Why do christians put limits on their gods's power?

MrPudding

This is something that has come up a few times and again today.

Christian believe that god is all powerful and capable of doing whatever he wants. Why do they insist of limiting him on the basic of limited human imagination?

As an atheist I often wonder why there is evil in the world. I am told it is not god's doing, but ours. I can't understand this. God created everything, why leave the possibility of evil.

Christians argue that evil is possible because god allows us freewill. Why can christians not accept that if god was all powerful, and had the desire, he could create an existence where we had free will but had no concept of doing evil.

If there was no evil, and humans simply did not have the knowledge to know of it, how would that impact our free will? As has been pointed out before, god limits and restrict many positive things for his favourite creations, like the ability to fly or to breath under water, this is apparently not in conflict with our free will. If not then why would not giving us the knowledge to do wrong to each other be such a gross insult to our free will?

I do not believe in your god, but I simply cannot understand why, if he is as powerful as you claim, he could not simply remove evil, or not allow it's existence in the first place.

Why?

MrP

kiffer

To teach us.
If a parent stopped it's child from skateboarding the child would never fall off... But also would never learn anything... You need to let them off the leash a little so that they learn that fire is hot and some times licking the cold metal swing set is the only way to understand why it's a bad idea
And if a child misbehaves then the parent must sometimes disciplin the child, grounding them, taking away phone usage, maybe even spanking them...

And for really big things like getting in a strop and yelling "I hate you! You never let me do the things I want!" a good parent should either destroy their child's soul or throw boiling oil on them and lock them in the basement forever...

Galvasean

MrPudding wrote: »

This is something that has come up a few times and again today.

Christian believe that god is all powerful and capable of doing whatever he wants. Why do they insist of limiting him on the basic of limited human imagination?

I don't think his power is limited in that way, but rather our comprehension of his power is limited on what we can fathom.
Does that make any sense?

philologos

As for limiting God, Alister McGrath takes an interesting point of view on God.

Our understanding of God can only ever be limited, and as such the Bible is a limited understanding, which has been toned down into human and understandable terms. In reality God could be a lot more than has ever been depicted to us in the Biblical text.

Yes Galvasean, it does make sense.

As for evil, MrP, this is a huge philosophical argument that I am dealing with in my philosophy course this year in philosophy of religion. I have come to the point of view that evil does have a purpose in forming human character and it does have some end goal in most cases. However, humans cannot always understand what that goal is. I know some interesting analogies that I might post on later.

MrPudding

kiffer wrote: »

To teach us.
If a parent stopped it's child from skateboarding the child would never fall off... But also would never learn anything... You need to let them off the leash a little so that they learn that fire is hot and some times licking the cold metal swing set is the only way to understand why it's a bad idea
And if a child misbehaves then the parent must sometimes disciplin the child, grounding them, taking away phone usage, maybe even spanking them...

But why do we need to be taught? Again, you are imposing limits on your god, human limits. We have to teach our children this way because that is the only way we can teach then. We can’t create them perfect knowing everything they need to, we are not all powerful.

kiffer wrote: »

And for really big things like getting in a strop and yelling "I hate you! You never let me do the things I want!" a good parent should either destroy their child's soul or throw boiling oil on them and lock them in the basement forever...

Not sure I understand what you are saying here.

Galvasean wrote: »

I don't think his power is limited in that way, but rather our comprehension of his power is limited on what we can fathom.
Does that make any sense?

No, not really. I understand that our comprehension could be limited, but for some reasons people that believe in god seem to have a problem understanding what all powerful means. Various excuses will be thrown up to explain why we need it to be that way, but the truth is, we don’t. This question is not so much about what he can or can’t do, and why he does or does not do it, more about why Christians are faster to dismiss his power.

Jakkass wrote: »

As for limiting God, Alister McGrath takes an interesting point of view on God.

Our understanding of God can only ever be limited, and as such the Bible is a limited understanding, which has been toned down into human and understandable terms. In reality God could be a lot more than has ever been depicted to us in the Biblical text.

I understand this point, it has been made many times, but it is not really relevant here. I am not talking about understanding god. I am asking why do you, on the one hand, say that god is all powerful. Nothing is beyond his abilities. But on the other hand to impose stupid limits on what he could do?

kiffer wrote: »

As for evil, MrP, this is a huge philosophical argument that I am dealing with in my philosophy course this year in philosophy of religion. I have come to the point of view that evil does have a purpose in forming human character and it does have some end goal in most cases. However, humans cannot always understand what that goal is. I know some interesting analogies that I might post on later.

Fair enough, but it does not have to be part of it. Why could an all powerful god not simply create us with a complete human character? One that did not allow for abuse his fellow humans.

