Thread: If I Were God...

There is a scientific factor here, as has been implied. Without free will (I know it is used a lot but I don't see a good reason why it shouldn't be other than overuse), or any individual traits/goals, we are nothing. Evolution would only be a physical thing. We as man, in our intelligent form, would go no where though. That is my take on it at least.

Now, assuming we do still have all these things we enjoy (such as free will and the ability to make decisions in any circumstance), I ask you this: what is your plan? How do you propose to stop suffering and problems? I know you are not a being of said power, but take a stab at it. Make something up that can work and then I might agree with you if it can stand in an argument.

Please don't use, "Well God could do it because he is infinitely powerful." I don't find that a legitimate argument because he can create but things logically come with their price.

We are all in agreement that we are dealing with an Omnipotent creator, correct?

If I had that power and I could have a child that child would live every day in total bliss and harmony without the realization of any thought process or perception of 'bad'

I do understand the arguments presented, just not under the context of Universals question.[/color]

Please don't use, "Well God could do it because he is infinitely powerful." I don't find that a legitimate argument because he can create but things logically come with their price.[/b]

That is precisely what has been said. Why must they come with a price? Whose logic is that? Yours, humans or Gods?

Originally Posted by Howetzer

We are all in agreement that we are dealing with an Omnipotent creator, correct?[/b]

I beg to differ. The Commonly Held Assumption that God is Omnipotent was in a large part a result of the False Apostle Paul's attempt to expand and consolidate his own Earthly Power, and therefore his own as Christ's Vicar and Pope. The Paulist presumption of an omnipotent God is not quite as true as some might see it.

One need consider the Origin of Evil in order to ascertain exactly how Omnipotent our Creator is. Adam and Eve's partaking of the Apple from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was just the result of a longstanding cellestial Feud and Civil War between the higher Choirs of Angels. Satan, more correctly Lucifer, was the one being who, in his Incarnation as the Serpent in the Garden of Eden brought Sin to Earth. But God did not forsee Lucifer's Rebellion. So instantly we are left with the conclusion that God is not Omniscient.

How, though, can God be Omnipotent if he is not Omniscient? Surely the power to forsee the future already casts a most Crucial Doubt on God's Omnipotence?

Originally Posted by Howetzer

That is precisely what has been said. Why must they come with a price? Whose logic is that? Yours, humans or Gods?[/b]

Well, since we have already established that God is not All-Seeing, now we come to the problem of determining whether or not God was Powerless to prevent Lucifer's rebellion, or whether instead though he did not Foresee it, he could have stopped it but instead chose not to and instead let Lucifer exercise Free Will. This is somewhat more troublesome, and is an Immense Theological Difficulty, particularly when one considers the precept that Humans, alone of All God's Creations (INCLUDING Angels) were Given the gift of Free Will. This precept entails that Angels were not given free will, and therefore, that Lucifer's Rebellion was, even if not foreseen by God, predestined. And also that God did not possess sufficient Power to stop Lucifer's Rebellion.

And so, if one accepts all this, then the only Logical Conclusion is that God, though immenseley powerful, is not strictly All-Powerful.

Welcome to Dreamveiws. Now on another note explain to me how is that you can just jump straight head first into this debate and not even introduce yourself? First of all everything you said is wrong and inconclusive at best, secondly who are you?

Howetzer, I'm glad you see what I am saying. Thanks.

Ne-yo and others, you keep doing exactly what I asked you not to do. You keep talking about laws of reality God has to follow. You keep saying things to the effect of, "But Adam screwed up everything. God had to let him," and "Without this, you can't have that." That happens every time I get into this discussion. It is why I started this thread and labelled it "a new approach". What you are not getting, no matter how clear I am, is that an infinitely powerful being would not HAVE TO do ANYTHING. If you say suffering has to exist because such and such is necessary for whatever, my response is always that an omnipotent being could make it where such and such is NOT necessary for whatever. The part about problems being gone in a puff is what you overlook every time. The scenario I described could exist with an infinitely powerful creator. ANY problem you say would exist in that scenario could be zapped out, and any needed benefit could be brought about. NO PROBLEMS. You keep talking about problems. I am saying NO PROBLEMS. Are you saying that God is not capable of that?

Originally Posted by Universal

Any problems with that would be gone in a puff.
[/b]

I don't believe in free will, even if I did I wouldn't think suffering is necessary for its existence, even if I did I would say that God would be able to make it where suffering is not necessary for the existence of free will, and free will isn't jack crap compared to an eternity of infinite happiness for all.

