Is God omnipotent?

[Deeje]

When you say “would not be easy”, it makes me think. For an omnipotent being, any task, such as extinguishing evil and redeeming mankind, would simply be a task, not an easy or hard.

I meant not easy for mankind....not that it would be difficult for God. His laws are so perfect that he abides by them himself.

Laws were broken in Eden by the devil who was the first rebel, and then by the humans whom he was able to mislead.....and so the penalty that God stated would have to be carried out.....but God did not tell the humans exactly how the penalty would be implemented. When he told them that..."on the day of their eating it, they would die"......what do we understand that to mean? It definitely wasn't a 24 hour day that God meant because Adam lived for 930 years. So what do we make of that?
Psalm 90:4...
"For a thousand years are in your eyes just as yesterday when it is past,
Just as a watch during the night."

Or 2 Peter 3:8
"However, do not let this escape your notice, beloved ones, that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day."

If a "day" to God is 'like a thousand' of our years, or as 'a watch during the night', then that makes sense of the Bible relating the ages of humans living closer to the perfection of our first parents. God's counting of a day is not like ours at all. The Genesis "days" were not 24 hour days either, making creation a long process over possibly eons of time.

God allowed the now sinful humans to "fill the earth" as he had commanded them.
But right at the start, he gave the first prophesy in Genesis 3:15, demonstrating that he had long range plans for a redeemer who was to eventually deal satan a fatal head wound, but only after the devil had dealt the redeemer a painful and temporarily disabling heel wound. (his crucifixion and resurrection) Jesus mentioned that the devil and his angels have a place of punishment reserved for them as well. (Matthew 25:41)

The fact that God had to do this specific thing, sacrifice a Messiah. Do you believe that God could have redeemed mankind another way? If so, then I can see the omnipotence. But if sacrificing Jesus was the only option, then I think that implies that God is omniscient in the way of Zoroastrianism, not omnipotent.

If you understand the implications of why Jesus was sent to earth as a human, then the redemption laws make sense.
Deuteronomy 19:21....
"You should not feel sorry: Life will be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot."
Exodus 21:23-25....
"But if a fatality does occur, then you must give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, blow for blow."
You can see that equivalency was meant as compensation for breaking God's law. When a life was taken, then a life had to be offered in recompense, to balance the scales of justice. Who would God trust more with such a demanding task (humanly speaking) than his beloved son? Jesus volunteered to surrender his glorious heavenly body in order to become a mere mortal and offer his perfect life for sinful mankind. What love these showed for God's human creation.

The life that Adam lost for himself was paid for with his own death....but the perfect (sinless) life that he took from his children could only be compensated for with another perfect (sinless) life.
The idea of redemption is still the same even today. If you pawn something to gain the value of it in cash to pay for something....you can redeem that item by paying back the money borrowed against it. It will be a set price. So it is with the redemption of the human race. Adam sold his children into slavery to sin and death by his single act of disobedience, and only an equivalent life could redeem them. Hence Jesus came from heaven in human form to offer his perfect life to release us from that slavery.....something that happened through no fault on our part. No other human could balance the scales of God's justice. Both God and his son did this willingly to preserve God's purpose regarding man's creation and to release us from a curse imposed by Adam.

God is still omnipotent as well as omniscient....but he chooses to exercise both in a balanced way, seeing that justice is served.
To attribute any of these things to another God is rather insulting to the Creator who is what Jesus called him...."the only true God"...(John 17:3)

 

[an anarchist]

The Genesis "days" were not 24 hour days either, making creation a long process over possibly eons of time.

So I am confused about this reasoning. So, since you’re not a YEC, you believe in an old earth. I’m assuming that you believe the established narrative that sun would predate any plant life? If the creation days are not literal days, but eons of time, aren’t they in the wrong order? The third eon, plant life was alive, the fourth, the sun came to be? Is this what you believe?
And you quote verses saying that days are very long, but Genesis seems to be quite literal when reading it. The first day, He created light, “then there was evening, and then there was morning, the first day”. Of course makes you wonder how there could be a day without a sun
I think that Genesis was intended to be read literally, but I’m a literalist. Am I understanding what you believe about the creation correctly?