MrP

Zombrex

MrPudding wrote: »

Christian believe that god is all powerful and capable of doing whatever he wants. Why do they insist of limiting him on the basic of limited human imagination?

In my experience it is not that Christians limit God per say, but they limit the possible states or types of existence.

The argument justifying evil or harm are nearly always made within the framework of this universe, without the frame work of humans being as we are now.

The point that is often lost is that there is no actual reason the universe needs to be like this, or that humans need to be like this.

There is no need, at least none that I can think of (and I know someone is going to say they have faith that God has a reason even if we don't know it, don't get me started on that nonsense, it is in itself declaring that God is limited to make something imprefect), that humans for example need to be able to burn.

The materialist in me says we burn because we evolved from material that burns easily. But that makes little sense in a religious context given that God is not limited in designing us this way. We don't have to exist in the form we do. We don't need to be made out of things that burn, we don't need to be made out of anything.

PDN

Omnipotence (being all-powerful) does not mean the ability to do something that is self-contradictory.

For example, it does not matter how powerful God is - He cannot create a square circle. Neither can he create a weight so heavy that He cannot lift it.

God could indeed have created us out of something that did not burn. In fact he could have created us with bodies that never felt pain. However, the same nerves etc that cause us to feel pain also create a lot of the pleasurable sensations that make life worth living.

Think for a moment of the ecosystems we encounter on planet earth. Sometimes we see something that we think we can improve on (eg introducing rabbits into Australia or taking African bees to America so as to increase the honey yield of European-type bees). However, then we find that we have actually made things worse rather than better and you have to spend millions of dollars on rabbit-proof fences and work out how to dodge swarms of killer bees in Arizona and Texas.

I suspect that there may well be a number of beneficial aspects to any kind of free-willed existence that cannot co-exist to their fullest extent. They need to be balanced, just as car manufacturer tries to strike a balance between beneficial qualities such as safety and speed. A car that is 100% safe will not be fast. A car that is indescribably fast will not be safe. A balance needs to be struck that enables a driver to enjoy both speed and safety.

May I add an observation? I think this thread is a perfect example of how atheists will use any stick they can to attack Christianity - and it is obvious that in your eyes we are damned if we do and damned when we don't.

When Christians ascribe a position to God that avoids self-contradiction, then we are accused of limiting God by our own understanding.

However, there are many instances where we ascribe qualities and actions to God that go beyond our understanding. For example:
a) The Trinity (How can God be one and yet three?)
b) Divine Foreknowledge (How can we have free will if God sees the future?)
c) Inspiration of Scripture (How can a book produced by many human beings over many centuries possibly be inspired by God?)
d) The existence of evil (How can an all-powerful, all-loving God, permit evil in the world)
e) Eternal Life (How can you spend eternity without getting bored?)

When we confess that these are issues beyond our understanding then we are mocked for hiding behind the concept of a 'mystery' or for receiving things by faith.

So you will mock us when we confess that God is not limited by our understanding, and you will also mock us when we explain why we think God does not do things that are mutually exclusive and contradictory. Which, in the end, probably says much more about you and your biases than it does about the coherence of Christian belief.

Dades

PDN wrote: »

Omnipotence (being all-powerful) does not mean the ability to do something that is self-contradictory.

The bible doesn't see it as self-contradictory, as God is said to have an afterlife waiting for believers with none of the 'necessary' horrors of real life.

MrPudding

PDN wrote: »

Omnipotence (being all-powerful) does not mean the ability to do something that is self-contradictory.

For example, it does not matter how powerful God is - He cannot create a square circle..

He could create a square circle, he can do what ever he wants. What is known as a square or a circle would simply be different.

PDN wrote: »

God could indeed have created us out of something that did not burn. In fact he could have created us with bodies that never felt pain. However, the same nerves etc that cause us to feel pain also create a lot of the pleasurable sensations that make life worth living.

So is god not capable of creating nerves that can feel pleasure but not pain? Again, you put a limit on your god’s abilities. In my book a being that was all powerful should be able to create a body that contains nerves that don’t feel pain. Simple really.

PDN wrote: »

Think for a moment of the ecosystems we encounter on planet earth. Sometimes we see something that we think we can improve on (eg introducing rabbits into Australia or taking African bees to America so as to increase the honey yield of European-type bees). However, then we find that we have actually made things worse rather than better and you have to spend millions of dollars on rabbit-proof fences and work out how to dodge swarms of killer bees in Arizona and Texas.

So what? We can’t mess with stuff without causing unforeseeable side effects. Last time I checked we were not all powerful, all seeing and all knowing.

