Seer666

I'm not sure there is anything in there stateing that God is "All Good". All good things are God, maybe. But, it does state that "Everything serves God's will", so that would mean God is all good AND all bad. If you believe he is all powerful.

Nope. I think you are way out of bounds on this call. God didn't want it to happen. A short little murderous fucktard wanted it to happen. Freewill is a bitch. Enough people went along with it that clearly a lot of people wanted it to happen, otherwise, it wouldn't have, and, as per the whole free will thing, God stayed out of it, and let us deal with our own actions. God didn't make it happen. We did. Humans. And us alone. Not one of our finer moments, if you ask me.

I really doubt God was apathetic to it. I think he was crying his eyes out. I don't think he liked it, but with that kind of power comes a level of self controle, that as much as he hated it, he stayed out and let freewill run it's course.


That is kind of hard to do, given the topic.

__________________
Bad spellers of the world untie!!!

I am the one you warned me of

I seem to have misplaced the bullet with your name on it, but I have a whole box addressed to occupant.

rlbond86

But if God will not intervene, why pray?

Seer666

It's my belief that while God will not pick you up, he will let you lean on him.

__________________
Bad spellers of the world untie!!!

I am the one you warned me of

I seem to have misplaced the bullet with your name on it, but I have a whole box addressed to occupant.

Felicity

God is timeless--so he sees the bigger picture. What seems horrific in the short term--eons of human history--will have an effect over time. I believe that which we don't understand, nonetheless, serves a higher purpose--and that purpose is good.

Amnesia620

Just as a thought, perhaps "God" will intervene if you pray. Just because you don't see it happening immediately doesn't mean that "God" isn't helping, watching, protecting, etc.

Heh...can you imagine...this coming from a Wiccan.

__________________
For example, I find that a lot of college girls are barbie doll carbon copies with few differences...Sadly, they're dumb, ditzy, immature, snotty, fake, or they are the gravitational center to orbiting drama. - Amnesia620

LazyBoy

I believe God is all powerful, but not "all good".....I do realize that you don't want bible references...But if you look back in the bible, on more than one occassion, people died, were persecuted, etc....Sodom and Gomorra :sp:....The Egyptian army being drowned, when chasing Moses and his people....etc...Job was considered a great man of God, and God allowed everything he had to be taken from him...

That is from the bible....the book that Christians are to live from...and even in IT everything that happened wasn't "good"...

Just a lil info from my worthless opinion...

-Will

__________________
Life is nothing, everything.....and something in between...

LazyBoy

Not ALL of prayer is supposed to be "asking for something"...Part of prayer is supposed to be thanks, repenting for sins, praise, and worship....

Also, alot of "prayers being answered" depends on what you pray for. I am a strong Christian, and I can pray for rain until I'm blue in the face...But it'll happen when its supposed to happen...

But praying for "God's will to be done" is what one "should" pray for. The rest is supposed to revolve around the faith that He IS all knowing, and we are to trust him...

-Will

__________________
Life is nothing, everything.....and something in between...

Nimetic

Sure...

The original issue raised was "God cannot both be all-good and all-powerful".

(I guess that "all-good" is kind of undefined... I'm not sure what is meant exactly by that term).

I take your point, but I think that it's unrelated to the original paradox - in that, and I simplify slightly, it seems to remove the first condition. If god is longer all-good, in relation to observable events, then there is no problem with the original statement.

Nimetic

I guess I was looking at how the question was framed.

My surprise was related to the implication that a person could avoid examining this question when first exposed to religion and/or philosophy. Of course.... I don't know, maybe the initial poster only just recently started down a that religious or philosophical path. I could understand, in those circumstances, why they'd suddenly come up with the question.

And sure... TFP'ers are debating it - but I was talking about the wider world.

Martian

Right, so here's how I see it.

Let me preface this by defining my beliefs as strong agnostic. Worded plainly this means that I believe that there may well be a higher power, but the nature of such a higher power is ultimately unknowable. Thus, any arguments I present are purely an outsider's perspective, as I don't follow any established religion.

Having said that :

The holocaust is a common example of God's failure to intervene. But there are a few salient points that can be used to debate this.

