Problems - The Root Cause

[dybmh]

Dominance cannot be a branch and root at the same time. Would you agree?
So are there traits that lead to improper dominance? (Dominance isn't a bad thing in itself)

Yes, I agree that dominance cannot be branch and root at the same time.

The number one factor contributing to improper dominance ( all dominance actually ), is an inborn desire/comfort coming from controlling others. Not all people have this inclination.

 

[Alien826]

I see evidence for God. If God is, that is an absolute truth... which none of us can change.
I therefore cannot agree with your believe that it is not the absolute truth that there is a God.

That's an odd set of statements.

You see evidence for God. OK, lots of people do.

If God is, that is an absolute truth. Yes. I'm not sure how "absolute truth" is different from simple "truth". Do you mean "absolutely true", meaning totally true. With a single statement of existence, that's pretty obvious. Of course we're going to need a definition of "God" at some point.

I don't see how the last sentence follows from what precedes it. Maybe you didn't intend it to be a logical conclusion?

 

[Wildswanderer]

When has any supernatural being ever solved our problems for us?

Jesus solved the problem of sin and will eventually bring paradise to Earth.

 

[blü 2]

what people say about truth - that truth is relative to each person, hence there is no absolute truth.

I used the 'correspondence' definition of truth ─ that truth is a quality of statements and that a statement is true to the extent that it corresponds with / accurately reflects objective reality (ie the world external to the self). This has the advantage of giving an objective test for what is true.

Obviously it doesn't work for supernatural claims, since these are only known to exist as concepts / things imagined in individual brains. That accounts for why there are tens of thousands, if not more, kinds of supernatural belief around the world, and many many more through history.

But even so, outside of this sentence there are still no absolute truths. No statement about reality is protected from unknown unknowns, for example; and to be absolute, a statement would need to be proof against a lot of claims that are not expressed in falsifiable terms, such as that what we think is real is actually a dream or fantasy in the brain of a superbeing, or that the world sprang into being last Thursday with all our memories, all the evidence of the Big Bang, all the geological and fossil records perfectly in place as we find them ─ and so on.

That says to me, in other words, everything is determined by what we think or decide, individually.

Well, human affairs tend to be like that ─ though natural events intervene, of course, but at present what we think, or desire, won't change the earth's rotation hence day and night, nor the orbit of the moon, nor the orbit of the sun in relation to the Milky Way &c.

why man can never fix the problems, because they cannot agree on any set standard.
Each person decides what is good, bad, peace, harmony, etc.

As I've mentioned before, humans have evolved to have particular moral tendencies ─ child nurture and protection, dislike of the one who harms, like of fairness and reciprocity, respect for authority, loyalty to the group, and a sense of self-worth through self-denial. We've also evolved a capacity for empathy and a conscience. The rest of our morality ─ largely concerned with how we interact with each other in families, in society, at table, with authority and so on ─ is generally learnt from our upbringing, culture, education and experience.

We are basically tribal creatures, as any football match will demonstrate, or a glance at the Russian invasion of Ukraine (which has many parallels in the bible eg Deuteronomy 7:1-2 “When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations...then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy." (and again at 20:16).

Contrary to that, I'd like to see the world embrace the Gens una sumus principle ('We are one people") as the International Chess Federation puts it. I'd say, Do no harm, and treat others with decency, respect and inclusion. (A lot of churches, a lot of religions, find that last one very difficult.)

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Let me guess. You don't believe. You know. Right?
So when you are wrong, what do you call that?

Can you rephrase that?

 

[joelr]

I though of this after a conversation, in which one person indicated that peace and harmony was not absolutely defined, but relative to each persons view.
It reminded me of what people say about truth - that truth is relative to each person, hence there is no absolute truth.
That says to me, in other words, everything is determined by what we think or decide, individually.

This worldview really reminded me of the profound truth that was written centuries ago - the root cause of every problem on the face of the earth.
It starts in Genesis.

