Who Made God?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]electric_eales wrote:

Well I for one would like to know more, if you want me to give up my sunday mornings and pay to go and listen to a stranger tell me how to live my life, you better have something better than a tatty old story book to back up your claims.

[/quote]

First, you don’t need a church to have a relationship with God. Second, you don’t need to pay to believe in God. Who here wants you to pay to listen to a stranger? At what church have you gone to where they force you to make payments?

182

[quote]Professor X wrote:
electric_eales wrote:

Well I for one would like to know more, if you want me to give up my sunday mornings and pay to go and listen to a stranger tell me how to live my life, you better have something better than a tatty old story book to back up your claims.

First, you don’t need a church to have a relationship with God. Second, you don’t need to pay to believe in God. Who here wants you to pay to listen to a stranger? At what church have you gone to where they force you to make payments?[/quote]

It is expected that you donate cash in Church.

Ok so you don’t have to go to church to believe in god and you also do not have to pay, but I was refering to being a Christian, not just believing in god, and for me if want to call yourself a Christian then you really should be going to church regular.

Like dickheads who claim to be Man utd supporters but have never been to watch one game, fuck off if you dont go to the games you are not a supporter.

I never expected you to pop up and take apart my post, but thanks anyway prof I love suprises :slight_smile:

183

[quote]bg100 wrote:

God did create the perfect universe (read Genesis 1-2 and see how many times God saw that His creation “was very good”), we stuffed it up through sin (Genesis 3).

As I mentioned in a previous post the bible is about how God fixes the imperfect world that we have brought upon ourselves.
[/quote]
Interesting thoughts. How does this all fit in with the notion of an omnipotent and omniscient God, though?

First…
[i]
Genesis 1:31

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.[/i]

Then…

[i]Genesis 6:5-6

And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.[/i]

By the way, I’m not trying to be a smartass here, just interested.

184

[quote]electric_eales wrote:

It is expected that you donate cash in Church.[/quote]

Actually, it is either an offering or a tithe. My mom believes in giving “tithe” to the church (meaning 10%). My personal views are different than my parents because I find some churches (especially some Baptist churches) to be filled with people trying to impress others with the clothes they wear or the cars they drive. I went to one Methodist church for quite a while because the preacher wore a polo t-shirt and one of his main messages was COME AS YOU ARE. I respected that man more than any other preacher I have listened to. He was all about community service and you could see what he was doing with any money he took in. Every church isn’t like that…and I won’t blindly give money to something I don’t fully put my support behind.

You seem to have a very flat view of Christianity. The real question is, are you truly interested in advancing it?

[quote] Ok so you don’t have to go to church to believe in god and you also do not have to pay, but I was refering to being a Christian, not just believing in god, and for me if want to call yourself a Christian then you really should be going to church regular.
[/quote]

Isn’t it a little funny for you to be telling Christians what you expect from all of them? there was a very long time that I didn’t go to church (before I found that one methodist church) because, like I said, I was tired of seeing people who seemed to be more focused on whether their clothes were in style and their cars were detailed. They would go to church dressed like pop stars in huge SUVs with shining tires. I was a broke student at the time and it really upset me a little then.

A man doesn’t need a church if he truly believes in God. He has one with him at all times.

185

IMO your not a very good Christian if you do not go to church regular, I would be suprised if many Christians (who do go to church regular) would disagree with that.

Im not talking about believing in god here I am talking about being a paid up member of the Christian club

186

[quote]electric_eales wrote:
IMO your not a very good Christian if you do not go to church regular, I would be suprised if many Christians (who do go to church regular) would disagree with that.

Im not talking about believing in god here I am talking about being a paid up member of the Christian club[/quote]

In your opinion? What makes your opinion valid other than that you simply thought of it?

187

[quote]electric_eales wrote:
IMO your not a very good Christian if you do not go to church regular, I would be suprised if many Christians (who do go to church regular) would disagree with that.

Im not talking about believing in god here I am talking about being a paid up member of the Christian club[/quote]

What you are saying just does not make any sense buddy. I’m a Christian. No membership card necessary for others’ approval. You must surround yourself around a lot of phonies. So, in your opinion what you see and what others see is what is valued authentically as a true Christian. Being a true Christian starts off with a personal relationship with Christ not by the judgement of others.

188

[quote]electric_eales wrote:
IMO your not a very good Christian if you do not go to church regular, I would be suprised if many Christians (who do go to church regular) would disagree with that.