PDN wrote: »

I suspect that there may well be a number of beneficial aspects to any kind of free-willed existence that cannot co-exist to their fullest extent. They need to be balanced, just as car manufacturer tries to strike a balance between beneficial qualities such as safety and speed. A car that is 100% safe will not be fast. A car that is indescribably fast will not be safe. A balance needs to be struck that enables a driver to enjoy both speed and safety.

Again you are comparing your god to humans. If the car manufacturer was all powerful, all seeing and all knowing, I do not doubt that they would be able to create a car that did not compromise on safety or speed, but was perfect. If you are all powerful, all seeing and all knowing then why do you have to strike a balance? Why do you have to compromise? You simply shift reality so there is no compromise.

PDN wrote: »

May I add an observation? I think this thread is a perfect example of how atheists will use any stick they can to attack Christianity - and it is obvious that in your eyes we are damned if we do and damned when we don't.

No. I will admit that sometimes frustration gets the better of me and I post something that could possibly be taken as inappropriate. That that is not the purpose of this thread. As you are keen to point out this board is for discussing christianity. There are a number of aspects of christianity that I have great difficulty understanding. This is one of them. This is a genuine attempt to gain understanding.

PDN wrote: »

When Christians ascribe a position to God that avoids self-contradiction, then we are accused of limiting God by our own understanding.

However, there are many instances where we ascribe qualities and actions to God that go beyond our understanding. For example:
a) The Trinity (How can God be one and yet three?)
b) Divine Foreknowledge (How can we have free will if God sees the future?)
c) Inspiration of Scripture (How can a book produced by many human beings over many centuries possibly be inspired by God?)
d) The existence of evil (How can an all-powerful, all-loving God, permit evil in the world)
e) Eternal Life (How can you spend eternity without getting bored?)

When we confess that these are issues beyond our understanding then we are mocked for hiding behind the concept of a 'mystery' or for receiving things by faith.

So you will mock us when we confess that God is not limited by our understanding, and you will also mock us when we explain why we think God does not do things that are mutually exclusive and contradictory. Which, in the end, probably says much more about you and your biases than it does about the coherence of Christian belief.

That is very interesting, but also besides the point. I am not talking about human inability to not know the mind of god, or even complex and difficult concepts like the trinity or non-boring eternal life.

I am merely interested in why people that say they believe in an all powerful god portray him to be anything but all powerful.

MrP

philologos

MrPudding wrote: »

I understand this point, it has been made many times, but it is not really relevant here. I am not talking about understanding god. I am asking why do you, on the one hand, say that god is all powerful. Nothing is beyond his abilities. But on the other hand to impose stupid limits on what he could do?

How do Christians impose limits on what God can do?

On an aside to that question, it is not that God is limited in His abilities, but that people are limited in their understanding. That is why Jesus said He used parables, because people heard the prophets in the past and yet they didn't understand.

MrPudding

Jakkass wrote: »

How do Christians impose limits on what God can do?

• That he cannot create a universe where there is no evil without removing free will.
• He cannot create nerves that can feel pleasure but not pain.
• He could not create us so that we could love without having the ability to do evil

These are a couple of specific limits on your god’s power that posters on this boards have mentioned over the ladt few months.

Jakkass wrote: »

On an aside to that question, it is not that God is limited in His abilities, but that people are limited in their understanding. That is why Jesus said He used parables, because people heard the prophets in the past and yet they didn't understand.

This is a great get out clause. I don’t understand. That is because you are not capable. Get’s you out of all sorts of trouble.

But again, I am not really talking about understanding.

MrP

partyguinness

It's a moot point because God doesnt exist..IMO

kelly1

MrPudding wrote: »

He could create a square circle, he can do what ever he wants. What is known as a square or a circle would simply be different.

Now that's just plain silly, not to mention the whole thread! :rolleyes:

The very definitions of square and circle means they are mutually exclusive.

MrPudding wrote: »

He cannot create nerves that can feel pleasure but not pain.

Don't you understand the point of pain? It tells the person something is wrong, damage is occuring! Take corrective action asap!

Without suffering, we would never learn from mistakes. It's how we mature. Pain is a teacher.

MrPudding

kelly1 wrote: »

Now that's just plain silly, not to mention the whole thread! :rolleyes:

The very definitions of square and circle mean they are mutually exclusive.

According to our limited understanding based on the universal rules we see around us. But how can you say that an all powerful being could not create a universe where a square and a circle were not mutually exclusive?

Anyway, geometry aside, what about the gem where we can’t experience love without having the ability to do evil or to suffer? Can’t remember the words exactly, but that is fairly close, and was, if I am not mistaken, originally posted by you.

