I've seen this line of reasoning before: define God by listing what attributes he doesn't have. It seems smart at first, but besides involving vigorous handwaving,
If you would, show me the handwaving in those few statements. I’m truly interested in what you’re defining as handwaving.
this method has a bigger problem: how is a deity defined only in terms of negatives different from nothingness?
You already know this isn’t the case (at least from me). Very rarely are the limits of God even mentioned by me unless they are relevant to the topic. This is a red herring.
I have a piece a piece of toast. The piece of toast can't be anything other than a piece of toast. It can't be non-bread in nature. It can't not exist. It can't create another piece of toast that is equal to or greater than itself. It's incapable of not knowing all things past, present and future. The piece of toast also can't create beings who are giving free will that will only choose him.
And it's so good too!
I’m sorry, but the toast example is lost on me honestly. The nature of toast and the nature of God are not one and the same. Don’t see any correlation here.
No. You cannot have your cake and eat it too: either we have free will, in which case God is not omniscient because he can't know what we will choose before we choose it, or God is omniscient in which case we don't have free will.
If they have a choice yes, but that choice is incompatible with one of the major, defining characteristics of God: omniscience. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
“have your cake and eat it too”. That’s just not happening here.
God’s omniscience and foreknowledge at its core is just knowledge. It’s an awareness of events not the execution of his predetermined will via a display of his power. Our ability to freely choose does not invalidate God’s knowledge. God is still sovereign yet allows for our free will.
Your argument is that in order for us to have free will God can have no knowledge of our future choices because it’s incompatible with a state of total knowledge. Well, I have to ask. Where are you getting that from?
Total knowledge is total knowledge. It’s not total knowledge less knowledge of our free choices…..that isn’t total knowledge.
Further, free will is an act of volition while knowledge (from a perspective of humanity) could be a by product of the exercising of that free will. Yet it isn’t one and the same. God’s knowledge is part of his nature which is divine. His knowledge is already complete….he doesn’t learn new information based on our choices….that is incompatible with his nature.
Our free will would be incompatible (and completely false) if God exercised his power in a such a way that his will overrode our choices.
If the inescapable result of me being created is that I will suffer for an eternity - and the Biblical hell is certainly described as eternal torment - and he knows that then yes, not being created would certainly be better.
Yes, I know that people despise that God punished mankind by allowing the proclivity for sin to pass from first man to all mankind. Still mankind wasn’t created to suffer for an eternity. Mankind was created to come into fellowship with the creator; yet he allowed the creation to determine whether or not they want to remain in their sin or instead return to righteousness. How do we return to righteousness and escape that eternal suffering? Through Jesus Christ.
“Why didn’t God create a better ‘creation’? Why all this absurdity?”
He can and will, but first he’s collecting those that want to be rid of their sin….his body of believers….his church. God’s “good creation” can’t become a “perfect creation” because of free will that results in sinful behavior. How would God overcome man’s free will? Once a person willfully understands and makes a choice to defy God they’re responsible for their actions (even with a sinful desire in them it doesn’t force them to act as such). Children and those unable to make those distinctions remain in a state of innocence and inherent righteousness. Through Christ we can return to that state of innocence.
Boy, you sure know a lot about this God that you say you do not comprehend.
No I said I can’t comprehend his nature and abilities completely. Doesn’t mean a believer can’t comprehend some aspects of the nature of God at all.
The same applies if his law boils down to "I will punish you for your nature, which you cannot fundamentally alter." My birth was a matter outside of my choice, as is my nature. I am, in essence, forced to play a game with loaded dice and held accountable for the losses.
Yet as I’ve explained God didn’t create humanity so that he could punish it. He created it to come into fellowship with it. No we can’t change our nature, but we can come into righteousness through Jesus Christ and become new creatures that work to suppress that desire for sin.
God’s law isn’t a game…..it’s law. You make it a “game of loaded dice” when you take chances with your eternal soul. You grasp sin and you grasp the consequences of that sin, but you remain defiant before God. I’m here pleading with folks to reconsider their own lives as it pertains to God and heed my testimony and millions of other testimonies.
This is meanigless... but something does strike me. For something you describe as "beyond our ability to comprehend" you certainly seem to have no problem comprehending it.
As I said before, I can’t comprehend every facet of God’s nature or abilities completely, but a believer can certainly comprehend some qualities of God….and I do.
Interesting bit of reasoning. There's a few logical fallacies here,
What are the logical fallacies? Walk me through them.
but I want to focus on one: you're making a deductive jump from the finite to the infinite and from an actual slap to a figurative slap.
I did for the sake of the example, but the continuity is found in the offense committed. Although, you fully grasp this. You just need to present a some form of an objection because I’m a theist LOL.
Make the backdrop biblical Jerusalem and then have the final perpetrator slap the incarnate son in Jesus Christ who was a flesh and blood man (yet fully God) in the face. The example still holds, but it’s unnecessary to go to these lengths because the concept was already understood.
"If you pay me $5 today, I'll pay you $50 in 5 days!"
Sorry, don’t follow…..help me understand.
[First, one small sidenote about the "God also designed his creation so that life is in the blood" bit: you are aware that artificial blood products are now available and it's possible to survice with such products. Right?]
You’ve mentioned that before. It’s certainly cool what medical science has achieved, but it’s essentially irrelevant for this topic.
Today we are under a new covenant and it’s Jesus Christ’s blood that matters. Good on medical science though!
You cannot an informed choice about something you do not comprehend.
You’ve already criticized me twice for comprehending God pretty thoroughly LOL.