 

[an anarchist]

"on the day of their eating it, they would die"......what do we understand that to mean? It definitely wasn't a 24 hour day

I understand it as Adam and Eve’s perfect spirits died that day, that moment. They were separated from God that 24 hour day. Their bodies and souls began to deteriorate that day, as well as their environment

 

[an anarchist]

If you understand the implications of why Jesus was sent to earth as a human, then the redemption laws make sense.

So it is with the redemption of the human race. Adam sold his children into slavery to sin and death by his single act of disobedience, and only an equivalent life would redeem them. Hence Jesus came from heaven in human form to offer his perfect life to release us from that slavery.....something that happened through no fault on our part. No other human could balance the scales of God's justice. Both God and his son did this willingly to preserve God purpose regarding man's creation and to release us from a curse imposed by Adam.

God is still omnipotent as well as omniscient....but he chooses to exercise both in a balanced way, seeing that justice is served.

I understand the idea behind a Messiah being necessary, I think.
Well, I’m still curious about is if God had to send a Messiah. If He didn’t, and is omnipotent and omniscient like you say, do you see the way He is exercising His omnipotence as benevolent?
Yes, with our free will we brought sin into the world, and continually do so. But this life can truly be Hell. In the most literal sense of that term, people experience Hell during their earthly mortal lives. Humanity is subjected to Hell while on this earth, is this benevolent? If God is omnipotent, and could redeem us another way, but has decided this is the path, I don’t see it as benevolent.
Perhaps I have it wrong, and instead of omniscient and benevolent, He is omniscient and omnipotent.
Arguments can be made against the benevolence of our God, this is true, though hard to accept. Our God is a war God, one who demanded merciless genocide. “Make sure you murder all the pregnant woman too while you’re slaughtering the men and children! If you don’t, you will be punished forever!” (The case of Saul)
David did good in God’s eyes, he mercilessly slaughtered his enemies, leaving no survivors.
I believe in the benevolence of my God, not His omnipotence.

 

[PureX]

I just bring it up because for example atheists will bring up the problem of evil as a moral dilemma to some theists beliefs. If Christians say God is omnipotent (from my experience, they often do) then the problem of evil is a legitimate question. What we believe won’t affect the reality of it, sure, but discussing it has worth I think.
Because not ascribing omnipotence to God is one way to solve the moral dilemma of the problem of evil. And moral dilemmas are always worth considering.

People ascribe omnipotence to their concept of God because they need or want 'God', if it exists, to embody such a condition. The reasons they need or want to presume this are their own. And are probably somewhat unique to them. I'm not sure what is to be gained by arguing with their need/want when we (and most likely they) have no idea why they need/want this in the first place. But it's likely not a 'logical' need/want. And it obviously doesn't have anything to do with the actual nature or existence of God. So what is to be gained?

 

[PureX]

Then, by that logic, omnipotent is a meaningless term since there is no way for us to understand it.

I agree. But it's not meaningless to a lot of our fellow humans because most of us are not that logical. Especially when we feel a need or a desire for what we imagine this divine omnipotence to entail. I think a lot of people need/want to feel (believe) that there is some form of intelligent, benevolent control at work in the universe. That is it not just a giant collection of random circumstances that could destroy them at any time for no reason at all. And I certainly cannot hold this desire against them, can I (can you?). So they choose to 'believe in' a God that is omnipotent, and in charge of 'it all'. Because that gives them some sense of a just purpose, and security.

 

[ChristineM]

Time is omnipotent...so much for your science and logical progression of the the first law of thermodynamics theories.

My God created time.

Evidence that time is omnipotent please... As far as i know time is not energy and may possibly have veen created during the bb.

So much for your guesswork to suite your confirmation bias

 

[ChristineM]

That's a very small view of God. As if he has to follow the natural laws he created.

Thats a very big view of god that you know he/she/it doesn't follow the natural laws of this universe.