First off, He has been keeping a low profile for the last two thousand years or more, depending on who you talk to. He sent His only son to the cross for our sins, then He said 'okay, you have your proof. Junior died so that you could be reborn. Do with that what you will.' The reason for this is that He requires his followers to have faith. He wants us to love Him in all His glory not for what he can do for us, but for who He is and what He has done already. If I knew God existed, you can bet I would start praying. I would want to assure my place in heaven and I would want a few miracles of my own. A Christian will say that this is exactly why He doesn't make it obvious. In that case it's not a true love of God. It's just my own self-interest, which isn't what He wants.

He could've intervened in a very direct fashion (striking Hitler with a bolt of lightning or what have you), but if He did free will would ultimately be removed. We would no longer make the choice to follow Him because there would no longer be a choice to make.

Having said that, I suggest you talk to some holocaust survivors. I am sure there are a great many who will tell you they would not have survived but for the grace of God. He did not save the lives of 6 million. How many did He save? That question is by it's very nature unanswerable.

On top of that, everything has also served a greater plan. What is it that He intended us to learn from that history? What came out of the war that would not have occured if it didn't happen? A great many of the technological advances that greatly enhance our lives today are either direct or indirect consequences of that war. Where would our lives be today without it?

Another question that's ultimately unanswerable.

Now away from the form answers and onto my own personal beliefs.

My beliefs hinge on the idea of subjective morality. What is good or evil? Can you define it for me? If the Axis had won the war, do you think we would all be claiming today that the bad guys won?

History is always written by the victors.

Given that, my concept of good hinges on my own knowledge and experiences. It is a product of my upbringing and my past. It's a highly individual thing.

God (using the term for lack of a better one; take it to mean 'the higher power') does not have an upbringing as such and may have access to knowledge far beyond what any mortal man is capable of. Given that, is it so unreasonable to postulate that His idea of good and evil may be radically different from yours or mine?

You give your dog shots to protect her from illness. The dog doesn't know the benefit of the shots and only knows that they hurt. You think getting your dog immunized against illnesses is a good thing.

How do you think your dog feels about it?

__________________
I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept
I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept
I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head
I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said

- Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame

msh58

many times i've learned god provides insight into his workings for a person, sometimes at a much later date, or doesn't even bother ever. holocaust must be a lesson of some kind. Thats my only guess. I'd like to know the reason it was allowed for certain also. Doubt that i will though.

LazyBoy

Sorry, I knows this isn't the answer you want...But I try to live by the Ten Commandments, and the teachings of the bible....Just in reference to a "definition" of good and evil...I'm a Christian, so, at least for me, that is my "dictionary" .....

And yes, I do realize that some of the issues we face today were not present in the times the bible was written, and IMHO, that is up to each individual to determine (on how they feel)...I try to "offer" my religion to anyone, but not "force" it on anyone...


And ask for the holocaust...I'm a Christian, and I have no answer...I feel that we are not meant to know everything...Because we have been taught that we are to have faith, and that he will test our faith. And if He were to explain everything to us, then what need would there be for "faith"?

Not arguing with anyone, just offering my thoughts

-Will

__________________
Life is nothing, everything.....and something in between...

Gitmo

I’m not a Bible thumper by any means and I know I’m not supposed to use the bible as a reference for this thread but the book of Job somewhat explains this topic. I guess if you look at God as all powerful and all knowing how could we possibly even begin to understand the things that he does and does not do.

Stillborn

But, if God did know everything that's going to happen, and it's all according to his plan, wouldn't that eliminate the idea that humans have free will?

If He has everything laid out for us, and if He knew every decision we will make, then we're just following a narrow track, and not truly making our own decisions.

__________________
Waiting... to be born again

Wanting... the saddest kind of pain
Waiting for the day when I will crawl away

Nimetic

That's a fairly complicated reply.

Ok. IMHO the simple view of god deserves to down in flames. I see it as self-evidently flawed and as a stepping-stone to simplistic philosophy and morals based on literal interpretation of religious texts.

