It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the Hebrew, Christian and Muslim God omnipotent?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 08:45 PM
link   
If he is, why then did he according to Enoch, banish his fallen angels rather than destroy them?

Why did he, after banishing the angels, not just wipe out all of man, or mans knowledge and start over instead of saving Noah and his progeny?

Why would he tempt man with the tree of knowledge, where the blame for temptation lies with the serpent?

Why did he find it necessary to carry on with man having been tainted by sin?

Why if he is omnipotent, foretold mans fate, a fate which we cannot change?

Why if the serpent is so vile a creature, did he give Moses the ability to turn his staff into one in order to avenge pharaoh?




posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Because he wanted to.

You can't argue with illogical statements and irrational beleifs. Can god make a rock so heavy that he can't lift it? Yes, not only that, he can pick it up and spin it like a basketball. Doesn't make sense? I agree, but who said it has to make sense?



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Because he wanted to.

You can't argue with illogical statements and irrational beleifs. Can god make a rock so heavy that he can't lift it? Yes, not only that, he can pick it up and spin it like a basketball. Doesn't make sense? I agree, but who said it has to make sense?
But I expect it to make sense, especially if he expects us to make sense of what it is he requires from us. We are not of his mind, logic, and intellect and cannot be expected from day one of his creation of us to think like he, for if so, we would not have levels of intelligence bordering on idiot to this day.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 10:11 PM
link   


If he is, why then did he according to Enoch, banish his fallen angels rather than destroy them?


An excellent question and one that bears examination. I find it interesting that so few people are interested in the recent fragments of the Book of Enoch found in the Dead Sea caves of qumran. I believe it's fair to now date this book around 800 bc. This book goes much deeper into the fall of the angels. It mentions that there were precisely 200 angels and names the ringleaders. I also found this passage quite remarkable in light of the polar-shift-ice-age-flood-thing:

[65.1 "And in those days, Noah saw that the earth had tilted and that the end was near." Book of Enoch CH.11]

However, your questions are not likely to get a well-thought response. I ask; what would you propose as a substitute for those who take these items on faith? This sort of "could God make a rock so big that even He could not lift it" question leads nowhere. Better to speak about God in terms of personal feelings, experiences and answers (or lack thereof) to supplications, IMO.

sp



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 10:27 PM
link   
First off, Allah is NOT the God of the Bible. For starters, Allah had no son, and Muslims do not believe that Jesus is/was the Son of God, or that He was crucified. Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God.

Getting to the question, yes, God is omnipotent.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Somewhereinbetween you have to understand that most of all the bible stories are nothing more and nothing else than colorful bed time stories made by men.

Also people has made God so human and human like to be able to find a common bind to it.

And omnipotent God would not have any reason to created mankind just to play with his creation like a child with a temper tantrum.

Everything and all the attributes of God has been given by man.




[edit on 4-1-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
if he expects us to make sense of what it is he requires from us.

Interesting point, but knowledge and understand of the character of god might not be necessary for that. If you notice, sometime the older parts of the bible read like a 'do/don't do' list as if lots of possible actions were considered and listed.


We are not of his mind, logic, and intellect and cannot be expected from day one of his creation of us to think like he, for if so, we would not have levels of intelligence bordering on idiot to this day.
Even the most brilliant people in all of history couldn't answer these questions like the one you opened with. Or at least if thy did they didn't tell anyone. Man is the 'rational animal'. If you subscribe to the idea that, one way or another, god created man and the universe, it stands to reason that this god might've given man this rational ability, and plopped him in a rational universe, so that he can use this rational ability to understand this universe. On the other hand, faith is not a rational position, its not something that can be swayed by logic; no evidence can refute it. So on the one measure, the Creator appears to have made man so that he will think. On the other, he's made it so that rational thought can't penetrate into the supernatural realm of god, and can't result, in and of itself, in faith in the very existence of this god. So it all makes it very difficult to determine if god has a set of rules that he even wants anyone to follow. This line or reasoning is usually refered to as 'agnostic'.


