Yes you are right let me change the language then because it is always going to be a problem right. In terms of my experience of god which is through christianity as it is the closest higher power to me. In terms God cannot do any wrong whatsoever, he can also do anything, therefore he can do wrong.
Well my understanding of anything is that is includes nothing also! Damn language again. Getting basic it’s people who don’t believe in god believe in something that something could be nothing or anything which in effect replaces a god of a christian understanding, it becomes their god of their understanding and perception.
True, but from what I know of Christian theology the Biblical God is also incomphrehensible but he is good. That is why he made something because it is against his nature to do nothing.
Something is a mark of goodness while nothiness is evil, if you insist that God can be nothing is just evil and self-contradictory on how Christian theology paints him.
Remeber as a rule you can never comprehend or contain God if you achieved that then that is not God anymore but just a pale and pathetic summary or attempt to “finitize” his infinity. Heck, even assigning gender to something of pure spirit is also a pathetic attempt of man to try understanding him. There I go again.
Ucci had what is probably the best response to these sorts of dilemmas a while ago: Why would God want to do that? Sure, he could build a rock that is as large as the universe (and therefore unliftable because there is nothing to lift it into) but what does that accomplish? Especially since all he’d have to do is make the universe a pinch larger and he could lift it. Likewise, I’m sure God could lie but why would he? A lack of ability shouldn’t be confused with a lack of will.
Yeah that beardy guy again,hard to shake off (no offense to anybody). I don’t agree that god is driven by a positive image necessarily in many christian based environments he can be viewed as a threat if we as sinners go outside of the moral principles of a chosen or inherited theology.
Good/Evil/Light/Dark…the symbol father son the holy ghost…has alot to do with Rosicucian symbolism the root of which could take us other places, society uses these signs and symbols today without knowing their history. Not sure about your last point can you hit me with that again if you are interested.
This in he context of this high brow philisophical forum is going to sound bad but bear with me, if you follow christianity and within that definition god can do anything well why does he want man to aquire and develop the characteristic of…let’s say killing. What christian rationalisation is there for that.
I heard a story ’ A man stood in the midst of a concentration camp during the second world war and look about him, all he saw was death adn despair and he said to the man beside him…‘where has GOD gone?’…to which the man replied …'where has man gone?
In the eyse of chrisitians are the actions of a god logically impossible? If so why do people pray to him to help them with things that are logically impossible?
The idea - thought - of “God” is just that - not a “him” who would “want” or “lie” or anything else human - “why” does not apply! If you believe in a super-natural, non-existant (not physical) being then reasoning based on the physical world does not make sense, it seems to me.
As the ignostic challenge demands, show that God has substance and meaning! Do more than assume that He is more than projection and pareidolia and the universal neurosis.
My consciousness says:
Ego demands certainty and continuity.
Ego creates Faith, logic, facts, and proof to combat uncertainty (fear).
None is any more valid than the other.
Peace
My 2 cents on the topic is that the word definitions we are using here for “all-powerful” and “all-knowing” are very important.
If I were to use my time machine and travel back in time to the 1st century and raise a few dead people, heal all the sick, and read peoples minds, I would bet that someone might write down that I was an amazing person “who knows everything and can do anything”.
However, 2000 years later we could sit around and take the 1st century writer to task by stretching his language to absurd limits that he would never have conceived. But I’m not sure that this would really change anything about who I actually was or what I could do. So, I fail to understand why these kind of discussions are important.