But that's not your describing. Your talking a more sophisticated model. I'm an atheist myself actually. I feel that I've examined thinking roughly similar to what you outline earlier in my life. To me, this seems a dead end - a way of salvaging "God" when no evidence exists. The arguments proposed ultimately seem so complex as to be unlikely (taking an Occams Razor approach) and in discussions with believers - similar views and concepts appear to take a constantly mutating form in order to dodge the many arguments against believing in a deity.

Ultimately - I think the affirmative should prove it's case, not the other way around.

But.... getting back to my first point. I rarely debating God with those who have this type of view. Anyone with a complex world-view who is willing to debate it genuinely is ok with me. In fact... (in my view again), lots of good has come of the more sophisticated religious thinkers.

So - with people such as yourself, I've no desire to threaten your religion, I'll tend to discuss politics, climate change and other interesting issues.

Perhaps also... having decided that God either doesn't exist or is not relevant, long discussions about God's nature seem a waste of time.

Nimetic

But God lets toddlers kill each other yes? Allows them to kill each other over arguments relating to the correct form of the parent? Allows them to drown in big waves... even creates the world in such a way that volcanoes will form, cause waves and hence said drownings.

I liked your view at first, but on second glance, I don't think that the parent-toddler model applies.

Nimetic

Gaa.....

I would be killed if I made that argument about the housework.

Yes I created the mess.

I can clean it - but don't, because it is not part of my plan

I have the power to do it

I have the ability to do any of the housework at any time

I am right here right now. See that mold that is growing on the wall. I am with that mold right now. See that fly that is about to land on last nights left-overs. I am with those left-overs.

You say that I never do the housework. That is not correct. I did the dishes last week. Not all of them you say? Well perhaps.. But I did intervene. It could have been a lot messier if I hadn't washed those spoons.

You will understand it all. Later. I did those dishes to show that I love you. I cannot explain any more. You will understand when you are older.

Nimetic

So - god allows suffering, in order to prove a point to a rival?

Yakk

What if God is all-powerful, and all-good.

But we don't understand what good is. Turns out that everything that has ever happened is a good thing.

Can we allow tradeoffs? If god wanted to create a being who is truely free willed, can god let that individual do evil and still be doing good -- because the existence of free will in that being is a greater good than revoking the free will and preventing the evil?

If good and evil exist somehow independant of god, and if "free will" is defined as a being whose choices are not determined by god, then god must withdraw control in order for the good of "free will" to exist. This would include disasters, like volcanos, that kill large numbers of "free will" beings -- preventing the volcano eruption and protecting the beings who freely chose to live near it would be an act that reduces the free will of those beings.

If you disagree with "good" vs "evil" existing independantly of god, then it only makes sense that the deity defines good by it's actions. It is good for god to allow two toddlers to kill each other because it is god who did, or did not, do it. Once again, not a problem.

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

theusername

Leto - 6 million Jews. As far as others/total, figures have been given between 12-21. I dont have the answer, being Jewish has brought this question to the forefront of my thinking. I believe in God but I struggle with this question. Not really anything to add.

__________________
?

smooth

Slap that together with Paul's writings to a church in Rome and you get more than you need to understand this dliemma/paradox/etc.

doesn't make much sense when you read them in context of modern renditions of "free" will.
If, however, you begin to understand that humans are now free to act according to their nature, and that their nature is inherintly sinful, then you would begin to think that that humans will only do "evil" or "bad" things if left to their own desires. That is, free will means that humans are left to wallow in their sinfulness, not that they can indvidually elect between a good course of action or a bad one. In fact, the scriptures and history are overflowing with examples of how this operates.

Then we have the gem that people will only do good things when they have the gift of grace. Although, some ungifted people will do good things, those things aren't truly good to the deity and are often resulting from one looking out for one's own interest...which wouldn't be construed as objectively or pure good (altruism). Branches of philosophy have battled out how and why people practice altruism.

This modern view of humankind is in contrast to the pre-sin view of the perfect creation: adam (man, being, whathaveyou). Whereas this perfect being, as such, had perfect freedom of the will, exactly like the deity possesses free will, that is, a will to do that which is in accordance with his own will. That's a bit muddles, but the gist is that a perfect being is bound to act according to how the deity sees fit. In short, the deity can not possibly do wrong since the deity controls the definitions and can not act abrasive to its own nature and desires.

