samtonga43
Well-Known Member
One cannot prove that God exists with logic and reason alone.
Correction:
One cannot prove that God exists.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Should God have created a world without suffering?
- Thread starter Trailblazer
- Start date
Correction:
One cannot prove that God exists.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
You just want to have your cake and eat it. You present a logical argument but when you logic is shown to be flawed, you fall back on faith and scriptures to assert anything you want without question. Just be honest, drop any claims of logic and admit that you have faith that you're totally unwilling to question or second guess. Of course, that does mean you can't declare anyone who disagrees with you as wrong on that basis.
It just happens that you know all the things about God that are relevant to this discussion? Convenient.
Why couldn't God stop being God? Not why would he want to, not what would happen if he did, I'm just talking about the raw fundamental ability to do that.
I never said it couldn't be true, only that you have no evidence whether it is true or not. Again, you're claiming logic but actually just using faith.
You've asserted lots of things that are illogical (or at very least that you've failed to support with logic). You're free to have faith too, but if something is logical, you shouldn't need faith to support it.
Please read carefully. I am not talking about what God would do, I am talking about what God could do. I wouldn't stick my head in to a wood chipper but I'm still could.
I can't speak for anyone else but my position is "with great power comes great responsibility" and that would apply to any being in existence.
I'm also more concerned about believers, and anyone who thinks we are all under and authority which can't be questioned concerns me (especially when it is claimed that only certain people can even understand or speak on behalf of that authority). You and your specific religion might not be directly problematic in that context but you're still promoting the general theological principle that causes those problems.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Maybe not how Trailblazer interprets the Baha'i Faith, and maybe that is how Baha'u'llah taught, but other religions have a Satan and his demons or even a God that causes bad things to happen. In the Bible it is God that sends disasters and plagues to people. So, assuming Trailblazer is representing what Baha'u'llah taught, then it is very different from what some of the other religions taught. But that doesn't bother Baha'is, because they say that those stories of God doing that weren't literal. So the only "truth" left is whatever Baha'is say is true. Then some Baha'is try and gives reasons why what Baha'u'llah has said is true and logical.
So if an engineer designs a road or a building or a roller coaster and things go wrong... Who is responsible? Sometimes it is the designer and engineer. Sometimes it is the people that constructed the thing. In the case of the world, all those things are supposedly God. God designed a world with all sorts of "natural" disasters.
If the engineer and designer had a road built that had a curve that sloped out towards the edge of a cliff and didn't think to have a wall or a guard rail put in, and every time it rained, someone slid off and died, then who is responsible?
Can you blame the driver? Sure. Maybe they had balled tires. Maybe they were driving too fast. But what if some of the people were driving at what they thought was a safe speed, but because the road was sloped the wrong way, then could the engineer and designer be blamed?
Now with the earth, we know earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes and all sorts of things are going to happen and people are going to die. Who designed the Earth this way? Supposedly God. But, for some reason, you never want to place blame on him.
Trailblazer continually comes up with threads like this. It's almost like she wants to "prove" God is never to blame. It's always people's fault. But, it seems, like she wants to throw in some Baha'i quotes to "prove" how wrong everyone else is and how right she and the Baha'i Faith is. Of course she denies is doing that.
And if a Christian started this thread you know that God wouldn't be to blame. It would be Satan and Adam and Eve. God made the world perfect without suffering, then dumb Adam, he had to listen to his easily deceived wife and take a bite out of the forbidden fruit. So what choice did God have but to curse them, the serpent, the animals and the whole Earth. And since Baha'is say the "believe" in the Bible, why didn't they just go with this story? But no, they want to be balance reason and science with religion and do away of any religious beliefs that don't make sense scientifically. I wonder... Have they?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
How do you think you showed my logic to be flawed? Show me what i said that is logically flawed or do not assert that.
Also please tell me how you think you can know anything about God without a way to know.
I did not say I know all the things about God that are relevant to this discussion
I said I do not know everything God can do and I don't care. All I care about is what God actually does.