Originally Posted by Ne

Welcome to Dreamveiws. Now on another note explain to me how is that you can just jump straight head first into this debate and not even introduce yourself? First of all everything you said is wrong and inconclusive at best, secondly who are you? [/b]

Hello too.
But Ne Yo makes a good point. You have apparently not have read the post. Because while your argument may make some sense in context to an entirely different post, it clearly is way off here.

Now before anyone reads this I want you to think of the song EvenFlow by Pearl Jam.

Okay Universal Mind I've given it a lot of thought and I may have something more feasible to you. Now I'm not saying that God "has" rules to follow. What I'm simply implying is that God, even though could've given us complete and total ignorant bliss he refuses to alter his original purpose for us. he's not like us (people) Yes, He knew that Satan would rebel as well as other Angels, Yes he also knew that Adam and Eve were going to Sin, in yet he still allowed it. This within itself is a prime example of the Free Will that has been imposed on all of God's creation and even God's invisible creations. Satan made a Choice to disregard God, Satan was God's first Angel created among his invisible creations by far the most beautiful of all Angels, That's why he has been referred to as the Morning Star. He had Free Will but Satan made a choice to go against God especially when God subjected Angels to us, He felt that we were the new creation and it's not fair that we are put on a higher pedestal than the Angels. We do not have the same the Power as Angels and we are not immortal but yet God has shown a greater love for his human creation. Adam and Eve made a choice to Disobey God. The Father did in fact create a world that was perfect inside and out. The first human couple was perfect by all means of the word. In creating the earth and the human family, God never intended that man should die. God's purpose was that humans would live on earth forever amid Paradise conditions.

God did not create humans to suffer. On the contrary, he endowed the first human couple, Adam and Eve, with perfect minds and bodies, prepared a delightful garden to serve as their home, and assigned them meaningful, satisfying work. However, their continued happiness depended on their recognizing God's ruler ship and his right to decide what was good and what was bad. That divine prerogative was represented by a tree called "the tree of the knowledge of good and bad." Adam and Eve would demonstrate their subjection to God if they obeyed his command not to eat from that tree.

Now everything above is pretty much self-explanatory The meat of your question will be presented in the following sentences. Now as you mentioned if you were God then maybe perhaps you would've simply overlooked Adam and Eve's sin Right? But see then you have a problem, because that would have further undermined respect for your authority, perhaps encouraging future rebellions and resulting in even greater suffering. In addition, condoning such disobedience would have made you as a God a party to wrongdoing. The Bible writer Moses reminds us: "God's works are perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness, with whom there is no injustice; righteous and upright is he." (Deuteronomy 32:4) To be true to himself, God allowed Adam and Eve to suffer the consequences of their disobedience.

Now I'm not going to lie I cannot comprehend or even began to fathom the thinking of the Almighty, and this is the problem that you are running into, because you are putting human thought into this scenerio and God is not human. So what if God immediately destroyed the first human couple along with Satan, the invisible instigator of their rebellion? He had the power to do so right? But here we have another problem because Adam and Eve would not have produced offspring’s subject to a legacy of suffering and death. However, such a demonstration of divine power would not have proved the rightfulness of God's authority over his intelligent creatures. Furthermore, had Adam and Eve died childless, that would have signaled the failure of God's purpose to fill the earth with their perfect descendants. (Genesis 1:28) And "God is not like men. Whatever he promises, he does; he speaks, and it is done." Numbers 23:19 Now God is not trapped by laws, God is true to himself and his works, so he will not alter his original purpose for his creation. God promised us a paradise earth where we will live to time indefinite, and even though God can just disregard it and start fresh and new he will not change over because his love is so great for his creation. Let me give you an example. And you may take this as Bogus but this is the real deal. God knew eons ago when you would arrive to this earth, even to the nanosecond. God has given you existence knowing that you would not believe in him. Now if that's not unconditional love then I don't know what is.

In his perfect wisdom, God decided to allow the rebellion to proceed for a limited time. The rebels would have ample opportunity to experience the effects of independence from God. History would demonstrate beyond a doubt mankind's need for divine guidance and the superiority of God's rule over man's or Satan's. At the same time, God took steps to ensure that his original purpose for the earth would be fulfilled. So inturn he is still giving us what he has promised us, life eternal in a paradise earth.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

That is precisely what has been said. Why must they come with a price? Whose logic is that? Yours, humans or Gods?
[/b]

To a degree, I suppose it would be mine and some others. I do not claim to know God or His intentions.