(Genesis 3:1-5)
1 Now the serpent was the most cautious of all the wild animals of the field that Jehovah God had made. So it said to the woman: “Did God really say that you must not eat from every tree of the garden?” 2 At this the woman said to the serpent: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden. 3 But God has said about the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden: ‘You must not eat from it, no, you must not touch it; otherwise you will die.’” 4 At this the serpent said to the woman: “You certainly will not die. 5 For God knows that in the very day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and bad.”

(Genesis 3:22)
22 Jehovah God then said: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad. . . .

There are various ideas on how these verses should be understood.
I appreciate the way they are understood by Jehovah's Witnesses... not because I am one, but because their understanding is in line with the context, and makes more sense, if we take the Bible as a complete book, inspired by God, as Paul and Jesus said.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
Luke 24:27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was written in all the Scriptures about Himself.

In a nutshell, the understanding is that the tree of knowledge of good and bad was a real tree which God placed in the garden as a representation of his right as sovereign, to decide, or set the rules for his creation, as to what is good and bad.

In other words, there is only one set law or standard, on which to determine what is good, and what is bad. People do not decide that for themselves.
So for example, John Doe does not get to decide, X is good for me, and Y is bad for me, while Jane Doe is deciding X is bad for me, and Y is good for me.

We see the problem.
There is disharmony, disorder, disunity - even chaos.
This independence from God - the supreme law giver, is the root of all problems.

When Adam and Eve chose to disobey God, and eat fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and bad, they were really rebelling against God's sovereignty - his right to rule them, and determine good and bad for them.
They chose to decide for themselves what was good, and what was bad.
This was instigated by the original serpent - the Devil, who encouraged the rebellion.

Hence, problem after problem, and why man can never fix the problems, because they cannot agree on any set standard.
Each person decides what is good, bad, peace, harmony, etc.

It's crazy, to me, that these cannot be identified in a definite way, but is left to subjective opinion. Crazy.
However, the same book that identifies the root cause of problems, also makes it clear that chaos, disorder... can only end, when one allows the source of true righteousness to determine what is good, or bad, for them.
1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of disorder, but of peace--as in all the churches of the saints.
Isaiah 32:17 The work of righteousness will be peace; the service of righteousness will be quiet confidence forever.

Is it not better to have one set standard, and law - from the supreme law giver - for all people to live by, especially considering that the evidence clearly shows, man does not know his way? Jeremiah 10:23

First there are many Gods and you cannot prove you God is the real or correct version. Evidence overwhelmingly says he's a made up creation based on Mesopotamian and older Gods.
So what you have here is one big holy war where everyone gets killed. Good plan.


Since it's "crazy" to you that people can't follow God are you going to be the first to accept that Allah and his rules will be strictly followed in the U.S. when Islam outnumbers Christians in 2050?
Neither can prove anything so you are going to have to go by popularity. Or does the whole country revolve around your beliefs in your mind?

But while Yahweh is the law giver for you do you think that we should have slaves as outlined in Exodus and Leviticus and a few other places? Should we get women and children as plunder of war if we win? Should graven images be illegal as well as women speaking in church (except for prophecy)?
Speaking to non-believers, should that be outlawed or just strictly followed?
If the Bible is the final law than there are many many laws that would need be enacted. Just the Sermon alone contains many laws now ignored. Freedom of religion would be the worst offense as it's the first 3 commandments.

Although you are incorrect, right now each person does not decide what is good. There are many actual laws, you speak as if it's a lawless society?
How is it that people are generally civil, get along, work together at all despite being so many other religions and beliefs in society?

How is secular Europe even standing? Or New England which is largely non-religious. When the church was in power why was there so much killing?


The serpent also isn't Satan. And the story is a metaphor borrowed from other places.

BILL MOYERS: Let me read Genesis 1, then I’ll ask you to read one from the Bassari legend.

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: All right.

BILL MOYERS: Genesis 1: “And God said, ‘Have you eaten from the tree which I commanded you that you should not eat?’ Then the man said, ‘The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree and I ate.’ And the Lord God said to the woman, What is this you’ve done?’ And the woman said, ‘The serpent deceived me, and I ate.’ Now, I mean, you talk about buck-passing, it starts very early.

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: That’s right.

BILL MOYERS: And then there’s the Bassari legend.

