Preserved Topic: problem with god (Page 1 of 4)

walking home today, i thought up an interesting paradox... assuming, as i think the Bible suggests:

• god exists
• god is all knowing
• god is all powerful

BUT if god knows everything, therefore the future as well, then he knows how he will act in the future, his actions are predetermined, therefore in my opinion he is not all powerful... anyone have any thoughts on this?

Yes, I think that you are basing your conclusions on some presupposed ideas. First, you are assuming that God operates within the same structure and confines of Time that we do to be subjected to any foreknowledge of future events. If I was writing a book about a group of people, I would be effectively outside of their framework of time and also (in this humble context) all powerful. Second, you are assuming that the definition of an all powerful God is something that we are able to quantify. I think the very nature of the term all powerful implies that God has an ability to do things beyond our own scope of understanding.

Granted, I don't think I understand much at all about God on those levels. I am just trying to understand how God interacts with people first.

Just my thoughts.

my assumptions were based on the god of the bible, which is a fairly human one i would say. still your comments were very interesting. have you (or anyone else?) read "sophie's world" by jostein gardner, that sounds exactly like what you suggest, the book concept. i'm not very good at literature, so never thought to extend it as far as a metaphor for god...

RTFM!

krets: There's a manual??

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

rtfb

b = bible

InSiDeR: Come on - you know there is only one source for all the answers to your such universal questions on life, the universe, etc.:

:FAQ:

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

every beginning is some other beginnings end

of course, by definition, God has no beginning or end

God, i love paradox

god is a concept.

therefore there is no paradox.

concepts can be altered to fit the current need.

If that were not the case, there would be no god.

Because people cannot accept - en masse - an unalterable entity.

I have problems with God too. That cheap bastard owes me money.

WHOA!!!
Satan has posted...
now all we need is a post from God himself...

*runs in circles pretending to dance*

outcydr: Satan isn't a moderator of this forum - the Devil is:

:FAQ:

Its a subtle but important difference

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

oh

darn it

edit/ *dances anyway*



[This message has been edited by outcydr (edited 03-02-2003).]

Are people still looking how to get to heaven?

I think I said all they need to know

clicky

Get to heaven? Why on Earth would I want that? I'm still having fun, exploring all those paths up the mountain!

The moonlight could be stronger, though...pretty dark, on some of those paths...hehe.


WebShaman

Though there are many paths
At the foot of the mountain
All those who reach the top
See the same moon.

My opinion is that God created time, and is therefore not bound the limitations that consist of Time.

I heard it described this way once: Got operates on an eternal basis, which means that there is no time. Therefore, he doesn't know what he is going to do. He has choices, just like us, it's just that God is perfect. God is all-powerfull and all knowing, so he knows everything that we will do because we are bound by time.

Therefor, since God does not operate within a world bound by time, there is no way to look ahead into the future.

I'm not sure if I'm correct, but maybe someone with more insight into this could tell better what I'm trying to say.

--

I'm confused now, who's Satan? (the poster )

^^??

Ahhh...ok...I'm confused...

WTH are you trying to say?

I think that I mean the in Gods world time doesn't exist, so theres no way to "look forward in time." But, in ours, there is, so God is able to look forward, or backwards, in time.

Hmmm...you are suggesting, that God is outside of Time, then? Well, Time is a tricky thing...it's all relative, after all.

However, if God is really outside of Time (the same would apply to any being), then it would know everything at once...there would be no linear progression, there would be no progression at all. Progression is a form of Time. So, why all this then? God would already know all the answers...and all this would not be necessary. Irregardless of what one may, or may not think is God's plan, it would already know (and have) it. That is a direct result of being outside of the timestream...one would exist simultaniously everywhere at once and everywhen at once. What then, would be left to do? Nothing...just be.