However, if we lacked certain things for the "better good", I think that would be pointless to both He and His creation. He created a logical balance to help us. He granted us the ability to appreciate His universe without Him intervening in order to force us to appreciate it. I will go into greater detail a bit later in this post.


I think Ne-yo sums up the unconditional love fairly nicely. Like I have said, I don’t see love in your makings, Universal.

Now, I must ask again, what is your plan to create all the hypothetical promises you make? So far, it doesn’t seem to me that it would work. If I have the option to do anything to the beings around me, it seems that that alone would dawn problems.

To keep us as individuals, I must be allowed to do it though. For you to stop it, inevitably contradicts your love for your creation, and, like Ne-yo indicated, shows that you failed.

Now, to address the question of why there are even these possibilities. You might disagree with this, and that is ok. I am not trying to persuade you vice make a point.

You wish for there only to be positives, but to have positives you must first have negatives. Why though? God didn’t have to create it I suppose, but in order to define what is good, we must first have a foundation. The life you would be creating is not a paradise. It is not eternal bliss because I would be without an understanding. This world would be mediocre. In your fantasy, everything would be neutral. Even if there was good and then better, I would not comprehend the concept nor take it in as extremely favorable. I would take it for granted.

Perhaps now, you might change your creation. You would make it where I am always happy no matter what. This would be a hollow feeling though. We have been granted an understanding to why we are what we are. In your world, I have no reason to be happy short of you forcing it upon me. I am nothing more than an empty vessel with thoughts dictated by you and you alone.

I pride myself to have independent interpretations and values to things. Yes, some things are run through chemical processes, and might affect my analysis. The fact is, I can analyze it and I am not forced to be overjoyed with everything. I have preferences and interests. Your world would be mechanical, lacking existence of individuals. That does not seem like bliss at all, for I wouldn’t even truly recognize it if it were.

Wasn't God being a little naive when he told Adam n Eve not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge - its like leaving a couple of kids alone with a cookie jar and strict instructions not to eat the lovely cookies - entrapment?

Anyway I'm glad they did - or rather I prefer the idea I am the descendant of curious rebels rather than disinterested yes-men (even if they were happy ones).

IMO infinite bliss is accessible now - not sure what God has to do with it though. But infinite bliss surely encompases diversity, perhaps even a little pain & sadness here and there? Otherwise it would be insipid homogeneity?

Originally Posted by Ne

But see then you have a problem[/b]

That sums up your answer. Remember... NO PROBLEMS!

Then you went on to say that we just can't understand. That does not answer anything.

Originally Posted by Universal

That sums up your answer. Remember... NO PROBLEMS!

Then you went on to say that we just can't understand. That does not answer anything.
[/b]

You made it look like I just said you can't understand and left it at that. Would you care to give me your P.O.V. to the other stuff I mentioned.

I have alwasy found when arguing with a relgous person of most major religions.
There is no way to win
because the argument that we cannot not possibly comprhend even i nthe sightest the Almighty's intentions
or reasons
can be regurgated repeatedly.

thats just my opinions
and without being drawn into a disucssion regarding his existence,
you cannt not hoenstly combat that point
or at least iv eenver been able to
Imran

Originally Posted by imran_p

I have alwasy found when arguing with a relgous person of most major religions.
There is no way to win
because the argument that we cannot not possibly comprhend even i nthe sightest the Almighty's intentions
or reasons
can be regurgated repeatedly.[/b]

You're Funny..lol So in that case then why even put up an argument if these are your true feelings. You and I have went back and fourth on several topics and you didn't seem to have these feelings then. So where did all this come from all of a sudden? Becuase in yet you continued to debate and argue, Which means that statement you made is contridictory. Let's put it this way don't say stuff you don't mean because if this is your conclusion and if you really felt truth to this statement then you wouldn't bother even debating anything on a religious level. WOULD YOU? But that's not the case is it Irman, IS IT!!!!
LOl..just messing around man

haha no, i actually tend to find your deifntely on of them people that doesnt always rely on tht one argument

But i do find that in the end, most relgious discussion tend to reach this peak, where that aegument is presented =)

but yes your right =D
only SOME rellgious discussions end up i nthat manner

Imran

Originally Posted by imran_p

I have alwasy found when arguing with a relgous person of most major religions.
There is no way to win
because the argument that we cannot not possibly comprhend even i nthe sightest the Almighty's intentions
or reasons
can be regurgated repeatedly.

thats just my opinions
and without being drawn into a disucssion regarding his existence,
you cannt not hoenstly combat that point
or at least iv eenver been able to
Imran[/b]

With all due respect Ne-yo I think he is right.
Have you answered to why things could not be the way Universal intended? That is to say without adding your own variables to it?
Left as is, can you argue that point without going back to the inevitable and always foreseeable and redundant responses to an answer that religious people cannot seem to answer?