And why is the thread silly? I can appreciate you might not like it but I don't see why it is silly. I think it is a perfectly valid question.

MrP

Thomas_S_Hunterson

MrP. our ability to sense pain is important in protecting us from damaging our bodies, although why an all-powerful god couldn't think of a better way remains to be seen (i'm thinking something a bit wolverine-esque , woulda made a lot of sense).

kelly1

MrPudding wrote: »

According to our limited understanding based on the universal rules we see around us. But how can you say that an all powerful being could not create a universe where a square and a circle were not mutually exclusive?

It makes no sense, it's self-contradictory. I suppose you like the idea of a straight curve too?

MrPudding wrote: »

Anyway, geometry aside, what about the gem where we can’t experience love without having the ability to do evil or to suffer? Can’t remember the words exactly, but that is fairly close, and was, if I am not mistaken, originally posted by you.

I don't believe I said that, but I did say that if we knew why people suffer, we would be less inclined to be charitable in the belief that they deserved their suffering.

MrPudding wrote: »

And why is the thread silly? I can appreciate you might not like it but I don't see why it is silly. I think it is a perfectly valid question.
MrP

You want to be able to get on a bicycle for the first time and cycle perfectly without ever falling off. You want knowledge without having to learn. Sounds like you want to be God!

If there were no pain/suffering we'd keep making the same mistakes again and again without any effort to improve. We'd never grow up.

I believe we've been put on this earth as "children" and for the purpose of growing to maturity. When we become adults spiritually, we're ready for heaven - we've completed our mission on earth, we move on to the next level

PS. I updated post #13

Call Me Jimmy

Sean_K wrote: »

MrP. our ability to sense pain is important in protecting us from damaging our bodies, although why an all-powerful god couldn't think of a better way remains to be seen (i'm thinking something a bit wolverine-esque , woulda made a lot of sense).

Yes but what he's saying is, why would god go to the trouble of making all these things to teach us and keep our body safe, when he could just create a world without pain instead.

kelly1 wrote:

If there were no pain/suffering we'd keep making the same mistakes again and again without any effort to improve. We'd never grow up.

he can create us with the ability to grow and mature but he can't create us already grown and matured? And what's the point in making us go through these 'level's instead of just going into heaven. His hope for us is that we all get into heaven eventually, is it not? Why not just put us in heaven, why put us through this pantomime?

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Yes but what he's saying is, why would god go to the trouble of making all these things to teach us and keep our body safe, when he could just create a world without pain instead.

True, it's all very fishy.

Dades

kelly1 wrote: »

I believe we've been put on this earth as "children" and for the purpose of growing to maturity.

Considering the picture from Gaza on page 11 of today's 'Metro' which, as a recent father, is still giving me palpitations, I don't accept that as an answer.

kelly1

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Yes but what he's saying is, why would god go to the trouble of making all these things to teach us and keep our body safe, when he could just create a world without pain instead.

OK so what God should have created is:

- Fire that burns materials but not human flesh.
- Water that we can swim in but never drown.
- Hammers that can crush metal but not fingers.
- Electricity that doesn't shock. etc, etc.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Jakkass wrote: »

How do Christians impose limits on what God can do?

On an aside to that question, it is not that God is limited in His abilities, but that people are limited in their understanding. That is why Jesus said He used parables, because people heard the prophets in the past and yet they didn't understand.

I hate this sort of argument (reminds me of this).

Call Me Jimmy

kelly1 wrote: »

OK so what God should have created is:

- Fire that burns materials but not human flesh.
- Water that we can swim in but never drown.
- Hammers that can crush metal but not fingers.
- Electricity that doesn't shock. etc, etc.

Pretty much. Or not bother making fire or electricity or water. just make a big room with no need for us to eat or drink and let us sit in it watching a video that teaches us what we need to know to be mature for the next 'level'.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

OK so what God should have created is:

- Fire that burns materials but not human flesh.
- Water that we can swim in but never drown.
- Hammers that can crush metal but not fingers.
- Electricity that doesn't shock. etc, etc.

Yes.

The question for you guys is why didn't he? As the OP asks, you guys suggest he couldn't have. Which puts limits of God's power. Or you suggest he had a good reason not to, which again puts a limit on his power (he had to do X for the greater good because if he did Y there would be problems)

Either way it is a problem for the idea of an all powerful god.

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

On an aside to that question, it is not that God is limited in His abilities, but that people are limited in their understanding.

That in of itself posses a problem, because God by definition should be coming up with perfect solutions and situations.

The more complicated and convoluted something is the less likely it is the perfect solution, particularly when you factor in having limitless ability to shape space and time.