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: It’s been tough on serpents, too. “One day Snake said, ‘We too should eat these fruits. Why must we go hungry?’ Antelope said, ‘But we don’t know anything about this fruit.’ Then Man and his wife took some of the fruit and ate it. Unumbotte came down from the sky and asked, ‘Who ate the fruit?’ They answered, ‘We did.’ Unumbotte asked, ‘Who told you that you could eat that fruit?’ They replied, ‘Snake did.’ It’s the same story.

BILL MOYERS: Poor Snake.

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: It’s the same story.

BILL MOYERS: What do you make of this, that in all of these stories the principal actors are pointing to someone else as the initiator of the fall?

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: Yeah, but it turns out to be Snake. And Snake in both of these stories is the symbol of life throwing off the past and continuing to live.

BILL MOYERS: Why?

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: The power of life, because the snake sheds its skin, just as the moon sheds its shadow. The snake in most cultures is positive. Even the most poisonous thing, in India, the cobra, is a sacred animal. And the serpent, Naga, the serpent king, Nagaraga, is the next thing to the Buddha, because the serpent represents the power of life in the field of time to throw off death, and the Buddha represents the power of life in the field of eternity to be eternally alive.

Now, I saw a fantastic thing of a Burmese priestess, a snake priestess, who had to bring rain to her people by calling a king cobra from his den and kissing him three times on the nose. There was the cobra, the giver of life, the giver of rain, which is of life, as the divine positive, not negative, figure.

BILL MOYERS: The Christian stories turn it around, because the serpent was the seducer.

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: Well, what that amounts to is a refusal to affirm life. Life is evil in this view. Every natural impulse is sinful unless you’ve been baptized or circumcised, in this tradition that we’ve inherited. For heaven’s sakes!

 

[SkepticThinker]

Jesus solved the problem of sin and will eventually bring paradise to Earth.

Sin still exists. People still sin.

So the answer is never.
Oh sorry it's "I think it will happen some day."
Which is also a never.

 

[Left Coast]

How about an advanced civilization with a set law, and rules they know works for the good.
@mikkel_the_dane @Polymath257 would that not be better, than us trying to find our way, and creating chaos and wrecking havoc along the way?
After all, we see that man has dominated man to his harm... for centuries, as Solomon observed.

How do those "set laws" or rules get decided?

Believing that the infallible creator of the universe came up with your religion's rules is precisely the ideology that has led to so much of the awful dominance through history that you're talking about.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Sin still exists. People still sin.

So the answer is never.
Oh sorry it's "I think it will happen some day."
Which is also a never.

So, now you believe in sin? What happened to right and wrong being relative?

 

[SkepticThinker]

So, now you believe in sin? What happened to right and wrong being relative?

No, I do not. Christians claim that people are sinners. We're talking about your perspective here. You just claimed that god(s) have solved a problem for us humans. Then you gave an example of a problem that isn't solved, since sin still exists (according to you) and that everyone is a sinner. So Jesus didn't solve any problem of sin.

I've never claimed that right and wrong are relative. You must be thinking about someone else.

The answer is that no god(s) have ever been shown to intervene and fix our problems for us. Every piece of evidence we have indicates that we have to solve our own problems, and that no divine daddy is going to step in and fix anything for us.

 

[Wildswanderer]

No, I do not. Christians claim that people are sinners. We're talking about your perspective here. You just claimed that god(s) have solved a problem for us humans. Then you gave an example of a problem that isn't solved, since sin still exists (according to you) and that everyone is a sinner. So Jesus didn't solve any problem of sin.

I've never claimed that right and wrong are relative. You must be thinking about someone else.

The answer is that no god(s) have ever been shown to intervene and fix our problems for us. Every piece of evidence we have indicates that we have to solve our own problems, and that no divine daddy is going to step in and fix anything for us.

But he did fix the problem of sin, because if we are in Him, sinning no longer leads to eternal death. This life here is an eyeblink. What happens for the rest of our existence is what's important and that's taken care of.

 

[SkepticThinker]

But he did cause the problem of sin, because if we are in Him, sinning no longer leads to eternal death. This life here is an eyeblink. What happens for the rest of our existence is what's important and that's taken care of.

