Am I getting anything wrong here? What?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CeaselessMedik
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CeaselessMedik

Guest
· God is perfect by definition
o He set himself as the standard of perfection
o God correlated human consciences to scripture
o In scripture God defines himself as perfect

· God created humans to be imperfect
o God created humans as lesser beings
§ He could have made perfect free-willed creatures with his omnipotence
o God ensured the Fall
§ Nothing happens that is not part of God’s plan
§ God created Lucifer knowing he would rebel
o “God judged it better to bring good out of evil than to suffer no evil to exist.” –St Augustine
§ God controls redemption
§ God does not grant angels redemption
§ God placed the Tree otKoGaE in the garden even though he did not want A&E to eat the fruit

· God ensures humans’ continued imperfection
o He allowed the fall to enable man to know his love and glory
o After A&E ate the fruit he prevented them from eating the tree of life’s fruit and becoming like him/them
o He does not let everyone into heaven; he judges us
o He only grants salvation through himself
o God keeps humans in conflict
§ Created limited natural resources
§ Created life to constantly need energy (name removed by moderator)ut
§ Banished A&E rather than killing them as promised

· God is hypocritical
o He kills
o He is vain
§ Many verses
o He toys with humans
§ Hardened hearts of enemy tribes of Israel, pharaoh
§ Book of Job
 
Brittany said:
If you mean moral perfection, then no. One cannot force someone to do something freely, that is not logically possible. God could not have made us morally perfect yet still have given us free will.
Click to expand...
You’re telling me an omnipotent god couldn’t define reality in such a way as to allow it?
 
CeaselessMedik said:
He could have made perfect free-willed creatures with his omnipotence
Click to expand...
“Perfect” and “free-willed” aren’t good classical bedfellows - as the unencumbered will requires the option to behave imperfectly.
 
Last edited:
Well you’re getting a lot wrong.

Here’s some help.

God is love.
As such, God is diffusive, He spills out of Himself, in eros and agape, wanting to increase love.
God created us.
He gave us god-like powers of will, intellect.
He wanted us to share (“to participate” using St Augustine’s words) in His divine life, not just in the hereafter, but today, now.
We are imperfect.
We don’t have perfect dominion over our passions and appetites, our will and intellect aren’t God’s.

We must struggle to seek the truth (with our intellect) and to do the good (with our will).

The more we do this, the better we get at it.

The less we do this, the worse we get, the more dominated we become by our emotions and appetites, the less able we are of ‘agape’, self-giving love. The "more imperfect’ our love becomes. It becomes more possessive, self-seeking.
 
Last edited:
Only God is perfect. Anything not God is subject to change and decay. The Incarnation essentially solves this problem by uniting the creature with the Creator and allowing us to partake of the divine nature.
 
Wow… lots of bad logic here. Yeah, you’re getting some stuff wrong…
CeaselessMedik said:
God correlated human consciences to scripture
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean by this. Can you clarify it, please?
God created humans to be imperfect
Click to expand...
No. God created humans with ‘free will’. Is that what you’re talking about here – the ability to make decisions that can be evil?
God created humans as lesser beings
Click to expand...
No… God created humans as physical beings. Then again, He also created angels, and although they don’t have the same nature as us, even they aren’t the equal of God!

I think the problem here is that you’re suggesting that God should have created equals to Himself? I’m not seeing why that’s either necessary or even reasonable…?
He could have made perfect free-willed creatures with his omnipotence
Click to expand...
Think about it: your sentence is self-contradictory. You’re suggesting that God could have created creatures that have free will… which is only expressible in one way. If there’s no way possible for a creature to make a certain choice… are you sure you could define that creature to possess free will? 🤔
God ensured the Fall
Click to expand...
Nope. Non sequitur. (Unless, of course, you’re saying that God enabled the possibility for the Fall by virtue of creating physical beings with free will. I’d agree with that one, but I wouldn’t suggest that this means that God is defective in doing so.)
Nothing happens that is not part of God’s plan
Click to expand...
Agreed. And one way of expressing that plan is “God wishes us to make free decisions.”
God created Lucifer knowing he would rebel
Click to expand...
Again, “free will”. Moreover, I’m not sure about that. Having created him, God knew him. It’s a bit of a philosophical leap to suggest “God knows all the effects of all the things He never does.” Some philosophers would agree; others would suggest that this ‘middle knowledge’ doesn’t exist.
God does not grant angels redemption
Click to expand...
No, but He offers them eternal life. Search for threads on the angels in this forum. We’ve discussed this before. 😉
God placed the Tree otKoGaE in the garden even though he did not want A&E to eat the fruit
Click to expand...
Figurative narrative.

I’m gonna stop here. Lots already to talk about. If we get through all this, maybe we can pick up on the rest. @CeaselessMedik… what say you?
 
Last edited:
Far too many questions to answer at once. I expect they’ll keep coming even as I address them xD I appreciate all the (name removed by moderator)ut, and I’m working on this essay/chapter now. I’ll post it when I have draft 1 finished for your review. 🙂
And I posted this in Apologetics. It “disappeared.”
 
Last edited:
Yes God could I guess have hypothetically created a different set of logic; but wait:

“In the beginning was Logos, and Logos was with God, and Logos was God.”

Logos in Greek means many things; letter, word or reason/logic. God is whom He is and thus the current rules; in a manner beyond our understanding are perfect. You could also probably skim through Aquinas Summa Contra Gentiles to answer this in a more satisfactory manner.

If you’re looking for something to satisfy you as an atheist you probably won’t find it on this forum due to many factors but you can keep trying. At the end of the day to some questions the answer really is faith but that answer won’r satisfy an atheist.

Ie God couldn’t have created a world in which freedom was basically not important because part of the God is this intrinsic rule that it is so.
 
If by that you mean that God cannot act contrary to His nature, then yes.
 
The most concise definition of God’s nature is this: He is. God’s nature is existing. It is by no means a simple definition, but it’s the best I’ve heard.

EDIT: Perhaps this may make things clearer. God, as an example, cannot stop being God, because His nature is to be God. God cannot create a triangle with four corners, because that is against the nature of a triangle.
 
Last edited:
Well, then omnipotence isn’t all-powerful. Did he not create the “laws” of logic in the universe? I thought he was above and beyond. And how does he “exist” when by our definition that entails being in time and space? When virtual particles pop into and out of “existence,” they pop in and out of spacetime.
 
He is beyond logic. But it is impossible to make a triangle with four corners because that’s not what a triangle is. If a triangle has more than three sides or three angles, it ceases to be a triangle. Hence, God cannot make a triangle with four corners.

God does not exist by our definitions of time and space, he is beyond and above them, almost like watching fish swim by in a river. Except he is beside every conceivable point along that river.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top