Plot holes in the bible and what the motivation for it would be

a reply to: whereislogic

No, it's old. The power to act wickedly or tell a lie does not equal the will to act wickedly or tell a lie.

Yes, the claim that a good God cannot do evil is at least as old as Boethius. It appears in The Consolations of Philosophy. There it is explained as follows: God is all-powerful, and good is more powerful than evil, therefore God must always do good, otherwise He would compromise His own power.

As arguments go, that one is exactly backward. Which is what one might expect from a philosopher of the Dark Ages.

The external quote you cite, which claims that omnipotence and infallibility mean something other than what they are commonly thought to mean, is equally tendentious. You don’t get to redefine common words and ideas to make them fit the parameters of your belief.

If God is omnipotent yet always self-limiting in His actions, then effectively He is not omnipotent. Potential omnipotence is not actual omnipotence.

If you contest this, please explain why I am wrong in your own words. I am not interested in other people’s opinions; I am familiar with the various arguments that have been applied to this question and do not need to be reinstructed in them. They are not persuasive; yet we may cherish the hope that you can produce a convincing argument of your own.

a reply to: Astyanax

i did not care for batman v superman dawn of justice. that said, there were a number of interesting lines in the movie, one of which was "a god who is all powerful cannot be all good, and a god who is all good, cannot be all powerful". for exactly the reasons you described.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: TzarChasm

Yes, it does suggest a purge, doesn’t it? Especially in the light of God’s instructions to Adam and Eve regarding the Tree of Knowledge, which indicates that Yahweh is pretty sensitive to informed criticism.

Only Adam was given the instructions from Lord God. (the woman) was not. The woman was not even formed yet by Lord God when the instructions were given to Adam.

That is also the reason why only Adam was cast out of the garden east wards in Eden. The woman was not cast out. It is specifically stated that only He/Him was cast out.

The woman was not formed from the dust on the ground. Neither could she be cast out and brought back to where she was taken, because the woman was formed in Eden from Adams rib. Only Adam was cast out and brought back to from where he was taken.

a reply to: whereislogic

I was not trying to describe a motive for God.

If one believes in a God whose notional goodness is contradicted by what we can see of events in the universe and in the lives of men, then one must either justify His apparent evildoing through elaborate sophistries or take refuge in the comforting excuse that no mere human has the capacity to understand or judge the motives of the Supreme Being.

Neither of these shifts is necessary for the unbeliever, or to one who is willing to consider that the Creator of All Things is either amoral or limited in his capabilities. So you must understand that, to someone taking a materialist view, they are seen as spurious and rather dishonest.

If you wish to convince an intelligent materialist (let alone an intelligent atheist) that God is both good and all-powerful, you will have to produce an argument that arises from the nature of the world — whether deduced rationally or observed empirically, it does not matter — rather than any argument arising from the nature of God, who has not been proved to exist.

Do you understand this? Do you realize why it has to be so?

a reply to: spy66

Only Adam was given the instructions from Lord God.

Yes, I know. Yahweh was a sexist. I was trying not to be.

I stand corrected.

a reply to: Astyanax

I am not interested in other people’s opinions;

Then it's strange to ask for them while giving your own opinion and preferred interpretation for the word "omnipotent" cause otherwise your challenge doesn't work (perhaps I should finish your statement with "when they're not compatible with my own", which seems to be more the case when asking these questions about God and the bible). All that matters in this thread (because of the title) is what the bible teaches about the subjects. Which is:

- God cannot lie
- God does not act wickedly
- God is perfect
- God is almighty

And it fits beautifully in my opinion if one discards these convenient human interpretations for the word "omnipotent" where ability is conflated with the actual will to do so or the need for it before something actually happens ignored. Like I didn't know ahead of time you were going to go: 'nuh-uh, not satisfactory' ("not persuasive"). Because you want to keep using your challenge and arguments in spite of the answer.

1 Timothy 6:4

he is puffed up with pride and does not understand anything. He is obsessed with arguments and debates about words.

It is therefore not a question of ability, what God can foresee, foreknow, and foreordain, for “with God all things are possible.” (Mt 19:26) The question is what God sees fit to foresee, foreknow, and foreordain, for “everything that he delighted to do he has done.”—Ps 115:3.

This is talking about the subject of "will". And the above doesn't just count for his ability to foresee, foreknow and foreordain. Or the subject of omnipotence/almightiness, similar things that are said about "perfection" can also be said about the subject of omnipotence/almightiness (and your argument regarding "then effectively He is not omnipotent" can be swapped out with "would evidence imperfection", it's almost the same argument but in another jacket):

The argument that God’s not foreknowing all future events and circumstances in full detail would evidence imperfection on his part is, in reality, an arbitrary view of perfection. Perfection, correctly defined, does not demand such an absolute, all-embracing extension, inasmuch as the perfection of anything actually depends upon its measuring up completely to the standards of excellence set by one qualified to judge its merits. (See PERFECTION.) Ultimately, God’s own will and good pleasure, not human opinions or concepts, are the deciding factors as to whether anything is perfect.—De 32:4; 2Sa 22:31; Isa 46:10.