If God stopped being God, God would no longer be God. That is logic 101.
We humans do not know everything that God can do. Why would it matter if God had the ability to "stop being God?"
I forgot what we were trying to prove is true. What is the "it" that couldn't be true? How do you know that I don't have any evidence to prove it is true? Do you just assume no religious people have any evidence?
Please do not accuse me of asserting things that are illogical without giving examples. What did I fail to support with logic?
You said: "if something is logical, you shouldn't need faith to support it." That is a false statement because nobody can prove that God exists using logic so we need faith to believe that God exists. However, faith can be a reason-based faith rather than a blind faith. Faith with evidence is reason-based.
I do not give a tinker's damn what God could do. Nobody can ever know what God could do and it is a moot point if God does not choose to do what God could do since God ONLY does what He chooses to do.
Why do you think it matters what God could do?
No, it does not work that way as God is not responsible for humans since god gave man a brain and free will so that humans could take care of themselves and others and the world we live in.
My religion teaches that we should question, that we should never believe without questioning, and that we should do a thorough independent investigation before we ever believe in the religion and the Messenger who revealed it. It is only after we believe the religion is true that we accept the authority of the Messenger of God who revealed it. Logically speaking, if the Messenger got messages from God who is all-knowing, and God told Him things that the rest of us do not know, then the Messenger has to know more than any human since no other human ever gets messages from God.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
AppleB did not say anything about Satan. He was wondering if it matters to God what He does.
AppleB said "Given your statement it seems to me that it doesn't matter to God what he does. Whether it's creating a world where 230.000 people were killed in the tsunami of 2004 (let's say for arguments sake this is the exact amount of people who were killed) instead of creating a world where 200.000 people were killed by the tsunami."
No, God designed a world in which it is possible to have natural disasters, but God does not cause those natural disasters, they simply happen. in a physical world.
Whenever you compare what humans do to what God does that is the fallacy of false equivalence.
False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.[1] A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".
This fallacy is committed when one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.[2] False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear scrutiny because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors.
False equivalence - Wikipedia
So comparing an engineer to God is fallacious. It is not only fallacious, it is inane because God cannot make any mistakes or be to blame for anything He does since God is infallible.
I do not blame God because that is completely illogical since God is by nature infallible so God cannot ever make any mistakes.
If God had not wanted there to be any natural disasters then God would not have designed a natural world in which they can happen. That was not a mistake, there was a reason for the design. And so what if they do happen? That is all part of life in a physical world and logical people do not blame God, they just accept reality. Sometimes people suffer and that is part of life in a physical world.
Either way, be it a Baha'i or a Christian, God is not to blame. Only atheists are so illogical that they blame God.
And which view makes more sense, the Baha'i view or the Christian view?
samtonga43
Well-Known Member
IF the Messenger got messages from God who is all-knowing, and IF God told Him things that the rest of us do not know...
What-iffing will get you precisely nowhere, Tb. Try logic.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
We're typically not getting that far because you keep dropping back to faith based statements rather than logical ones. There were aspects of the discussion like; "God created everything but didn't create suffering", "God is omnipotent yet there are things he can't do", "Scripture and Messengers are the word of God because they say they're the word of God"
Given I don't (yet) accept the existence of God, we're discussing the abstract concept of God as it is presented. I'd addressing that abstract concept on a purely logical basis and I don't think it is logically consistent.
Not in as many words, but you've never said "I don't know" about anything here. You say humans (and specifically, I) can't know everything about God yet you never fail to make definitive statements about the him at each and every step.
Yes. An omnipotent God could make themselves cease to exist entirely. True omnipotence is a weird concept to wrap our heads around (like omniscience or infinity).
The Bible being the word of God just because it says it's the word of God. I suspect you forgot because you'd already fallen back to just making it a statement of faith.
I'm not talking about whether God exists or not, I'm talking about whether the concept of God you're presenting is logically consistent.
That's just meaningless rhetoric. Faith is entirely irrelevant to evidence or logic (other than as a potential distraction).
