ramifications of omnipotence for God

So He's innocent until proven guilty - but He's skipped bail and failed to show up in court.If He's omnipotent, He could give us the chance to meet Him. The fact that He doesn't is hardly our fault. It's His responsibility to give us any information that would exonerate Him. By not doing that, He just makes Himself look more guilty.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

quote:

---

If the claim is that god can't make a universe without evil that also manages itself and yet still allows for free will, then that means that god is not omnipotent.

---

Omnipotent, omniscient... none of these descriptive terms are found in the Bible. We should remain mindful that these are human definitions.Taking into account God’s position as an absolute source of power on all things, earthly life is his to give and his to take away. Indeed, we lack the perspective legitimately and knowledgeably to question His use of force. We would first need to conform our thinking to God’s thinking and not of our own, if such a thing would be possible.

quote:

---

After all, if god is not bound by logic, then one cannot claim that there is a logical barrier to having a universe without evil and yet still has free will.

---

Whether we are dealing on a mathematical, emotional or a rational level, absolute freedom requires a given set of conditions in order to exist. Absolute freedom not only implies movement in any direction but that the movement itself remains in an independent state of free will at all times. The arrangement rests on a system of dependencies which God himself chose to uphold. Any provisions made to limit the movement of the said body negates the condition of absolute freedom.Assuming that God did create a world without the possibilities of evil or sin, through our own consciousness we could not experience absolute freedom. It is also critical to understand that Eve as it were, was not defective or incapable of resisting temptation. After all, it was not the fruit that led her to betray God.

quote:

---

So can god do it or not?

---

I would say yes! God has already demonstrated that creatures and other forms of matter *can exist outside the implications of sin(see animals).

quote:

---

if he can but chose not to, how is that not malevolence?

---

Assuming for a moment that God did create evil and made provisions so that his creations were to fall into sin, then that would qualify him as an evil God, by our own standards. However, we have no reason to conclude that any of these conditions apply, therefore, the concept remains baseless.

quote:

---

To be able to stop evil and yet choose not to do so is evil.

---

It would seem as though God has already dealt with evil and quite possibly ensured that mankind for all of eternity will remain mindful of the event.

quote:

---

I've asked you straight out... I expected a direct answer: Is god willing or unwilling? Capable or incapable?

---

Assuming you are asking whether he is willing or not to adjust the system to avoid evil remains out of our grasp. Capable?... without a doubt! However, if we were to embark in a world where we could not sin, I for one would feel ripped off. Taking it a step further, if we remained in a world where we were unconscious of sin, then we could never claim or experience absolute freedom. I suppose one could reason that such a condition would only lack for those having experienced indifference. However, the thought of masking reality as it where seems somehow fraudulent. If one had to choose between, preprogrammed creatures and living in the likeness of God, I could see the latter being the popular choice.So the question could be narrowed down to this. Can we conclude that absolute freedom could exist without the possibility of or more freedoms of direction? better yet, can God make it so? I would say YES! - However, this we are not operating in truth now are we? Even if God were to make provisions to assure that evil never occurred, then the reality of truth has been altererd and no longer absolute.

Hi pbee, I sure messed up on that one I guess, because I was trying to point out that the word translated as Adam and man and mankind were all the same. So you are saying I should accept what the The Leningrad Codex 'Biblia Hebraica Leningradensia' says as the truth and not the one containing the differences.Hendrickson Publishing Group | Books, Bible Reference, and Bibles Aron Dotan revised, reset, and redesigned the masoretic text into the most accurate edition of the Leningrad Codex in print.What was wrong with the masoretic text? That it needed to be revised.Other than it was: Masoretic Text - Wikipedia These people did not believe Messiah had come so why should I trust them?The Septuagint predates the masoretic text by some 1,000 years, and was quoted by Jesus and His disciples. I think I will trust this text. According to whom or what? The man created in these verses was not formed from the dust of the ground neither was the woman made from the rib of man.They were simply created in the image and likeness of God.

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

I can not answer for anastasia but I will try to answer your question. God is willing to save anyone that will trust in the sacrifice Jesus made on the cross.God is unwilling that any should perish but that all would come to repentence.God is capable of anything.In the beginning Genesis 1:1 God created the heaven and the earth. It was perfect no sin or evil in it.By man disobeying a direct order sin entered into the world.Can God stop evil from happening? YESWill God stop evil from happening? YESWhy has God not stoped evil from happening? Because He is not willing that any should perish but that all would come to repentence.But the day is coming when God will say enough is enough, then everyone has to face the judgment.Enjoy

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

The Septuagint LXX:
Greek and English
by Sir Lancelot C.L. Brentonpublished by Samuel Bagster & Sons, Ltd., London, 1851

quote:

---

(KJV) Gen 5:1,2 - This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created."

​

(LXX) Gen 5:1,2 - This is the genealogy of men in the day in which God made Adam; in the image of God he made him:
male and female he made them, and blessed them; and he called his name Adam, in the day in which he made them.