amethyst
First off, Allah is NOT the God of the Bible. For starters, Allah had no son

The old testament god had no son either. Yet its said that the torah and bible god are the same. In this light, the koranic god is the same god. All three religions are stating, explicitly, that their god is the god of abraham. The christians say something had to be added to it, and I suppose the muslims say that the worship was corrupted by men, and god gave a new revelation. Regardless, the very fact that they claim to be the god of abraham is sufficient to make it so.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Even the most brilliant people in all of history couldn't answer these questions like the one you opened with.
I would say it cannot be deinitively answered until we all come to be living in his realm, but it can be reasonably answered by argument. For example; Gen 6 seems to suggest that God destroyed man because his sons, presumed to be his angels, copulated with man and created a race of giants, and these angels along with Satan, subverted God's plan for man, which suggests his limited hold on them. Likewise, if indeed he had intended to destroy the giant race, he failed, and he failed because the trait was obviously within Noah's family.


On the other hand, faith is not a rational position, its not something that can be swayed by logic; no evidence can refute it.
I agree. position



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

faith is not a rational position, its not something that can be swayed by logic; no evidence can refute it. So on the one measure, the Creator appears to have made man so that he will think. On the other, he's made it so that rational thought can't penetrate into the supernatural realm of god, and can't result, in and of itself, in faith in the very existence of this god.

Unfortunately answers like this seem to be the case more often than not (no offense directed at Nygdan).

Suggested thread concerning faith as the basis of Christianity:"Faith" - The Christian's Clever Escape Move

I am in awe of this concept of "faith" and how it is used. "Faith" is the most pivital concept of the Christian proposal; essentially the keystone. However, the weakest point of the Christian idea is its suceptability to questions which, when answered by Christians, result in conflicting answers - or would at least without the idea of "faith". Anytime a question arises where there seems to be no answer present that could possibly favor the Christian, "faith" is proclaimed..."you must have faith in God and His word!!"

This works out beautifully, almost as if by design. But whose design, this "God's" or man's? Faith is simply the backdoor designed to alleviate the Christian from having to answer these terrible questions. Faith is a double-edged sword though. For through faith one receives "eternity in heaven". "Eternity in heaven" through faith is not only a signing bonus for Christianity, but also is its sole defense.

I am not attacking the idea of faith only this tragic, misguided use of faith. I cannot, however, whole-heartedly shake my finger at Christianity for using faith in this manner - I must admit, I periodically smirk in revere of its peridoxical use. For it truly is, and has proven to be, ingenious and an ingenuitive base for a religious structure - everytime "faith" is thrown in my face not only as a serious answer but a "substantial" one, I am truly awestruck by thie Christian machine of peridox.

Maybe Jesus was not only a carpenter, but during those 19 some-odd years he disappears from the Bible's reference he earned a degree as a machinist (a jokingly based proposal of course).



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
If he is, why then did he according to Enoch, banish his fallen angels rather than destroy them?


Because he has a plan. I'm sure he could (and will according to Revelation).


Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Why did he, after banishing the angels, not just wipe out all of man, or man?s knowledge and start over instead of saving Noah and his progeny?


Noah was a righteous man. Why blast a guy who has got it right?


Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Why would he tempt man with the tree of knowledge, where the blame for temptation lies with the serpent?


A test. We take them every day, all part of the experiment. Free will, what will man do?


Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Why did he find it necessary to carry on with man having been tainted by sin?


He loves mankind.


Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Why if he is omnipotent, foretold man?s fate, a fate which we cannot change?


God is a micro-manager? I don't see where this is coming from. I always saw him as a macro-manager. He moves the big stuff and lets us move the little stuff.


Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Why if the serpent is so vile a creature, did he give Moses the ability to turn his staff into one in order to avenge pharaoh?