We can't discus what God should do if we've not agreed what God could do. It's also relevant to the question of internal logical consistency to the concept of God being presented I've already mentioned.
That's a statement of faith, not logic, so it has nothing to do with my point. I stand by my general point that any conscious being with power would be responsibility for how it uses that power. If you're proposing a God that doesn't have any such responsibility, you're talking about a major moral vacuum plus some practical inconstancies with scripture that describes God making moral choices or presenting them to humans.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Correction:
One cannot prove that God exists as a fact but one can prove that God exists to themselves, which is all that really matters.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
That was logic.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
But you said my logic was flawed and I asked you to explain how it is flawed:
I said "How do you think you showed my logic to be flawed? Show me what i said that is logically flawed or do not assert that."
What statements about God do you think would be logical and why would they be more logical than MY statements?
Why can't faith based statements ALSO be logical?
I said: "Also please tell me how you think you can know anything about God without a way to know."
The abstract concept of God as it is presented where and by whom?
How can you discuss an abstract concept on a purely logical basis if you do not know any attributes of the concept you are discussing?
I never said "I don't know about anything" because I know some things about God, just not everything.
No human can ever know everything about God because the Messengers of God do not reveal to us everything they know about God, for two logical reasons:
1. Humans do not have the capacity to understand everything that the Messengers know about God, and
2. Humans do not need to know everything that the Messengers know about God.
That said, as humanity evolves spiritually humans have an increasing capacity to understand things about God that they could not understand in the past, and that s why more is revealed about God by the Messengers as time goes on. In the future, more will be revealed about God, as humanity (1) has a better capacity to understand and (2) has a need to know more about God.
When I say "know more about God" I am referring to how God operates, I am not referring to the attributes of God, whcih humans already know about since they were revealed in the Bible and other religious scriptures a long time ago.
You do not know that because you are not all-knowing. You base everything you say God can do upon your limited conception of what omnipotence is -- can do anything. Nobody can "wrap their head around" what omnipotence means and that means that it is a bald assertion to say that God can make Himself cease to exist entirely. You are not all-knowing so you do not know that.
I never said that the Bible is the word of God just because it says it's the word of God. The Bible does not even say it is the word of God, Christians say that, and I agree with them to a certain extent. That is not only a statement of faith because the Bible is its own evidence although we need some faith to believe that what it says is actually true.
Logically consistent with what?
Faith is necessary to believe in God because there is no proof that God exists and logic will never help you prove that. There is evidence that God exists, the Messengers of God, but you need to have a reason to believe they are Messengers of God, and you need to have faith because nobody can ever prove that a Messenger got messages from God.
I asked "Why do you think it matters what God could do?"
You are already dead in the water with your response because it is highly illogical. The reason it is illogical is because humans do not determine "what God should do." Only God determines what He should do since God is omniscient as well as omnipotent. Humans who put any "shoulds" on an omnipotent/omniscient God are illogical because (a) humans cannot know more than God and (b) humans cannot have more power than God.
Omniscience means whatever God has chosen to do has to be the best choice of all the available choices.
God is also infallible so God cannot ever be wrong or make a mistake. That means that whatever we see that God actually is responsible for (which does not include human free will choices) cannot be a mistake.
No, there is no reason to believe that any conscious being with power would be responsible for how it uses that power. God is not a human, that is what you simply do not understand. God is not responsible or accountable to humans for anything He does or does not do. Anything we do get from God is only by God's mercy and grace, as an omnipotent God could wipe out all humans in a heartbeat and would have done so long ago if He did not love us.
I said: "No, it does not work that way as God is not responsible for humans since god gave man a brain and free will so that humans could take care of themselves and others and the world we live in."
That was a statement of logic, not a statement of faith. To make logical statements about God, one has to know something about God. It is completely illogical to base all one's statements upon "God is omnipotent" especially when you do not even know what omnipotence implies. I will now help you out in that regard.
