"God knew evil would happen so he is responsible for it in some sense, and, ergo, I cannot believe in that God" is lightyears from where we need to be.
… Beyond that I think I go in a much different direction from stem.
Well, don’t hold out on us. What’s your take?
I’ll be honest, it’s hard for me to actually get to a place where some entity could even be regarded as a god, since I’m not even sure what that means in a practical sense. Is it a being from a Type III/IV/V/VI civilization? Does a god even have a civilization at its point in existence? What’s the meta point if there is a god that’d make any sense whatsoever to our brains?
It’s all academic, anyway. One gamma ray burst and the question is resolved for all of us.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
I’ll be honest, it’s hard for me to actually get to a place where some entity could even be regarded as a god, since I’m not even sure what that means in a practical sense. Is it a being from a Type III/IV/V/VI civilization? Does a god even have a civilization at its point in existence? What’s the meta point if there is a god that’d make any sense whatsoever to our brains?
It’s all academic, anyway. One gamma ray burst and the question is resolved for all of us.
- Doc
LOL. What's my "take"? Ah, Doc. You're a funny one.
So, I am sure that if there is a supreme entity it does not require us regarding it in any way at all. And, yes, I get that you might not understand what its existence would mean to you in a practical sense.Other than, perhaps, you not having a practical sense in the first place without its prior existence. Such an entity would be prior to any civilization, or the existence of anything else, and any civilization that springs up is contingent upon its existence. The meta point of the supreme entity as it is understood in Classical Theology is that existence as such depends on it, and all that is at some point probably returns to that supreme entity, although I am a lot fuzzier on the latter point. Emanation and return is the grand cycle of things.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Absolutely agree. If evil is allowed for the greater good it must happen. For example, inoculations of children allow temporary harm for the greater good. That would mean every atrocity is allowed for some greater good.
yes it makes God a confusing hypothesis, I think.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
....... P1. If an omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient god exists, then evil does not.
P2. There is evil in the world.
C1. Therefore, an omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient god does not exist.
Hi Stem,
I feel pretty certain that evil is quite real and see no point in trying to balance every evil with some sort of good.
I agree god as pictured in your quote above does not exist.
That picture was put together by people thinking with a small bubble universe with the earth as the center. It was a few thousand years old and consisted of ideas flowing from the mind of god.
But what is the alternative view of God? I guess i don't know what that would be.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
When I read stem's descriptions of the Deity, I feel like we are so far off from hitting the mark of what such an entity would be like. Again, as I said elsewhere, we are playing a very small sandbox trying to grapple with an order of existence that is beyond our comprehension. As a result, our attempts to wrestle with these concepts in our language fall woefully short. It is easy for me to say, "Yeah, stem, I don't like that idea of God either," and that would be accurate, but it would not be the same as saying, "There is no God because what you said sounded really bad."
After all, what does stem know of the nature of God? Here on this board we have very little capacity to wrestle with these issues. I would rely on the philosophers and scientists with some experience at grappling with higher orders of reality and more abstract thought. "God knew evil would happen so he is responsible for it in some sense, and, ergo, I cannot believe in that God" is lightyears from where we need to be.
I can agree with stem in thinking that most people's concept of God can't be anywhere near correct or worthy of investing any belief in. Beyond that I think I go in a much different direction from stem.
I'd go with igtheism. God seems, in all lights, as far as I can tell, incoherent. I think that's mainly why it suffers as a hypothesis. When I hear people say there's a God and try to supply a reason it sounds about like they are supplying a reason for nothing, or not much of any thing. I would be quite interested if ever anyone can define a God that makes sense, and then move that concept from their imagination to some place in reality. Until then, whatever anyone knows, let alone me, about the nature of God seems a game of make believe.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
"God knew evil would happen so he is responsible for it in some sense, and, ergo, I cannot believe in that God" is lightyears from where we need to be.
… Beyond that I think I go in a much different direction from stem.
Well, don’t hold out on us. What’s your take?
I’ll be honest, it’s hard for me to actually get to a place where some entity could even be regarded as a god, since I’m not even sure what that means in a practical sense. Is it a being from a Type III/IV/V/VI civilization? Does a god even have a civilization at its point in existence? What’s the meta point if there is a god that’d make any sense whatsoever to our brains?
It’s all academic, anyway. One gamma ray burst and the question is resolved for all of us.
- Doc
Yep. Nothing to add, but yep.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
I'd go with igtheism. God seems, in all lights, as far as I can tell, incoherent. I think that's mainly why it suffers as a hypothesis. When I hear people say there's a God and try to supply a reason it sounds about like they are supplying a reason for nothing, or not much of any thing. I would be quite interested if ever anyone can define a God that makes sense, and then move that concept from their imagination to some place in reality. Until then, whatever anyone knows, let alone me, about the nature of God seems a game of make believe.
As far as you can tell says it all.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Within Mormonism there is reason to believe that we are capable of knowing a lot about god. In fact, the Lectures on Faith tell us that we must come to have a "correct idea his character, perfections and attributes" if we are to have the kind of faith in god that leads us to salvation:
2 Let us here observe, that three things are necessary, in order that any rational and intelligent being may exercise faith in God unto life and salvation.
3 First, The idea that he actually exists.
4 Secondly, A correct idea of his character, perfections and attributes.
5 Thirdly, An actual knowledge that the course of life which he is pursuing, is according to his will. For without an acquaintance with these three important facts, the faith of every rational being must be imperfect and unproductive; but with this understanding, it can become perfect and fruitful, abounding in righteousness unto the praise and glory of God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
The entire 3rd and 4th lectures are dedicated to the character and attributes of god.
I would infer from this that the information given there is all we are required to have.
Except perhaps for what drum dude said a while ago: V V V
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
Hi Stem,
I feel pretty certain that evil is quite real and see no point in trying to balance every evil with some sort of good.
I agree god as pictured in your quote above does not exist.
That picture was put together by people thinking with a small bubble universe with the earth as the center. It was a few thousand years old and consisted of ideas flowing from the mind of god.
But what is the alternative view of God? I guess i don't know what that would be.
Stem, I was not chasing some strange new picture. I think God faces genuine limitations in interaction with creation. I cannot analyze these in any detail not being Gods supervisor. I believe God is creator, source of life and order. In love he aims for a better future. I can say that God is omnipotent meaning God is the source of all power that exists but may not have power to do every imaginable thing. A cause and effect universe with agents making choices entails conflicts.Traditional conservative Christian thought refers to this as a fallen world where in things are happening which God tolerates looking towards a better future. I think the resistance runs deeper than a first man's sin but the story is a pointer. The alternative is no life at all so best make the best of the difficult life we have.
I think this is fundamentally the God of all religions though many,particularly past, religions have focused upon stories and interactions of intermediary, or multiple gods. In a sense LDS view an intermediary, one who ariveded at godhood,as the person we actually deal with.
The entire 3rd and 4th lectures are dedicated to the character and attributes of god.
I would infer from this that the information given there is all we are required to have.
Except perhaps for what drum dude said a while ago: V V V
Yeah, well, not only was this decanonized some time ago, but it seems to me to be pretty rudimentary stuff. It is fine as far as it goes, but one could drive a fleet of ships through the holes in it.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