The snake is one of God's creatures. It is not inherently evil. Satan turned himself into one in disguise, so that woman would recognize it as a native inhabitant of the garden. Snakes strike quickly so they're seen as dangerous but they are also used as medical purposes even in ancient times. It's like saying tigers are evil, spiders, mosquitos, etc...

Omnipotent means 'all powerful' so I'm not sure how these questions relate. If you're asking about omniscient (all-knowing), then okay, we can explore that direction. The Book isn't set up in a Q & A format. It takes reading the whole thing where people are reflecting back to these events and common themes of God to pick-up on a lot of the why questions.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
First off, Allah is NOT the God of the Bible. For starters, Allah had no son, and Muslims do not believe that Jesus is/was the Son of God, or that He was crucified. Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God.

Getting to the question, yes, God is omnipotent.


Are not Muslims and Jews both descended from Abraham? The Muslims are from Abraham's son with Sara's handmaiden and the Jewish faith from Abraham and Sara's son, Isaac?

I believe that they DO worship the same God.

The Koran is the same as the Penteteuch (sp), which is the first 5 books of the bible...the old testament.

I believe that God is omnipotent.

The reason that he did not destroy the fallen angels was because, after all, they are his creations, too, and he has a plan.

The reason that he did not wipe out all of mankind was...Noah was a pure blood, Hebrew, through which Yahshua would be born. Besides, the flood was menat to destroy the hybrids (giants/Niphilim) that were the product of the matings of the "sons of God" (fallen-angels) and the daughters of men.



[edit on 1/18/2005 by Cherish]



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:10 AM
link   
It is impossible, and illogical to consider a God to be omnipotent. There are no arguments to the contrary aside from meaningless ravings of those afraid of living life.

Saint, you said God has a plan..... Elaborate for us? Coincedentally I just made a post regarding that very thing. A post explaining why people who say that are speaking in lunacy.


www.belowtopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
If he is, why then did he according to Enoch, banish his fallen angels rather than destroy them?

To understand this you have to remember the fact that heaven and hell are not physical places. Hell is not a place were you burn in a dry heat for eternety. Hell is a permanent absence of God. In this way the fallen angel has to be around for ever in total isolation. In my opinion this is worse than destruction.


Why did he, after banishing the angels, not just wipe out all of man, or man�s knowledge and start over instead of saving Noah and his progeny?

God sees the good and bad in every person and tries to guide man to the good. But to answer your question with a question: Why would God destroy his own creation? Well the answer is simple. He made man in his own image, therefore: by destroying man he would destroy himself.


Why would he tempt man with the tree of knowledge, where the blame for temptation lies with the serpent?

God did not tempt man, the serpent did. The serpent symbolises satan. Satan holds the power of seduction and persuasion, he has no real power, he has to make men carry out his evil doing. The tree of knowlege is not an actual tree. It's a symbol of knowledge, research and developement. The problem God has with these things is that this will make room for destruction av messing with his creation, wich we see happening today.


Why did he find it necessary to carry on with man having been tainted by sin?

Man is tainted by the sins commited by Adam and Eve. However man has the possibility to be saved, because Jesus died for the sins of man.


Why if he is omnipotent, foretold man�s fate, a fate which we cannot change?

God is all seeing, and therefore can see the furure of man. The future of man was decided when an apple was taken from the "Tree of Knowledge". But that does not mean that all men have a fate. Men have free will, and all actions are carried out through free will.


Why if the serpent is so vile a creature, did he give Moses the ability to turn his staff into one in order to avenge pharaoh?

Like I said, the serpent in it self is not a vile creature. But in the history of Eden, it represents Satan, the Devil or what ever you want to call it.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seapeople
Saint, you said God has a plan..... Elaborate for us?


I'm glad you asked! The best analogies I have for this is gaming and parenting. Hear me out please, I'm not saying parenting is any easier than gaming by any stretch of the means, but follow my train of thought please:

Gaming: When you play any strategy game you have two things - tools and a goal. To the best formation of your thinking, you come up with an idea to employ those tools to reach your goal. In other words, you have your victory planned, you just need to get your guy(s) on the screen to do it.