Complicated solutions arise from limitations. You have to X Y Z because you can't just do A. You have to drive around Dublin city for an hour because you can't just move all the buildings out of the way and drive straight through. And you have to drive because you can't just make yourself appear in Glasnevin. etc etc

The idea that God has perfect solutions that we simply cannot understand is in itself a bizarre proposal.

MrPudding

kelly1 wrote: »

It makes no sense, it's self-contradictory. I suppose you like the idea of a straight curve too?

It is self contradictory in our current existence but you can’t know that it would not be in some other. This is silly, I agree, but it is not the point I am trying to make.

kelly1 wrote: »

I don't believe I said that, but I did say that if we knew why people suffer, we would be less inclined to be charitable in the belief that they deserved their suffering.

I am pretty sure you did, but it will require some digging.

kelly1 wrote: »

You want to be able to get on a bicycle for the first time and cycle perfectly without ever falling off. You want knowledge without having to learn. Sounds like you want to be God!

No. But if that was the way we were, simply knowing how to do things, we would not know any other way and therefore it would seem normal.

kelly1 wrote: »

If there were no pain/suffering we'd keep making the same mistakes again and again without any effort to improve. We'd never grow up.

Again, missing the entire point. It is actually quite simple and I have to ask if you are intentionally pretending to miss it… Your god could have made us in a way that we did not need to improve, did not need to learn and did not need to suffer. He could have done this because he is all powerful. He did not.

kelly1 wrote: »

I believe we've been put on this earth as "children" and for the purpose of growing to maturity. When we become adults spiritually, we're ready for heaven - we've completed our mission on earth, we move on to the next level

PS. I updated post #13

But why? It does not make any sense. Why would an all powerful, loving and just creator make the majority of his creations live in a world without love? A world filled with pain and suffering? Please remember that some of your Christian brother believe that the majority of these poor people will not make it to heaven because they have not accepted Christ as their lord and saviour. So that kind of disposes of the whole “yes but they will be happy in eternity.”

Why bother with all the suffering and pain? Why not simply create everything perfect? If perfection was all we knew we would not question it. If we did not know of evil or badness, if it simply was not part of our makeup, we would never consider doing anything bad. This would not go against the concept of free will anymore than the fact I can’t breathe under water go against my free will.

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Yes but what he's saying is, why would god go to the trouble of making all these things to teach us and keep our body safe, when he could just create a world without pain instead.

Exactly.

MrP

rockbeer

kelly1 wrote: »

You want to be able to get on a bicycle for the first time and cycle perfectly without ever falling off. You want knowledge without having to learn. Sounds like you want to be God!

Why not? If god is all powerful surely he could have made us a whole lot more powerful than he chose to? He could have made us immune to damage for a start, then we wouldn't need pain to tell us something was wrong because nothing would be wrong.

And why couldn't he have given us lungs and gills? He did it for these guys.

Again, you impose arbitrary limits. I don't really understand why you're so easily satisfied with "he must have had his reasons" as an answer.

Edit: Blaming it on our imperfect understanding also doesn't really work because you have to ask why god didn't use his unlimited powers to give us a greater ability to understand. He must have wanted our understanding to be limited.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

If there were no pain/suffering we'd keep making the same mistakes again and again without any effort to improve. We'd never grow up.

That doesn't make sense. We only need to "grow up" (ie learn from our mistakes) because we face a harsh hostile world. You need to get shouted at by your mother for playing in the road because you need to not play in the road because cars can hurt you. If cars couldn't hurt you you wouldn't need to learn, or even be aware of this.

The idea that we need pain to exist so that we can suffer pain so that we can learn how to avoid suffering pain in the future is very flawed

kelly1 wrote: »

I believe we've been put on this earth as "children" and for the purpose of growing to maturity. When we become adults spiritually, we're ready for heaven - we've completed our mission on earth, we move on to the next level

But why is it necessary to suffer pain to "grow spiritually"?

Why is it necessary to grow spiritually in the first place?

PDN

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Pretty much. Or not bother making fire or electricity or water. just make a big room with no need for us to eat or drink and let us sit in it watching a video that teaches us what we need to know to be mature for the next 'level'.

And then we would be having a debate where you would complain about how terrible it is having to sit in a big room watching videos, and surely if God was all powerful He could have created us with the ability to do fun stuff like eating and drinking, and why does God treat us like babies instead of giving us the freedom to handle stuff like fire, or electricity or water? And this must prove that God doesn't exist because if He was all-loving then he would have given us those abilities, and if He was all powerful He would have been able to do so, and it's not fair, and I think I'll just thcream and thcream and thcream until I burtht!

philologos

MrPudding wrote: »

Exactly.