“Say: O people! Let not this life and its deceits deceive you, for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will. He bestoweth His favor on whom He willeth, and from whom He willeth He taketh it away. He doth whatsoever He chooseth.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 209
“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest.He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.” Gleanings, p, 284
“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Gleanings, p. 73
for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will.
· That means God has complete power and He does whatever He chooses to do, which implies that He is not going to do what you think He should do or what you want Him to do, unless He chooses to do it.
He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain.
· That means you have no right to question what God ordains. It is what it is and you cannot change it.
All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish.
· That means if God feels like giving you something you will get it but if not you won’t.
I hope we have this cleared up now. You can have expectations of God and a wish list but don't expect to get everything on your wish list. This is Omnipotent God 101 stuff and without understanding it there is no point proceeding to the next class.
Last edited:
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
I felt it was obvious and you never challenged my statements but I can be more specific if you like;
1) God created everything.
2) Suffering is part of everything.
3) Therefore; God created suffering.
Believers in general and you in particular. You've made lots of statements about the nature of God in this thread and it's those statements I'd addressing. If I make any assumptions or interpretations which don't fit your concept of God, you're free to point them out (like you did about you not taking literal interpretation of the Adam and Eve story).
It's your thread about your concept of God. If it isn't clear to anyone what we're actually talking about, I'd suggest you're the one who should be clarifying it.
How do you tell the difference between the things we can know and the things we can't? And what happens when people get the same information but reach different conclusions based upon them? Why can't I know some things about God jus like you do?
We're both human and neither of us are all-knowing. If there is something I can't know, you can't know it either. You faith can't give you any additional knowledge.
There is no "with". Logically consistent just means logically consistent. Things like not being defined as omnipotent yet unable to do some things.
If God is omnipotent yes, and omnipotence is a question of what God can do. If we agree God could do anything and so is truly omnipotent they we can agree that yes, your thread question would indeed be illogical (though so would declaring anything God does as "right" or "wrong", "good" or "evil"). It feels like that would conclude the thread.
This is where the logical issues with omnipotence/omniscience and fitting them in to our human mindsets. If God knows everything, he can't really make choices at all - he'd already know everything he's going to do. He can't be right or wrong, good or evil, he'd just be. I'm not sure how you could build a coherent religion around that though, which is probably why believers attribute so many temporal, human and emotional characteristics to God, even though none of that is rational in the context of an omnipotent and omniscient being.
God is also infallible so God cannot ever be wrong or make a mistake. That means that whatever we see that God actually is responsible for (which does not include human free will choices) cannot be a mistake.
Your scripture is irrelevant to me and the word omnipotence exists independently of the idea of any gods. You're not addressing what that word actually means, you're just using it as a tool to make any claims you want about God, regardless of how illogical, contradictory or meaningless they might be.
Now you're acting as if there is some point here. You've already said you only asked your irrational question to try to catch out atheists (for some reason). If you have a further purpose, it would be good if you actually explained what that is.
rational experiences
Veteran Member
Water was created by spatial pressure in space above the ground.
Water however flooded into a sun irradiating converting earth mass and sealed it.
Human life mainly bio water.
If you unseal stone as particles held together sink holes open you see water.
A well.
Then when it evaporates a huge sin hole is left behind.
The water we were walking spiritually upon as the human life living radiation suffering. Non stop everyday.
We were told occult science took out holy water out of stone beneath our feet and sacrificed life as a new constant.
As science is satanism always was satanism.
Only medical human science is science our biology.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Let me correct that so it reflects my actual position.
1) God created everything.
2) In the creation are things that can cause suffering.
3) Therefore, God created the potential for suffering.
There is logically flawed about that. It is perfectly logical.
But you do not accept my statements about the nature of God, you reject them.
Okay, fair enough. You may as well know what I mean when I talk about God.
