If you were God?

Originally posted by ckoh1965
[b]Of course Adam and Eve had no free will. Apparently, they were free to roam around in Paradise happily. But they were still subject to a restriction. They were not allowed to eat those damn sweet apples! Why would God want to put them to the test, I don't know.

Why did he put them to the test? I thought you said that Adam and Eve had no free will? If so, they were simply going through the motions, no?

Originally posted by ckoh1965
Perhaps just to feel pleased with Himself that all other beings MUST obey his wishes. Maybe I wouldn't have been so negative in my opinion on Him if he had disallowed, say, killing another human. But He disallowed the consumption of apples, for pete's sake!

So you would allow free that was restricted in some way? You could only do "bad things" that were deemed of a lesser evil in your site.

Originally posted by Anonymousnumber1
If I was a 'god', then I'd make sure that my creations knew that I existed.

What if they refused to believe you? Would you then make them believe?

Originally posted by Starrman
I would also allow them to evolve so much they could begin to use my godly powers, provided that they were a peaceful, rational group who would not abuse such power. My hope would be that they would eventually sublime and depart for another universe or dimension to begin again.[/b]

But I thought you said they had free will and that you would let them be? Why the limitations of being peaceful or rational? Why would you care? What would you do about it if they did get out of line? Would you be capable of doing something about it if you were not omniscient?

Originally posted by whodey
So religious disputes are the only disputes predicated on nonsense? It would seem to me that any arguement has a wrong side to it. After all, no two opinions can be right at the same time. In fact, both could be wrong. Therefore at least one side of the arguement would have to be predicated on nonsense, no?

Disputes which cause entire civilizations to murder each other in the name of their God for centuries (i.e. Kashmir, Ireland, Crusades, etc. etc.) are what I am talking about, not an argument over flat tax or who ate the last slice of pizza. These are humanity's worst blunders that I am talking about. All in the name of God and religion. It makes me want to puke thinking how many have died for His cause.

Originally posted by whodey
I don't mean to agitate you. I only am trying to get you to think about some things. In your life, if you go out of your way to help someone and they never acknowledge your effort or say thank you, what is your gut instinct? Is it not one of ungreatfulness on their part? Is a "thank you" deserving even though no one is forcing them to say thank you?

Don't you ever preach to me again or you'll end up in the dojo, son.

Originally posted by Darfius
Originally posted by darvlay
[b]If I was God and I created a race of humans who I claimed to love more than all other creations, I would at least reveal myself to them and provide proof of my existence so that 95% of them wouldn't have to burn in hell when all is said and done.

Are you claiming that the only proof for His existence would be re ...[text shortened]... e 'burns' in hell. The fire was symbolic of judgment, i.e. "the Lord will come in fire."[/b]

There is no historical proof of God, in my mind. Philosophical discussions and texts (Aquinas, I'm thinking of specifically) are something which I respect and do consider, however I do not consider them as proofs, per se. Revelation is the way, Barfius!

Originally posted by dottewell
If I had infinite intelligence, and perfect foreknowledge of the consequences of my every action, I doubt I'd bother doing anything at all.

Certainly not animal experiments. That's just cruel.

Animal experiments? If you were God and all knowing, why would you create us to do experiments on us? Especially if you knew the results beforehand? This would require you to have a sadistic nature, no?

Originally posted by whodey
So you would give them a second chance. Does this mean you would be willing to die for them if it meant it was the only road to provide them with redemption?

That is a false dilemma. Because it isn't the only road to redemption. It's only because of the christian god's extreme incompetance that he opted for that tortured path. Any god worthy of the name (especially an omniscient one) wouldn't have let himself be maneuvered into such an awkward position. He would have done the job right the first time.

Originally posted by darvlay
Disputes which cause entire civilizations to murder each other in the name of their God for centuries (i.e. Kashmir, Ireland, Crusades, etc. etc.) are what I am talking about, not an argument over flat tax or who ate the last slice of pizza. These are humanity's worst blunders that I am talking about. All in the name of God and religion. It makes me want to puke thinking how many have died for His cause.

So what you are really talking about is murder and war. Does this require a religious context?

Originally posted by whodey
So what you are really talking about is murder and war. Does this require a religious context?

What do you think, question boy?

Originally posted by whodey
Is this not problematic? Are you not the one holding everything together? If you are not onmiscient, is this not asking for chaos within your creation?

Are you suggesting that you know the full nature of god? You presume too much, this is my god, not yours. Besides, why should there not be a natural order to the world I create?

Originally posted by whodey
But I thought you said they had free will and that you would let them be? Why the limitations of being peaceful or rational? Why would you care? What would you do about it if they did get out of line? Would you be capable of doing something about it if you were not omniscient?

They weren't limitations, they were expectations. I am hardly likely to give the gift of godhead to people not ready to recieve it. There is no line for them to step over, merely conditions of which they are unaware that, if met, will provide reward. Why would I do anything about their actions, they have free will remember. I can see you're having a really hard time reconciling this against your idea of god.

Originally posted by whodey
Animal experiments? If you were God and all knowing, why would you create us to do experiments on us? Especially if you knew the results beforehand? This would require you to have a sadistic nature, no?

Yes, Whodey. That's precisely my point. Why would god create man?

Originally posted by rwingett
That is a false dilemma. Because it isn't the only road to redemption. It's only because of the christian god's extreme incompetance that he opted for that tortured path. Any god worthy of the name (especially an omniscient one) wouldn't have let himself be maneuvered into such an awkward position. He would have done the job right the first time.

You are assuming that God created everything in a vacuum. There are no laws governing the spiritual world. This simply is not the case. The spritual world has an order to it as does the physical world. In fact, Christ lived by these spiritual laws. An example is his teaching that if one desires to be served then one must first serve. He did this by serving mankind and dying for them. These same laws dictate sinfulness equates death. If God breaks this law, does this not make him a law breaker? Would this not conflict with his supposide holy nature? How does one get around this law except for another law stating that if one dies without sin, their life is taken unjustly. Therefore a debt is then required to be paid by death for this unjust act to its victim. This victim is then owed something by death as a recompense. Thus through Christ, who now has power over sin and death, we can be redeemed.