Because this does not directly relate to what is in the Bible (God does this, takes that back, destroys this, creates that...etc, etc), this does not represent a view of a being that is outside of the timestream, but rather of a being that is immortal (undying). Obviously, God doesn't know everything...otherwise, it wouldn't have needed to create anything. Unless it is, in reality, of a cruel nature, that is. Then maybe it just enjoys torment. Or worship. Strange, that God would get angry about the lack of recognition, or worship...or the admitance (or denial) of its existance. No all-powerful being outside the Timestream would be interested in such things - they are only human values...connected with living in a Time-stream. Were you (or I) to be dis-connected from the Timestream, and therefore Timeless, we would have no need of most of our 'humaness'...for we would be one with everything (everywhere and everywhen at once).

Just like a video game!....."Black and White"

I'm thinking that omnisciense shouldn't equate knowledge of all but knowledge of all possiblities. It removes the paradox and explains why we're here. I.E. Start this human race and see where it actually goes out of all of the possiblities available.

I wonder if God is a gambler. Maybe he's guessing where we're going to end up and playing the odds.

GrythusDraconis
I admire a man who can budget his life around his pint of Guinness and I envy a man who's wife will let him. ME, inspired by Suho1004 here.

i've seen this a lot, people explain god by saying he does not operate on the terms we perceive, time, space, energy, etc.. - that is to say he is outside them. even if this were true, i've never understood how god affects everything if he is outside it, like watching tv, save changing channels i can't realistically affect what is happening on tv at the moment - i can't make the people do things. and that is even if god does exist outside them, as this seems to be little more than an escape clause, IMHO. as science progresses further, and somewhat disproves more and more common religeous beliefs, this seems a convienient way of allowing a god, by making him outside of all these things. in the middle ages they used to believe heaven was between the earth and the moon or something similar, i can't quite remember what - but then gallileo came along, so that put an end to those ideas. the late douglas adams explained it better than i can:

quote:

---

A man didn't understand how televisions work, and was convinced that there must be lots of little men inside the box, manipulating images at high speed. An engineer explained about high-frequency modulations of the electromagnetic spectrum, transmitters and receivers, amplifiers and cathode ray tubes, scan lines moving across and down a phosphorescent screen. The man listened to the engineer with careful attention, nodding his head at every step of the argument. At the end he pronounced himself satisfied. He really did now understand how televisions work. "But I expect there are just a few little men in there, aren't there?"

---

Think of it in dimensions. Imagine people who live in a two dimensional world, such as on a piece of paper. Now, you have two stick people throwing a ball back and forth. For them, there are only the directions of up and down. If you were able to pull that ball off the page, then, for those 2D people, the ball would have disappeared, but to you nothing out of the ordinary would have happened because you live in 3 dimensions.

Now, imagine God exists in, say, 18 dimensions. Whatever He is able to do would be wholly unfathomable to us in our 3 dimensions even more than us interacting with a 2 dimensional world.

Oh, and everything I've said is completely untrue, but it's a good lie. It's good enough to give us the pretense of understanding something we cannot possibly fathom.

Here's a quick snippet from "The Thief of Time" by Terry Pratchett that illustrates another point as well. In the scene, Lobsang, the incarnation of Time, is talking to Susan, Death's granddaughter (it's a bit complicated ):

"I can see it all. I can see everything." - Lobsang
"So what's going to happen next?" - Susan
"You misunderstand the meaning of everything." - Lobsang

ahh in the words of George Carlin

"If god is all powerfull could he make a rock so big that he couldn't lift it?"

Same question no time paradox



.:[ Never resist a perfect moment ]:.

You see thats where limitations of space come into play. Theoreticly God could lift any rock. The problem would be that the rock got so big, it couldn't get any bigger, and therefore the problem was not with god, but with the universe. God could expand the universe, infinately, and same with the rock, and everytime he could lift it. like his power, the size he could lift is infite. the problem lies not with god, but with the space the rock occupies.

I'm going to the moon, I cant stand it here anymore.

^^^^^ Now that is funny...why make it bigger...just make it more massive. Eventually, one comes to the infinite point...infinite power, against infinite mass...which wins? The old question, and ustoppable force vs an immovable object. However, even with infinite mass, it would move...even if it was of such a short space, as to be unmeasurable.

