It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:30 AM

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
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.
And what ultimate sacrifice might that be? Someone you refer to as his son?

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!
I think you are confused as to the topic of the thread. If you take issue with the thread placement, then just move it out of Eden.

I don't recall this topic being about lunacy or lunatics, Crowne, but do tell, what are you denying?

By the way, my contention is that the omnipotence to which I speak is a religious conspiracy. Perhaps I should simplify in the future.

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 07:22 AM

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
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.’

I'd addressed per previous page titled: God's plan. Here's the cut & paste:

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:

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.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

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.?

It is an answer and a logical & emotional one at that. Lemme break it down.

Logic: If you have a piece on the chessboard that is a powerful player, why would you put it in a position to be easily overtaken? You'd let pawn take queen? No, you utilize the power piece to leverage the game.

Emotion: If you have a child that you love, you would not tell him/her to go play in traffic.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

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.

When you set up a formula with a great deal of variables, don't you want to see just what they equate to?

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

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.

When you have a child/spouse in prison, perhaps then you'll understand how you can love someone yet they do wrong. Animals do not acknowledge God, reasoning, etc. Humans do push out God. Your statements are proof.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

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.

I'm not talking about 'all knowing' here. I'm taking about doing. He does the big things. We do the little things. Is there dispute with that? If so, show me verse since it's what I am to believe.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

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.

I've apologied for nothing. By the way, have you ever owned a pet snake? If yes, please answer, did you find it to be an 'evil' creature?

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

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.

I'm making the case that He is omnipotent and that these questions do not relate to ominpotency.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
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.

What thread are we talking about? I'm not sure what the case was for non-response until I do. I will say however, when no progress is being made and no attempt is being made to understand me, there is little point to bickering. So far I don't see that to be the case, will let you know if I reach it and can even go to bickering if you feel it would help.

[edit on 19-1-2005 by saint4God]

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 12:58 AM

Originally posted by saint4God
I'm not sure what the case was for non-response until I do..

I believe you know full well the thread I speak to, considering the number of times you claimed I had not answered your question. We see only what we want to see, I suppose.

I will say however, when no progress is being made and no attempt is being made to understand me, there is little point to bickering...
I understand. Your point of view is obviously that unless others agree with you, there is no progress and no attempt to understand you. Obviously then you will always abandon threads when faced with the inevitable post you cannot rebut, particularly when you demand that rebuttal.

There is no point then in driving down a two-way street that the other considers a one-way, and the exchange is over.

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 06:58 AM
Let me look for the thread and get back to ya. I have to admit though, I'm not very good at guessing games. I remember something about the resurrection where someone had their books and I had mine so we pretty much agreed to disagree but not sure if that was you. Was this the case?

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 07:21 AM
I think I found it! Is this the one?

I did enjoy eating popcorn watching this thread. Logician had some nice deliveries. Better than mine I think. Were Logician's answers not enough? I thought he represented well so didn't really have anything different or more to add. Again, you listed your links/sites and I have my Book and they say two different things *shrug*. There's no-one who can 'win' the discussion, it's up to the individual to decide what to believe.

Might I've made 2 accusations that I've 'run away' and 1 that Logician 'turned tail' as well. This makes #4 so it seems to be a popular theme...

Anyway, back to the discussion here.

[edit on 20-1-2005 by saint4God]

<< 1   >>

log in