God's folded arms

Blindwatchmaker

Active Member
Feb 28, 2021
106
27
52
Surrey
✟9,892.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Private
Why do you go big, when small is logically just as relevant? And what does a baby killed in the flood have to complain about that a baby drowned in a backyard pool does not? If God is unjust or cruel to cause catastrophe, he is unjust and cruel to cause ANY suffering.

Our right to dignity of existence does not even show up on the scale of justice.

I agree. If God exists and is omnipotent he is likely to be evil as the suffering in the world must be a matter of his choosing.
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
God could have chosen to forgive manking without murdering himself/his son. (He's the boss right?..)
This is a false notion. Sin is the ONLY thing that truly hurts God (bruised his heel). Sin is a horror that God does not make us to understand, lest we be undone, I think. It is cosmic treason. I think of it as something that would tear reality, if God wasn't above even that.

God is altogether, thoroughly, precisely, just, and will set everything back right, but for now, this is the state he is willing to go through for the sake of those for whom he chose to have mercy. He doesn't decide this is and that isn't sin, capriciously; sin is what it is because it opposes God. It pretends the maker of life is irrelevant, or a liar, and that must be dealt with by death.
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
I agree. If God exists and is omnipotent he is likely to be evil as the suffering in the world must be a matter of his choosing.
You assume a kind of (I don't mean 'degree of') substance and dignity to humanity and probably all the rest of the universe, as beings and reality in and of themselves, complete, independent of God. If God is First Cause, then nothing exists independent of his assessment and use of it. Nor are humans complete until they are what God made them for.

He is not one of us, not like us. WAY above us. We have no rights, as relates to God. Our existence, our lives, our happiness and suffering, is entirely in his hands, for his purposes. You don't like it because it isn't fun for you. You assume cruelty, when you only have pain. You are not SOMEBODY to whom God owes anything.
 
Upvote 0

Blindwatchmaker

Active Member
Feb 28, 2021
106
27
52
Surrey
✟9,892.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Private
This is a false notion. Sin is the ONLY thing that truly hurts God (bruised his heel). Sin is a horror that God does not make us to understand, lest we be undone, I think. It is cosmic treason. I think of it as something that would tear reality, if God wasn't above even that.

God is altogether, thoroughly, precisely, just, and will set everything back right, but for now, this is the state he is willing to go through for the sake of those for whom he chose to have mercy. He doesn't decide this is and that isn't sin, capriciously; sin is what it is because it opposes God. It pretends the maker of life is irrelevant, or a liar, and that must be dealt with by death.

Clearly, lots of people find this line of reasoning compelling.
But this really limits God in quite a significant way.
God could have made a universe in which all living creatures had free will but were not inclined to sin.
(This is how many people imagine we will be in Heaven so such a state must be possible).
But he chose to make humans flawed and imperfect and liable to transgress his laws.
This is all very anthropomorphic again. Poor old Gold being upset at the actions of humans.

But being all-knowing he would have known that humans would have the nature HE gave them.
That's the problem with being all-powerful. The buck stops with you.

If I was a god and felt like creating a universe and populating it with people, I would make them in a way I knew would please me, or not make them at all if I didn't think I could manage that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taodeching
Upvote 0

Blindwatchmaker

Active Member
Feb 28, 2021
106
27
52
Surrey
✟9,892.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Private
You assume a kind of (I don't mean 'degree of') substance and dignity to humanity and probably all the rest of the universe, as beings and reality in and of themselves, complete, independent of God. If God is First Cause, then nothing exists independent of his assessment and use of it. Nor are humans complete until they are what God made them for.

He is not one of us, not like us. WAY above us. We have no rights, as relates to God. Our existence, our lives, our happiness and suffering, is entirely in his hands, for his purposes. You don't like it because it isn't fun for you. You assume cruelty, when you only have pain. You are not SOMEBODY to whom God owes anything.

To me, this sounds like serfdom, mental slavery and the abdication of moral reason.
I created my child (or at least had a hand in his creation and his existence is contingent on my choices).
That doesn't mean that he has to be in servitude to me and that whatever I say goes. He is entitled to judge me as he sees fit.
Personally, I haven't yet seen any evidence sufficient to convince me that any gods exist.
But if one does, then their choice to create the universe would not automatically mean that we cannot judge them for their actions.
 
Upvote 0

Taodeching

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2020
1,540
1,110
51
Southwest
✟60,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
He is not one of us, not like us. WAY above us. We have no rights, as relates to God. Our existence, our lives, our happiness and suffering, is entirely in his hands, for his purposes. You don't like it because it isn't fun for you. You assume cruelty, when you only have pain. You are not SOMEBODY to whom God owes anything.

