I have mentioned before is ALS. This disease is not caused by certain lifestyles or bad choices. It is simply in ones genes. Another is Taysachs disease. The only thing a person could have actively done to contract this fatal childhood illness, is be born to a family from eastern Europe or the Middle East. These diseases don't test, they kill. Children with Taysachs aren't expected to live past 10. Progeria victims usually don't live past 20. Why is God killing these children? They haven't even lived long enough to 'sin.'

:: Vigil,

Even before you reply, I want to say that our ideas of omnipotence differ. For I believe omnipotence cannot be limited by anything. Even if you say that gods nature limits his omnipotence, than god is in fact not omnipotent. For an omnipotent being would have an omnipotent nature without any limits.

Click to expand...

Yes, that was one of the main points that I wanted to make. If our views differ here we can never see eye to eye on this subject.

But I do believe god is in fact omnipotent in the only since that omnipotency can exist. Aristotle made very clear through formulating his law of identity that something must have a specific nature in order to exist. Everything in reality has a defined nature. A swimming pool cannot be a bird and a book cannot be a car. Because things exist in a specific way there can be no contradictions. Contradictions can only exist in our evaluation of reality. If god does not have a specific nature god cannot exist.


Previously you said:

The point I'm trying to make is that the single idea of god being both omnipotent and solely good makes it illogical that evil would be neccesary. [...] However, even the simple idea of god being solely good and omnipotentm I don't believe evil should exist in any way.

Click to expand...

I think this is where our ideas of omnipotence ultimately clash. But to me, your logic seems to be following a pattern of "if X then Y and because of Y then X." Both premises may be correct, but they may just as likely be arbitrary assumptions. If the reasoning is not based on something outside of the argument then the argument cannot hold. Good can exist in the presence of evil - good only lacks evil, it does not necessarily control or conquer evil, by definition. Your interpretation of what Christians mean when they say "solely good" is probably another source of our disagreement. Also, I never claimed that evil is necessary for good to exist, only that god saw that its existence is best fit to ultimately serve the purpose of good.

But here is that problem with that assertion... God creates EVERYTHING!!! [...] But if an omnipotent being can do ANYTHING!!!

Click to expand...

How do you know god creates everything? If he could do anything, don't you think he could leave it up to us to create some things? Couldn't he make it so that we have choices? Also see my last post about the creation of evil.

And do you realize that no matter how many choices you have, you always choose ONE. So what choice do you have anyway.

Click to expand...

You have the choice to choose one. What proof of reason can you offer to claim that we have no choice? If you cannot apply reason to your claims they hold no weight.

You will inevidably choose one, why doesn't god make that one always a good one. We would never know the difference.

Click to expand...

This is a good point, but I think the main issue is that god would know the difference. If we were only "robots" we would obviously not serve the same purpose and our creation could then become pointless.



:: Leader,

Well, I don't think god is killing babies, but first I will say that I think a perfect god would also be a just god. If a child dies at a young age, I don't think that the child will be eternally punished for not believing in something it could not even conceive. And if the world is as full of suffering as you originally suggested, then maybe dying wouldn't be so bad for them.

My question now is what is a non-physical being? Without understanding what one of these non-physical beings is, I can't understand how it relates to suffering, or who created diseases.

Click to expand...

I apologize that I still haven't made my views clear. I know you mentioned a couple of diseases that could not be blamed on man, so let me try to explain it better. If non-physical beings exist we know very little about them. Christians believe that they are defined only by their motives (love or hate) and their intentions (build up or destroy). Think about the Christian view of god and god's antithesis: Satan is empty and wants to absorb; God is full and overflows. Satan wants victims that can become food; God wants servants that can become sons. The bible says that Lucifer made a choice that his way was better than god's. The bible also says that many other similar beings also made this choice (they became known as demons). So if these non-physical beings, or principalities, could "take sides" surely they would do whatever is in their power to fulfill an agenda based on their respective ideals. If they had the potential to interfere with the physical realm surely evil beings would destroy whatever they could. They would do as much damage as possible to god's creations in an attempt to take us from him. A specific example is that by taking the life of a loved one, it causes those who loved to question god. Also if they take the life of someone who has never and will never turn to the "good side" then they have achieved a victory. I hope this helps you to see what a lot of Christians think about this.

"But I do believe god is in fact omnipotent in the only since that omnipotency can exist. Aristotle made very clear through formulating his law of identity that something must have a specific nature in order to exist."

Than something with a specific nature that is limited can not be omnipotent. For having a specific nature limits that thing. And omnipotency cannot be limited.

"Everything in reality has a defined nature."

Does that mean that god is within nature? I was under the impression that god was above nature, beyond nature, and before nature. In that case, god may not have a defined nature.