MrP

Not quite. It's not as simple as saying that pain = bad, and it shouldn't exist. I believe that God has a purpose for pain in our lives, and a purpose for evil. However humans cannot ever have a full understanding of this. I know I wouldn't be the same person without having experienced pain in my life, and I doubt anyone here would be the same. Although evil may look bad, it can have a positive purpose. We learn a lot through painful experiences.

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

And then we would be having a debate where you would complain about how terrible it is having to sit in a big room watching videos, and surely if God was all powerful He could have created us with the ability to do fun stuff like eating and drinking, and why does God treat us like babies instead of giving us the freedom to handle stuff like fire, or electricity or water? And this must prove that God doesn't exist because if He was all-loving then he would have given us those abilities, and if He was all powerful He would have been able to do so, and it's not fair, and I think I'll just thcream and thcream and thcream until I burtht!

We cannot imagine the perfect reality for humanity to have been created. We can on the other hand determine this isn't it

God can imagine the perfect reality. In fact creating the perfect existence is as easy as creating any other.

For some reason he choose not to create that reality. This would strongly conflict with either the good/loving part of God or the all powerful part of God.

The inescapable conclusion is that either God is not what you think he is in terms of his power, or nothing in this universe exists or is the way it is without God explicitly choosing that it would be this way, in full knowledge of what will happen.

This to my mind would strongly contradict the idea of a loving caring God.

MrPudding

Jakkass wrote: »

Not quite. It's not as simple as saying that pain = bad, and it shouldn't exist.

Why is it so hard for you to accept that ti would be possibly for us to exist and the requirement for pain to simply not be there?

Jakkass wrote: »

I believe that God has a purpose for pain in our lives, and a purpose for evil. However humans cannot ever have a full understanding of this.

Again, great cop out. Tell it to the people that no nothing but pain and will never see heaven or be resurrected in a glorious body to live on the newly created earth and live forever. You know, the people that won’t make it because of where they are born?

Jakkass wrote: »

I know I wouldn't be the same person without having experienced pain in my life, and I doubt anyone here would be the same. Although evil may look bad, it can have a positive purpose. We learn a lot through painful experiences.

Absolutely. I would not be the same person myself. But then, again, that is not my point. If there was no such thing as pain and no such thing as suffering there would be no issue.

Can you throw out a couple of positive purposes for evil? I presume the positive purposes are positive when you happy to be lucky enough to avail of the promise of eternal life?

MrP

rockbeer

Jakkass wrote: »

I know I wouldn't be the same person without having experienced pain in my life, and I doubt anyone here would be the same. Although evil may look bad, it can have a positive purpose. We learn a lot through painful experiences.

That's a fantastic perspective you have there Jakkass. I hope you take time in your life to go and share it with some of the many, many people who are born and die in poverty and suffering with no respite in between. I'm sure it will make them feel better to know that pain has been such a positive influence on your life.

It's all very well for comfortable westerners to portray pain and suffering as somehow character building, but the reality for much of the world is that they know little else and, if he exists, their blood is on your god's hands.

MrPudding

Wicknight wrote: »

For some reason he choose not to create that reality. This would strongly conflict with either the good/loving part of God or the all powerful part of God.

The inescapable conclusion is that either God is not what you think he is in terms of his power, or nothing in this universe exists or is the way it is without God explicitly choosing that it would be this way, in full knowledge of what will happen.

This to my mind would strongly contradict the idea of a loving caring God.

Epicurus FTW.

MrP

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

I believe that God has a purpose for pain in our lives, and a purpose for evil. However humans cannot ever have a full understanding of this.

Then why do you believe it?

Jakkass wrote: »

I know I wouldn't be the same person without having experienced pain in my life, and I doubt anyone here would be the same.

The idea that pain grows us as people some what falls down when you start looking at the full spectrum of pain and suffering people endure. While you and Kelly may believe that pain "matures" you some what, it is hard to argue that a 5 year old burning to death or a mother and children drowning because their car went of a bridge, "matures" them.

This is before one gets to the question of why this growth is necessary in the first place. As I said to kelly, the things we learn though endurance and suffering are all related to endurance and suffering. We learn how to deal with facing future suffering.

If suffering did not exist in the first place this would be unnecessary. It is a cyclical argument (hardly shocking on this forum :pac:) that we need suffering so that we can grow and mature to deal and cope with future suffering.

The thing that is bad about being immature and not growing is that it makes you illprepared to deal with life's challenges. This becomes some what irrelevant if there isn't actually any challenges to living.

