ramifications of omnipotence for God

My stinking ego, along with my sinful nature, my inability to live a perfect life, has nothing to do with where I will spend eternity.That was settled 59 years ago when I received Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior.I am not hedging any bets.I am stating a fact iceage.I know my God is real.I know the new heaven and new earth are in my future because I have met God's requirements. Adam and Eve were perfect humans therefore they could walk and talk with God. They knew God like you know your friends. Does you knowing your friends and being convinced of their existence affect your freewill.Neither did knowing God personally affect Adam and Eve's freewill. Even though they were convinced He existed, because they saw Him.I have not seen God as Adam and Eve was privileged too but I am just as convinced as they were that He exists.I was convinced by the hearing of the Word (the foolishness of preaching) at the calling of God the Spirit, and received Christ as my personal savior, believing by faith and making a choice to do so. Since that time God has convinced me in many ways that He exists by many wonderful things He has done in my life.Now if God had convinced me without me hearing the Word and believing by faith making a choice (exercising my freewill) Then I would not have had freewill at all. I read Pascal's wager and found this in it. You can believe God exists not just live as if God exists and still not meet God's requirements to spend eternity with Him.Just believing God is, has nothing to do with where you spend eternity. The demons believe and tremble.To spend eternity with God you must be born again, by exercising your freewill and choose to trust Jesus Christ for salvation

---

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

So when I say "you" sidelined, you can then equate yourself to Adam and Eve who were perfect human beings.You and I are far from perfect human beings.But you are partially right about the freewill of Adam and Eve.The only freewill they ever had was to choose to eat the fruit or choose not to eat the fruit. That was the only choice given to them.Today there are many more choices that can be made.First is to believe that God exists or does not exist.
Second would be which God to choose.
Third would be whether to put your faith in the God you chose.
Fourth would be whether to obey the God of your choice. I quite agree that many people say oh well the devil made me do it.
As far as being able to avoid one's own responsibility for their actions that avoidance will only last until they stand before Jesus in judgment. You can not prove that God does not exist, but you do not believe He does exist as you can find no evidence that will convince you that He exists. sidelined, I would like to be able to tell you that God will convince you, but I can not.If you can not read the Bible and God reveal Himself to you through His Word or discuss His Word with someone and God reveal Himself to you, I am afraid you will not be convinced. I would like to point out:Benjamin Libet - Wikipedia I find the theory to be wanting.

---

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

But you are. You have intonated verbatim Pascal's wager several times here. You *know* God is real based on what? Let see.... These are all subjective evidences. Very similar to what a Hindu or Muslim would present as evidence for their faith. Yours is only different by flavoring and cultural tinting.How did you know it was not yourself just fooling and talking to yourself. But you said clearly that if God convinced us that he existed then we would have no choice. Adam and Eve were allegedly convinced but had free will. One can have undeniable and unavoidable convincing evidence for the existence of a God and still have all their free-will intact.You are being prideful and dishonest not acknowledging this error in your logic. Sidelined noted it also. Here you go again. The story of Adam and Eve from your own religion disproves this notion. Further Judas and the Jews who crucified Christ had all the objective and physical evidence in the world yet allegedly exercised free-will! Your own holy book provides many examples counter to your often repeated statement.It seems that you are so programed to in repeating this doctrine that you are unable to rationally examine it. Yes but did you continue beyond that point and read the criticisms of this approach? Did you read what William James said about it... By consciously making this bet or using it as an evangelical arguement to convince others based on the expectation of a reward and the fear of punishment you have robbed the very essence of a valid belief or a true faith in a religion and its god. What you have left is superstition.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

i thought the fundamental premise was that god is omnipotent.

---

Check the subject line: "ramifications of omnipotence for God." One of those ramifications is: Why is there evil if god can do anything? Look back to the original post: Why can't god make a universe where there is free will and obedience?If we've established that he's capable of stopping evil, then we're left wondering if he's willing to do it.If not, then he's malevolent.

quote:

---

quote:

---

But if it isn't sufficient when we see it in other instances, then it isn't sufficient at all.

---

​

bullshit.

---

Care to elaborate?My parents raised me. My parents quite literally gave me life. They took their own life, cut off a part, mixed the pieces together, and created me.But I don't worship them.So why worship god for the same reason?

quote:

---

quote:

---

Which, again, means it isn't a reason.

---

​

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?

---

You're equating a question of morality with a question of biochemistry?

---

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.

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.

pbee responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Let's try it again, and we'll take it my original way. Is god capable?, Is god willing? Is there evil in the world?, is god capable of stopping it?, Is god willing to stop it?, If god can stop it and is willing to do so?