Im not talking about believing in god here I am talking about being a paid up member of the Christian club[/quote]

First of all, there’s no such thing as a “good” Christian. You’re either Christian or not. You become more mature in your faith but there’s no “good” or “bad”.

Second, you don’t earn brownie points by going to church, a Christian will however want to meet with fellow Christians for the purpose of worshipping together and learning from the bible. It would be unusual for a Christian who didn’t want to go to a church that was encouraging for them, but they shouldn’t be going out of some sort of religious duty.

Thirdly, church is free. The reason for giving money is the same as I mentioned for the reasons in going to church, it’s because the Christians WANT to give out of gratitude for what God has done for them and also out of a desire to help others.

189

[quote]michael2507 wrote:
bg100 wrote:

God did create the perfect universe (read Genesis 1-2 and see how many times God saw that His creation “was very good”), we stuffed it up through sin (Genesis 3).

As I mentioned in a previous post the bible is about how God fixes the imperfect world that we have brought upon ourselves.

Interesting thoughts. How does this all fit in with the notion of an omnipotent and omniscient God, though?

First…
[i]
Genesis 1:31

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.[/i]

Then…

[i]Genesis 6:5-6

And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.[/i]

By the way, I’m not trying to be a smartass here, just interested.[/quote]

I’m guessing that your question is about why did God allow man to be wicked if he is omnipotent and omniscient and therefore could have stopped this happening?

I think the answer lies in the fact that God has given mankind free will to choose to follow or reject Him. We (i.e. Adam and Eve) chose to reject Him and the result is the imperfect world resulting from the curses described in Genesis 3.

190

[quote]bg100 wrote:
michael2507 wrote:
bg100 wrote:

God did create the perfect universe (read Genesis 1-2 and see how many times God saw that His creation “was very good”), we stuffed it up through sin (Genesis 3).

As I mentioned in a previous post the bible is about how God fixes the imperfect world that we have brought upon ourselves.

Interesting thoughts. How does this all fit in with the notion of an omnipotent and omniscient God, though?

First…
[i]
Genesis 1:31

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.[/i]

Then…

[i]Genesis 6:5-6

And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.[/i]

By the way, I’m not trying to be a smartass here, just interested.

I’m guessing that your question is about why did God allow man to be wicked if he is omnipotent and omniscient and therefore could have stopped this happening?

I think the answer lies in the fact that God has given mankind free will to choose to follow or reject Him. We (i.e. Adam and Eve) chose to reject Him and the result is the imperfect world resulting from the curses described in Genesis 3. [/quote]

It still seems incoherent to me that it repented God and he was grieved, as an omniscient and omnipotent entity obviously would have been able to foresee all this if not prevent in the first place. Besides, why would an omniscient, omnipotent and inherently good God choose to do something that causes himself grief and his creation torment, e.g. how could an inherently good God say this…

[i]Genesis 3

14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.[/i]

191

From the original post, it sounds that this question is referring to the god of the Christians. If not, please forgive me.

From a theological point of view, god wouldn’t have a creator, he just is. This however does present us with a significant problem of how is that possible. It is illogical to have an effect without a cause, so it requires faith to accept that god doesn’t have a creator. Of course we then have the conclusion that god’s creator must of had a creator (and so on to infinitity).

So ultimately, its an unanswerable question even if the christian god exists.

However, from the non-religious point of view, the easiest and most likely answer is that no one created god because there is no god. The universe has existed since the beginning of time since time began with the big bang and is itself an integral part of space. Biggest problem with this is also effect without cause.

192

[quote]michael2507 wrote:

It still seems incoherent to me that it repented God and he was grieved, as an omniscient and omnipotent entity obviously would have been able to foresee all this if not prevent in the first place. Besides, why would an omniscient, omnipotent and inherently good God choose to do something that causes himself grief and his creation torment, e.g. how could an inherently good God say this…

[/quote]

You want to argue philosophy? Why do we run experiments? I have burned many an ant with a magnifying glass just to see the effect when I was a kid. Did that act make me evil? It isn’t like I didn’t know what would happen. It may be a poor relation to the topic (given that God is believed to be the source of Good in alternate to evil), but I honestly believe that is the point…that this universe was created with the rules at which it works in order for “cause and effect”, “yin and yang”, “good and evil” to play out like a chess board. I also don’t believe that this is the only reality or the only set of physical rules.