Reminds me of how ancient pagans thought of their gods.
 
Upvote 0

Blindwatchmaker

Active Member
Feb 28, 2021
106
27
52
Surrey
✟9,892.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Private
If I was a God, and chose to create thinking creatures, I would want my creations to think independently and have opinions about what I got right and what I could do better. I would NOT want fawning platitudes and unconditional adoration all the time.

The God concept some are describing here sounds a little insecure. Rules against criticism etc
A strong leader can take that kind of stuff and in fact encourages it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taodeching
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
To me, this sounds like serfdom, mental slavery and the abdication of moral reason.
So you make yourself equal with God. To your mind, the creator of absolutely all that is, the creator of very fact, is only worthy of credit, glory and praise if we are willing to give it to him, and not otherwise. You assume yourself a complete being in and of your self that God must reckon with, to be just.

Are you not making a god after your own image, your own concept of him? God is not like us. If he made us, he did so for his own purposes, and so this life is not for us, but for him. We are not talking about another human being.

"Moral Reason" sounds noble, but what does it mean? Apart from God there is no objective morality from which, or by which, to reason. Apart from God, 'moral reason' is equivocation, self-service definitions and uses of words, and relativism.
But if one does, then their choice to create the universe would not automatically mean that we cannot judge them for their actions.

To put it as simply as possible, we have nowhere enough information with which to judge him, specially as relates to authority of God over creation, nor do we have the station with which to judge him, nor of course the intelligence. All we know is our experience. We have to drag him down to our level, in our minds, in order to assign culpability.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟378,031.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Do you really think that?
God has parted oceans. You're saying he can't tweak a few things to stop an attacker committing a crime?
An attacker like this - a sicko who rapes and kills 5 year olds - is going to try again with the same target, or acquire a new target at a later time unless he is stopped decisively. You haven't been giving me decisive examples that unambiguously don't interfere with free will.

If he was hidebound to driving somewhere to get to his target (how would he even acquire that target if he has to drive to find her?) some of these might stop him that day, but he'd have to be pretty dumb to let the cops have any information that could lead to his detainment. Furthermore, many of these perps don't even have to drive in order to get to their targets.
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
God could have made a universe in which all living creatures had free will but were not inclined to sin.

Why would he do that? Also, what is your definition for free will, in that case?

(This is how many people imagine we will be in Heaven so such a state must be possible).

A thing must be possible because many people imagine it to be so? Huh?

But he chose to make humans flawed and imperfect and liable to transgress his laws.
This is all very anthropomorphic again. Poor old Gold being upset at the actions of humans.

I could add to your ridicule. As a little, so a lot. If that is ridiculous to you, consider that he planned for it to be that way. To your anthropomorphic thinking, that would be madness, but God is not us. He is not even like us. His 'decree' (plan) and his command are two completely different things. He has this temporal life set up like this for a reason, and it is not what you seem to imagine --that he wants as many as possible to be in Heaven with him, (or other notions of the sort).

But being all-knowing he would have known that humans would have the nature HE gave them.
That's the problem with being all-powerful. The buck stops with you.

The buck stops with God --True that. How is that a problem? He did not only know it. He caused it ON PURPOSE. No doubt that brings you joy to know you have more fodder for the ridicule mill, lol, but it should make you realize there is more going on here than you supposed.

If I was a god and felt like creating a universe and populating it with people, I would make them in a way I knew would please me, or not make them at all if I didn't think I could manage that.

And you don't see yourself as an Anthropomorphist? You judge God according to man, not according to Omnipotence. "If I...." indeed!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Reminds me of how ancient pagans thought of their gods.
There is something true to the philosophy --though apparently most of them though of extreme power, not Omnipotence. First Cause is not the description of very many gods.
An attacker like this - a sicko who rapes and kills 5 year olds - is going to try again with the same target, or acquire a new target at a later time unless he is stopped decisively. You haven't been giving me decisive examples that unambiguously don't interfere with free will.

If he was hidebound to driving somewhere to get to his target (how would he even acquire that target if he has to drive to find her?) some of these might stop him that day, but he'd have to be pretty dumb to let the cops have any information that could lead to his detainment. Furthermore, many of these perps don't even have to drive in order to get to their targets.
Ok, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, does it interfere with free will to suddenly have a stroke or heart attack and die? That would stop him.
 
Upvote 0

Taodeching

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2020
1,540
1,110
51
Southwest
✟60,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
There is something true to the philosophy --though apparently most of them though of extreme power, not Omnipotence. First Cause is not the description of very many gods.