So how could the first perfect being "sin"?
My only resolution of this comes from the notion that the deity intentionally split the perfect being, as explained in the book of origins (while allowing it to be a mythological explanation--and this labeling it as "mythology" in no way detracts from the factual truth or non-truth of the events, but merely clarifies that the text is a way of understanding human history). The deity split the perfect being into two: a man and a woman, thereby rendering the aforementioned perfect being into two imperfect entities. And then the course of history was set, what with eve's inability to only consider the will of the deity as her own, being an individual now. and adam not with his wife, doing his individual desires in some other spot, unable to counteract the disasterous effects of her personal choice to violate the will of her creator and the other half of her being.

And so we learn the lesson of our inconsequentiality, and our individualistic tendencies when left alone, both when we fail to take into consideration the motives and needs of the group (which would be extremely important to a tiny ethnic group in nomadic times) and the needs of the creator (also important if one were to understand this strain of religion as socially cohesive and necessary to the continued existence of the group that we now understand as "jews" or "hebrews")

and then we wonder just why in the hell all this happened, why didn't Adam stay as adam rather than Adam and Eve. And for that we have to look at a bunch of stuff, but we can really get an answer right from one of the most prolific writers and translators of this worldview into the gentile consciousness--Paul.

dang, I gotta go. This is a lot to read anyway, but basically paul claims that people will just act like sinful creatures, as he did, until grace comes upon them and compels them to see the truth. This is all for the deity's glory.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

asaris

The reason the first being to sin could sin was because he, and all beings with free will, had two inclinations, one towards the good in itself, and one towards the good for him. He got confused, and desired his own good over the good in itself, and so sinned. How's that?

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

smooth

The problem I see with that is twofold:

1) adam didn't sin, Eve did. Your premise is inaccurate, but I read it as your reasoning for why Eve may have sinned originally to move on to

2) "all beings with free will" do not have two inclinations. To argue that would be to argue that the deity, also a being with free will, has two inclinations--one to do its own will and one to go against its own will.

As far as I've been able to take it, that's not logically possible.
I'd have to go back to some church history books to see the lineage, but I'm wagering off-hand that the notion humans have free will, in the sense that they have two sets of inclinations to choose from, crept into some doctrines around the same time rationalism took hold.

I don't know the exact point of departure, but the early churches definately taught and believed that humans had no other kind of will other than to sin unless they were prevented from doing so by the deity. And the notion that one could have two sets of inclincations and must choose between the two on a daily or individual incident (case-by-case) would contradict many of the points the figurehead of the christian religion made about serving two masters simultaneously.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Zyr

A few points:

1. Predetermination. There is no free will. If someone wants to point out some kind of scripture saying you have free will, I'm all ears.

2. Even years of suffering is nothing compared to enternity. No matter how short, long, painful or enjoyable your life is, it is nothing to your eternal reward.

3. Why should letting people die be bad? God is the benchmark for good. There is nothing more good, by deffinition.

</devil's advocate>

__________________
"Oh, irony! Oh, no, no, we don't get that here. See, uh, people ski topless here while smoking dope, so irony's not really a high priority. We haven't had any irony here since about, uh, '83 when I was the only practitioner of it, and I stopped because I was tired of being stared at."

Omnia mutantu, nos et mutamur in illis.
All things change, and we change with them.
- Neil Gaiman, Marvel 1602

RCAlyra2004

This entire thread amazes me. No one dares change their "beleifs" in light of the apparent *Evidence.

Try this on for size. GOD is a cruel %^&&&$^% who "planned for 12 million people" to die at the hands of a tortuous bunch of Nazi's. (ok it doesn't work for me either)

or


God isn't actually there... We are alone in space on a rock with atmosphere and the only beings that could have stopped the Nazi's were the other "humans" on this planet.