Parenting: Even before you have your child, you have the named picked along with the hospital you're going to go to have her/him, the schools in your area mapped and a college savings account started. That child's life has been mapped for the first 18 years. Wow! What comfort there is in that if you're parents are able to pull it off. Well, said child need not follow that path the further s/he goes, but if s/he wants to, the rewards are great.

Okay, I'll stop with the analogies. It makes sense, as we are mini-creators in our world, to make the blueprints before building the house.

Where's my scripture? To believers:

Isaiah 46:9, 10: I am God and there is none like me; declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done.

I Peter 1:20: (Christ) who (as a sacrifice for sin) was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world.

Isaiah 14:24: Jehovah of hosts has sworn, saying, Surely, as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand.

Acts 3:18: The things which God foreshowed by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He thus fulfilled.

[edit on 18-1-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 03:24 PM
link   
God of the hebrews = ancient national epics and poetry.
God of the christians = Jesus, a political radical.
God of the muslims = justification for wars and gang mentality.

The above Gods are not related to each other, except in the minds of the original proponents, who wanted their religions to build upon already well-established prejudices.

Aside from this, there might be some fragments of divine communications buried in the monotheist scriptures, even some hints of divine beneficient guidance. Gods are very powerful beings, but not omnipotent. They are not omniscient either, and can fall into delusions of grandeur. Gods are gods only because they did well in their previous lives.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   
It has always seemed to me that the reason God, who is omnipotent, did not destroy Satan and those angels who followed him is because then it would have appeared just as Marg claims it does appear - that God has tantrums and that God rules by fear. And, rather than destroying mankind and starting over when Adam and Eve dropped the ball, He gave the ultimate sacrifice to pay for our sins. Their is no illogic in this whatsoever.

Lunacy doesn't exist merely because you choose not to understand. Lunacy is wasting time on something that means nothing to you if you prefer to deny it. I also wonder about other aspects of lunacy, for example, isn't this a spirituality topic, rather than a conspiracy topic? Seems a bit loony to not get the threads in the right forums!



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Somewhereinbetween you have to understand that most of all the bible stories are nothing more and nothing else than colorful bed time stories made by men.


This is just your opinion Marg.

Christians believe that the Bible is the word of God. And God didn't create the world and people just to "play" with them. He wanted a people to love and to love him back. He gave us free choice. We make the choices and because he is GOD He knew the choices we would make.

God is omnipresent and omniscient. In case you don't understand what that means....God is present all places at the same time and knows all things. God is also omnipotent which means that He is all powerful.

And...this isn't just my opinion Marg. Jewish and Christian people know this.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:17 PM
link   
why not destroy the fallen angels? God will destroy all at the same time save satan in rev 21 after his release for a short time after the milenium.

read jude about the watchers that kept not their habitation. they are chained up and awaiting sentencing. Your question implies that the bible says that because God wasn't strong enough/doesnt exist and that it was written as an exuse to cover weakness. In reality God is testing the hearts of men, who are saved by grace, but with judgement rendered to every man for his works.

(im assuming if your are accepting the argument of fallen in gen 6 and jude, your not refusing the lucifer interpretation of isiah 14 and ez 28, rev 13 , 2thess2, matt 24)

all the signs rendered in eygpt by moses were to thwart a specific god for the eygptians. the frogs, the locust, the blood nile , and the passover (symbolic of lambs/jesus who became our passover), etc. . including the dragon/snake/sea monster.

passing thru the red sea was imo symbolic of baptism of water by john.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Edits and (inserts) for brevity.


Originally posted by saint4GodBecause he has a plan. I'm sure he could (and will according to Revelation).
I am afraid that is not a good enough response. It is an easy way out of logically responding to the question, as prefaced by ‘because.’


Noah was a righteous man. Why blast a guy who has got it right?
Again, this is not an answer, it in fact is an evasion of a direct question, which I supported with the supposed feeling of regret as felt by God.


