Questions for God

[blü 2]

The real God doesn't mix with anyone.

“Beware, beware, lest thou be led to join partners with the Lord, thy God. He is, and hath from everlasting been, one and alone, without peer or equal, eternal in the past, eternal in the future, detached from all things, ever-abiding, unchangeable, and self-subsisting. He hath assigned no associate unto Himself in His Kingdom, no counsellor to counsel Him, none to compare unto Him, none to rival His glory. To this every atom of the universe beareth witness, and beyond it the inmates of the realms on high, they that occupy the most exalted seats, and whose names are remembered before the Throne of Glory.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 192

And all should cry, Beware! Beware!​

His flashing eyes, his floating hair!​

(as Sam Coleridge remarked).

 

[Bird123]

No part of me is non-physical and your assertions don't amount to pointing out to me anything different.

My brain functions, life support systems, everything about me, is the product of chemical and biochemical bioelectric phenomena. Nor have you demonstrated anything different.


That means God exists in reality, the world external to the self.

So some videos please.


There wasn't any reality before last Thursday. The universe sprang into being just as you see it last Thursday, with all your memories in place exactly as they are now.

As I said, your job is to demonstrate that that's incorrect, not merely assert it.

So now, I have a Job???? You don't seem to like the Reality of my replies. With such a narrow view and your desire to hang onto your beliefs, perhaps all I really need to do is wait until you no longer have a physical body. All those beliefs will no longer exist from that point on. You will have the proof you desire without doing anything at all.

Oh, that job is so easy!! Do nothing. Won't you be surprised?

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[F1fan]

In my opinion, it's a pointless endeavor for me to try to convince you and other atheists that my beliefs in spirits and the spiritual realm are valid. As far as I'm concerned, if you want to change your mind and believe me, then that's fine with me, but if you don't, then that's okay with me too. I have long since resolved not to argue and debate with atheists or other skeptics about my personal experiences with what I consider to be paranormal. I know what it is I believe, and I know why I believe as I do (as demonstrated in the posts I linked). While I often enjoy conversing with skeptics, whether online or in person, I don't feel compelled to have them validate my own beliefs, whether spiritual or what I consider to be paranormal. I'm not interested in convincing them.

I find the paranormal interesting, and have seen some interesting findings. I'm not as convinced as you are, but also haven't challeneged what you have stated on the subject, nor your experiences. To my mind paranormal issues are vastly different than religious claims, and don't equate the two.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

God's knowledge of what will happen is not the cause of things.

Disagree that a tri-omni deity if it existed would not be the cause of everything, but even if I stipulate to that, why should it matter? Such a deity still has the power to make things right, and if it chooses not to, it would responsible for that decision. This is the corner the Abrahamist paints himself into by declaring that his god is tri-omni. With that comes omniresponsibility even if the believer is forced to excuse his god and blame man for its work.

The reason the world is imperfect is because of man.

This is what you are forced to proclaim if you assume that your all-knowing and omnipotent god is also perfectly good, but the concept is incoherent. You've god man responsible for every aspect of nature apart from himself. Why do worms infect eyes and cause blindness? Man, and his rebelliousness, because you need to hold the god blameless or explain why these infections are consistent with infinite goodness and power, but the assertion is self-refuting.

 

[loverofhumanity]

No, that's mere assertion. It can't be correct if there's no way for God to know there's nothing [he] doesn't know [he] doesn't know.

So show it's correct by showing HOW God knows there's nothing [he] doesn't know [he] doesn't know.

And how am I supposed to do that when I possess a finite limited and error prone mind? God I believe is the Unknowable Essence so beyond the attributes of God I don’t know anymore. It’s like asking the painting to describe the innermost workings of the painter which is outside my reality and dimension of thought and the painting has no way of doing that. Even the Prophets and Messengers don’t know or understand the essence of God, only that He exists.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You’re expecting the God you don’t believe exists, to answer a riddle you set for him on a forum? That’s odd.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without accepting it."

 

[Muffled]

What, cares about individuals, or just the species?

I beleve He said even the hairs on your head but for me that is fewer each day.

 

[Muffled]

Why just the kids?
Have you ever wondered why God hasn't saved everyone from everything you don't like?

Are you familiar with the king who asked for a longer life? It turned out he had a son after that who was evil. If he had died when he was supposed to Israel might have avoided having another evil king.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Are you familiar with the king who asked for a longer life? It turned out he had a son after that who was evil. If he had died when he was supposed to Israel might have avoided having another evil king.

It's funny how the best action for God to take is always for him to act as if he doesn't exist.

 

[Muffled]

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without accepting it."

I believe there is a difference between an idea occurring and entertaining it.

 

[RestlessSoul]

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without accepting it."

