A Problem with God

[Kem]

personally i love trying to see meaning in all things and all that good stuff but when it comes to go im torn ... its all well and good having a good who loves us all like children ect ect but then you end up with situations like those 2 girls and you have to make up all kinds of crazy crap to make god seem a good guy ... like the example of suicide bombers.

hence the creation of the devil figure... its just a made up thing to blame anything bad taht happens in the world on something else so your god doesnt seem like a d1khead.

personally i try not to think of this as religion is just a way of brainwashing the stupid and comforting the delusional and week.

 

[Robbo]

This is entirely possible (maybe even plausible, when one considers the world’s history) but like every other answer it’s full of ‘ifs’; none of us can truly know – so why bother?

If we didn't 'bother', we wouldn't get anywhere Tek ......every question is full of 'if and buts and moneky nuts' ..until that is ...you crack it...then it ceases to become a question.... it is this process that is initiated by curiosity, continued with ingenuity and completed with logicality that separates us from the chimps and Arsenal supporters

 

[TEKLOFTY]

If we didn't 'bother', we wouldn't get anywhere Tek ......every question is full of 'if and buts and moneky nuts' ..until that is ...you crack it...then it ceases to become a question.... it is this process that is initiated by curiosity, continued with ingenuity and completed with logicality that separates us from the chimps and Arsenal supporters

Quite, but i feel that with this particular type of question an answer is impossible to reach; any debate is simply jovial - and yeh, it is kinda fun.

 

[SJS]

He can certainly undo the mechanics of them being killed by rewinding but not the knowledge they were killed somewhere.

Surely in turn of killing huntly you would eradicate your own memory of anything that had happened, as it doesn't then go on to happen?

It makes sense in my head, just hard to explain really.

You could think of it as if you remove huntly from existance, then the girls don't die. Which then means you wouldn't go on to ask the guy upstairs to go back in time. So you would lose the memory of it happening becuase it didn't.

What a load of gobbeldigook.



Another way of thinking of it is that God may not be omnipotent. (This is taken from my Religious Ethics essay that I just finished.)

Process theology is a way of thinking that God is not omnipotent in the sense of being coercive. He has a power of persuasion rather than coercion. Process theologans beleive that God doesn't have ultimate control over the universe, he can only influence events. God has a will in every thing, but not every thing is the will of God.

 

[Duncan Berry]

Guys the problem most of you are forgetting is that if God takes any action to change anything, then at one point said event occurred and so even though nobody perhaps even god would be aware they have made said change does not alter that fact that the event happened


so my conclusion is in this paradox god is not omnipotent

 

[Buddha 3]

Guys the problem most of you are forgetting is that if God takes any action to change anything, then at one point said event occurred and so even though nobody perhaps even god would be aware they have made said change does not alter that fact that the event happened


so my conclusion is in this paradox god is not omnipotent

C'mon now, you are thinking way too much within the constraints of logic. If something is omnipotent, there is no logic.

 

[Ceicj]

And to throw in another intriguing paradox at this point just to attune the mind, I shall share the Prisoner Paradox with you and then we can all go screaming to the loony bin together.

Two prisoners are banged up awaiting execution, they have no idea when they are gonna be executed until one fateful Saturday night when the guard comes into their cell and declares, 'Good evening gentlemen, I have some news for you, you will both be executed at some time in the next 7 days, I am gonna leave it as a surprise as to which day you do get executed; And so have fun in the time you have left guys, however much time that is, cheerio'.

The prisoners look at each other but one of the prisoners has a grin from ear to ear, his friend looks on in disbelief and questions the smile upon his cellmate's face.

The guy with the grin explains, 'it's OK, we can't be executed, we are safe, woooo hooo'.

The other prisoner can't believe this and desperately asks for him to explain why he thinks that....'well, my friend, the guard said, it would be a surprise as to what day we would be executed and since we can only be executed in the next 7 days, the last possible day that could happen would be Saturday'.

The bemused friend nods silently in eager agreement.

'Well, the guard also said it would be a surprise and so it couldn't be Saturday because if we got to Friday night without being killed then Saturday wouldn't be a surprise at all, it would be obvious to us both it would have to be the next day, but it can't coz then it wouldn't be a surprise'

The bemused friend once again nods silently in agreement.

'Well, if we know it ain't gonna be Saturday, then it can't be Friday either by the same reasoning' ........' and the same argument for Thursday and so on'

The bemused friend suddenly doesn't look so bemused and he too is then wearing a grin from ear to ear ........

The point is, they do executed but where is the flaw in his thinking ....?

after spending some time on it i believe i have got it

they missed out sunday!

EDIT:i do realise this is slightly off topic now but i am proud of myself for getting it

 

[Bedlam]

after spending some time on it i believe i have got it

they missed out sunday!

EDIT:i do realise this is slightly off topic now but i am proud of myself for getting it

After reading this, I re-read the original post and the flaw is fairly simple. Its certainty.

For a start, the prisoner has used an inductive argument. That is one were you start at the end and deduce backwards (If C cannot be true, then I must look at B, but that can only be true when I reach B after A). So, to start with, his argument is based on the certainty that he knows that he cannot be executed on friday. But that only holds true for thursday night. So if the prisoner reaches thursday morning without being hanged, his reasoning is that he cannot be hanged friday, so must be hanged on thursday. But if that is true, then he cannot be surprised. And if he cannot be surprised, then what reason does he have to believe that he won't be surprised on friday. The answer is none. So, if he is certain he will be hanged on thursday (and therefore not surprised) then he cannot be certain that he will not be hanged on friday. That is contradictory to his argument. And if he cannot be certain, then he can still be surprised and therefore still hanged.

It took several reads but I do not believe that this is a true paradox. More an interpretation of the prisoner and guards logic.

 

[F3Z]

I think the answer would be easier to come up with if you stop considering time as a line or multilple time-lines. Just because it only goes in one way for us, and a thoerical backwards direction doesn't mean that it is a line. If god does exist (which i don't believe myself) then he has seen all of time already even if it has no begining or end. So then any changes he makes would not affect a time-line but simply existence. Sure he could take somebody back in time but that would be against the idea of god allowing free will.

I think more more complex question has already come up;

Could God make a rock so big that he himself couldn't lift it?

 

[tiffer]

As Jesus is being crucified he shouts to his disciples,I'll be back so leave my ****ing easter eggs alone.....