 

[ChristineM]

Although I would say that the word "power" used in definitions of omnipotence is not talking about power in physics. For instance a prince has power, and we understand this not to mean physics definitions of power. Likewise, for deity, power in omnipotence is the ability to actualize.

I wouldn't know, I've never met a god to ask.

However to exert such power of a prince requires energy to command and energy of the minion's to carry our the commands

 

[Deeje]

So I am confused about this reasoning. So, since you’re not a YEC, you believe in an old earth. I’m assuming that you believe the established narrative that sun would predate any plant life? If the creation days are not literal days, but eons of time, aren’t they in the wrong order? The third eon, plant life was alive, the fourth, the sun came to be? Is this what you believe?
And you quote verses saying that days are very long, but Genesis seems to be quite literal when reading it. The first day, He created light, “then there was evening, and then there was morning, the first day”. Of course makes you wonder how there could be a day without a sun
I think that Genesis was intended to be read literally, but I’m a literalist. Am I understanding what you believe about the creation correctly?

I have studied the creation account carefully and there is so much more to it than the scanty outline suggests. The Hebrew word "yohm" (day) for example, does not only mean a 24 hour day. It can mean an indefinite period of time. We even use the word that way ourselves....."in my grandfather's day" (not meaning a 24 hour period) and Genesis 2:4 uses the word to convey the whole of creation.

I am not a YEC because that is completely implausible to me. The earth itself is very ancient and the Genesis account does not argue with that, making no time distinction between the first verse regarding creation of the universe, and the preparation of this earth for habitation that follows....meaning that they could have been separated by hundreds of thousands or even billions of years. A timeless being like the Creator does not operate in earth time. We only do because of the rotation of the planet...not something that restricts God.

If you read the account carefully, you will see that the first thing God said when preparation had begun was "let there be light", so light was obviously penetrating the atmosphere to some degree to allow photosynthesis to assist in the growth of vegetation. (the first living things to appear) This agrees with verse one which says that the "heavens and the earth" were created as one action.....that would include all the heavenly bodies including our sun, which is our only source of light. If cloud layers were preventing the sun from being visible on the earth's surface then in Genesis 1:14 it talks about the appearance of luminaries, which could have meant a clearing away of the clouds so that these luminaries now became visible. Job 38:9 says that the earth was "swaddled" with clouds. So the sun and moon and stars were always there, just not clearly seen through the cloud layers until later.

Now when reading about the beginning and end of each "day" what do you notice about how this is stated?
It says there was "evening and morning"...is that a 24 hour day? So, how long is it between evening and morning?
If it was a 24 hour day it would be evening to evening, as the Jews counted their days from sundown to sundown.
I believe that this terminology relates to the close of one creative period and the beginning of another because the close of a day is the evening and the beginning of a new day is at dawn. Don't we even say "it was the dawn of a new era?...meaning the beginning of a new era, or time period.

I see Genesis as completely literal, but not read with understanding by many...especially YEC's.

 

[Deeje]

I understand it as Adam and Eve’s perfect spirits died that day, that moment. They were separated from God that 24 hour day. Their bodies and souls began to deteriorate that day, as well as their environment

Again, I do not see any mention about their "spirits" dying that day....God said that they would die that day and spiritually they were separated from God, that is true, but since the whole person is the 'soul' and their 'spirit' is the breath that keeps them living, Adam and his wife did not die physically that day. They had to fill the earth with their children as God had commanded them to do. Their bodies began to die that day, for sure, but being that close to perfection, it took a long time for their physical organism to fail completely. Life spans continued to be high right up to Noah's day. Later in King David's day he mentioned that a human lifespan was a mere 70 or 80 years.

Something else you will notice in the creation account, is the absence of a closing declaration for the 7th day....I believe this is because the 7th day has not yet ended. But at the end of the thousand year reign of God's Kingdom, all will then return to way God intended things to be on earth, and he can then say with great pride, that everything is again...."very good".

 

[Deeje]

I’m still curious about is if God had to send a Messiah. If He didn’t, and is omnipotent and omniscient like you say, do you see the way He is exercising His omnipotence as benevolent?