I don't think God could make an object that it couldn't effect...by definition. If it could be created (by God), it could be affected (by God).

So it is not all-powerful...it cannot rise above itself.

Everytime I read these postulated "explanations" of god's omniiscience and omnipotence, I just have to think - wow, you guys have way too much time on your hands to be thinking of such bizzare explanations for things that you state outright we can't understand anyway.

Things are just way over-thought sometimes in an effort to justify "god".

careful there man, you've been advocating lack of thought a lot lately

Jason

i'm certainly with DL-44 on this one, looking at the dimensions analogy, sure we work in three dimensions, or four if you include time, but there are currently understood to be 10, and even these are things that science can comprehend, and i can comprehend just about as concepts at least. so even things that we can't actually perceive, like extra dimensions can be shown to exist.

Nope, not advocation *lack* of thought at all.

But there are times when it is very possible to very signifcantly *over* think a situation, making it far more complicated in your own mind than it is in reality, and missing the point entirely.

I'm all for keeping simple things simple. =)

Our minds have certain limitations. There are some things that we simply cannot comprehend and trying to fully comprehend something that can only be done in part can lead to great consternation. So just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? ~Bugs strolls down the halls pondering endlessly~

Pssst! There aren't any Angels...they are just figments of your imagination

The real question is, how many words can one carve on the head of a pin, without going blind.



[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 03-07-2003).]

No, see, the question is - how mnay pseudo-scientific theories can we create to explain why imaginary angels would dance on pin-heads!

DL-44, I have a question for you since I consider you a purist when it comes to your atheism. Have you met the types of "atheists" who have a passionate "belief" in the non-existence of God? Do you know the ones I'm referring to?

I totally understand that atheism should be a simple disbelief in a deity, but there are some who take farther than that. I've always considered those types to be the alter-ego, as it were, of the religious fanatic types.

Point in case would be Madeline Murray O'Hare who vehemently opposed religion and belief in God. She stated as a fact that there was no God. Joseph Michael Straczynski, the creator of Babylon 5, on the other hand used to be in her organization but left because of her fanaticism. Yet he remains an atheist much in the same vein as you, as far as I can tell.

Yes, I know the type all too well.

Very akin to satanists (without all the blood and stuff ) who rather than develop their own actual religion simply mirror and mock chritianity.

Atheism is not, and should not be, a belief system. It is simply a lack of beleiving in gods.

Now, I will go so far as to say that I personally hold it as "fact" that god does not exist. But of course, nothing is absolute and nothing is infallable, so I also reserve the possibility that I'm wrong (contradictory? no - as I said, nothing is absolute, especially fact).

I believe that the effort exerted in making the lack of belief into a belief system is futile and absurd.

Does this make me "non-spiritual"? Of course not. You can't equate religion to spirituality any more than you can equate atheism with religion.

=)

i have absolutely no problem with you or anyone believing in god, being a muslim, believing in the tooth fairy - whatever. i think people are perfectly entitled to their own beliefs, if they can reasonably justify them (which you, bugimus, quite clearly can). that is not to say i don't think things like this shouldn't be debated, quite the contrary. why, other than my being fairly liberal (PoliticalCompass)? the way i see it is that it's a case of probablity that is argued here, that is to say, i believe it more probable that god doesn't exist, and you the opposite. and essentially we're both taking our chances and trusting our judgement - that's why the debate is important.

Amen, DL. Well said...

Yes, it was very well said. Thanks for the honesty and clarity

Ive read where God is an instant. Always in the present and he emptied himself, not diminishing his greatness in anyway and formed all things. Created time for himself to come as a God- man for mankind and in his being outside the realm & limits of time. The beginning & end of all things already determined by him. So it means we have already been judged, we are just living it through. Right? Since we are made in his spiritual image, meaning God lives in each of us as our soul constantly beckons to him. Do we have eternity in us? Is that why when most people are dying they want to go home because that is where they come from? God. Someone elaborate on this for me.