If God expects worship, then I demand proof that God exists and this particular law is just and moral.
Well, God is actually worthy of worship.
God created us in his divine image (a generous act on his part) and defined for us two important roles within his creation: one, a kingly role in which we govern over his creation; two, a priest type role in which we walk in faithful service with God and surrender to his will for our lives so that others may draw close to him as well. The goodness of God flows to his creation and thereby becomes an extension of his church…..we are equipped with his attributes.
To worship God means to be included in his existence and to acknowledge his position in the order of all things and to also understand our role within his creation. We are creatures that literally overflow with worship for things we love and admire and cherish most……worship and praise pours out of us. God doesn’t need our worship though….his existence is not contingent upon it, but he created us so that we may enter into fellowship with him and engage in praise in worship for which is absolutely worthy. As part of the created order we give praise for those things we value the most in life. Believers enjoy the very presence of God and he enjoys ours as well….it’s a relationship. Given his exalted status when we are given his approval it elicits our praise and worship….we almost can’t help it at times LOL.
As C.S. Lewis notes in reference to praise and worship:
“But the most obvious fact about praise – whether of God or anything – strangely escaped me. I thought of it in terms of compliment, approval, or the giving of honour. I had never noticed that all enjoyment spontaneously overflows into praise unless . . . shyness or the fear of boring others is deliberately brought in to check it. The world rings with praise – lovers praising their mistresses [Romeo praising Juliet and vice versa], readers their favourite poet, walkers praising the countryside, players praising their favourite game – praise of weather, wines, dishes, actors, motors, horses, colleges, countries, historical personages, children, flowers, mountains, rare stamps, rare beetles, even sometimes politicians or scholars. . . . Except where intolerably adverse circumstances interfere, praise almost seems to be inner health made audible. . . . I had not noticed either that just as men spontaneously praise whatever they value, so they spontaneously urge us to join them in praising it: 'Isn't she lovely? Wasn't it glorious? Don't you think that magnificent?' The Psalmists in telling everyone to praise God are doing what all men do when they speak of what they care about. My whole, more general, difficulty about the praise of God depended on my absurdly denying to us, as regards the supremely Valuable, what we delight to do, what indeed we can't help doing, about everything else we value.”
You demand proof, but the reality is you’re replying back and forth with proof of God’s existence. The problem I have with your demand is that I can lead you to God, but you refuse to follow. You will not engage in faith, you will not surrender to God on his terms…..it’s about your terms……what you demand. Again, I can lead a horse to a water, but I can’t make it drink.
Again, you seem to find no issue with the fact that God instituted a "law" that he knew nobody could follow, then set a penalty for violating this "law." That's bad enough in itself, but there's something even bigger: you say that God can't change that law; it's set and we must all live with the consequences. But you're OK when God develops a workaound, whereby he sent himself-as-his-son, to die to satisfy the requirements of the "law" by proxy.
Do you not see the absurdity?!
I don't understand it - I can't understand how a law that punishes me for something that it outside of my control. I consider such a thing unjust and immoral.
No. In my eyes, if your God is real, he should not punish people for having the nature he gave them. That he does speaks volumes.
Our sinful natures don’t prevent us from following God’s laws, but his standards are divine and righteous and we can’t meet them on our own. I’m sorry, but none of us can.
Our sinful natures create a proclivity in us for sin, but we aren’t forced to act upon that desire.
Although the law doesn’t act as a slave master, it functions as a light so that we can illuminate our shortcomings and need for Christ. What we can’t do individually is achieve righteousness so that we can enter into eternal communion and fellowship with God. Ultimately the most important choice we have to make is whether or not we accept or reject God. A lifetime of sin can be overcome if we affirm God and surrender to his will for our lives.
God doesn’t punish you for your sinful nature or your humanity. We certainly have a desire to sin, but yet we aren’t forced to act on that desire…..you freely choose to engage in it. I used to watch pornography and lust after women, but today I don’t watch pornography and really work to suppress all lustful desires with the help of Holy Spirit that is within me.
What I find interesting about God’s law is how dismissive some folks are of it. Most review the 10 commandments or Christ’s teaching in the NT and say, “there’s nothing of significance there…..just a bunch of common sense. You don’t need a God to tell you not to murder, not to steal, etc…..”
I’d expect if I left my wallet somewhere and you saw me do that you’d quickly return it to me. I’d also expect if you saw my child about to step into oncoming traffic and knew that I wasn’t paying attention you’d intervene and yank her out of harm’s way. I sincerely believe you would.
People downplay God’s law and emphasize our sinful desires, but clearly our sinful natures can be suppressed. We just can’t be deemed righteous by our own merits, but we are fallible and fall prey to our free will and engage in our sinful desires.
I might find it absurd, but my sticking point is that I’ve personally experienced a revelation of the Holy Spirit that changed me forever. In that moment I felt his goodness and grace overwhelm me. The Lord’s presence was so thick in that room I felt like I was moving through water. That revelation of his goodness and righteousness and grace and the fulfillment of scripture in my life thereafter left me no doubt of who God is…..and I just experienced a little taste LOL. I’m sorry man, but it just fills me up and makes me happy….want others to know the same in their lives.
Yes, I refuse to accept something that cannot be proven logically or rationally and is based on nothing but ancient superstition and stories of burning bushes and talking snakes.
Yep, you got “superstition”, “burning bushes” and “talking snakes”, but you left out a reference to “Noah’s ark”, “6000 years old”, “bronze age goatherder grimoire” and “flying spaghetti monster”. As always I here to help!