---

​

Yes to all of the above.

---

Then whence cometh evil?

quote:

---

We already have evidence that God has dealt with(stopping) it. (see Rev. 21:1,4)

---

Huh? That has nothing to do with it:Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.None of that tells us why there is evil right here, right now. Are you saying there is no evil right here, right now? That the new world is already upon us and this is precisely the way god wants things?If god is willing and is able, then why is there any evil anywhere at any time?

quote:

---

The Evil(sin) residing in our world today is the direct result of the actions of individual person(s). Namely an Angel now called Satan.

---

But that contradicts the statement that god is willing and able to do away with evil. Why on earth does the devil exist if god is willing and able to do away with him?Your rationalization about god creating evil is just that: A rationalization. The text does not say that god is carrying out an experiment and, in fact, the history of Judaism doesn't support such an interpretation at all.Judaism is a monotheism: There is no god but god. He is the source of everything, including evil. "Satan," as you call him, is not the devil but rather an agent of god, as clearly described in Job. There is no concept of "the devil" in Judaism. That's why the serpent is not the devil: There isn't any devil.

quote:

---

To date, I have not seen anything other than textual misinterpretation.

---

Well, since you're applying a Christian interpretation to Jewish texts, I would say that you're the one running around with the textual interpretations. The Old Testament was written by Jews, for Jews, and can only be understood in a Jewish context.

quote:

---

You're trying to accuse God of malevolence based on blindsided reasoning.

---

Incorrect. I am directly stating that if god is capable of stopping evil but is not willing to do so, then that, by definition, is malevolence. It doesn't matter why he is unwilling. Not wanting to stop evil even if you can is, by definition, evil.

quote:

---

The very term Malevolent implies that God wanted or encouraged his creations to do bad.

---

If he could have stopped it but refused to do so, and then got pissed off and punished those who had no hope but to fail due to his refusal to assist, then yes, that is malevolence.God is capable of doing anything, yes? Then he can create a world where humans have free will but don't disobey. But, he didn't and then punishes people for using that free will to do things he doesn't like. How is that not malevolence?

quote:

---

All the while, evil was not in the original design of things.

---

Then whence cometh evil?

quote:

---

In closing, I would say, it is all to easy to blame God for sin and consequence. However, such reasoning is about as sound as blaming the law when one faces incarceration. It just doesn't make much sense.

---

Um, have you never heard of the word, "entrapment"?

---

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.

pbee writes:

quote:

---

Since God the almighty does not wait around for anyone.

---

Then what's the hold up? If god doesn't wait, why hasn't it happened yet?Is god unwilling?

---

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.

quote:

---

Since God the almighty does not wait around for anyone.
  —Rrhain

---

I can only assume you're referring to this paragraph:

quote:

---

In summary, it would seem as though God is waiting(hypothetically speaking) for certain conditions to occur. However, claiming that God is waiting around for the great day of judgment is not entirely accurate. Since God the almighty does not wait around for anyone. In fact the framework for Armageddon was cast from a time which precedes our own understanding. All that is required now, is the triggering of the event.

---

If you would of read the entire paragraph, you could have saved two needless posts under this topic.Simply put, God does not hang over shoulders waiting for the right moment. The Great Day has been set and will be triggered when a specific set of events are met. Furthermore, It would seem as though God appointed Jesus with the authority to lead the armies against Satan and his followers. Again suggesting that God is not lingering around waiting for things to happen.In my own opinion, I would say that God used a "set it and forget it" approach to resolving Satan's wrongdoings. And why not? He is God after all...Edited by pbee, : typo'sEdited by pbee, : textual adjustements

pbee writes:

quote:

---

As for the tree, it was in itself inert or harmless. The very existence or presence of the tree did not produce evil, nor did it compromise the system.

---

Oh, please.Suppose you have a very delicate Mhing vase. It's in a room on a somewhat rickety pedestal. You put your toddler in the room and very directly and specifically tell the child, "Don't touch."When we hear the inevitable crash and the kid crying, do we blame the kid for not obeying or do we blame the parent for being stupid enough to put the toddler in that position?After all, what did the parent think was going to happen?The ability to sin requires the ability to understand right from wrong. But Adam and Eve didn't have that ability since they hadn't eaten from the tree. Therefore, how could they possibly be said to have "sinned" by eating from the tree?Let's not forget, Adam and Eve were sinning before they ate from the Tree of Knowledge.Hint: It gets mentioned before the incident with the serpent.Hint: What was the very first thing they panic about after their eyes were opened and they became as god, knowing good and evil? You'd think it would have been eating the forbidden fruit since that was the only command they had ever been given, but for some reason something else comes immediately to mind.Were it not for god putting the Tree of Knowledge where Adam and Eve could get to it, there wouldn't have been any trouble. And since Adam and Eve were innocent (not stupid), they can't be blamed for god's mistake.