Jakkass wrote: »

Although evil may look bad, it can have a positive purpose. We learn a lot through painful experiences.

We learn how to deal with, or avoid, future painful experiences. Irrelevant if one removes pain in the first place.

philologos

• That he cannot create a universe where there is no evil without removing free will.
• He cannot create nerves that can feel pleasure but not pain.
• He could not create us so that we could love without having the ability to do evil

Those aren't even limitations.

God evidently chose to provide free will, and he chose to provide us nerves, and he chose for us to live with having the ability to do evil. Evidently He had reason to do this. As for what those reasons were, we are left to fumble around with words, as it is really inexplicable. I do believe that there is much more here than what we actually can discern through our senses and through our intellect about this issue. It's one of those questions that will have to be dealt with in the afterlife I think

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

God evidently chose to provide free will, and he chose to provide us nerves, and he chose for us to live with having the ability to do evil. Evidently He had reason to do this.

Well yes, of course he had a reason. The point is that it is illogical that the reason was good. It is actually possible to determine that without having to know the reasons themselves. The alternative is that God is limited, which is why someone would ask why do Christians, who insist on a good God, limit God

kelly1

MrPudding wrote: »

Again, missing the entire point. It is actually quite simple and I have to ask if you are intentionally pretending to miss it… Your god could have made us in a way that we did not need to improve, did not need to learn and did not need to suffer. He could have done this because he is all powerful. He did not.

OK let me try again.

You seem to think believe that God could have made a better job of creation by making evil impossible but yet you have a limited intellect and can't fully comprehend the implications of making a perfect world and what this perfection should look like.

OK so let's assume God made a "perfect" world. Can a material world be perfect? What level of perfection would you choose? Do you mean finite perfection or infinite? Perfection in our eyes or perfection in God's? Would you want to be equal to God? Nobody can possibly understand the implications of being equal to God without actually being God. Is it possible to have 2 or more God's with infinite power etc? Nobody really knows.

Since I don't actually know the reason for suffering, I suspect that God left it to us to decide the level of perfection we want to achieve. If it's up to us to decide, I think it must be possible to make mistakes (sin), there must be choice. If there were no choice, the decisions wouldn't really be ours and the perfection would be externally imposed rather than coming from us. It would be false.

The limit of our perfection therefore is not imposed by God but is determined by how much we are willing to give selflessly i.e. how much we deny our own will and do God's will (which is true perfection).

Any better?

Thomas_S_Hunterson

kelly1 wrote: »

OK so let's assume God made a "perfect" world. Can a material world be perfect?

An all-powerful being could make anything perfect.

kelly1 wrote: »

Since I don't actually know the reason for suffering, I suspect that God left it to us to decide the level of perfection we want to achieve. If it's up to us to decide, I think it must be possible to make mistakes (sin), there must be choice. If there were no choice, the decisions wouldn't really be ours and the perfection would be externally imposed rather than coming from us. It would be false.

This quote from The Devils Advocate springs to mind:

John Milton (not the poet:p) wrote:

Let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch. He's a prankster. Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, ****in' ass off! He's a tight-ass! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Worship that? NEVER!

philologos

Wicknight wrote: »

Well yes, of course he had a reason. The point is that it is illogical that the reason was good. It is actually possible to determine that without having to know the reasons themselves. The alternative is that God is limited, which is why someone would ask why do Christians, who insist on a good God, limit God

How is this limited?

God evidently chose in His omnipotency to form the world and the life in it the way He did. How is that limiting God?

I can contend with the rest of the post later, but I think this is the main question that MrP was really putting forward.

How does such a conclusion cause us to see God as being limited. It's true that God could have created this universe in any way that He indeed wanted to create it, however he evidently chose the way that life is now. Perhaps as an adequate tribulation period to ensure us to be prepared for the Kingdom of Heaven, or perhaps to help us develop as human beings, there are many philosophical arguments that have been made on this issue by people such as Aquinas, Augustine, Herbert McCabe, Alvin Platinga, which in my view explain thee situation rather well from a theistic perspective. The atheistic perspective from people such as Mackie, and Rowe also provide food for thought, but if you examine the case yourself, you may come to the same position as I did.

rockbeer

kelly1 wrote: »

The limit of our perfection therefore is not imposed by God but is determined by how much we are willing to give selflessly i.e. how much we deny our own will and do God's will (which is true perfection).

This seems to suggest that all the suffering in the world is a result of humans exercising our own will and failing to do god's will.

How does that explain random suffering? For example, a child dying in a natural event such as a tsunami or volcano. Or somebody dying a slow, horrible death buried beneath an avalanche? Nothing that humans can do would prevent such things happening, however pure we are. So god's world has suffering built in to it.