What happens in this one life we know we get for sure is what's important.

The rest of the stuff you're talking about, again, is "oh it's going to happen some time in the future" thus reinforcing my point that no god(s) have ever fixed our problems for us.

 

[nPeace]

If you are talking about some kind of after-life judgment, then that is no use whatsoever to us here on Earth. Otherwise, please explain.

Not afterlife.
Do you know what's happening two hundred trillion miles away at this moment?
You don't, right.

What if you could know... if what were happening would or could have a present and future impact on our life?
I'm sure the science guys would all like to know all the mysteries of quantum mechanics.

Well, whether we know it, or not, there is more happening outside of our scope.
This happened at a point in time in our present day, but is history now.
Daniel 7:9-10

Only those who value the truth recognizes this though. The Bible isn't fiction, as some claim. It tells us the truth.
Whether we believe it or not, is a matter for us.
That changes nothing.

You are just making my point for me. What you are doing is picking one religion's interpretation of one scriptural passage and claiming that is the Truth and all the others are false (by implication). Devotees of other religions, or other opinions within yours, could make statements that contradict yours, just as dogmatically. Where do we go from there?

Well if something is true, it doesn't really matter what I pick, does it?

For example, if I held out to a crowd - yourself included, one hundred $100.00 bills, and in there is only one legit bill... all the rest are counterfeit. ...but I picked the one I know is genuine... first.
It doesn't really matter who cries moo, that all are the same, does it?
One is genuine. If I have it, a thousand moos won't change that , will it.
While there are 99 people holding a counterfeit, there is only one holding the real thing.

So I don't find the argument you used - which I hear so very often - very useful.
It would make more sense to say no religion is good. Fullstop, and forget about who uses scripture or not.

Scientists have disagreements, and they have different ideas. You don't hear anyone making the argument that some scientists pick one interpretation and claim that is the Truth and all the others are false...

Oh wait. We do hear that.

The problem skeptics are having though, is that they aren't sure, That's not a problem for those who are.
All the prophets were sure. Jesus was sure. The apostles were sure. All of Jesus disciples were, and are sure... 100%.

It's comparable to they all holding the genuine bills, while counterfeits fly all around them. Perhaps you remember, that was the case? It's in the Bible.

(Matthew 7:15) Be on the watch for the false prophets . . .

(Matthew 24:11) Many false prophets will arise and mislead many. . .

(Matthew 24:24) For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will perform great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones.

(2 Corinthians 11:13) For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ.

Just as individuals can identify real money, from counterfeit, individuals are obligated to identify true religion, from false.
The marks are given.
Failing to identify those marks is not the fault of true religion.
Actually, true religion not only demonstrate the mark. They advocate them. People have no excuse.

It's good that you admit it, but will you also admit that "two wrongs make a right" is not a particularly logical argument?

Admit what, exactly?
Well, of course my statement doesn't render his statement unreasonable... because it was only to help him see the need to stop throwing stones, when you live in a glass house.

Besides, I do not consider all statements said in ignorance to be unreasonable. They are sometimes sincere, and can be meaningful.

I believe he was sincere, though wrong.
I don't think he fully thought it through, and so I turned the table, with the hope he realizes it.
If he persists with the argument, then I would consider him being unreasonable.

When anyone presents a solution to all of humanity's problem, they don't come across as kind of full of themselves... regardless of who they are.
Experts do this all the time, by using evidence and data. That's what I did.

However, I understand he was just looking for the first opportunity to lash out at me.
A few atheists on here would like to get their hands around my throat.

Does two wrongs make a right?
Sometimes.

Now, I hope you don't go telling me I am wrong, because we will have to get into that debate about who gets to decide what is good or bad.

I can think of some examples where God does not condemn this... for the purpose of helping the arrogant.

1. Ezekiel 3:7-9 Sometimes, being as stubborn as the stubborn is necessary. See Isaiah 50:7
2. 2 Corinthians 11:16-20 Sometimes, boasting - though not a good thing - may be necessary. See 2 Corinthians 10:8

So, yes, meeting arrogance with arrogance is necessary... at times.
The trick is in knowing when to use it... I don't admit to getting it right 100%.

