Flaws with God.

as it is with all religions zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Originally posted by Trickster
Or, more correctly, the flaws I can see with believing in a God. I'm not going to embellish here, but these are some of the flaws I see in believing in God (meaning the God of Classical Theism):

1. Evolution.
2. Evil and suffering. Why would an all-loving God create a world where his 'children' are often subjected to pain? Before anybody mentions the fall from the garden of eden, an all-knowing God would have known this was going to occur, and planned accordingly.
3. The Bible. Two major points here - the fall from Eden. If Adam and Eve hadn't yet eaten from the 'Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil', then how can God hold them to account for doing so, since they obviously weren't aware what they were doing was wrong? Also, the sheer vindictiveness of God in the Old Testament astounds me.
4. Why would God want or need to create the world? If he really is infinite (in every sense of the word), then there would be no reason for him to create the world.
5. What did God do before creating the world, and what will he do afterwards?

I'm sure more will come to me, and if they do I'll post them up.

Oh, finally:

6. I see no reason to believe in God, especially the God of any particular religion. If I was to believe, I'd determine my own concept of a God, not let someone else tell me what to believe in.

Is everything you find in the flaws with God coming straight out of the Bible?! The Bible was undoubtedly edited over the years to fit certain cultures and beliefs! Nowadays, who honestly believes in the Adam and Eve story? God was busy creating other worlds and universes before ours.

Originally posted by finti
as it is with all religions zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Here we go again! Finti comes in and makes a snide remark. Are actually at one point going to post something constructive on this forum, or are you going to keep making snide remarks?

Originally posted by Regret
I do not see how this threatens the concept, unless of course one believes creation is limited to some method that cannot include evolution. Most intelligent believers in God should have no issue with the possible truth of evolution.

I think this comes from erroneous theological philosophies contrived by men. I think this is a valid question to ask most Christians, as for them God didn't need to do it. Mormons believe God did it because it is in his nature to create, and as such, creation is an eternal thing that God will continue to do. We are not the only world God has created, and we are probably not the first or last world he will create.
Another valid question for most Christians. Mormons believe he continues creating, as stated in response to #4. Joy and rejoicing in one's posterity.

If there is a God, probability would state that he has manifested himself at some point. People are funny, they believe if there is a God that it should conform to what they believe God should be. Such is irrational, perspective is insufficient to know the impact of what we consider would be good and what we would consider evil, and our limited perspective cannot judge actions that impact millennia.

I wasn't quite sure of your point here, but it looks like you're criticising the nature of humans to define God - something I greatly agree with. As I said, I would prefer my own God, relevant to my own life, rather than a God defined thousands of years ago.

Thanks for your reply, by the way. My threads never seem to interest people.

Originally posted by Council#13
Is everything you find in the flaws with God coming straight out of the Bible?! The Bible was undoubtedly edited over the years to fit certain cultures and beliefs! Nowadays, who honestly believes in the Adam and Eve story? God was busy creating other worlds and universes before ours.

Yes. I already addressed this point in response to Lil's comment. However, 2, 4 and 5 are not just Bible-related. (6 too.)

Originally posted by Trickster
Perhaps you missed the term 'God of Classical Theism'? Since that expressly means a God based on Holy Scripture, the Bible would indeed be the source for any discussion of this God.

I'm aware I missed off the Qu'ran and Torah, but assume they are included. As for why the Bible is a problem, perhaps you can give me a satisfactory answer to my question on the Fall? There are other problems I have with the Bible, but I was trying to keep my post succinct

I don't believe Bible is the problem with God. I think the God is problem with the Bible.

Since I believe there are certain philosophical aspect of the Bible which can be taken away and implemented as a greater good, - the idea of Sadistic deity is the initial problem with it. Same applies to Qur'an and Torah.

Provided you take away the Deity, there could well be a lot of excellent philosophical and humaneterian ideas in there.

Problem with God isn't Bible, but other way around.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Well, the Christians (or alternatively Muslims of Jews) claim their God is the one and only - and the Holy Text of that religion is the pinnacle of Divine Interaction - the teachings as it were of the God itself.

Thus the Bible is a problem when one approaches the monotheistic Abrahamic deity for many reasons, including the ones listed. For some to believe in the God the Bible describes... well, many find problems with believing in the Biblical one - be it for theodicy (the question of good and evil) which is has always been a big question. An all good, all powerful God, ruling over a world were suffering and "evil" are commonplace.

Refer to above.

Besides, I believe it is wrong to limit God to Bible, Qur'an or Torah.
Limiting God to one of those scriptures, or even the three of them, is the same as claiming that there is one true path to a deity.

Based on that, furthermore, it is easy to dispute the lack of existence of a deity, because understanding of such deity is limited to three books.