God in the Baháʼí Faith
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Baháʼí view of God is essentially monotheistic. God is the imperishable, uncreated being who is the source of all existence.[1] He is described as "a personal God, unknowable, inaccessible, the source of all Revelation, eternal, omniscient, omnipresent and almighty".[2][3] Though transcendent and inaccessible directly, his image is reflected in his creation. The purpose of creation is for the created to have the capacity to know and love its creator.[4] God communicates his will and purpose to humanity through intermediaries, known as Manifestations of God, who are the prophets and messengers that have founded religions from prehistoric times up to the present day.[5]
The Baháʼí teachings state that there is only one God and that his essence is absolutely inaccessible from the physical realm of existence and that, therefore, his reality is completely unknowable. Thus, all of humanity's conceptions of God which have been derived throughout history are mere manifestations of the human mind and not at all reflective of the nature of God's essence. While God's essence is inaccessible, a subordinate form of knowledge is available by way of mediation by divine messengers, known as Manifestations of God.
While the Baháʼí writings teach of a personal god who is a being with a personality (including the capacity to reason and to feel love), they clearly state that this does not imply a human or physical form.[2] Shoghi Effendi writes:
What is meant by personal God is a God Who is conscious of His creation, Who has a Mind, a Will, a Purpose, and not, as many scientists and materialists believe, an unconscious and determined force operating in the universe. Such conception of the Divine Being, as the Supreme and ever present Reality in the world, is not anthropomorphic, for it transcends all human limitations and forms, and does by no means attempt to define the essence of Divinity which is obviously beyond any human comprehension. To say that God is a personal Reality does not mean that He has a physical form, or does in any way resemble a human being. To entertain such belief would be sheer blasphemy.[15][16]
God in the Baháʼí Faith
How could you know anything about God unless you had a source of information? Otherwise, you would just be making things up. People can and do come to different conclusions about God and that is because they are looking at different sources of information (from different religious scriptures). People get the same information (such as the Bible) and interpret it differently and that is why there are so many sects of Christianity.
Yes, my religion can and does give me additional knowledge about God. What do you think religion is for?
The reason I know about God is because I have a source of information. I did not just make up all that is written in that Wikipedia about God, it was derived from various Baha'i Writings. The reason you don't know what I know is because you have no read those writings but you could know what I know if you read them.
You do not know what omnipotent means as it applies to God because you do not know what God is.
God can only do what is possible to do given His nature and you have to know His nature in order to know what God can and cannot do. Omnipotent means all-powerful, it does not mean "can do anything." For example, God cannot become a man because then God would no longer be God. God cannot he fully man and fully God at the same time, as Trinitarian Christians believe. This is the logic Christians do not understand.
The thread was not intended to be logical, it was intended to see if there are people who believe that God should do other than He has done, which would be illogical.
God can know everything and still make choices. This is hard to explain even though I know what I want to explain. God is omniscient so God knows everything that has ever happened, is happening, or will ever happen, but God's knowledge is not what causes things to happen. God has to chose and will something to happen and it happens when God wills it to happen. God knew that He would choose it and will it before He chose it and willed it because God is all-knowing. The reason this is complicated is because what God chooses and wills to happen is connected to what human choose to do; so if humans choose a, then God does b, but if humans choose c, then God does d. God always knew that He would do b or d because God is all-knowing. God is just waiting for a human to choose a or c. I can give you an example of what I mean if you want one.
How can the word omnipotence exist independently of the idea of any gods? Is anything else but God omnipotent? I did explain what it means for God to be omnipotent in my previous post.
It was not just to catch atheists. I really wanted to know what anyone (not just atheists) thought about whether God should have created a world without suffering and if so why they think that, or if not why they think that.
Last edited:
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
There's lots of different concepts of God and Gods. In your beliefs all those others are wrong and your concept of God is the only true one.
But you can't prove... except to yourself? And all those other people in the other religions with different concepts of God can "prove" to themselves too. But, they are all wrong and you're right?
Yes, I agree. It is not consistent at all. All-knowing, All-loving, and all that stuff... The Biblical God doesn't seem nice at all. He sends earthquakes and storms... sends fire from heaven... floods the whole world... and has his people kill every man, woman and child in some cities. The Baha'is take those Bible stories and make them allegorical, to get God off the hook for killing and ordering the killing of a lot of people. Yet, there are still a lot of people suffering from diseases and natural disasters. And God created it that way? But is not responsible? Why not? Wouldn't all be part of his divine and perfect plan? Or, there is some kind of "spirit" or "invisible" creative force that put everything in motion and is not in control of who gets hurt or killed when disasters happen?