That's an odd set of statements.

You see evidence for God. OK, lots of people do.

If God is, that is an absolute truth. Yes. I'm not sure how "absolute truth" is different from simple "truth". Do you mean "absolutely true", meaning totally true. With a single statement of existence, that's pretty obvious. Of course we're going to need a definition of "God" at some point.

I don't see how the last sentence follows from what precedes it. Maybe you didn't intend it to be a logical conclusion?

I see evidence for God. If God is, that is an absolute truth... which none of us can change.
I therefore cannot agree with your believe that it is not the absolute truth that there is a God.

I think it sounds confusing too... reading it over.
The reason is probably punctuation... or lack of it. , and because I copied and pasted his quote, and don't double check how it sounded. Oops.

I therefore cannot agree with your believe belief, that it is not the absolute truth that there is a God.
Is that okay now?

 

[nPeace]

Yes, I agree that dominance cannot be branch and root at the same time.

The number one factor contributing to improper dominance ( all dominance actually ), is an inborn desire/comfort coming from controlling others. Not all people have this inclination.

So do you consider all control to be wrong?
For example, is it wrong for a parent to control their child, until it is capable of controlling itself?
Is God's control of his children something bad, when it is administered for the good of humanity?
Of course, God's dominance does not remove freedom of choice. It only enforces his laws which are necessary for things to harmonize with his will... him being a God of order, and peace.

Man was not designed to dominate man, but God is dominating all things.
Are you applying dominance here, in the way you described it?

 

[nPeace]

Obviously it doesn't work for supernatural claims, since these are only known to exist as concepts / things imagined in individual brains. That accounts for why there are tens of thousands, if not more, kinds of supernatural belief around the world, and many many more through history.

What accounts for there being scores of different ideas, beliefs, theories... among scientists?

 

[blü 2]

What accounts for there being scores of different ideas, beliefs, theories... among scientists?

The nature of reasoned enquiry, including the process of formulating hypotheses in falsifiable form to account for what has been observed.

It's scientific consensus on that last part which accounts for scientific orthodoxy at any point of time. Of course, science proceeds by empiricism and induction, so none of its conclusions is ever final. Their justification at any point is that they work in reality, give us penicillin, computers, cell phones, fast-charging batteries, Mars rovers, the LED and so on.

There have been various attempts to apply reasoned enquiry to supernatural claims, but with no positive results. One simple example is James 5:

14 Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; 15 and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up.
​

To which we can reply, No, not at any rate significantly greater than spontaneous recovery.

​

 

[Kenny]

I though of this after a conversation, in which one person indicated that peace and harmony was not absolutely defined, but relative to each persons view.
It reminded me of what people say about truth - that truth is relative to each person, hence there is no absolute truth.
That says to me, in other words, everything is determined by what we think or decide, individually.

This worldview really reminded me of the profound truth that was written centuries ago - the root cause of every problem on the face of the earth.
It starts in Genesis.

(Genesis 3:1-5)
1 Now the serpent was the most cautious of all the wild animals of the field that Jehovah God had made. So it said to the woman: “Did God really say that you must not eat from every tree of the garden?” 2 At this the woman said to the serpent: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden. 3 But God has said about the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden: ‘You must not eat from it, no, you must not touch it; otherwise you will die.’” 4 At this the serpent said to the woman: “You certainly will not die. 5 For God knows that in the very day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and bad.”

(Genesis 3:22)
22 Jehovah God then said: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad. . . .

There are various ideas on how these verses should be understood.
I appreciate the way they are understood by Jehovah's Witnesses... not because I am one, but because their understanding is in line with the context, and makes more sense, if we take the Bible as a complete book, inspired by God, as Paul and Jesus said.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
Luke 24:27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was written in all the Scriptures about Himself.

In a nutshell, the understanding is that the tree of knowledge of good and bad was a real tree which God placed in the garden as a representation of his right as sovereign, to decide, or set the rules for his creation, as to what is good and bad.

In other words, there is only one set law or standard, on which to determine what is good, and what is bad. People do not decide that for themselves.
So for example, John Doe does not get to decide, X is good for me, and Y is bad for me, while Jane Doe is deciding X is bad for me, and Y is good for me.