---

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 have never said a person could not have all their freewill intact if they had undeniable and unavoidable convincing evidence that God existed.I did say if God convinced you or anyone you would not have freewill.God is not in the business of convincing you or anybody of anything.God has given us a book and if man messed it up to the point we can't find the truth in it, that is not God's fault.Jesus left His church and gave it the job of making disciples and teaching them the all things He had taught them. If man has messed that up to the point there is no True Church to share the gospel, that is not God's fault.But there are True Churches today that still teach the gospel that Jesus taught.I believe the Word of God has been preserved and the truth can be found. I find God's plan of salvation in Bibles that have been prepared by people that do not believe in the new birth as Jesus taught. What has my statement concerning my freewill got to do with Adam and Eve?For what I said about Adam and Eve see: Message 146You don't get it do you?It is not a bet it is a statement of fact.

---

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

We started this whole vein of thought with your following statement... Adam and Eve were quite convinced of God's existence. Yet they had freewill. You have not resolved this contradiction of thought.

---

But it is a very flawed statement of fact. The only real statement of fact you are making is that your vision of God is a Thug.It makes a mockery of "faith". It turns faith into an extortion game based on fear and uncertainty. It is obviously one of your "evangalising tools" as you use it frequently.It makes God like some thug knocking on your door demanding money for "fire insurance". He could be bluffing and then maybe not. Should you pay him? In your case you believe it to be "Hell avoidance insurance".Second and this is important you have not thought it all the way though.Here are the possibilities that you are considering...

The bible is true and you go heaven and the skeptic goes to hell

The bible is NOT true and it does not matter to either

​

But wait there are other possibilities which actually seem more reasonable.

​

Perhaps God Rewards honest courageous searching and reasoning AND punishes blind fear based self-centric faith. In other words God rewards rationally minded individuals who place honesty and ethics before blind faith and punished those who blindly cling to a faith with the express intent of "saving their skins". In which case

​

You go hell and the honest skeptic goes to heaven

​

As Richard Carrier put it in his essay "The End of Pascal's Wager: Only Nontheists Go to Heaven"

​

quote:

---

It is a common belief that only the morally good should populate heaven, and this is a reasonable belief, widely defended by theists of many varieties. Suppose there is a God who is watching us and choosing which souls of the deceased to bring to heaven, and this God really does want only the morally good to populate heaven. He will probably select from only those who made a significant and responsible effort to discover the truth. For all others are untrustworthy, being cognitively or morally inferior, or both. They will also be less likely ever to discover and commit to true beliefs about right and wrong. That is, if they have a significant and trustworthy concern for doing right and avoiding wrong, it follows necessarily that they must have a significant and trustworthy concern for knowing right and wrong. Since this knowledge requires knowledge about many fundamental facts of the universe (such as whether there is a god), it follows necessarily that such people must have a significant and trustworthy concern for always seeking out, testing, and confirming that their beliefs about such things are probably correct. Therefore, only such people can be sufficiently moral and trustworthy to deserve a place in heaven--unless god wishes to fill heaven with the morally lazy, irresponsible, or untrustworthy.

---

ICANT It is hardly established that Adam and Eve even existed much less were perfect human beings. {whatever that means!} Irregardless we were dealing with the notion of free will which, unless you can explain otherwise, we will assume to mean the same thing to any party. I thought Adam had access to any thing in the Garden.If he made a choice to eat a banana{ my apologies to Ray Comfort} does this mean that he had no freewill in the matter? If so then why could God not prevent him from eating of the FOTTOGAE? I have no need for belief on unbelief merely evidence of God which does not exist. This is consistent with the condition of a universe in which there is no God. If you would believe God exists without evidence for the existence then you do indeed have an uphill battle to perform. However, is this a condition of an absence of God or a God that really is quite psychotic and malign? Yet the bible is full of instances in which people use the name of God or jesus to justify the absolute atrocity of their actions up to and including genocide. I cannot prove anything does not exist ,yet that is perfectly logical since a condition of existence is only based on evidence. Since there is none forthcoming from God himself then there is no contest to begin with. I am big on that since evidence goes a long way into establishing credibility eh? Go figure. Perhaps,however, this is just the tip of the iceberg concerning brain studies and freewill.

