How can God regret if he knows the future?

[ximmix]

I won't say God is responsible for not stopping the rape, as the rapist is personally responsible.

It is the same as saying, yes I know there is a rape going on, and I can stop it, but at the other place someone is drowning and I have to save that one first, so I am not responsible for not stopping the rape.

Really? God can't save them both? So much for omnipotence then...

 

[ximmix]

I can't and in fact I might well be wrong, and that God is indeed all powerful, so in that case @2PhiloVoid will be correct. The issue is we are way to simple to understand God, so other than the attributes of God from Bible, the rest we are left to guess. The bottom line is the evidences definitely suggest a God of order, and from the Bible a God that does not like evil. Different people can come to different conclusions, but for me it is evident that when we claim humans are good and there is no God, we usually get into a worse position.

You say God doesn't like evil, but in the old Testament He commands a lot of things that seem very evil to me. Christians seem to rationalize that fact with the belief that anything God does is good by definition....

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Do I understand you correctly, do you mean that it's ok that God doesn't stop the suffering from happening in the first place, because he will make it up to the victim somehow at a later date? And I guess that only applies to Christian victims. To me, it seems like a lot of extra-biblical reasoning to explain God's inaction, and it makes God seem a bit cruel in my eyes...

Yes, that IS what I mean, Ximmix ... with the caveat that the term 'ok' needs to be further vetted out semantically in its conceptual relation to biblical morality, because what I mean by 'ok' is, I'm sure, not quite what you mean by 'ok.'

Oh, the seeming "contradictions" of biblical thought!

 

[ximmix]

Yes, that IS what I mean, Ximmix ... with the caveat that the term 'ok' needs to be further vetted out semantically in its conceptual relation to biblical morality, because what I mean by 'ok' is, I'm sure, not quite what you mean by 'ok.'

Oh, the seeming "contradictions" of biblical thought!

OK, I would be interested in hearing how you think that is ok and moral. But I notice you use the words biblical morality, does that differ from the morality of us living today?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

OK, I would be interested in hearing how you think that is ok and moral. But I notice you use the words biblical morality, does that differ from the morality of us living today?

It's permissible morally because, unlike any of us, God can undo the emotional and physical damage done to us in this world. We all tend to complain about God's allowance of any kind of suffering because ... we can't undo much of any of it in this life, and it hurts and is frustrating to us. That's supporting point #1.

Supporting point #2 >>> Everything implied in this other thread I made over on the Ethics and Morality section of Christian Forums (see link below)...

Cracking our humanitarian teeth on Godless Human Rights ...

 

[dcalling]

Really? God can't save them both? So much for omnipotence then...

See my response to @Tinker Grey :
It is my believe that God is not omnipotent. I believe God is omnipotent on all things physical, but once soul is created which is capable of its own awareness, omnipotent became impossible (just my thought, so 2PhiloVoid could be right and I could be wrong).

 

[dcalling]

You say God doesn't like evil, but in the old Testament He commands a lot of things that seem very evil to me. Christians seem to rationalize that fact with the belief that anything God does is good by definition....

Something that seems "evil" in our eyes might be what is needed to correct a wrong. i.e. if a child did something wrong, the parent better correct it. Do you believe the act to stop ww II germany or imperial japanese army evil?

God in OT give 400 years for the Canaanites to repent, God even send Yohna to Isreal's enemies to tell them to stop their evil, and God told us clearly if we don't stop our evil acts, He will judge us.

 

[ximmix]

It's permissible morally because, unlike any of us, God can undo the emotional and physical damage done to us in this world. We all tend to complain about God's allowance of any kind of suffering because ... we can't undo much of any of it in this life, and it hurts and is frustrating to us. That's supporting point #1.

Supporting point #2 >>> Everything implied in this other thread I made over on the Ethics and Morality section of Christian Forums (see link below)...

Cracking our humanitarian teeth on Godless Human Rights ...

"God can undo the emotional and physical damage done to us in this world". How? Does he just wipe the memories of the victims so they don't remember it? I don't see any other way to compensate for their time in agony. And if he does that, isn't that God regretting things? If he has to undo something, that means that thing shouldn't have happened in the first place.

But I understand that a lot of Christans love the idea of suffering, so maybe that explains your eagerness to defend it. Btw, is there anything in the Bible supporting this?

 

[ximmix]

See my response to @Tinker Grey :
It is my believe that God is not omnipotent. I believe God is omnipotent on all things physical, but once soul is created which is capable of its own awareness, omnipotent became impossible (just my thought, so 2PhiloVoid could be right and I could be wrong).

That means God is not omnipotent.

 

[RDKirk]

Further, can an omniscient god even think? Surely, a mind that knows everything has nothing to do.

That's an interesting question that I've spent time pondering in the past. Men seem to think sequentially and compartmentally.

It appears that God's "thinking" is, if there is any human analogy that can be applied, like a woman appears to think: Everything all at once.

 

[dcalling]

That means God is not omnipotent.

Yes, if you read my post that is exactly what I meant. But I have made it clear that I could be wrong and 2PhiloVoid could be right.

EDIT: It could also be that God can be omnipotent but choose not to inorder to make us not machines, but humans with soul. i.e. it is a sacrifice, in order to have real life, there must be evil.

