Where lies the greatest claim?

B

b0urgeoisie

I am the Bourgeois
Registered Senior Member
In a philosophy book that I am reading God is described as Omniscient, Omnipotent and All-good by main stream theism. Which of those three claims is the most outrageous?
1.Omnicient
2.Omnipotent
3.All-good
Please include your reasoning in your responses.
 
As an infinite Being, one cannot fathom any of these attributes of God.

Therefore claiming that any/all of these are "outrageous" is an excercise in incompetence and ignorance.
 
i guess 1-2 could be argued with becuase if he is present in everything... that means he has alot of the religons(if any) evil too
3 would make the most sense

but i am but a mer mortal
 
Hey Bourgeois, this one's for you...
I was just wondering. What is your concept of "God"?
Is God an old man in the clouds. A mysterious spiritual myst.....?
I would just like to know what exactly you think God is. with all respect.
 
We have no evidence that any of those concepts are possible and thus all must have equal high outrageous ratings. However, I guess it is conceivable that someone capable of clear thinking could be all-good - although that depends on the definition of good.

Omnipotence and omniscience are simply childish fanciful notions.
 
1.Omniscient
2.Omnipotent
3.All-good

all three are outrageous to enth decree
you'v only to read some of the threads on this forum to realise that, but to help I will give you my reasons at lest you will get what you ask for.

How can an omnipotent, omniscient god be "A jealous God"?
If the world is too complex to not have a creator, then the creator would be, by definition, too complex to not require a creator also.
A Loving god would not have created Hell.

no validity

The christian belief in a Judgment Day is completely conceptually unsound. The christian god is, according to their own holy book, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, so the god knew before he made each person exactly what would happen to that person and exactly what they would do. If the god is omnipotent and omniscient it is not possible for a person to do anything at all that the god did not directly cause to happen. What is there to judge? Nothing.

abuse of the innocenses

How can any reasonable person defend the idea of a loving god that sends his own creations to eternal torment? If this loving god loves his children, then why is it that even one would ever go to hell? How long would you punish your children for their mistakes? Would you burn your child's flesh for eternity? If your child was going to hell and you could stop him from going, would you do it? Of course you would not let those things happen to your children, but this "loving god" definitely would. The proposal that a loving god could send his beloved children to Hell for an eternity of punishment instead of teaching them the error of their ways and correcting them in order to better them, is fundamentally, irreparably, undeniably, conceptually unsound. No god can be omniscient, omnipotent and benevolent and still send its beloved children to any version of Hell.

The christian god is also inherently fond of punishing children and even having them murdered for the sins of their fathers. What god-fearin christian man would claim to tolerate his beloved daughter being punished for his mistakes?


lets pray

It is conceptually unsound that any omniscient and omnipotent being would need constant flattery from its flawed creations or that it would care in the slightest about the offered opinions and requests of those whose past, present and future are obviously previously set in stone by the omniscient and omnipotent being who created them. They can have no opinion, feeling, or prayer which the omniscient and omnipotent being did not create and intentionally cause to come into being long before he ever even created them.


Gods perfect

A perfect god does not make mistakes, nor change his mind. It is not conceptually sound. In the tale of Noah's ark, God did both. The idea of an omniscient and perfect god as purported by the bible is conceptually unsound according to the very words of the bible which the religious claim professes it to be so.


The holy bible describes God as omniscient, omnipotent and loving. Most christians are very fond of saying how loving their god is. If a god is all powerful, and all knowing, then he knows exactly what a person will do before he even creates them. Before the christian god creates a man with a soul, he knows whether or not that man will go to Hell. He is omniscient and He created Hell. The christian god then makes people anyway, even though he knows he will send most of them to Hell. Why would a loving god make men and send them to hell for being exactly what he created them to be? He is perfect, so he certainly doesn't do it on accident. A god can not be loving, omniscient, omnipotent and send people to Hell.They are mutually exclusive.
 
Thank you all for your replies. They are helpful. But, the question is not: Is God capable of any of those three? The question is not even about God. Of those three attributes which is the greatest claim?
 
Of those three attributes which is the greatest claim?
Click to expand...

That a being is omnipotent is the greates claim.

Any entity that exists has to follow the laws of physics, the fact that nothing can contradict the laws of metaphisics renders omnipotence the greatest claim.

God canot create a squred triangle, he can't create an elephant out of a penut, these two examples must follow the laws of metaphisics, since the entity "god" can't do neither then "it" is not omnipotent.

Godless.
 
Godless said:
That a being is omnipotent is the greates claim.