Are you saying he worked within limitations to create this material world and could not have designed it so that random suffering such as in my examples didn't occur?

Then he is not omnipotent.

Or are you saying that he deliberately designed it this way even though he didn't need to?

In which case he has chosen to inflict random suffering upon us regardless of how 'good' we are.

rockbeer

Jakkass wrote: »

Perhaps as an adequate tribulation period to ensure us to be prepared for the Kingdom of Heaven, or perhaps to help us develop as human beings

You are once again highly selective in your examples of suffering.

How is a child who dies within days or months of its birth due to malnutrition or natural disaster 'prepared for heaven'? How exactly does such a child develop as a human being?

You excuse suffering on the grounds that it must be good because god created a world where such things happen; that he consciously allows it.

Surely you can see that it is more rational to conclude either that god does not exist or that he is not as you portray him?

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

God evidently chose in His omnipotency to form the world and the life in it the way He did. How is that limiting God?

Because he should have done better.

There are two conclusions why he didn't, one he didn't want to (calling into question his goodness), or he couldn't (saying he is limited)

If he is good (which you content) then he is limited. If he isn't limited then he isn't good, but then a bad god is not the Christian position.

The assert that he is good and unlimited would not have produced this universe.

philologos

Wicknight wrote: »

Because he should have done better.

If we as humans are clearly unable to see where God's reasoning was on this, as we cannot fully have an understanding of God, we really cannot determine what is "better" than another. And Wicknight, I really don't think you would be much better a candidate for deity than the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, no offence, I don't think anyone would be.

kelly1

rockbeer wrote: »

This seems to suggest that all the suffering in the world is a result of humans exercising our own will and failing to do god's will.

How does that explain random suffering? For example, a child dying in a natural event such as a tsunami or volcano. Or somebody dying a slow, horrible death buried beneath an avalanche? Nothing that humans can do would prevent such things happening, however pure we are. So god's world has suffering built in to it.

Certainly all suffering caused by humans is a result of sin. But you've just shifted the goalposts. We are discussing moral evil, not natural disasters.

rockbeer

kelly1 wrote: »

Certainly all suffering caused by humans is a result of sin. But you've just shifted the goalposts. We are discussing moral evil, not natural disasters.

Suffering is suffering. It is still a part of the landscape of the world you claim that god created.

Are you declining to answer?

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

If we as humans are clearly unable to see where God's reasoning was on this, as we cannot fully have an understanding of God, we really cannot determine what is "better" than another.

Only if he is limited. If he is limited I certainly cannot tell if he could have done any better, because I don't know the limits to his ability to do better. This could have been the best he could do.

If he is unlimited though I certainly can. While I cannot tell you what a perfect universe is like, I can tell you this isn't it. An unlimited God has no reason not to produce a perfect universe.

Jakkass wrote: »

And Wicknight, I really don't think you would be much better a candidate for deity than the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, no offence, I don't think anyone would be.

Well I think it would be hard to do worse.

kelly1

rockbeer wrote: »

Suffering is suffering. It is still a part of the landscape of the world you claim that god created.

Are you declining to answer?

Yes until we finish with the question of why God allows *people* to commit evil.

We'll get nothing resolved if we keep changing the question (not that we're likely to resolve this question anyway).

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

Certainly all suffering caused by humans is a result of sin. But you've just shifted the goalposts. We are discussing moral evil, not natural disasters.

no we aren't. We are talking about suffering, the ability of humans to suffer, mentally and physically. Where the suffering comes from is secondary. Plenty of suffering occurs because of nature.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

Yes until we finish with the question of why God allows *people* to commit evil.

We'll get nothing resolved if we keep changing the question (not that we're likely to resolve this question anyway).

That isn't the question. The question why did God design humans with the ability to suffer. For example, why did God design our skin to burn at a relatively low temperature? How is that necessary?

And by the way the argument You don't know but you still believe it is, just looks silly.

kelly1

Wicknight wrote: »

While I cannot tell you what a perfect universe is like, I can tell you this isn't it. An unlimited God has no reason not to produce a perfect universe.

Do you fully understand the implications of making people incapable of evil? If not then you can't say you could design a better world that God. You're understanding is limited and you're observing from inside the system so it's highly arrogant of you to say a better job could be done.

kelly1

Wicknight wrote: »

no we aren't. We are talking about suffering, the ability of humans to suffer, mentally and physically. Where the suffering comes from is secondary. Plenty of suffering occurs because of nature.

If your refer back to the OP, you'll see the question is about why God allows evil to happen, not why we're allowed to suffer. Suffering is the result of evil, not the reason it's possible.