My original quote:

"It is my believe that God is not omnipotent. I believe God is omnipotent on all things physical, but once soul is created which is capable of its own awareness, omnipotent became impossible (just my thought, so 2PhiloVoid could be right and I could be wrong)."

 

[ximmix]

Something that seems "evil" in our eyes might be what is needed to correct a wrong. i.e. if a child did something wrong, the parent better correct it.

Well I wouldn't slaughter the child. God did seem to do a lot of slaughtering to correct these perceived wrongs...

 

[ximmix]

Yes, if you read my post that is exactly what I meant. But I have made it clear that I could be wrong and 2PhiloVoid could be right.

EDIT: It could also be that God can be omnipotent but choose not to inorder to make us not machines, but humans with soul. i.e. it is a sacrifice, in order to have real life, there must be evil.

My original quote:

To me that doesnt make sense at all. That an omnipotent being should be restricted in that way, only omnipotent "in all things physical". And the idea that he chooses not to use his omnipotence is just silly in my mind, as is the idea that God allows evil in order for us to have a real life...

Edited for spelling.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

"God can undo the emotional and physical damage done to us in this world". How? Does he just wipe the memories of the victims so they don't remember it? I don't see any other way to compensate for their time in agony. And if he does that, isn't that God regretting things? If he has to undo something, that means that thing shouldn't have happened in the first place.

Unfortunately, while that's a good question, it's not one that we have definite, comprehensive info about in the Bible on which we can draw upon and say, "Oh yeah, it'll definitely be this or that new psychological situation!"

However, look at how Jesus is depicted in His Resurrected state in the New Testament books. What do you see there? Are all traces of His own suffering just "wiped away" or...............is He somehow and paradoxically still bearing some memory of His own suffering yet, despite that, Transcendent to that very same suffering?

But I understand that a lot of Christans love the idea of suffering, so maybe that explains your eagerness to defend it. Btw, is there anything in the Bible supporting this?

Nope. Not for me. Absolutely No! I've hated the idea of suffering ever since I fell down the first time as a toddler and bonked my head and skinned my knee.

 

[ximmix]

However, look at how Jesus is depicted in His Resurrected state in the New Testament books. What do you see there? Are all traces of His own suffering just "wiped away" or...............is He somehow and paradoxically still bearing some memory of His own suffering yet, despite that, Transcendent to that same vary suffering?

I think the idea of Jesus dying on the cross is not what Christians think it is. In my view, if the story in the Bible is true, yes he did suffer and he did die. But then he was resurrected and is now God. Small price to pay...

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I think the idea of Jesus dying on the cross is not what Christians think it is. In my view, if the story in the Bible is true, yes he did suffer and he did die. But then he was resurrected and is now God. Small price to pay...

Perhaps. Perhaps not. That in and of itself will forever remain a kind of Rorschach that each one of us will have to intuit and interpret for ourselves as to what value we think the sufferings of Jesus in His mortal life are worth.

But then too, remember that in the N.T., those who are Christians are told that they will likewise be resurrected and "share in" the same nature of restoration, transcendence and providence of God in Christ. Perhaps this is why Paul says what he says in his Letter to the Romans, among other places?

 

[ximmix]

Perhaps. Perhaps not. That in and of itself will forever remain a kind of Rorschach that each one of us will have to intuit and interpret for ourselves as to what value we think the sufferings of Jesus in His mortal life are worth.

But then too, remember that in the N.T., those who are Christians are told that they will likewise be resurrected and "share in" the same nature of restoration, transcendence and providence of God in Christ. Perhaps this is why Paul says what he says in his Letter to the Romans, among other places?

I know that there are so many people through out history that have suffered more than Jesus did, and a lot of it was caused by religious people. I don't see how his suffering would be more worth than any "witch" burned alive at the stakes, especially since Jesus came out of this ordeal pretty well in the end...

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I know that there are so many people through out history that have suffered more than Jesus did, and a lot of it was caused by religious people. I don't see how his suffering would be more worth than any "witch" burned alive at the stakes, especially since Jesus came out of this ordeal pretty well in the end...

So, because you think that Jesus' sin isn't worth more than any witch burn alive, then God is totally responsible for human suffering ...

Really? Is this value comparison you're making between the death of Jesus and that of a witch actually a part of your own personal evaluation about God's culpability? How? I'm not seeing any direct implications here.

 

[ximmix]

So, because you think that Jesus' sin isn't worth more than any witch burn alive, then God is totally responsible for human suffering ...

Really? Is this value comparison you're making between the death of Jesus and that of a witch actually a part of your own personal evaluation about God's culpability? How? I'm not seeing any direct implications here.

Ok, maybe I was a bit unclear. My point was the the physical suffering of Jesus was nothing exceptional, a lot of people have suffered worse. And still the passion of Christ is hailed is something unique. And I used the witch example just because they suffered horrible deaths being totally innocent, comparable to the suffering of Jesus. I'm sure you agree there are no real witches. And they didn't wake up three days later as goddesses...

 

[Kaon]

It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the Lord all night.
1 Samuel 15:11

The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled.
Genesis 6:6

He can't.