Or, these things just happen and people make up concepts of Gods to explain why they happen? And then, because some people make their Gods infallible, they can do no wrong? And then, therefore, it's perfectly "logical" to them. So it must be the victims fault. Why were they at the beach when the tsunami hit? What were they thinking when the fire came roaring through? But, supposedly, God knew? He spares some and let's others die? Or, is that just by chance and God had nothing to do with it? I don't know. Christians? Baha'is? Anybody in any religion? Does anyone have a perfect answer? Yet, some people in each religion think they do have a perfect answer. And they are all different.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
Both of our logical statements are valid. The key element you're refusing to accept is that if God created things that will cause suffering, God effectively created the suffering, especially in the context of a God defined as omniscient and therefore fully knowing that the suffering will happen as a consequence.
There are three distinct elements here. Knowledge, belief and logic. I don't accept any claims of knowledge of God (from anyone). I do accept any claims of belief (but only as belief, nothing more) and I'm applying logic to those beliefs.
Your religion does not give you any more knowledge than anyone else has access to. In general, religion isn't just what you know or believe, it's what you do about it. Someone could believe exactly the same things you do yet choose not to be a practicing Baháʼí.
My points have nothing to do with specifically applying the word to God. I know what omnipotent means because I'm literate.
You keep declaring that without any support. The definition of the word means exactly that.
You re proposing a God that is extremely powerful but is limited in his ability to do some things. If God is literally incapable of doing those things (rather than just "not wanting to"), God can't be all-powerful. There would also have to be something out there with the power to prevent God doing those things (be that some abstract universal law, greater abstract power or greater consciousness).
That is illogical. God is beyond time so the concept of him waiting makes no sense and he would always know which "choice" the humans will make. There never really be a choice, the humans will have always been going to do what they do.
This isn't an issue unique to beliefs about gods. The whole concept of anything being omniscient generates difficult philosophical issues with choice, chance and cause-and-effect.
All words exist independently of the things they apply to. Any dictionary is full of them. I don't think anything is omnipotent but the concept could be theoretically applied to anything we want to.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, they are not all wrong because some of those religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) also believe in the one true God.
They might be wrong in how they interpret their scriptures, but that is another matter.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
That is not logical. Just because God created things knowing that they would cause suffering that does not mean that God created suffering. Suffering exists because it is not preventable in a physical world and the physical world is the cause of all suffering except the suffering that is caused by human relationships that are subpar.
Okay, thanks for clarifying what you accept.
My religion gives me more knowledge about God and God's will for this age than any of the older religions.
I agree that religion isn't just what you know or believe, it's what you do about it. Baha'u'llah wrote:
“The essence of faith is fewness of words and abundance of deeds; he whose words exceed his deeds, know verily his death is better than his life.” Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 156
You are correct in saying that someone could believe exactly the same things I do yet choose not to be a practicing Baháʼí.
“When asked on one occasion: “What is a Bahá’í?” ‘Abdu’l-Bahá replied: “To be a Bahá’í simply means to love all the world; to love humanity and try to serve it; to work for universal peace and universal brotherhood.” On another occasion He defined a Bahá’í as “one endowed with all the perfections of man in activity.” In one of His London talks He said that a man may be a Bahá’í even if He has never heard the name of Bahá’u’lláh.” Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 71
Chapter 5: What is a Bahá’í
The Bible supports my position..
Why is God called omnipotent?
The term omnipotence refers to the idea that God is all-powerful. There are many stories in the Bible which reveal the power of God. ... This is because they believe the accounts from the Bible to be the truth, and stated exactly as they happened.