---

"The tragedy of life is not so much what men suffer, but rather what they miss."Thomas Carlyle

If I read correctly, you beleive that Adam and Eve were ignorant and that they rebelled against God as a result of consequences proposed by God which in turn, lead Adam and Eve into innevitable sin.As you have maintained in your arguements, such an interpretation certainly paints a grim picture of a capricious Creator. After all... why would He create man with intellectual needs only to allow him no means of fulfilling those desires without incurring a death penalty? Furthermore, Who would feel drawn to serve such a God?What many people do not know, is that this interpretation flatly contradicts the context of the Genesis. Starting with the concept that Adam and Eve were ignorant or incapable of rational decision making(such as a child). We have evidence that they had already taken in plenty of knowledge before they disobedeyed God. Their Creator, himself, was directly involved in their education. For instance, he brought animals and birds to the man for him to name them. No doubt Adam would have studied each one carefully in order to give it an appropriate name. And Eve, although created later, was also not ignorant. Since the serpent questioned her and she proved that she was educated in God’s law by disclosing the difference between right and wrong, and explaining the consequences of those actions.Eating the fruit, could have been, as simple as an act of open defiance towards God. An open refusal to obey Him." Is that not what Genesis clearly says? The scriptures confirm this viewpoint in Romains saying "By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners." - So scriptureally, the original sin was indeed an act of disobedience.While a sin of disobedience may seem simple on the surface, consider its profound implications. A footnote in The New Jerusalem Bible puts it this way "It [the knowledge of good and bad] is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence... The first sin was an attack on God’s sovereignty." Yes, the tree of the knowledge of good and bad symbolized God’s prerogative to set the standards for man as to what is approved or what is condemned. By refusing to obey God’s law, man was calling into question God’s very right to rule over him. God justly answered the challenge by allowing man to rule himself.

pbee I will attempt an answer since Rrhain and I are on the same page here.
They did not rebel, they simply had no information by which to judge the consequences of the action as being right or wrong. In fact, as I recall Eve was obeying the command as she mentioned to the serpent. Now God must have known what she said {being omnipotent} yet we see no praise given to her by God for this and, indeed, we also have the serpent in the picture created by God specifically to trip up Eve.
Eve ,having never encountered the serpent could not know that the act was evil and in fact the death that was supposed to happen was also a lie as the serpent said. Remember the verse "for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." ? It never happened. But we are not talking of knowledge but of discernment, which required the eating of the apple. So why did God not create in her the ability to know she was being conned? Or did he just forget that because he was busy? That would be reading into the verses that which is not supplied.We are not told of the thoughts on the matter. Regardless God knew in advance this would happen, so why is God incapable of creating humans that do not "sin"? Does this not call into question his omnipotence?Oh really? Perhaps you would care to relay to us just what Adam named the animals so that we can see if this is correct.
Disobedience punishable by death? DO you do the same thing to your children at any level of maturity? What possible threat is it to God? They did not decide for themselves though, since their fate was inevitable since God planned the whole thing. If God had not placed the fruit of the tree of good and evil in the garden then what would be wrong with that? It cannot be freewill since they had that before consuming the fruit. God is being an obvious idiot for such a vastly ignorant display of ineptitude when he ,by definition, had to know better. What crap! In this story God provided both the temptation and the serpent when Adam and Eve were already obeying. Had God not created the nature of the serpent so that it would do such a thing {and he knew it would} then it appears that Adam and Eve would have obeyed just fine.Edited by sidelined, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Now God must have known what she said {being omnipotent} yet we see no praise given to her by God for this and, indeed, we also have the serpent in the picture created by God specifically to trip up Eve.

---

There is a severe contradiction here. Where God's absolute authority over all things(omnipotence) is in question. - When God made a statement which declared that Humans and Angels had free will. We can conclude that, logistically, it is impossible for God to[look into] all things, past, current and future, and hold true to His word. If God, was true to His statement, then He would *not violate the terms of His Creations. One of the arrangements is in violation of His divine declarations. Either God lied about never lying and He lied about creating beings with absolute freedom or, He willfully chose to respect His creations privacy and allowed them to live without being compromised.I think the most obvious hurdle in this argument, is that many people cannot accept that God is capable of:

In opposition to the initial contradiction, both those conditions are logically possible without violating the terms of Gods absolute power. In the latter, God never compromises His absolute authority, since He exercises[His own]choice, while respecting His creations free developments regardless of the outcome.With respects to God. One has to wonder, what fun would there even be for an entity as powerful as God to even run predestine simulations such as our own? When we ourselves(as humans) would consider such and activity redundant and unbecoming of an intelligent being. Especially one capable of creating such a complex universe as our own.The scope of this conversation can easily transcend the boundaries of this thread and forum. Considering even a single aspect of the implications laws and absolute assurances of God, the philosophical attributes alone seem infinite!