He exercised his omniscience in a way that would benefit as many as possible without coercion. He has no need to threaten people into submission. He does not want anyone to be destroyed, "but desires all to attain to repentance". ( 2 Peter 3:9) He is offering a place in his Kingdom to all who want to qualify as citizens....that is benevolence...restoring all that was lost in Eden, he has always wanted to give mankind a wonderful future, but rebellion had to be dealt with in a way that would prevent it from ever happening again. He handled the situation very wisely, taking the long term solution.....much like any good parent would permit their child to undergo a series of painful operations to correct a birth defect, if the pain of the surgery meant the rest of their life freed from the problem. This is how I see God 's actions with regard to his human children.

Yes, with our free will we brought sin into the world, and continually do so. But this life can truly be Hell. In the most literal sense of that term, people experience Hell during their earthly mortal lives. Humanity is subjected to Hell while on this earth, is this benevolent? If God is omnipotent, and could redeem us another way, but has decided this is the path, I don’t see it as benevolent.

It is not God who makes life "hell".....it is his enemy, satan the devil. Read the account in Job ch 1-2 and see who was responsible for the "hell" he went through....? God kept a strict eye on what satan was allowed to do and never allowed Job to go beyond what he could bear. (1 Corinthians 10:13) Job was a representative for all of us....the devil tested Job's faith to the limit, just like he is testing ours.....what answer will we give him? (Proverbs 27:11) Do we serve God only for the benefits? Or will we prove that we love our God when put under test and show that we will die for him if necessary? (Luke 22:31)

Perhaps I have it wrong, and instead of omniscient and benevolent, He is omniscient and omnipotent.
Arguments can be made against the benevolence of our God, this is true, though hard to accept. Our God is a war God, one who demanded merciless genocide. “Make sure you murder all the pregnant woman too while you’re slaughtering the men and children! If you don’t, you will be punished forever!” (The case of Saul)

You always have to take these accounts in context. In many cases the Israelites were fighting those who came into battle in the name of their gods......Israel came into battle with those who wanted their territory and the only way to get the message across that their God was fighting with them was with a resounding victory....and doing to those nations exactly what they would have done to his people. It was a very barbaric time. But that would not last. By the time Jesus came, the Jews had lost their land and were dispersed all over the place. They no longer had a military force and Jesus never advocated bloodshed or political meddling. He remained politically neutral and kept his disciples preaching about the only hope for peace on earth....God's Kingdom.

David did good in God’s eyes, he mercilessly slaughtered his enemies, leaving no survivors.
I believe in the benevolence of my God, not His omnipotence.

Again, in context, those enemies were routed with complete annihilation.
I do not understand your last statement there....God's benevolence is seen in creation and also in how he blessed and protected his people when they obeyed him....but he left them to their enemies when they were disobedient and they began worshipping false gods. He withheld his blessing and protection as a punishment....even allowing those enemies to take them from their land and into exile.

His omnipotence was seen on those occasions when he rescued the Israelites from Egypt...the ten plagues...the parting of the Red Sea.....the pillar of fire and the pillar of cloud that guided them in their journey through the wilderness, supplying food and water to millions in an inhospitable place for 40 years. Their clothing and sandals did not wear out.....even though he was punishing them for their complaining and disobedience, he still cared for their basic needs.

God's omniscience is seen in how far sighted he was in his wisdom in dealing with rebellion, not only among his human children, but also among the many angels who joined satan in rebellion....how he dealt with that situation would have everlasting benefits to all of his children, both in heaven and on earth.

That is the way I see it.....

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Not me, i have been atheist for close on 40 years. And have been a member here since 2017... Maybe another forum.

You are so right ChristineM, it was not you but @ChristineES in 2010. Apologies to you for mixup.

And according to beliers in an omni everything god, he/she/it created humans in he/she/it's image.

Quite. But I don’t think that you and I would agree on what that means and on what that entails in long run.

I believe that any engineer who creates a product should be responsible for the inherent faults in that product.

