A New Proof for the Existence of God

[inocente]

I don’t see that. Why is there a need for an absolute scale? Alzheimer’s disease is objectively present in many people to a greater or lesser degree, but AFAIK there is no absolute scale to measure its progress.

But you’re not trying to use Alzheimer’s to prove or disprove the existence of God.

In any case God could create evil as well as good as in Isaiah 45:7. It there was an experiment which could prove or disprove God then it would be headline news.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

But you’re not trying to use Alzheimer’s to prove or disprove the existence of God.

In any case God could create evil as well as good as in Isaiah 45:7. It there was an experiment which could prove or disprove God then it would be headline news.

Your literal acceptance of 45:7 is incorrect. The author is talking about the " evil " of the affections or concupisence and natural and Divine punishments which are considered evil, per se, but only from our perspective. None of which are evil in themselves. Further, since God is all good, the absolutely Good, he cannot create or cause any genuine evil. As Genesis, all evil is caused by sin, even natural evil.

Linus2nd

 

[inocente]

Your literal acceptance of 45:7 is incorrect. The author is talking about the " evil " of the affections or concupisence and natural and Divine punishments which are considered evil, per se, but only from our perspective. None of which are evil in themselves. Further, since God is all good, the absolutely Good, he cannot create or cause any genuine evil. As Genesis, all evil is caused by sin, even natural evil.

It’s not “literal”, but I agree in part. God is saying He produces both the good and the disasters such as Alzheimer’s.

This is a different theology. God is truly almighty, all powerful, God creates everything whatever humans might think of it, however humans interpret it, God does it all except for the evil which we as free agents, make for ourselves. Isaiah was a Jew, he’s allowed to imagine a God who is unconstrained by His creatures’ opinions of what He can and can’t do.

"I, the Lord, do all these things".

 

[Linusthe2nd]

It’s not “literal”, but I agree in part. God is saying He produces both the good and the disasters such as Alzheimer’s.

This is a different theology. God is truly almighty, all powerful, God creates everything whatever humans might think of it, however humans interpret it, God does it all except for the evil which we as free agents, make for ourselves. Isaiah was a Jew, he’s allowed to imagine a God who is unconstrained by His creatures’ opinions of what He can and can’t do.

"I, the Lord, do all these things".

It is certainly true that whatever concept we have of God and his nature and his powers are very limited. But we have to keep in mind that God is Good personified and therefore he cannot create anything that is essentially widked. Even Satan is good in so far that he is one of God’s creatures. His wickedness is the absence of the good that should be there. But God did not create Satan as a wicked creature. Satan chose to be wicked.

In the same way, all that God did and does is good. Even a hurricane is evil only from our perspective.

I would not presume to teach theology to Isia.

Linus2nd

 

[Tomdstone]

Even a hurricane is evil only from our perspective.

It is difficult for me to see why it is a good thing for a tornado to rip off the arms and legs of a 3 year old child and leave him paralyzed and suffering in horrible pain for life? How is this a good thing?

 

[oldcelt]

It is difficult for me to see why it is a good thing for a tornado to rip off the arms and legs of a 3 year old child and leave him paralyzed and suffering in horrible pain for life? How is this a good thing?

It isn’t, and is entirely inconsistent with an all-loving god. It is entirely consistent with a natural event caused by hot and cold air colliding.

 

[Amandil]

It isn’t, and is entirely inconsistent with an all-loving god.

Inconsistent with being beaten nearly to death then suffering asphyxiation on a cross?

What precisely is your definition of “all-loving” anyway?

oldcelt:

It is entirely consistent with a natural event caused by hot and cold air colliding.

So natural events cannot at the same time be passively willed by God?

And so when a passer by sees the girl, or anyone injured, and risks their life to save them for their sake, it can’t be God who prompts them to act out of love?

So God cannot be loving both the victim and the person who risked their own life in rescuing them and being present in their lives?

 

[Tomdstone]

So natural events cannot at the same time be passively willed by God?

That is the issue that some people have been looking at and are questioning as to whether a natural event such as a tornado, which rips off the legs of a small child and causes her a life of paralysis and pain, - whether this situation is compatible with the idea that God is all loving and does not wish pain on anyone and that God is all powerful, so that He has he power to eliminate the suffering of such a child.
I am not saying it is so, but only posing this as a theological question:
Is it possible that perhaps God is not All-powerful, but that there are limitations to His power? Already, we know that there must be some limitations with reference to logical contradictions. Logical contradictions are not possible, so God cannot make a set which contains all sets which do not contain themselves as elements.