When I say All of the *Evidence I mean this:

1. There is NO evidence that God intervened in any way, nothing supernatural was reported by anyone... still 12 million people died

2. There is also no evidence of a plan... the world is in Chaos...

3. Even if there is a God (remember there is no proof) there is no indication that he/she cares for this world. So at best God is absent (hence the lack of evidence)

4. To say that everything will be OK after we die and go to heaven defies any rational thinkg at all. It only means that YOU do not have to stand up and say, "HEY STOP KILLING THOSE 12 MILLION PEOPLE" since God will do it for you. (bit he/she didn't say anything)

5.Just because you get a warm feeling when people talk about God and his love for you does not mean there is a God. People from all religions get the same "warm feelings" that christians get all the time.

__________________
Living on the edge of sanity

asaris

Not true. God is the good in itself, so the good for him is identical to the good in itself. This is ultimately true for all of us, but we can get easily confused.

This idea is something I'm getting from Scotus, in which he is deeply influenced by Anselm. I might mention that the 'being' I was referring to is proximately the devil. Traditional theology (by which I mean primarily Thomistic) holds that our only impulse is towards the good in itself. Scotus's objection is that this fails to explain how the devil fell, because he knew the good in itself. He argues that what must have happened is that the devil came to love himself more than God (the good in itself), and in this way fell.

Special Note: If you happen to not believe in a literal devil, think of this as a thought experiment...

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

Rodney

If there is a god, he, she, or it probably thinks we all have better things to do than speculate on the People Magazine details of his existence.

Most of the major religions agree on the basics of a good life: love and support your fellow humans, help the good in yourself to flourish, leave your piece of the world in better shape than you found it in.

Do all that, and both you _and_ God -- be it a Hairy Thunderer, Cosmic Muffin, whispy Celtic Deitress, or artificial construct of the Collective Unconscious -- will be pleased. For some value of "pleased."

smooth

What exactly are you saying "not true" about in my first point?
Are you just disagreeing with me for sake of disagreement? It certainly looks like your reply simply restates what I claimed: that the deity has only one inclination...its own good inclination.

We could get into notions of how the devil "fell." But we would then already be cross-talking as our premises would clash. I don't agree with the doctrine of a fallen angel as devil and I haven't been able to place that anywhere in scripture. All references I've found to the devil speak to it's original hebrew, that being an accuser, and as a special office. This runs in line with multiple references that the accuser is simply doing the work of deity as analogous to a prosecutor in the courtroom. All references of his behavior are in line with doing that which he is sent to do (reference Job again, for the most explicated example).

there is one reference I've found to a fallen star, which then becomes Lucifer in the Catholic tradition. But that notion is present nowhere in judaism and if one rereads that portion, then one can also understand it as applying to adam. Try it, and get back to me on that. or you could post the references you think point to the notion of a Lucifer operating in contrast to the deity's will and we could discuss that, which I think wouldn't be out of place in this thread since we're discussing how could a being, especially an angel, operate outside the will of an all-powerful deity. the simply answer, as far as I can tell, is an angel can't.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

hunnychile

I think (feel is more like it) that God finds this thread most interesting and it's just chuckling & letting us entertain it with all these unimformed human words. The labels we humans reach for as descriptives are especially hilarious. The free will statements are close to another reality and worth meditating. All/Being or nothingness is a helpful meditative tool.

As if GOD can be "definable" at all.

__________________
"I need compassion, understanding and chocolate." - NJB

IamtheSuffering

Another point, that may have been mentioned already, i don't have time to read the whole post...

If god is also Omnibenovolent, or all knowing, he would know of the evil that would come from his giving us free will, and he would be all powerful, so he COULD change it, and he is all good, so he HAS to have our best interest at heart. Also, if god gave us free will, how does he know the outcome of this all? Couldn't EVERY person deny him, and the "allies" have no army, so evil must triumph? Hm...

Amnesia620

Okay...to anyone who takes the time to read this:

Humor me for a second here...I don't have all day to read through everyones posts, so if I'm echoing someone, then well consider it my statement in agreement with that person.

On the subject of situations and events in our history like the Holocaust, Plague, Etc., perhaps it is getting things back into balance, or in preparation for something to come...? Think about it.