Yet, in your opinion as atheist, surely no engineer “created” our being?

In your opinion as atheist, must not any potential solution to the problem illustrated in the image you posted lay with man…?

If so, at least on that, you and I agree.


Humbly
Hermit

Ps. Sorry this reply ended up in different thread. The “My Lord is God” one was either moved to where I don’t have access, or I was blocked by author.

 

[ChristineM]

You are so right ChristineM, it was not you but @ChristineES in 2010. Apologies to you for mixup.




Quite. But I don’t think that you and I would agree on what that means and on what that entails in long run.




Yet, in your opinion as atheist, surely no engineer “created” our being?

In your opinion as atheist, must not any potential solution to the problem illustrated in the image you posted lay with man…?

If so, at least on that, you and I agree.


Humbly
Hermit

Ps. Sorry this reply ended up in different thread. The “My Lord is God” one was either moved to where I don’t have access, or I was blocked by author.

I think the “My Lord is God” thread has been deleted for some reason. I was in mid comment when it went.

For me, yes poverty, starvation etc is the fault of mankind. However more than half the worlds population believe in the Abrahamic god. That said god created all, yet are unwitting to attribute any fault in the creation to him. They would rather make excuses, apologetics etc so their god can do no wrong in their eyes

 

[PureX]

I think the “My Lord is God” thread has been deleted for some reason. I was in mid comment when it went.

For me, yes poverty, starvation etc is the fault of mankind. However more than half the worlds population believe in the Abrahamic god. That said god created all, yet are unwitting to attribute any fault in the creation to him. They would rather make excuses, apologetics etc so their god can do no wrong in their eyes

I'm not sure by what reasoning you find this objectionable.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

I think the “My Lord is God” thread has been deleted for some reason. I was in mid comment when it went.

For me, yes poverty, starvation etc is the fault of mankind. However more than half the worlds population believe in the Abrahamic god. That said god created all, yet are unwitting to attribute any fault in the creation to him. They would rather make excuses, apologetics etc so their god can do no wrong in their eyes

I see. Does them doing so affect you much, do you feel? I’d like to think that we can all coexist without getting in each other’s ways too greatly. Atheists and people of faith working together against the horrors in the image you posted. I believe it is not impossible.


Humbly
Hermit

 

[ChristineM]

I'm not sure by what reasoning you find this objectionable.

I am sure you don't. And that is one reason

 

[ChristineM]

I see. Does them doing so affect you much, do you feel? I’d like to think that we can all coexist without getting in each other’s ways too greatly. Atheists and people of faith working together against the horrors in the image you posted. I believe it is not impossible.


Humbly
Hermit

Does deliberate ignorance affect me? What it can lead to does and has affected me

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Does deliberate ignorance affect me? What it can lead to does and has affected me

Oh dear. And you spoke somewhere else of being tired of the animosity shown (on a religious forum) towards atheists…?

I respect your choice for atheism and I do not demand that you try to see anything from the point of view I have chosen to live by, but please refrain from calling it deliberate ignorance if at all possible.

It creates a much unnecessary and counterproductive divide between people of sometimes otherwise similar goals (regarding for instance the work against human starvation that you seemed to find so acute about an hour ago; or were you merely using the image of starvation to attack your imagined enemy in people of faith?).


Humbly
Hermit

 

[ChristineM]

Oh dear. And you spoke somewhere else of being tired of the animosity shown (on a religious forum) towards atheists…?

Yes it has taken many years of such animosity for me to realise how widespread it is. I do not say all (or even most) god believers are deliberately ignorant. But there are some and one bad apple...

I respect your choice for atheism and I do not demand that you try to see anything from the point of view I have chosen to live by, but please refrain from calling it deliberate ignorance if at all possible.

See previous point... You asked a question, i replied baaed on experience.

It creates a much unnecessary and counterproductive divide between people of sometimes otherwise similar goals (regarding for instance the work against human starvation that you seemed to find so acute about an hour ago; or were you merely using the image of starvation to attack your imagined enemy in people of faith?).

What do you think.