We see the problem.
There is disharmony, disorder, disunity - even chaos.
This independence from God - the supreme law giver, is the root of all problems.

When Adam and Eve chose to disobey God, and eat fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and bad, they were really rebelling against God's sovereignty - his right to rule them, and determine good and bad for them.
They chose to decide for themselves what was good, and what was bad.
This was instigated by the original serpent - the Devil, who encouraged the rebellion.

Hence, problem after problem, and why man can never fix the problems, because they cannot agree on any set standard.
Each person decides what is good, bad, peace, harmony, etc.

It's crazy, to me, that these cannot be identified in a definite way, but is left to subjective opinion. Crazy.
However, the same book that identifies the root cause of problems, also makes it clear that chaos, disorder... can only end, when one allows the source of true righteousness to determine what is good, or bad, for them.
1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of disorder, but of peace--as in all the churches of the saints.
Isaiah 32:17 The work of righteousness will be peace; the service of righteousness will be quiet confidence forever.

Is it not better to have one set standard, and law - from the supreme law giver - for all people to live by, especially considering that the evidence clearly shows, man does not know his way? Jeremiah 10:23

A great piece.

 

[dybmh]

So do you consider all control to be wrong?
For example, is it wrong for a parent to control their child, until it is capable of controlling itself?
Is God's control of his children something bad, when it is administered for the good of humanity?
Of course, God's dominance does not remove freedom of choice. It only enforces his laws which are necessary for things to harmonize with his will... him being a God of order, and peace.

Agreed, not all control is bad.

Man was not designed to dominate man, but God is dominating all things.
Are you applying dominance here, in the way you described it?

I'm granting that submission to God's law would result is harmony, peace, etc. But I'm taking it further to determine the root of submission. In order to get to submission, a person must abandon a desire/comfort from being in control.

 

[nPeace]

Can you rephrase that?

You don't believe.
Therefore I am assuming, you know.
So, I'm asking, if something you know, proves to be false, what would you refer to the knowing?
Obviously you thought you knew, but didn't. So if it's not a belief, what is it?

 

[nPeace]

How do those "set laws" or rules get decided?

Believing that the infallible creator of the universe came up with your religion's rules is precisely the ideology that has led to so much of the awful dominance through history that you're talking about.

I don't agree.
What led to "the ideology that has led to so much of the awful dominance through history" was man deciding to be his own god, as I mentioned in the OP.

To answer your first question, an advanced civilization, say Type 3... 4... 5.... would be far more advanced than man - eons in advance.
What knowledge they acquire would not only be built on, but become automatic and instantaneous... as in, without thought.

We can think of the angels as an advanced "civilization"... greater than any type we can think of. How advanced?

Spoiler

(Genesis 31:11) . . .the angel of the true God said to me in the dream. . .
(Exodus 3:2) . . .Jehovah’s angel appeared to him in a flame of fire. . .
(Judges 6:21) . . .Jehovah’s angel then vanished from his sight. . .
(2 Kings 19:35) . . .On that very night the angel of Jehovah went out and struck down 185,000 men. . .
(Daniel 6:22) . . .My God sent his angel and shut the mouth of the lions. . .
(Acts 12:6-10) 6 When Herod was about to bring him out, that night Peter was sleeping bound with two chains between two soldiers, and guards in front of the door were keeping watch over the prison. 7 But look! Jehovah’s angel was standing there, and a light shone in the prison cell. Hitting Peter on the side, he woke him, saying: “Get up quickly!” And the chains fell off his hands. 8 The angel said to him: “Get dressed and put on your sandals.” He did so. Finally he said to him: “Put your outer garment on, and keep following me.” 9 And he went out and kept following him, but he did not know that what was happening through the angel was real. In fact, he thought he was seeing a vision. 10 Going past the first sentinel guard and the second, they reached the iron gate leading into the city, and this opened to them by itself. After they went out, they made their way down one street, and immediately the angel departed from him.

God is described as being far more advanced in knowledge, thought, power, wisdom... you name it.

It's not hard to understand why he is in the position to set laws and rules... for all. Is it?