It actaully does on several levels. Like for instance I debate against other people in regards to the scriptures and It gets to that point even amongst those that are debating from the same reference but different views. But I guess that's how it goes. It's really heard to find a nitch that someone can follow who doesn't believe in God but it's really one or the other you cannot seem to find grey area no matter how much you debate.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

With all due respect Ne-yo I think he is right.
Have you answered to why things could not be the way Universal intended? That is to say without adding your own variables to it?
Left as is, can you argue that point without going back to the inevitable and always foreseeable and redundant responses to an answer that religious people cannot seem to answer?
[/b]

I agree with imran as well. That is why religion is a difficult subject that I tend to avoid. The only real reason I am here is because this topic spawned from my topic, which turned into a topic about religion vice a religious feature.

The problem goes both ways. Perhaps we can't make a successful argument on why God cannot create a world without problems (which may paradoxically be a problem in itself). On the other hand, we have heard no plan to contradict. Promises are one thing but they must be supported. We are creating scenarios and possible reasons. All we have received in return are counterarguments that either claim to understand God/His power, or the consistent accusation that the question is not being answered. We are all doing this though. None of us can claim to understand God and His intentions, thus leading some of us to simply believe He does not exist. That is simple enough I suppose. I don't think the argument really shows his existence or lack there of though.

The way I see it is that Universal has his way of showing "love". God has his way with his own plan. Frankly, we all kind of have our individual ways to show it.

Some of us disagree with Universal, just as he does us.

I personally don't think a world without problems has value, nor do I think He could give it a solid value. I am not saying it is impossible, but as of right now I don't see how it is without taking anything away.

Originally Posted by Ne

You made it look like I just said you can't understand and left it at that. Would you care to give me your P.O.V. to the other stuff I mentioned.
[/b]

My point of view is that you talked about two things-- the problems that would exist in a situation with no problems and the notion that we can't comprehend God's mysterious ways.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

With all due respect Ne-yo I think he is right.
Have you answered to why things could not be the way Universal intended? That is to say without adding your own variables to it?
Left as is, can you argue that point without going back to the inevitable and always foreseeable and redundant responses to an answer that religious people cannot seem to answer?
[/b]

Howie: Im not liking your tone right about now I'm going to need for you to edit that post. As a matter of fact I'm going to need you to Edit every single post that you've created or replied to since joining Dreamviews and come back when your done. We'll see you in Oh, about 5 years...LOL j/k

Originally Posted by Howetzer

My point of view is that you talked about two things-- the problems that would exist in a situation with no problems and the notion that we can't comprehend God's mysterious ways.
[/b]

Okay then let's get serious. I'll be straight up with you Universal Mind. For us to assume that God's highest priority is the prevention of suffering in an animal is without warrant whatsoever. The blanket statement “If I were God, there would be no suffering.” is simply not true, when taken by itself. God has a number of goals for the creature ("God wants God's creatures to enjoy eating", "God wants God's creatures to experience conspecific interactions of give/take", "God wants the higher animals to experience community by sharing", etc.), and any attempts to prioritize a specific goal (i.e., absence of suffering) to an absolute is exceptionally difficult to defend. However I am curious on something, It's something I've should questioned before even getting into this. What do you consider suffering? I mean what would you consider the concept of a creature suffering? Are you talking about physically, emotionally, and mentally?

Oh yeah? Well, I can top that. I would create an existence with NO suffering of ANY kind. And everybody would be able to enjoy eating or things even cooler than that, and they would enjoy it INFINITELY. That's how loving I am.

I'd worship that.

me too
who cares about free will =)
I wudnt know id be misisng it
Imran

Don't worry, UM will give us free will. He's nice like that.

I just don't think it is possible for some differences to be compromised upon.
The Blue Meanie and I have went round & round on occasion. There were times we actually agreed to disagree. We had just decided to relinquish the discussion.

<div align="center">Earlier I said it as simple as I could possibly understand it to be.</div>
If I had a child & I was all powerful, my child would suffer in no manner. Total bliss (forever

• EVER

I can&#39;t, obviously. I can&#39;t comprehend why God would not either. But I certainly don&#39;t claim to understand God&#39;s plans. For if there is a God almighty he would know a better plan than I.


In the mean time Ne-Yo, I will be editing posts.