But is there first cause or is that just human opinion
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
But is there first cause or is that just human opinion
I'm personally not willing to consider any other God. If you wish a proof of first Cause, I insist science is inconsistent to reject it. MOST of the reasoning science uses is extrapolation of cause and effect. For conclusions to the logical beginning of causation are said to be (right off the top I say two of these are illogical, but...) "Infinite Regress" of causes, "Chance", and "Intent" (on purpose)".
 
Upvote 0

Taodeching

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2020
1,540
1,110
51
Southwest
✟60,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm personally not willing to consider any other God. If you wish a proof of first Cause, I insist science is inconsistent to reject it. MOST of the reasoning science uses is extrapolation of cause and effect. For conclusions to the logical beginning of causation are said to be (right off the top I say two of these are illogical, but...) "Infinite Regress" of causes, "Chance", and "Intent" (on purpose)".

I see your reformed, I understand better now. Still you have no satisfactory answer except to suppose that God is some kind of angry pagan deity that creates and destroys at whims merrily letting evils happen because humankind is just not worthy.

Really I wish Christians could just be honest and admit that they have no answers many times instead of this.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟378,031.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Ok, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, does it interfere with free will to suddenly have a stroke or heart attack and die? That would stop him.
You thought of a good example. OP did not. But let's go with this one for a bit:

If God decided he was going to divinely assassinate all would-be perps who target five year olds for rape and murder, I would have no problem with that - but where should he draw the line at whom not to kill? Should he kill all rapist-killers of those who target girls of a certain age or lower? Or those of any age? Rapist-killers only, or all killers of girls, or both rapists and killers of girls, regardless of whether they do both? And what about boys, should their predators also be killed? What is the standard for whether or not God should let someone live? Why is that the standard? By whose authority is it the standard?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Blindwatchmaker

Active Member
Feb 28, 2021
106
27
52
Surrey
✟9,892.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Private
You thought of a good example. OP did not. But let's go with this one for a bit:

If God decided he was going to divinely assassinate all would-be perps who target five year olds for rape and murder, I would have no problem with that - but where should he draw the line at whom not to kill? Should he kill all rapist-killers of those who target girls of a certain age or lower? Or those of any age? Rapist-killers only, or all killers of girls, or both rapists and killers of girls, regardless of whether they do both? And what about boys, should their predators also be killed? What is the standard for whether or not God should let someone live? Why is that the standard? By whose authority is it the standard?

With respect, this is extremely silly.
Your god is supposed to have infinite powers (within what is logically possible).
I am asked to believe in one breath that he knows the number of hairs on every persons head, and in the next that he is incapable of manipulating the physical world in order to prevent people inflicting huge suffering on others and in the next that he can organise a parking space right outside the food store if you just pray hard enough.

Can you see why this concept of an omniscient omnipotent being is not coherent?
It's like his properties and limitations bend and flex to suit whatever narrative is being justified.

If God is all-powerful it would be trivially easy for him to prevent suffering.
You could even remove the free will element entirely from the conversation by limiting it to childhood leukaemia or trees falling on animals in the forest leaving them to die slow painful deaths.
God we are told, can cure the sick, part oceans and raise the dead, but when the conversation turns to awkward topics, suddenly he has all these limitations and reasons why he can't help.

I don't think it's consistent at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Taodeching
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So it follows that God must WANT the rape and murder of the five-year-old to take place as he is capable of stopping it but chooses not to.
How do you square that with the claim of God as benevolent?

I don't square it with that claim, and for personal reasons, I never have. But I have learned some things about how to apply it to arguments supporting the 'goodness of humanity.'
 
Upvote 0

Blindwatchmaker

Active Member
Feb 28, 2021
106
27
52
Surrey
✟9,892.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Private
I don't square it with that claim, and for personal reasons, I never have. But I have learned some things about how to apply it to the argument of the 'goodness of humanity.'
That sounds interesting, thanks.
So you agree that an all-powerful god who allows so much suffering cannot be 'good'?
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That sounds interesting, thanks.
So you agree that an all-powerful god who allows so much suffering cannot be 'good'?

I wouldn't say that I agree. I know that by today's [various] ethical and moral frameworks, God isn't evaluated as "being good." Fortunately, I also have empirical evidence that human beings have some nasty, evil penchants, with or without there being a God in the picture. And some of these same human beings will be the some of the ones who tell me that God isn't good.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Taodeching
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,005
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,935.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
But is there first cause or is that just human opinion
Are you asking from a Christian view point? --God is First Cause, or he is not Omnipotent.

Are you asking from a human view point? Atheistic? Logically, no other explanation works to solve the chain of causality.
 
Upvote 0