I don’t know who you’re quoting there, but it’s a sentiment I certainly applaud. It would be good see more of such a rare quality in action.

 

[Trailblazer]

Disagree that a tri-omni deity if it existed would not be the cause of everything,

That is illogical, since humans have free will, so humans make choices that cause 'some things' that happen in this world.

but even if I stipulate to that, why should it matter? Such a deity still has the power to make things right, and if it chooses not to, it would responsible for that decision.

What do you mean by "make things right?" Why should a deity do everything that 'you think He should do' simply because He has the power to do so? God has the power to eliminate every living thing on earth in one split second. Do you think God should do that?

This is the corner the Abrahamist paints himself into by declaring that his god is tri-omni. With that comes omniresponsibility even if the believer is forced to excuse his god and blame man for its work.

Blame God for what work? What did God do that is wrong?
This is the corner the atheist paints himself into by declaring that God is responsible for everything that man does wrong.
God needs no excuses since God is Infallible. Only humans need excuses since humans are fallible.

This is what you are forced to proclaim if you assume that your all-knowing and omnipotent god is also perfectly good, but the concept is incoherent. You've god man responsible for every aspect of nature apart from himself. Why do worms infect eyes and cause blindness? Man, and his rebelliousness, because you need to hold the god blameless or explain why these infections are consistent with infinite goodness and power, but the assertion is self-refuting.

God does not cause these infections so God is not to blame. There is no way to know why bad things happen and admittedly it is difficult to reconcile all the bad things that happen to people that were not freely chosen with an all-good God, and it is even hard to reconcile these things with a loving God.

I watched an episode of Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman last night where the preacher went blind suddenly due to inflammation of his retina, a rare condition that often reverses itself, but in his case it was not reversed so he remained blind. Dr. Quinn questioned how a loving God would allow such a thing, and so did I. Many people questioned why God would allow such a thing, but since there were many God-fearing Christians in that town, most of them did not blame God. In the end, everyone accepted this man's plight, including the preacher, but this is only a TV program. I did not accept it, and I could not sleep after that. Even though I know it was only a TV program, things like this happen in real life.

It must have been my night. After that I watched an episode of Little House on the Prairie and many people in the town came down with Typhus and many people died. Of course the townspeople did not blame God since they were all Christians.

Why do bad things happen to good people? Why does God allow it? I think a better question is why did God create a world in which He 'knew' these things would happen causing untold suffering and death, leaving loved ones behind to grieve? I don't think there is an answer to that question, at least not an answer we will have in this life.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is patently illogical, since humans have free will, so humans make choices that 'cause' what happens in this world.

If God created humans and free will, then any product of humans' free will would ultimately be the responsibility of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

If God created humans and free will, then any product of humans' free will would ultimately be the responsibility of God.

That is commonly known as 'passing the buck.'

God is not responsible for ANYTHING that humans choose to do, although God is responsible for the things that happen to people that were not chosen.
Things that happen to us not by choice is our fate, and God is responsible for our fate.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is commonly known as 'passing the buck.'

God is not responsible for ANYTHING that humans choose to do, although God is responsible for the things that happen to people that were not chosen.
Things that happen to us not by choice is our fate, and God is responsible for our fate.

It's like talking to a wall. Never mind.

 

[Trailblazer]

It's like talking to a wall. Never mind.

It's like talking to a wall. Never mind.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

humans have free will. God is not responsible for ANYTHING that humans choose to do

If humanity has free will and it was the choice of a deity, then the deity is responsible for what results from that action. The law holds a parent responsible for the acts of its children even though the parent did not give them free will, and the more foreseeable an undesirable outcome, the more the parent can be held liable. If your kid finds your car keys and goes joy riding, the parent can be held liable for whatever ensues, but if the keys wereleft in the car along with a case of beer, the consequences for the parent will likely be more severe.

Why should a deity do everything that 'you think He should do' simply because He has the power to do so? God has the power to eliminate every living thing on earth in one split second. Do you think God should do that?

I don't think a deity should do anything, but to call it tri-omni, it has to conform to that description. Remember, a big difference between how you and I think is that you assume that it has certain qualities and that therefore, whatever happens is consistent with that assumption, whereas I decide what qualities it has based on its actions. If something happens that we would both consider sadistic if a person did it, the believer will try to understand that as a manifestation of perfect goodness, but the skeptic won't. He'll judge the action the same whether a person or god did it.

God needs no excuses since God is Infallible.

And here's an example of that. The god of Abraham is quite fallible by a critical thinker's standards. The flood story is a fine example of both moral and intellectual failings of the god that allegedly drowned almost all terrestrial life because it was unhappy with what it created and then repopulated the earth using the same unsatisfactory breeding stock. The believer is forced to find some way to rationalize that, but not the skeptic, who is free to call it what it is.