Any entity that exists has to follow the laws of physics, the fact that nothing can contradict the laws of metaphisics renders omnipotence the greatest claim.

God canot create a squred triangle, he can't create an elephant out of a penut, these two examples must follow the laws of metaphisics, since the entity "god" can't do neither then "it" is not omnipotent.

Godless.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your comments Godless. That pattern of logic, however, has been refuted by nearly every philosopher for the last 400 years. What cannot be done by any entity simply cannot be done. An omnipotent entity who is unable to perform such a task is not proved fallible for this inability.
In a text used at the Baylor school of medicine two persons who disagree on the basis for the argument both agree on the result. Harry G. Frankfurt and George I Mavrodes both agree that an omnipotent force should not have to create a square circle, for example, do demonstrate their power. This reasoning holds true for the classic - "Can God create a stone too heavy for him to lift?" Because, in both cases critical analysis demonstrates that omnipotence has to be first pr oved to be disproved. So the logic fails.
 
God existed before there ever was a such thing as logic. We do not know the beginning of logic and the end of it, therefore confining God to logic as if logic precedes God constitutes the paradox.
 
God existed before there ever was a such thing as logic. We do not know the beginning of logic and the end of it, therefore confining God to logic as if logic precedes God constitutes the paradox.
Click to expand...

LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL. :D :D

Thanks for the evening joke!!.

Godless.
 
southstar: I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in public.
 
Not really.

For example one can never say as a matter of fact that causality is manifest everywhere in our universe.

What I said is simply an extension of my first statement that one must not make such definitive statements about what they, as finite entities, cannot possibly encompass.
 
Godless said:
omnipotence cannot be proved, logic would dictate no entity that exists within the realm of our metaphisics can contradict the laws of metaphisics, therefore this would render an entity to perform outside the bounds of physics, a contradiction. Omnipotence is a paradox. http://www.fact-index.com/o/om/omnipotence_paradox.html

Godless.
Click to expand...
Sometimes I wonder about people.
Godless did you even realize that you threw up the argument that I had preemptively refuted?
 
Harry G. Frankfurt and George I Mavrodes both agree that an omnipotent force should not have to create a square circle, for example, do demonstrate their power. This reasoning holds true for the classic - "Can God create a stone too heavy for him to lift?" Because, in both cases critical analysis demonstrates that omnipotence has to be first pr oved to be disproved.
Click to expand...

Just because these two pundits, claim what they claim does not make it so.

Omnipotence, means all powerfull. That's the meaning of the word. So if god can't create a squre triangle, this renders him non-omnipotent.

God's omnipotence conflicts with his omniscience, because if God knows everything that is going to happen in advance, he cannot do anything in the present; he must simply watch the future unfold as previously foreseen, because changing anything would falsify his prior belief concerning the future;
God's omnipotence precludes him from having knowledge of any sensations or emotions associated with weakness, e.g., fear, frustration, despair, sickness, etc., and thus conflicts with him omniscience;God's omniscience and omnipotence conflict with his omnibenevolence, since a god who could prevent evil would do so unless he were unable to do so or unaware of the evil.

Webster:

\Om*nip"o*tence\, Omnipotency \Om*nip"o*ten*cy\, n.
[L. omnipotentia: cf.F. omnipotence.]
1. The state of being omnipotent; almighty power; hence, one
who is omnipotent; the Deity.

Will Omnipotence neglect to save The suffering
virtue of the wise and brave? --Pope.

2. Unlimited power of a particular kind; as, love's
omnipotence. --Denham.

Unlimited power, means "god" would be able to create anything, since a penut is a thing and an elephant is another thing, god would be able to create an elephant out of peanut!!. If he can't he is not omnipotent!.

Godless.
 
Last edited:
I am sure that to claim to be all-good is the greatest statement. By saying that God is all-good is to remove sin from all actions. You can not say that any one thing is evil. You can only make assumptions on the intentions of the acting party.

Allow me to demonstrate my hypothesis.

God = All Good
God = Killing (flood,Sodom & Gomorrah, Egyptians in the Red Sea, etc...)
God = All Good
All Good can never = Bad
Killing = ?

This is not an attempt to justify killing. It is not an attempt to prove God is not All-Good. I am only suggesting a responsible believer must answer critical questions like this.
 
Godless said:
Just because these two pundits, claim what they claim does not make it so.

Omnipotence, means all powerfull. That's the meaning of the word. So if god can't create a squre triangle, this renders him non-omnipotent.

Godless
Click to expand...
Stay by your computer. I am going to stretch out before I flex on you. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top