Infinitively wise being, who has created everything and all, cannot be limited to books. I think the infinate would suggest that.

What is more, if such deity does exist, it would logically lead me to believe that it does not hear prayers or answer them, it does not care for prayers or praises.

Truth is a pathless land - God, if it ineed does exist is everything around us, including ourselves.
There is, therefore, no need for belief in devil or a sadistic deity of the kind, because humans are lone are quite capable of every evil imaginable.

Reflecting, thus on my post, the initial thread theme is very limited - it DOES NOT at any level demonstrates any plausible ''flaws with God'' - it shows flaws with a single definition of God.

If you are trying to demonstrate the fallibility of Christianity, Islam or Judaism, those are more than evident, repeated and constantly revealed.

If you are trying to show the fallibility of existence of a deity, you are not, by any stretch of imagination, doing that.

Originally posted by Trickster

I tossed this one in because some people do believe in the literal Biblical creation story.

Originally posted by Trickster
Having already accepted evolution, I assume you also agree that there must have been billions of years in which humans had no consciousness or ability to make decisions, so I don't see how you can claim that natural accidents are any fault of humanity. Meteors, for example, cannot have been affected by humans. Even less catastrophic events, such as death by disease, have been around longer than humans.
Also, since God would already know that all this suffering was going to occur, why would he create the world? Why didn't he create a world, and a humanity, which didn't suffer and receive pain, or at least had less pain?

Originally posted by Trickster
I wasn't aware God had given them this knowledge. As such, I retract that statement, but replace it with the question "Why did God feel it necessary to tempt Adam and Eve when he already knew what would happen?"

Originally posted by Trickster
(I put both these responses together, as they are the same)
It's an interesting response, and not one I've heard before. If we are not the only world God's created, then why do we hold ourselves in such an exalted status?

Originally posted by Trickster
I wasn't quite sure of your point here, but it looks like you're criticising the nature of humans to define God - something I greatly agree with. As I said, I would prefer my own God, relevant to my own life, rather than a God defined thousands of years ago.

Originally posted by Trickster
Thanks for your reply, by the way. My threads never seem to interest people.

Regret...in your justification for human suffering you supposed that it must be necessary for the learning of empathy and compassion.

The claim that God needs anything implies he is finite and not truly infinite as you would try to push.

1. Evolution.

Evolution?? Never happened and if it did where is the proof. I’d like to see it.

2. Evil and suffering. Why would an all-loving God create a world where his 'children' are often subjected to pain? Before anybody mentions the fall from the garden of eden, an all-knowing God would have known this was going to occur, and planned accordingly.

Where there is light there must be dark. Right? Light would not be light is there wasn’t dark and dark wouldn’t be dark with out light. Same with good and evil. To have good there must be evil or good isn’t good. It’s nothing. Same with love and hate God loves man but hates sin. What is sin? Braking any of Gods 10 laws. Like #2: You shall not make yourself an idol. (Have you made a god in your mind that you're more comfortable with, a god to suit yourself?)

God created the world knowing man would fall so that God could die on the cross to save man from hell so that the fallen man could still go to haven even after falling and give God the glory.

3. The Bible. Two major points here - the fall from Eden. If Adam and Eve hadn't yet eaten from the 'Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil', then how can God hold them to account for doing so, since they obviously weren't aware what they were doing was wrong? Also, the sheer vindictiveness of God in the Old Testament astounds me. "Why did God feel it necessary to tempt Adam and Eve when he already knew what would happen?"

God told them not to eat. The serpent (satin) tempted Adam and Eve. Then they eat.

4. Why would God want or need to create the world? If he really is infinite (in every sense of the word), then there would be no reason for him to create the world.

For his Glory. (See #2)

5. What did God do before creating the world, and what will he do afterwards?

I can’t wait to ask him myself.

6. I see no reason to believe in God, especially the God of any particular religion. If I was to believe, I'd determine my own concept of a God, not let someone else tell me what to believe in.

You don’t have to believe in God. Just like I can stand on the highway and say “I don’t believe in trucks.” It’s not going to make the truck go away. It will still hit me and I would still die. Just because you don’t believe in something doesn’t mean it’s not there. Satin and the demons believe in God and Jesus. But it’s not going to do them any good. God/Jesus is the only way in to heaven if you fallow him and put your trust in him. You don’t believe in heaven or hell? It don’t mean their not there.

Evolution?? Never happened and if it did where is the proof. I’d like to see it.

Can you show me proof of god? Of course not, evolution however has been proven by scientists plenty of times. You should really look it up someday, it isn't just a stupid theory.. It's as close to scientific fact as you can get.

Originally posted by Nocturnalwolf82
Evolution?? Never happened and if it did where is the proof. I’d like to see it.