Characteristics of God - God - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - WJEC ...
https://www.bbc.co.uk › bitesize › guides › revision
I already stated my position, that there are some things God cannot do because of His attributes that make Him God. God is not only omnipotent, God has many other attributes that are what makes Him God, and these are immutable attributes of God. God is: Eternal, Holy, Unchanging, Impassable, Infinite, Omnipresent, All-Powerful, All-Knowing, All-Wise, Infallible, Self-Existent, Self-Sufficient, Sovereign, Immaterial, Good, Loving, Gracious, Merciful, Just, Righteous, Forgiving, and Patient. Because these are immutable attributes of God, God cannot become less than all-knowing, less than all-powerful, unwise, dependent upon humans, unjust, merciless, unjust, impatient, malevolent or hateful.
I believe that omnipotent means God is all-powerful, not that God can do anything. God cannot become something He isn't because in that case He would no longer be God.
I am not going down this road with one more atheist. You can believe whatever you want to believe because you have free will to choose what to believe.
When I said God is waiting I did not mean that literally, waiting as a human would wait. I speak from a human perspective because that is what people can understand. It is true that God always knows which "choice" the humans will make but God does not choose for humans, humans make their own choices, choices God knows they will make because God is omniscient.
An example of God's omniscience can be seen in this passage. God has foreknowledge so God already knows what people are going to do. Moreover, there is a time appointed by God when God will act and only God knows when that will be.
“He Who is the Eternal Truth knoweth well what the breasts of men conceal. His long forbearance hath emboldened His creatures, for not until the appointed time is come will He rend any veil asunder. His surpassing mercy hath restrained the fury of His wrath, and caused most people to imagine that the one true God is unaware of the things they have privily committed. By Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed! The mirror of His knowledge reflecteth, with complete distinctness, precision and fidelity, the doings of all men.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 204
Yes, God could always know, but does God choose to know (?) because God created angelic life and human life gifted with free-will choices to make choices out of one's own free-will choice to act responsibly toward God or not.
God is waiting because first God's purpose is that Earth be populated as stated at Genesis 1:28.
God gifted Adam and Eve with the free-will choice to obey Him or disobey Him. Their free choice/our free choice.
If God would have acted immediately we simply would Not be here.
The passing of time has allowed for us to be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us.
Sinner Satan enters the picture at Job 2:4-5 and challenges Not only the man Job but by way of extension all of us.
Touch our ' flesh....' (loose our physical health) and we would Not serve God.
Both Job and Jesus under adverse suffering proved Satan a liar and so can we.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
But God created the physical world and the human relationships. You can't say God created everything and then list some things God didn't create.
If I point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, I wouldn't be creating the energy that projects the bullet, I wouldn't be creating the torn flesh and bleeding but nobody would say I didn't cause the victims injuries.
Your religion does not give you any more knowledge than anyone else. We all have access to exactly the same information.
This leads us towards my position in that it is literally impossible for any being to be truly omnipotent (hence the classic "Can God create a weight he can't lift?"). It is impossible for anything to be able to do anything because the doing some things will prevent them for doing others.
God could still be extremely powerful, just not truly omnipotent. It doesn't make much difference to a great extent, though does subtly adjust some of the deeper philosophical questions about the nature or God and certainly makes it less valid to dismiss out-of-hand challenges to things attributed to God simply on the basis of his omnipotence.
That is my point though. We can't understand how an omniscient being would think and presenting it in a way we understand fundamentally changes it. The simple answer is that we can't know.
Like omnipotence, I'd actually argue that true omniscience is logically impossible, since an omniscient being would need to know everything they know in addition to everything else which means they'd need to somehow hold more information than there is in all existence.
AppieB
Active Member
This sounds to me like a cop out: Sure you can use logic and reason to try understand God and his existence ... as long as it's favouritable to God. But the moment there is a crititque, logic and reason are no longer valid. That's like playing tennis without the net. And to be honest, I have no interest in that.
When I was a Christian I asked many many times. I never got an answer.
It would be amazing to ask those 230.000 people who died, how they grew stronger. Or the 6.000.000 Jews who died in WWII for 'the greater good'.