ramifications of omnipotence for God

it may be possible that it is now that we are without free will. in their words "slave to sin." another possibility is that there is some great understanding that we lack which makes doing "right" more efficient or desirable. this knowledge may have been left out of the mythical tree. however, once we learn this piece of information, doing right and obeying god will become so compelling that we don't need to lose our free will to desire and accomplish it.

why does allowing bad things to happen make god malevolent?i think that's a very simplistic assumption. is god malevolent for letting us die? is god malevolent because he allows nature it's course? is god malevolent because he allows men in their capacities to do awful things?i think that's the summation of the bad things in the world. i think you want a sandbox god who absolutely micromanages everything. what's the point of making a functioning universe if you move all the pieces yourself? might as well have a claymation universe.

i think that's patently ridiculous as evidenced by the fact that they refuse to accept evolution in any sense.

i think it would be obvious that i was referring to fundies. being an evolutionary christian.

*sigh*i'm a christian. i accept evolution. and i don't think that the common christian belief supports an omnipotent god. of course my own opinion on whether a god must be omnipotent or no... the jury is out.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

omnipotence doesn't require that one not be bounded by logic.

what i was suggesting is that god is bound by logic and this is simply a boundary of existence, and not something which reduces omnipotence. it's like the old "can god make a rock so big he can't lift it" argument. god chose to make a universe that runs itself. we are responsible for the bad things we do, not him.

i really don't think that being bound by logic (which is simple sanity and existence) is a weakening limitation. it's just stupid. i think there must be more options than that. thank simple malevolence and benevolence. so the world isn't cupcakes and butterflies. malevolence really is a state of evil by commission not omission. failing to prevent evil does carry some responsibility for the evil, but god never really claims to not carry responsibility. rather, the idea is that nature rules itself and man is most responsible for his actions. so? who gives a shit if god is omnipotent? but i really don't think that your ideas of what omnipotence must mean are real or relevant. why ask god for help? because he's more powerful than we are. why go to a doctor if he isn't omnipotent? because he knows more about medicine than your drunk aunt.i've never really understood why people get so caught up on this omnipotence thing. jesus, even the bible can't agree if god is omnipotent or not. so what the hell does it matter?

considering that i have no idea what i think about god, you may be surprised by what i have considered. you keep repeating yourself. i think you're full of crap. i'm not avoiding answering them, i'm saying they aren't relevant questions. whose claim?and failing to be proactively perfect does not mean being nasty. no. it would seem that the reason god gives for the people of israel to worship him is that he brought them out of the land of egypt. he doesn't say "i'm omnipotent and perfect and i make bubbles burst into cherry-flavored farts," he says "i'm the lord your god who brought you out of the land of egypt." it's a reciprocation for services rendered.christians worship god because he (at least theoretically) released them from their guilt, not because he's lollipops and sunshine.and me? i haven't figured any of it out.

no, but it's not my claim, yet you're holding me to it. no. but there is a difference in the level of responsibility for someone who actively harms and someone who simply doesn't block someone else's harm. there is a responsibility, but it's not the same. indifference is not malevolence. that's the reason given. if it's not sufficient for you, then that's your call. then i'd imagine those people don't need god. some people do. some people just like god. different strokes.

i thought the fundamental premise was that god is omnipotent. the premise we are discussing here is that god is "good". bullshit. some people with adhd don't need medication. does this mean that no one with adhd needs medication because having adhd isn't a reason to be medicated just because some people don't need it?

of all the people to say the universe is black and white...just because you're convinced that this is a ramification of omnipotence doesn't mean it is. it isn't sufficient for you. that doesn't matter to anyone else. sufficiency is subjective. therefore, because it's not sufficient in one instance doesn't mean it can't be sufficient in others. and also, some people do worship their ancestors. our morality seems to be hardwired. our essence is biochemistry. sure. i see no problem.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.