A closed mind will never see anything it does not wish to see.

Open your mind and google evolution proof and then read a lot.

Originally posted by Regret
To tell you the truth I am not entirely positive as to the origin of man. I believe God created man and the other creatures, but man is a separate and more complex creation imo. As to suffering, perhaps it is necessary to teach compassion and empathy. Perhaps any creature that is not God is subject to these things by virtue of existence. Perhaps suffering and pain are inseparably connected to imperfection. Laws govern existence, I do not believe that God acts outside these laws, I believe he exists within them. Also, if man, supposedly the pinnacle of creation, has pain and suffering as a natural part of existing (e.g. growing pains, birth pains, deterioration due to age resulting in various pains), why would his lesser creations not be similar? As well as large creations such as the planets. Man isn't always the target of events causing pain and suffering, would we have discovered all the things we have without many of these tragic events? Perhaps the events are tragic, but there are positives associated with many. Would man have survived in a world populated with dinosaurs?

That looks to me a somewhat controversial view. If God operates within the laws of nature, then how exactly did he create the universe? Ex nihilo? I don't think it's possible to create something from nothing, according to the governing laws of nature - though I'm open to being told otherwise.
I'm not arguing that the existence of pain in animals is a flaw in itself - rather questioning why an all-loving God would feel the need to create things such as disease and starvation. And if he was all-powerful, he would be able to create the positive effects without the negative. (For instance, he could have created a world in which humans and dinosaurs can co-exist.)

Questions also arise as to why God doesn't intervene in massive catastrophes - in the New Testament he heals single people, but he never manifests himself as a saviour during genocide or natural disasters. The bubonic plague would be a good example.

Without the possibility of disobedience, can one truly show that one is obedient? If you do not have the freedom to act in a way aside from the prescribed course are you free? I believe the possibility of improper action is necessary for freedom to exist. I don't think God tempted them, he merely told them not to do it, and left the choice to them. Also, consequence must follow action, regardless of proper or improper action.

That's a fair enough point, but it still seems a somewhat petty experiment - God knew humans would disobey him. It's like leaving out some sweets in front of a small child and telling them not to eat any. Would it not be better for God to punish the person committing the improper action rather than allow that person to harm another?

It also still raises the point as to why God feels it necessary to have obedience - wouldn't it be better to create a human race that was able to determine for itself what is right and wrong? If not, he would have been able to minimise the effects of improper action upon innocents.

I think that is merely something we do. Look at many Christians, they exalt themselves and put down everyone else, such is the sin of pride. It isn't feeling good about oneself, it is feeling of superiority over others.

But even you say that humans are the pinnacle of God's creation - surely a more humble approach would be better? Gratefulness, rather than pride, that we are the ones chosen to have such a position. (For this one I'm arguing just for the sake of argument - I can see your point).

Yes, I think defining God is illogical. Given the scope of God and our limited perspective, there is no logical or rational way to define such a being. Unless of course he provides defining characteristics, something I feel hasn't truly been done in the Bible.

Yes, there really is no definition of God, other than that he is good. A real definition would probably help a lot of people. My original point still stands - I would rather come to my own understanding of a God, rather than subscribe to the somewhat rigid and conservative view of a deity.

You're welcome, this thread may garner a decent number of responses.

Good to know. I hope it does.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I don't believe Bible is the problem with God. I think the God is problem with the Bible.

Since I believe there are certain philosophical aspect of the Bible which can be taken away and implemented as a greater good, - the idea of Sadistic deity is the initial problem with it. Same applies to Qur'an and Torah.

Provided you take away the Deity, there could well be a lot of excellent philosophical and humaneterian ideas in there.

Problem with God isn't Bible, but other way around.

I'm grateful for your input, but the subject of the philosophical merits of the Bible are not what this thread is about.

Besides, I believe it is wrong to limit God to Bible, Qur'an or Torah.
Limiting God to one of those scriptures, or even the three of them, is the same as claiming that there is one true path to a deity.

Based on that, furthermore, it is easy to dispute the lack of existence of a deity, because understanding of such deity is limited to three books.

Infinitively wise being, who has created everything and all, cannot be limited to books. I think the infinate would suggest that.

What is more, if such deity does exist, it would logically lead me to believe that it does not hear prayers or answer them, it does not care for prayers or praises.

Truth is a pathless land - God, if it ineed does exist is everything around us, including ourselves.
There is, therefore, no need for belief in devil or a sadistic deity of the kind, because humans are lone are quite capable of every evil imaginable.

Reflecting, thus on my post, the initial thread theme is very limited - it DOES NOT at any level demonstrates any plausible ''flaws with God'' - it shows flaws with a single definition of God.

If you are trying to demonstrate the fallibility of Christianity, Islam or Judaism, those are more than evident, repeated and constantly revealed.