To illustrate this, God’s almightiness is undeniably perfect and is infinite in capacity. (1Ch 29:11, 12; Job 36:22; 37:23) Yet his perfection in strength does not require him to use his power to the full extent of his omnipotence in any or in all cases.

God not wanting to lie or act wickedly (ever!) does not affect his omnipotence. It does result in the statement "God cannot lie" being truthful if He never wants to lie (past, present and future). Then it can't happen, it cannot become a reality.
Jude verse 10-16:

But these men are speaking abusively about all the things they really do not understand. And in all the things that they do understand by instinct like unreasoning animals, they go on corrupting themselves.

11 Too bad for them, for they have followed the path of Cain and have rushed into the erroneous course of Baʹlaam for reward, and they have perished in the rebellious talk of Korʹah! 12 These are the rocks hidden below water at your love feasts while they feast with you, shepherds who feed themselves without fear; waterless clouds carried here and there by the wind; fruitless trees in late autumn, having died twice and having been uprooted; 13 wild waves of the sea that cast up the foam of their own shame; stars with no set course, for which the blackest darkness stands reserved forever.

14 Yes, the seventh one in line from Adam, Eʹnoch, also prophesied about them when he said: “Look! Jehovah came with his holy myriads 15 to execute judgment against all, and to convict all the ungodly concerning all their ungodly deeds that they did in an ungodly way, and concerning all the shocking things that ungodly sinners spoke against him.”

16 These men are murmurers, complainers about their lot in life, following their own desires, and their mouths make grandiose boasts, while they are flattering others* for their own benefit. [*: Or “admiring personalities.”]

a reply to: whereislogic

- God cannot lie
- God does not act wickedly
- God is perfect
- God is almighty

how do you know he is/was unable to lie?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Says it in the book

"in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time," Titus 1:2

originally posted by: DiaJax
a reply to: TzarChasm

Says it in the book

"in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time," Titus 1:2

an exact quote from god? of course, one cannot trust a liar to be honest about their capacity for deception. that goes without saying.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Within the context of this thread anything found in the book is to be taken as factual. (You'll have to suspend your disbelief.) This in itself doesn't generate a plot hole, but in combination with something else it very well could.

a reply to: whereislogic

Astyanax:
I am not interested in other people’s opinions

whereislogic
Then it's strange to ask for them while giving your own opinion and preferred interpretation for the word "omnipotent"

I was, at that moment, interested in your opinions on the subject. Not other people’s.

The word ‘omnipotent’ has only one meaning and it is not open to interpretation.

Your external quotes are unattributed and therefore valueless. As for those dire threats and condemnations in the Bible, well, they would say that, wouldn’t they? Just like the threat of damnation at the end of Revelations to stop anyone from tampering with the material. That’s the kind of threat made up by children; no adult believes nonsense like that unless it comes from a religious source, and then — as we see here — there’s no arguing with them.

Well, you’ve had you chance, whereislogic, and I’m afraid you have failed to make a convincing argument for your views. You may try again when you feel you have some better talking-points. For the present, farewell.

originally posted by: DiaJax
a reply to: TzarChasm

Within the context of this thread anything found in the book is to be taken as factual. (You'll have to suspend your disbelief.) This in itself doesn't generate a plot hole, but in combination with something else it very well could.

my point was that the quote in question was someone else describing god, not an actual quote from the head honcho himself.

my other point about liars still stands.

a reply to: TzarChasm

my point was...

I think, though, that the OP is entitled to set some preconditions for debate (we don't have to play if we don't like them) and in this case he wishes us to take all statements in the Bible as intended to be taken as literally true.

I think this is a brilliant strategy for managing the discussion and limiting deviations off topic. It eliminates casuistry at a stroke. I am happy to play by those rules. I recommend giving it a shot.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: whereislogic

- God cannot lie
- God does not act wickedly
- God is perfect
- God is almighty

how do you know he is/was unable to lie?

There is one God in the bible that does lie and deceive, And that is "Lord God". Lord God's first deceiption and lie tok Place in the garden of Eden.

Lord God is the evil God we all read about it the old testament. But Lord God is not thee God of genesis Chapter 1. Lord God appeared after God rested on the seventh day : Genesis Chapter 2.

a reply to: spy66

This is a believer's way of saying the same thing I have been: that the God of the Old Testament is not the omnipresent, omnipotent, benevolent God of the Philosophers. He only took on those attributes after the expanding Greek cutural hegemony cast its influence over the religion of the Prophets.

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: DiaJax

2. God asking dude to kill his son. If the heavens parted right now and god came down himself and asks me to murder my kids... we arent gonna be friends. Send me to hell, whatever you wanna do, but i aint killing my kids. And how dare you ask me to do such a thing!!! Thats a disgusting way to test someones faith.