If your train of thought stopped at the period of my suggestion above, then consider this: in the way of reincarnation, perhaps "god" needed them elsewhere...

I believe that to get something, you have to give something. We know, via Science, that Energy is neither created nor destroyed, it just changes form. One person dies (changes form) and becomes something new...anything...and/or everything. It's food for thought.

And just to clarify: Prayer is the same as a Spell. It just carries a different name. Even when you are not asking for something for yourself or someone you know, you're still asking. Sure, in prayer you may Thank "god" or "the lord", etc. for what's been given to you...this is indirectly asking for future prayers to be answered (i.e. wisdom, strength, compassion, trust, etc.) Thanking "god" is, in it's own way, "giving" something, so that future prayers may be answered ("getting" something). It's a give and take; a balance.

You know the popular ones (generalized):
"He gives and He takes away"; "Grant us Serenity to accept the things we cannot change..."; so on and so forth.

__________________
For example, I find that a lot of college girls are barbie doll carbon copies with few differences...Sadly, they're dumb, ditzy, immature, snotty, fake, or they are the gravitational center to orbiting drama. - Amnesia620

vjssy

I'm going to save myself from carpal tunnel and just post a link here:

I believe the OP is referring to what's known as the theist's dilemma, though he may have come by his own means.

http://members.tripod.com/~tosdepartment/theodicy.htm

Disclaimer: I don't necessarily agree with anything on aforementioned website, am not an affiliate of aforementioned website, and I've no idea what the complete content of the website is. View it at your own discretion, yadayada. I think you get it. It was just google'd.

Anyhow, it's an old question to which there haven't been many good answers - from a logical standpoint, meaning.. no revelatory knowledge, no abstract metaphysical statements, etc. -. I just wanted to say that most of the questions asked in this forum are nothing new, and while it's valuable to share your opinions, not all people are equally understanding or accepting of others' beliefs. Thus, the quibbling in nearly every thread that I've read since I discovered this section of the forum. Can we please stop. By the time I'm back on this forum, I'll have read more relevant text. If you want people to respect your opinions, at least be prepared to offer relevant and accurate knowledge to support or refute anyone's claims - and remember that despite undeniable evidence, some people choose to believe otherwise, and that many metaphyiscal questions can never be proven by worldly logic, such and such .. yada yada. Just stop attacking each other. How does that help this forum in any way? Maybe this should be it's own post. I dunno. I'm not saying that everyone on this forum does it, but it certainly seems to have a presence. askldfj ! long live the FSM. / the world was created 5 minutes ago. lol. Someone tell me if im way out of line, I didn't think I was.

__________________
Me saepe mone.

nanotech

Let me say that. God is all good but he won't give everything to humans for free. There is a small price if you want prosperity and wealth and the heavens. That you have to do good and pray. He gave you the complex earth and planets, heavens, life, human body, brain, prophets, earth resources, food and all creatures.

But do you think God created humans to serve them?

"I have not created the humans and the jinn but to worship me" A verse from the Quran.

Jinn is another invisible creature that lives in this world like humans. There are sightings of ghosts all around the world, there are exorcists all around the world. Many of the invisible creatures are Jinn. Are they fake? No. Jinn exist and have certain potential and resources in life and will be judged as humans.

That’s how it has always been. You pray to God and then God helps you prosper, become stronger and have a better life.

"And we will make you face hardships to see who does better work" verse from the Quran.

There are tests of hardship along the way. You will not get heaven just by sitting there. You will not see everything good in this world while you do nothing. That is wisdom of God. And if nobody does good and stop indecency and tell people to do good, then God will end that nation and replace it with a better one. Like what happened to the Pharaoh Nation and many nations before us.

If you can watch “Perished Nations” from Harun Yahya videos, you’ll see what I mean.

But to note, the price of the hardships of life are negligible compared to the reward. And another related verse: "And with each hardship comes ease, and with each hardship comes ease"

Justsomeguy

Just commenting that I enjoy these articles. First, there are always many fallacies of logic. Second, many ideas that the authors argue against are ideas that they want to believe the opposing group believes. However, most of the time the opposing groups do not carry those believes. Furthermore, they take a simple concept and take the extreme oppositions. For example, if someone says that they are not in support of war, you cannot say they are in support of doing nothing. In many instances people that oppose a war would feel strongly that other measures are necessary. However, arguments such as the link quoted above ignore that concept.