A test. We take them every day, all part of the experiment. Free will, what will man do?
Placing the tree of life and telling them not to eat of it is no test when one considers that they were subsequently removed from the garden lest they find that tree. If it was, it surely was a silly test, one that suggests that after failing on the tree of knowledge, his omniscience is indeed in question, and his omnipotence more so in that he did not destroy the serpent. But stay tuned, I have more to say on the creation story in a thread of mine, probably tomorrow.


He loves mankind.
He loves us so much, he regretted making us, and slaughters all but 4, including the animals who did him no harm with his love. That is quite the paradox. Small wonder humans do not invoke deity exemption for doing the same.


God is a micro-manager? I don't see where this is coming from. I always saw him as a macro-manager. He moves the big stuff and lets us move the little stuff.
If you do not see where his all knowing comes from, then I say look.


The snake is one of God's creatures. It is not inherently evil. Satan turned himself into one in disguise, so that woman would recognize it as a native inhabitant of the garden. Snakes strike quickly so they're seen as dangerous but they are also used as medical purposes even in ancient times. It's like saying tigers are evil, spiders, mosquitos, etc...
This is one of those apologies, where a Christian just the other day in some other post denigrated this reptile, and where a month or two ago, another cursed all Muslems to be belly crawlers. Your answer goes directly to my statement that Christians cannot agree amongst themselves. However, if it is not inherently evil, he surely did adjust the female attitude toward same. There is that freewill issue once more. But as I said above, stay tuned for my creation post.


Omnipotent means 'all powerful' so I'm not sure how these questions relate.
I have a question and a statement in response: If the God you revere is not omnipotent, then why do you revere him and speak as though he is? Refer my position previously stated.

Now let me make it perfectly clear Saint4, you last engaged me by hounding me for a response on Jesus’ resurrection despite my having provided links on my position relative to your question. When I finally relented and detailed the information you requested, you abandoned the thread without response. I read that only one way: faced with that which you could not logically counter, your defence was avoidance. Therefore, consider the questions you pose above as the last I will respond to.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by TordenskioldTo understand this you have to remember the fact that heaven and hell are not physical places. Hell is not a place were you burn in a dry heat for eternety. Hell is a permanent absence of God. In this way the fallen angel has to be around for ever in total isolation. In my opinion this is worse than destruction.
Interesting interjection, this hell. Depending on your faith, it either exists or does not, temporarily or otherwise. If it is a place without God, then what is punishment that some so dread?


God sees the good and bad in every person and tries to guide man to the good. But to answer your question with a question: Why would God destroy his own creation? Well the answer is simple. He made man in his own image, therefore: by destroying man he would destroy himself.
A semblance of Kierkegaard.


God did not tempt man, the serpent did.
Yes he did, and he did so with both the tree of knowledge and of life. Why else would he place Adam and Eve there, to punish them for eating of one, and inhibiting them from the accessing the second? That is not freewill. It is simple. If you don’t want to tempt your children with candy, don’t dangle same in their faces.


The serpent symbolises satan.
So Moses then invoked Satan as ordered by God.

The tree of knowlege is not an actual tree. It's a symbol of knowledge
I agree.


Man is tainted by the sins commited by Adam and Eve. However man has the possibility to be saved, because Jesus died for the sins of man.
Well, if Jesus died for the sins of man, then there is no taint. In other words, Adam and Eve’s were forgiven, and from what I discern from most Christians in here, so are whatever sins they still commit and will commit in the future.


God is all seeing, and therefore can see the furure of man. The future of man was decided when an apple was taken from the "Tree of Knowledge". But that does not mean that all men have a fate. Men have free will, and all actions are carried out through free will.
So he is going through this thousands of years exercise to create those who will not make it and those who will. The object I presume is to make envious those whom he knew would not make it of those whom he knew would. This does not seem to be a logical course for an omnipotent God who has the ability to just say; forget creating the sinners, I will just create my unquestioning followers.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join