Satan, Lucipher, didn’t exist until the beginning of our reality. That means our entire game is based on the existance of his presence in competition to that of God. You keep asking why he wouldn’t just stop it…as if you can’t believe that the reason may be that the game was the point. Give some creatures the ability to choose and watch what they do. If time is only present in our reality, then every negative event was already known…but “he” could still view it…and “he” could still react to it.

The Matrix touched on the same concept. In it, The Source explained that man rejected any reality that provided pure peace. It was as if giving the ability to choose required turmoil to exist. Otherwise, humans wouldn’t accept that reality.

I know, you want to simply reject the idea of a higher power. Perhaps your debate would be better if you stopped trying so hard to look for reasons why God doesn’t exist…and looked for more reasons as to why we do.

193

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Perhaps your debate would be better if you stopped trying so hard to look for reasons why God doesn’t exist…and looked for more reasons as to why we do.[/quote]

That’s actually a very good point…

I believe that, again, we’re arguing semantics – basically, we’re arguing about how omni is “omniscient”.

I’ll grant you that arguing omniscient is like arguing infinity or more than 3 spatial dimensions without using Math – it’s very hard to argue what we cannot understand or put into a form we can (Math). In order to fully understand what it would be like to be omniscient, one would have to… be omniscient, even if only for a day.

Although I do not necessarily buy your comparison with scientific experiments – because, theoretically, an omniscient being has no reason to doubt and does not need to seek certainty – and I do not completely buy the Matrix metaphor you presented – because the AI behind the Matrix, although technically omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient inside the Matrix, did NOT have the ability to change our DNA if they wanted to (which God, theoretically, does) – the fact remains that you have a great point there: we should not try to rationalize or much less judge something we cannot possibly understand or experience (omniscience). We can only choose to believe in it – or not.

Plus The Matrix is still one of my favorite movies of all time. Besides the audio-visual orgy, the metaphors are definitely some of the most fascinating and thought-provoking ever put on film, irrespective of anyone’s personal beliefs.

194

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Satan, Lucipher, didn’t exist until the beginning of our reality.
…

I know, you want to simply reject the idea of a higher power. Perhaps your debate would be better if you stopped trying so hard to look for reasons why God doesn’t exist…and looked for more reasons as to why we do.[/quote]

Just out of curiosity, how did you arrive at the conclusion that Satan didn’t exist until the beginning of out reality?

And not speaking for michael2507, but it isn’t very difficult to not believe in god’s existence, logic points strongly in that direction. But belief in god has little to do with reason, its just a matter of faith. So the answer to Who made god is also just a matter of belief and faith, not reason.

195

[quote]Wombat wrote:
Professor X wrote:

Satan, Lucipher, didn’t exist until the beginning of our reality.
…

I know, you want to simply reject the idea of a higher power. Perhaps your debate would be better if you stopped trying so hard to look for reasons why God doesn’t exist…and looked for more reasons as to why we do.

Just out of curiosity, how did you arrive at the conclusion that Satan didn’t exist until the beginning of out reality?

And not speaking for michael2507, but it isn’t very difficult to not believe in god’s existence, logic points strongly in that direction. But belief in god has little to do with reason, its just a matter of faith. So the answer to Who made god is also just a matter of belief and faith, not reason.[/quote]

God created Lucipher. Lucipher was kicked out of Heaven for plotting against God. Thusly, if God knows the outcome of every event, his creation of Lucipher, his fall to Earth, and his dominion over “Evil” were known and had to exist in order for the game to begin.

196

[quote]Professor X wrote:

You want to argue philosophy? Why do we run experiments? I have burned many an ant with a magnifying glass just to see the effect when I was a kid. Did that act make me evil? It isn’t like I didn’t know what would happen. It may be a poor relation to the topic (given that God is believed to be the source of Good in alternate to evil), but I honestly believe that is the point…that this universe was created with the rules at which it works in order for “cause and effect”, “yin and yang”, “good and evil” to play out like a chess board. I also don’t believe that this is the only reality or the only set of physical rules.

Satan, Lucipher, didn’t exist until the beginning of our reality. That means our entire game is based on the existance of his presence in competition to that of God. You keep asking why he wouldn’t just stop it…as if you can’t believe that the reason may be that the game was the point. Give some creatures the ability to choose and watch what they do. If time is only present in our reality, then every negative event was already known…but “he” could still view it…and “he” could still react to it.