Finally, atheist arguments are really interesting because they normally take a radical belief that is identical to the fundamentalists who they loathe so severely. For example, "I believe there is a god just because I think there should be one." "Haha, you're an idiot to believe in a god because I don't think there is one," in which both are normally followed by some primitive supporting statement that a two year old is capable of presenting.

rlbond86

The post was my own conclusion. Personally, I am of the belief that God is not all powerful, but this not a problem in my eyes. I think that maybe He gets involved in the little things, but doesn't change the big picture; things like the Holocaust seem like they could have been stopped by an all-powerful God.

Of course, what constitutes all-powerful? Can God violate the laws of physics (presumably the ones he created himself)? Can God make 2+2=5? Can God kill himself?
There has to be a certain line that even God cannot cross.


I really can't think of a completely valid statement for God's omnipotence. But this is my personal belief, and I'm pretty sure nobody here has it correct -- how can we know the true nature of God?


vjssy -- nice article. Sums up many of my beliefs -- although I do believe in God.

frogza

God has a plan. That plan is to reward men for thier actions here on earth. If he stopped us every time we were about to make a mistake, thereby making us perfect, who would be the one worthy of reward? God and God alone. If we are perfect due to compulsion we can not take credit for that perfection. The credit for any action is exclusive to the person responsible for the action. The only way one person can be rewarded and another punished fairly is to allow them to live without forcing them into or away from any action.

The dilema that comes from this is that not everyone wants to "play fair" and treat others kindly. We get people like Hitler who uses his free will to do horrible things. Since god did not force him to do those things, Hitler can and will be punished. Since most of those he killed, died because of their faith, they can be considered martyrs, the rewards that go along with that are tremendous. Since it was not God who killed them, and since he didn't force them to stick with their faith the reward now is possible.

So in the end, by not stopping the slaughter, God is now able to fullfill His plan of rewarding millions, even though he now has to punish a relative low number of Nazis.

Da Munk

Assuming that there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being, I find it very difficult to imagine that this being would be purely benevolent. All that is considered good would be his work, but so would all that is evil. The premise presented in the OP doesn't prove that a god could not be omnipotent, but that a god could not be both omnipotent and purely benevolent. An all-powerful being would probably not view good as we define it as being inherently better than evil, but as equally necessary to the function of the universe.

I also find it hard to believe that a god could at once give humans free will and have planned out all that has and ever will be. Either could be true, but I don't see the two as reconcilable with each other.

rlbond86

Or so they say. But this plan seems to be arbitrary and cruel far too often to be executed by a benevolent and all-intelligent God.

Justsomeguy

The arguments always seemed ridiculous to me. God represents the prime mover yet think of him with respect to natural laws? To think of him in that perspective seems superfluous. Of course, there are arguments against it. Simple ones even. But, I don't really understand the premise of arguing these kind of concepts to begin with.

This is a concept that is tough to deal with especially given the concept of time. I don't think it is nearly as tough to address as it is to comprehend. One reason is because of time. Remember time is relative to us. It's a man-made concept. So, think of time as the perceived differentiation from one action to the next. In actuality, all events have already occurred. However, we cannot experience all action at once, therefore we invented the concept of time (the distance between two actions). Therefore, in a way, you could say that we do have free will. However, all action has already occurred. Therefore, while we do have a free will within the constraints of space and time, all things have already occurred. Therefore, it is not necessarily free will in a mechanism that we can understand. Or at very least, have incredible difficulty grasping.

My biggest problem has always been the concept of God and evil. If we, created in God's image, how do we have free will? I mean, free will implies the ability to do evil. By definition, God does not. Of course, I found a conclusion to satisfy my battle with this issue and most issues.

frogza

If this life was all we had, then yes I'd agree with you. The flaw in your argument is that you aren't taking into acount all that will follow this life. Comparing eternity to the few years we are here shows that an eternal reward far outweighs any pain we have here.