---

quote:

---

(KJV) Gene 1:28 - And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

​

(LXX) Gene 1:28 - And God blessed them, saying, Increase and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the seas and flying creatures of heaven, and all the cattle and the earth, and all the reptiles that creep on the earth.

---

Here, as with the Leningrad Codex, the The Septuagint does not support the term 'replenish' as well. A careful examination of the the Septuagint will also show a number of differences between (it) and *many of the KJV in use today. Enough to conclude that the KJV is not entirely as reliable as the root documents it has been drawn from.-Genesis 5 was written as overview of the creation account from an alternate viewpoint. The earlier parts of Genesis deal with the creation of the heavens and the earth and everything in them. Later, in Genesis, we then move onto the creation of the human race and the implications of sin.In a case such as this, there is substantially more scriptural evidence to support that Adam was physically created on earth and in a physical garden than he would of remained as a spiritual being. However... having said this, I would not stand and argue this point, since the implications brought on by such a concept do not seem to create any significant differences in the big picture.Along these lines, it is interesting to note that Jesus himself, when he commenced his work, was about thirty years old, being the... son of David... son of Abraham... son of Adam. David and Abraham are well known historical persons. If Adam was not a real individual, what about Enoch? And if Enoch was a real person, how could he have been the seventh in line from a none physical Adam?Adam lived on for a hundred and thirty years. Then he became father to a son in his likeness, in his image, and called his name Seth. (Seth certainly was not fathered by all early men, nor did all early men father sons at 130 years of age)We seem to have more scriptural evidence to support that Adam was indeed a physical being from the get go than the result of a transitional phase brought on by sin. I have concluded this evidence across a multitude of biblical translations and sources. Including earlier documents which were used to compile the KJV.Edited by pbee, : typoEdited by pbee, : No reason given.Edited by pbee, : No reason given.

pbee I understand you like the MT, I don't.Masoretic Text - Wikipedia The Mt has numerous differences of both little and great significance when compared to (extant 4th century) versions of the Septuagint,Jesus quoted the Septuagint as did His apostles.

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

I just noticed a major typo in my post. The referenced data was not of the MT but of a Septuagint translation, as posted at the top.
Sorry about the confusion. The titles (MT) are wrong. They are in fact Septuagint references.I have updated the acronyms to (LXX) though not entirely accurate, it should suffice. I have no particular attachment to the MT or LXX myself. I do however enjoy the older documents as useful references for textual criticism. Edited by pbee, : No reason given.Edited by pbee, : No reason given.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

what i was suggesting is that god is bound by logic and this is simply a boundary of existence

---

But that means god is not omnipotent. If there is a boundary, then there is a limitation and the meaning of omnipotent is no limitations.So it would seem that you are saying that god is incapable.

quote:

---

god chose to make a universe that runs itself. we are responsible for the bad things we do, not him.

---

But that doesn't answer the question: Can god stop evil?If so, why doesn't he? If he can but does not do so, then god is malevolent.If not, then why turn to him to try? Thus, god is not omnipotent.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Phat responds to me:

quote:

---

Lets engage in a hypothesis which asserts that a God could be real. For the sake of argument, we would first have to agree on the characteristics of this God. For now, lets assume foreknowledge and interaction with all creation at some point in our lives.

​

Thus, hypothetically, believers and non-believers all will interact with said Deity. Are we ok so far?

---

BZZZZT!Pascal's Wager. I'm so sorry, Phat.

quote:

---

I believe God is capable of ultimate foreknowledge yet chooses to allow for human decision to determine ultimate destiny.

---

Congratulations, Phat. You just did away with free will.If you know what I'm going to do before I do it, then I have no ability to change that.

quote:

---

Thus, God hypothetically leaves some foreknowledge open

---

But you just contradicted yourself. If some foreknowledge is "open," then god does not have "ultimate" foreknowledge.Which is it, Phat? Ultimate or not?

quote:

---

Would you be prepared to argue that such a God is still evil if He judges us based solely on our desire to be independent?

---

BZZZZT!Pascal's Wager. I'm so sorry, Phat. Johnny, tell him what parting gifts he has!Well, Bob, Phat has won himself a lifetime of anguish in someone else's hell! Yes, that's right. After spending all of his life fighting against Satan and worshipping the Christian god, Phat gets a reward of going straight to Hades for his hubris. He'll be sentenced to solve a series of puzzles for which the instructions can be read in many ways. Every attempt to glean more information will be met with "Since it would just be a waste of my time to tell you, I won't." Of course, every proposed solution will conflict with something in the contradictory instructions. This being for his continued insistence that those around him are unworthy of explanations.But, he won't get hungry because he'll have an afterlife-time supply of Rice-a-Roni®, the San Francisco Treat.You didn't really think that the god that truly exists was the Christian one, did you?And let's be honest, Phat...you were talking about the Christian god, weren't you?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

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?

pbee responds to me:

quote:

---

Omnipotent, omniscient... none of these descriptive terms are found in the Bible.