God does not cause these infections so God is not to blame

And another example. For you, this deity is always blameless whatever happens, but the skeptic is free to judge the actions the same as he would if a human created the pathogens. I don't know if the Covid virus was created in a lab, but if it was, whoever did that is responsible for all of the Covid infections that followed.

Many people questioned why God would allow such a thing, but since there were many God-fearing Christians in that town, most of them did not blame God. In the end, everyone accepted this man's plight, including the preacher, but this is only a TV program. I did not accept it, and I could not sleep after that. Even though I know it was only a TV program, things like this happen in real life.

That's what you would expect even if it were the news rather than fiction. The god is not responsible for the blindness to them, but if the person recovers his sight, it gets credit for that.

 

[Trailblazer]

If humanity has free will and it was the choice of a deity, then the deity is responsible for what results from that action.

No, adult humans are responsible for their own actions. That is reality.
Have you ever seen the deity go on trial in a court of law? No, because any rational person knows that adult humans are responsible for their own actions.

The law holds a parent responsible for the acts of its children even though the parent did not give them free will, and the more foreseeable an undesirable outcome, the more the parent can be held liable. If your kid finds your car keys and goes joy riding, the parent can be held liable for whatever ensues, but if the keys wereleft in the car along with a case of beer, the consequences for the parent will likely be more severe.

God is not a human parent with children He is responsible for so to compare the two is the fallacy of false equivalence.

False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.[1] A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".

This fallacy is committed when one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.[2] False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear scrutiny because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors.
False equivalence - Wikipedia

The Meaning of Comparing Apples to Oranges When you're comparing apples to oranges, you're comparing two things that are fundamentally different and, therefore, shouldn't be compared.
Comparing Apples to Oranges - Idiom, Meaning & Origin

I don't think a deity should do anything, but to call it tri-omni, it has to conform to that description.

That is problematic because what a tri-omni would do to conform to that description is only a matter of personal opinion, it is not a fact.

Remember, a big difference between how you and I think is that you assume that it has certain qualities and that therefore, whatever happens is consistent with that assumption, whereas I decide what qualities it has based on its actions. If something happens that we would both consider sadistic if a person did it, the believer will try to understand that as a manifestation of perfect goodness, but the skeptic won't. He'll judge the action the same whether a person or god did it.

I do not assume that the deity has certain qualities, I believe it has certain qualities, and the deity does not have to 'prove itself' to me. Not only is that impossible, it would be like asking a human to prove itself to a plant or a rock.

And here's an example of that. The god of Abraham is quite fallible by a critical thinker's standards. The flood story is a fine example of both moral and intellectual failings of the god that allegedly drowned almost all terrestrial life because it was unhappy with what it created and then repopulated the earth using the same unsatisfactory breeding stock. The believer is forced to find some way to rationalize that, but not the skeptic, who is free to call it what it is.

Why are you talking about a Bible story that science has proven is not true? Maybe that is because that is all you have to try to show what you believe are God's moral failings.

I am not forced to find some way to rationalize the flood story, because I do not believe it ever took place.

The Baháʼí Faith regards the Ark and the Flood as symbolic. In Baháʼí belief, only Noah's followers were spiritually alive, preserved in the ark of his teachings, as others were spiritually dead.

Noah - Wikipedia​

And another example. For you, this deity is always blameless whatever happens, but the skeptic is free to judge the actions the same as he would if a human created the pathogens. I don't know if the Covid virus was created in a lab, but if it was, whoever did that is responsible for all of the Covid infections that followed.

You are free to judge God all you want to as am I, but it is not going to change anything. If God exists God is not affected by our judgments, and God is going to do what He chooses to do regardless of anything humans think. That goes with being All-Powerful.

Apparently it makes atheists feel good to judge God, maybe because if God is not good then that justifies their disbelief.
I do not care if God is good because I cannot know. God is what God is and I don't believe on the basis of beliefs about God's alleged attributes.

That's what you would expect even if it were the news rather than fiction. The god is not responsible for the blindness to them, but if the person recovers his sight, it gets credit for that.

God is not responsible for the blindness but if the person recovers his sight back people thank God, since they believe it is a miracle, and only God can do miracles.

 

[Truthseeker]

Have you ever seen the deity go on trial in a court of law? No, because any rational person knows that adult humans are responsible for their own actions.

 

[Truthseeker]

I do not assume that the deity has certain qualities, I believe it has certain qualities, and the deity does not have to 'prove itself' to me. Not only is that impossible, it would be like asking a human to prove itself to a plant or a rock.

I am using this because I see no symbol for funny.