Now on to my logic. My logic basically states that if god is solely good (no evil at all) and is the creator of everything, than evil should not exist. For an omnipotent being that is solely good would make a world that has no evil. However, being that evil does exist, I find it logical that an omnipotent essence that is both good and evil created the world. Or caused the world. Hence good and evil does not exist at all except for within our own perceptions. Hmmm... That makes alot more sense.

To say that god is the creator means that god (since infinite regress should not exist) created everything. And makes everything happen.

"You have the choice to choose one. What proof of reason can you offer to claim that we have no choice? If you cannot apply reason to your claims they hold no weight."

No, you only have the ability to choose one. I cannot choose two for that is impossible. I never said you had no choices, I just said that if you can have that many choices, but always choose the good one, we would not feel any different.

"This is a good point, but I think the main issue is that god would know the difference. If we were only "robots" we would obviously not serve the same purpose and our creation could then become pointless."

And again I would say that if god was omnipotent, he could make it so that we are not robots. If god is in fact omnipotent.

Ahh, thanks. That last explanation of the perception of good and evil does help me to understand your views in that context. I still have quite a few disagreements though. :mrgreen:

If you believe that a god with a specific nature is not omnipotent, then the god that I can conceive is not omnipotent by your definition and standards. If god's nature is contradictory (both perfect and imperfect, logical and illogical) then why did he create a physical universe devoid of contradictions?

"Everything in reality has a defined nature."

Does that mean that god is within nature? I was under the impression that god was above nature, beyond nature, and before nature. In that case, god may not have a defined nature.

Click to expand...

Reality, by definition, is the totality of all things possessing actuality, existence, or essence, while nature strictly relates to the material world. If god is not in reality he cannot exist. God can be above nature, but not above the reality of existence if god exists.

I never said you had no choices, I just said that if you can have that many choices, but always choose the good one, we would not feel any different.

Click to expand...

You never said there were no choices, but you seemed to imply this by saying, "So what choice do you have anyway." Sorry if I misinterpreted this. I also could have chose my wording a little better when I said, "choice to choose one" because you obviously you must choose something. The point I was trying to make is that you cannot say that the act of choosing one thing does not involve choice.

And again I would say that if god was omnipotent, he could make it so that we are not robots. If god is in fact omnipotent.

Click to expand...

Do you realize that both of the claims you are making (both your views of god and the hypothetical situation you are creating for an omnipotent and good god) involve some sort of contradiction? Reality exists regardless of the observer and the observer's perceptions, and if god exists god must exist in reality. A single god that can possesses multiple identities is a contradiction (as is a god that is omnipotent but must create everything). A human lacking the ability to make the alternate choice and yet is not programmed to make the intended choice is also a contradiction. If god makes it so that this is not a contradiction he has created another by breaking the physical principles that he created, ad infinitum. Contradictions cannot exist, that is why I suggest a third possibility. If god exists he must do so by maintaining a specific nature and abiding by the principles of that nature.

"If you believe that a god with a specific nature is not omnipotent, then the god that I can conceive is not omnipotent by your definition and standards. If god's nature is contradictory (both perfect and imperfect, logical and illogical) then why did he create a physical universe devoid of contradictions?"

This is why I don't believe the god you concieve of exists. Especially because I think a perfect god cannot have limitations and I find it illogical to say that an omnipotent being has limitations.

"Reality, by definition, is the totality of all things possessing actuality, existence, or essence, while nature strictly relates to the material world. If god is not in reality he cannot exist. God can be above nature, but not above the reality of existence if god exists."

However, if god is not above the reality of existence, than god is limited by gods existence. This would make god only a product of his environment and therefore would not be an omnipotent being. If god created everything, than god must have come before everything and created all things in existence and therefore is above existence. If you believe that god is only a product of his environment than god is no greater than you or I.

What choice do you have if you only are able to choose one. That means you only get one choice. No matter how many choices are in front of you, you only get one. You are not able to go into the future and see the outcome of that choice and decide which one is best. You decide which one is best for your present situation or what you think is best for the future. But in the end, you only get one choice. That was the point I was making.

To say that god cannot exist without contradictions is limiting god once again. It doesn't matter how many contradictions I give him, an all powerful being has the ability to make whatever he wants. Not whatever is within his nature, for his nature is omnipotent and without boundaries. Contradictions can exist if god wants them to. You are limiting your god, and a limited god is no longer god.

LCMS Sprecher said:

Suffering is a result of the imperfection of the world. The world is imperfect because of sin. As far as Job is concerned, his suffering was an attempt by Satan to show God up "in a sense" and turn His servant against him. Sin does affect good people. Would you say that the good Christian people in the World Trade Center towers died and their loved ones suffered because they sinned outrightly against God. No, it was the sin of the world that brought that calamity upon them.

Click to expand...

Actually we DO sin against God everyday..