---

Oh, let's not be disingenuous. The fact that the term "omnipotent" does not appear in the Bible doesn't mean that the concept isn't present. The Bible directly states that god can do anything. Do you really need me to quote the verses?

quote:

---

Assuming that God did create a world without the possibilities of evil or sin, through our own consciousness we could not experience absolute freedom.

---

Why not? God can do anything, so why can't he do this? We're left with the conclusion that god is malevolent: Capable of stopping evil but unwilling to do so.

quote:

---

quote:

---

So can god do it or not?

---

​

I would say yes!

---

Then why doesn't he? If he can but chooses not to, then god is malevolent.

quote:

---

However, we have no reason to conclude that any of these conditions apply, therefore, the concept remains baseless.

---

Excuse me? Did we or did we not eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?Ergo, I know what good and evil is. If god can stop evil but chooses not to, then god is malevolent.

quote:

---

Assuming you are asking whether he is willing or not to adjust the system to avoid evil remains out of our grasp.

---

First, why? Why is it out of our grasp?Second, that isn't what I'm asking. I'm asking if god is capable of preventing evil.

quote:

---

Capable?... without a doubt!

---

Then why doesn't he? Is he unwilling? If so, then he is malevolent.You don't get to have it both ways.And stop dancing around with obfuscation. The questions are very simple and require no more than a yes or a no:Is god capable of stopping evil? You seem to have said yes.Is god willing to stop evil? Yes or no.If yes, then where does evil come from?If no, then god is malevolent.

quote:

---

However, this we are not operating in truth now are we?

---

Then that would mean god is malevolent.Thank you for finally stating something directly.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

ICANT responds to me:

quote:

---

I've asked you straight out...I expected a direct answer: Is god willing or unwilling? Capable or incapable?

---

[/quote]God is willing to save anyone that will trust in the sacrifice Jesus made on the cross.[/quote]That isn't what I asked. I asked if god is willing to prevent evil, no qualifications.The fact that you have imposed qualifications means that no, god is not willing to prevent evil.Ergo, if god is capable of doing so, then he is malevolent.

quote:

---

God is unwilling that any should perish but that all would come to repentence.

---

Than whence cometh evil? If he can stop it and is willing to do it, where does it come from?

quote:

---

Why has God not stoped evil from happening? Because He is not willing that any should perish but that all would come to repentence.

---

You do realize that you just contradicted yourself, yes?I'm asking very simple, yes-or-no questions. Why do you persist in trying to qualify them?Is god capable of stopping evil? Yes or no.Is god willing to stop evil? Yes or no.No qualifications, no reservations, just yes or no.If god is capable and unwilling, then he is malevolent.If god is capable and willing, then whence cometh evil?God is unwilling that any should perish but that all would come to repentence.God is capable of anything.In the beginning Genesis 1:1 God created the heaven and the earth. It was perfect no sin or evil in it.By man disobeying a direct order sin entered into the world.Can God stop evil from happening? YESWill God stop evil from happening? YESWhy has God not stoped evil from happening? Because He is not willing that any should perish but that all would come to repentence.But the day is coming when God will say enough is enough, then everyone has to face the judgment.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

i really don't think that being bound by logic (which is simple sanity and existence) is a weakening limitation. it's just stupid.

---

Ahem. You said it, I didn't.What will you do if logic contradicts a tightly-held opinion about the nature of god? Will you change your conception or keep your opinion?As I often say: Have you considered the possibility that god does exist but not in the way you think?

quote:

---

i think there must be more options than that.

---

But there are only four options: Either he can or he can't, is willing or is not.If he can and is willing, whence cometh evil?If he can and is unwilling, then he necessarily is malevolent.If he can't and is willing, then he isn't omnipotent.If he can't and is unwilling, then why call him god?Which is it? That's why I'm asking such very simple, straightforward, yes-or-no questions. You keep wanting to avoid answering them.

quote:

---

failing to prevent evil does carry some responsibility for the evil, but god never really claims to not carry responsibility.

---

But the claim is that god is good. If god is malevolent, how can he be good?We're back to that pesky logic problem: Are you going to abandon your claim that god is not immune to logic?

quote:

---

so? who gives a shit if god is omnipotent?

---

Um...the person who started this thread? If you find the topic of the thread irrelevant, why are you participating? Simply state that no, god is not omnipotent and leave it at that.

quote:

---

why ask god for help? because he's more powerful than we are.

---

And that's a reason to worship him? Might makes right?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Please supply Bible version, book, chapter and verses that state that:
"God can do anything".

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

When God stops evil from happening the world will come to an end as you and I know it.But God is not willing that you will perish so He is waiting for you to repent .So No I did not contradict myself.

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."