The Matrix touched on the same concept. In it, The Source explained that man rejected any reality that provided pure peace. It was as if giving the ability to choose required turmoil to exist. Otherwise, humans wouldn’t accept that reality.

I know, you want to simply reject the idea of a higher power. Perhaps your debate would be better if you stopped trying so hard to look for reasons why God doesn’t exist…and looked for more reasons as to why we do.[/quote]

I don’t want to reject the idea per se, just as little as I’m trying to accept it. Why are you assuming this? Given the fact that many posters of faith take what is written in the bible very literally, is it so hard to believe that I’m simply interested in the thoughts of these people with regard to apparent inconsistencies?

As I stated before on this thread, I consider the core of what has been asked by the OP inherently unknowable - it’s a matter of believing or not believing.

Rather, I’m searching for coherent answers with regard to the specific issues raised. The image of us being lab rats in some sort of divine experiment again seems to conflict the notion of an omniscient, omnipotent and inherently good God. What could God gain as his level of knowledge is infinite anyway? The image of us being pawns in a divine game of chess doesn’t fit in either. Would God sit back and watch his creation suffer for his amusement?

Basically, I share the view you presented with regard to the “opposites”, e.g. yin and yang or whatever you want to call it, battling it out under a certain set of rules like a game to a large extent. The point I’m trying to make here, though:

In this context, I see no inherent necessity for a God who fits the above-mentioned description, in fact, this point of view even seems to conflict the existence of such an entity to some extent. I’m fully aware of the impossibility of fully grasping some of the concepts mentioned, i.e. omniscience. Nevertheless, as I like to see words quasi as signposts, I think it is possible to at least find a pointer in the right direction.

197

[quote]michael2507 wrote:

In this context, I see no inherent necessity for a God who fits the above-mentioned description, in fact, this point of view even seems to conflict the existence of such an entity to some extent. I’m fully aware of the impossibility of fully grasping some of the concepts mentioned, i.e. omniscience. Nevertheless, as I like to see words quasi as signposts, I think it is possible to at least find a pointer in the right direction.[/quote]

The Bible itself describes God as a “jealous God”. Clearly, your label of “omnipotent and in no need of knowing anything else or engaging in any further ‘experiment’” doesn’t apply. Like an above poster wrote, how omnipotent he is seems to be what you are arguing. Maybe you are trying too hard to fit GOD with your label instead of simply accepting that there is a possibility that he simply “is”.

198

[quote]Professor X wrote:
michael2507 wrote:

In this context, I see no inherent necessity for a God who fits the above-mentioned description, in fact, this point of view even seems to conflict the existence of such an entity to some extent. I’m fully aware of the impossibility of fully grasping some of the concepts mentioned, i.e. omniscience. Nevertheless, as I like to see words quasi as signposts, I think it is possible to at least find a pointer in the right direction.

The Bible itself describes God as a “jealous God”. Clearly, your label of “omnipotent and in no need of knowing anything else or engaging in any further ‘experiment’” doesn’t apply. Like an above poster wrote, how omnipotent he is seems to be what you are arguing. Maybe you are trying too hard to fit GOD with your label instead of simply accepting that there is a possibility that he simply “is”.
[/quote]
Not exactly my label, rather what I have found to be the common definition of the term God, e.g.

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=god

As you pointed out yourself, this definition doesn’t seem to coincide with the God described in the bible. This is the exact issue I’m trying to fathom.

199

[quote]michael2507 wrote:

As you pointed out yourself, this definition doesn’t seem to coincide with the God described in the bible. This is the exact issue I’m trying to fathom. [/quote]

I don’t understand why it is so hard to fathom. Man tries to put things in boxes…people, animals, situations. Everything gets a neat little label for easy identification. It really helps stupid people as well just in case they forget what a “window” is or a “door”. The problem with neat little labels…is they probably don’t apply too well to things that are completely way out of our grasp (mentally) in the first place.

200

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I don’t understand why it is so hard to fathom.[/quote]

Well, as you stated, the Bible itself describes God as a “jealous God” (e.g. Exodus 20:5). He experiences grief and repentance, curses His own creatures. Then there is the issue with Lucifer and his dominion over “evil”.

All this, i.e. God being subjected to negative emotions, not being the ruler of “everything”, last but not least man’s free will, makes Him seem limited. It is as if he had limited himself in the course of creation.