If you are trying to show the fallibility of existence of a deity, you are not, by any stretch of imagination, doing that.

I think it is clear enough by my initial post that I am not finding fault with the existence of any deity, but the God of Classical Theism. Since many people do in fact believe in this God, then it seems a relevant issue and one that can be discussed in depth.

As, regrettably, you feel the initial thread topic was limited, then I apologise. However, as I qualified what I meant by the thread title and clearly outlined my aims and arguments, I'd prefer it if you kept any further input in the thread on-topic - instead of criticising the thread itself.

Originally posted by Nocturnalwolf82
God created the world knowing man would fall so that God could die on the cross to save man from hell so that the fallen man could still go to haven even after falling and give God the glory.

God told them not to eat. The serpent (satin) tempted Adam and Eve. Then they eat.

For his Glory. (See #2)

So, to you, God is effectively a glory-seeker? But, because there's nobody he can show off to, he has created a race of people who will be awed by him? If so, he's succeeded in failing at that, because many people do doubt him. (In fact, the majority of the world doubt or deny the existence of the God of any religion.

(To clarify that point, I mean that religions almost always deny the existence of the gods of other religions.)

Originally posted by Trickster

I'm grateful for your input, but the subject of the philosophical merits of the Bible are not what this thread is about.

I think it is clear enough by my initial post that I am not finding fault with the existence of any deity, but the God of Classical Theism. Since many people do in fact believe in this God, then it seems a relevant issue and one that can be discussed in depth.

As, regrettably, you feel the initial thread topic was limited, then I apologise. However, as I qualified what I meant by the thread title and clearly outlined my aims and arguments, I'd prefer it if you kept any further input in the thread on-topic - instead of criticising the thread itself.

What ARE you talking about?
It is on topic. My post has covered everything you have raised in your initial post.

You have tried to somehow explain the flaws with God, and you went on to talk about bible. Initially, you went on to say you were covering Islamic and Jewish God.

You have at no point metnioned Abrahamic God, you have mentioned the flaws with ''god''

For you God is limited to these three religions, adn thus your thread is just exactly the same as every other thread in this forum.

Originally posted by Trickster
Why would an all-loving God create a world where his 'children' are often subjected to pain?

Tough love.

Kinda like when a parent spanks a child for getting out of line.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What ARE you talking about?
It is on topic. My post has covered everything you have raised in your initial post.

You have tried to somehow explain the flaws with God, and you went on to talk about bible. Initially, you went on to say you were covering Islamic and Jewish God.

You have at no point metnioned Abrahamic God, you have mentioned the flaws with ''god''

For you God is limited to these three religions, adn thus your thread is just exactly the same as every other thread in this forum.

Sorry, but in my first post I make explicit reference to the God of Classical Theism. I have never said that God is limited to those specific three religions, just that it is their God that I would like to discuss in this thread.

Obviously, if I had included other definitions of God then your points would indeed be relevent, but I didn't, so discussing a God that does not care about his creation is not. The entire point of the thread is to discuss the problems with a God of Classical Theism, not suggest alternatives. You didn't 'cover' any of my post - instead you attacked the concept of a God of Classical Theism and the thread itself. As such, much of your post was totally irrelevant to the discussion I am trying to have.

For the purposes of this discussion, the Abrahamic God and the God of Classical Theism are one and the same.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Tough love.

Kinda like when a parent spanks a child for getting out of line.

But if God knew what was going to happen, why let it happen?

Like I said above, it's like putting a jar of sweets in a room with a small child and telling the kid not to eat them.

Originally posted by Fishy
Of course not, evolution however has been proven by scientists plenty of times. You should really look it up someday, it isn't just a stupid theory.. It's as close to scientific fact as you can get.

Evolution is no where near to being considered a scientific fact yet. Way to many holes and the whole problem with spontaneous regeneration. This is just as closed minded as the Christian and/or agnostic view of intelligent design can be.

Like Regret I believe that evolution is a possilbe method through which God created man, but the scientific evidence does not add up enough for me.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Not even close to scientific fact.
Close to scientific fact:
gravity, atomic orbitals, functions of some of the different parts of the human brain, etc.

Evolution is no where near to being considered a scientific fact yet. Way to many holes and the whole problem with spontaneous regeneration. This is just as closed minded as the Christian and/or agnostic view of intelligent design can be.

Like Regret I believe that evolution is a possilbe method through which God created man, but the scientific evidence does not add up enough for me.

Perhaps you could offer answers to my other points as well?

Originally posted by Trickster
Yes. I already addressed this point in response to Lil's comment. However, 2, 4 and 5 are not just Bible-related. (6 too.)

Well burn me if I won't read everyone's post.