Abraham knew God wasn't going to kill his son as he'd been promised Abraham mant times his bloodlines would be those that bring the Son of God.

Abraham also told the men who went with them to the mountains to wait for them at the base of the mountain saying THEY would return the next day.

Also - his son Isaac was not a young boy, he was almost 30. He was as faithful as his father.

Abraham was obedient and because he was his bloodlines will be blessed throughout all eternity.

This whole encounter was set down to prove many things. God's faithfulness to man and man's faithfulness to God.

It's also a foreshadow of the sacrifice of Christ, God's son, who would die in our place.

Pretty cool happening when you think about it!

peace

originally posted by: spy66

There is one God in the bible that does lie and deceive, And that is "Lord God". Lord God's first deceiption and lie tok Place in the garden of Eden.

Lord God is the evil God we all read about it the old testament. But Lord God is not thee God of genesis Chapter 1. Lord God appeared after God rested on the seventh day : Genesis Chapter 2.

Where do you get this complete rubish?

Lord God? There is no 'Lord God' other than God and there's nothing in Genisis 2 to support your claim.

peace

originally posted by: silo13

originally posted by: spy66

There is one God in the bible that does lie and deceive, And that is "Lord God". Lord God's first deceiption and lie tok Place in the garden of Eden.

Lord God is the evil God we all read about it the old testament. But Lord God is not thee God of genesis Chapter 1. Lord God appeared after God rested on the seventh day : Genesis Chapter 2.

Where do you get this complete rubish?

Lord God? There is no 'Lord God' other than God and there's nothing in Genisis 2 to support your claim.

peace

- In genesis Chapter 1 God is not mentioned as Lord God, but as God

-

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

-

2, And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

-

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

- Chapter 2 verse 3.

3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

The lies from Lord God starts in genesis Chapter 2 verse 4. Lord God never created the heaven and the Earth.

The very first thing Lord God created was Man from the dust on the ground. Which is also a contrediction to what takes Place in genesis Chapter 1.

Lord God then plants a garden Eastward in eden. This implies that since Lord God planted his garden eastward in Eden. Eden actually already existed prior to Lord Gods garden to the east. God never mentioned that he had formed a Place called Eden in genesis Chapter 1. God created the heaven and the Earth and the last living thing God created was man as male and female and God rested on the seventh day.

God nver mentioned in genesis Chapter 1. that he had created the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil or the tree of life. Nor did God mentioned that he had formed a beast that was more subtle then all the other beasts he had formed. All thee God formed was all Good and God rested on the seventh day. Dont tell me that the serpent is all good, and dont tell me Thee God had formed the beast before he rested on the seventh day.


If God is resting. Lord God must be a imposter God.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: whereislogic

The word ‘omnipotent’ has only one meaning and it is not open to interpretation.

Omnipotence - Wikipedia

The word "Omnipotence" derives from the Latin term "Omni Potens", meaning "All-Powerful" instead of "Infinite Power" implied by its English counterpart. The term could be applied to both deities and Roman Emperors. Being the one with "All the power", it was not uncommon for nobles to attempt to prove their Emperor's "Omni Potens" to the people, by demonstrating his effectiveness at leading the Empire.[3]
...
In the scholastic understanding, omnipotence is generally understood to be compatible with certain limitations or restrictions.

Like I said, it's an old meaning, not new (and you acknowledged being aware of when commenting about Boethius after first implying with a question that I was using a "new meaning", then contradicting that implication by using the phrase "is at least as old as Boethius" just before quoting "God is all-powerful,..." etc.). That understanding of "omnipotence" (as described by wikipedia above, not necessarily Boethius) has remained the same in the 20th century; which doesn't prevent people including theologians from holding and expressing different views though (or stop people like Boethius from using poor arguments that are more easily brushed off or 'defeated' or end up being distracting or used as distractions from the original usage and understanding of the term "Omni Potens" or "All-Powerful" as it was used in the 1st century CE or the meaning and usage of the synonymous term "almighty" as it is translated from the Hebrew and Greek equivalents in the bible and as it was used and understood by those speaking Hebrew and Greek). To some personalities that are very much admired, even the correct usage and interpretation or understanding of the word "nothing" is open to interpretation or forcing their own "new meaning"/interpretation on the conversation cause otherwise their argumentation doesn't work so well:

Psychology: Dawkins&Krauss selling the philosophy and contradiction that nothing is something

These type of conversations are usually not that fruitful cause you end up debating words and the correct usage of words, even such simple words such as "nothing". Rather than actually getting someone to use the words honestly and properly as they were originally used and understood or convincing them that that's the only way to investigate this rationally and have an honest discussion about it.

a reply to: spy66

God was God before he created anything to be LORD of.

Once He'd created - He became LORD of all He created.

Same guy - enlarged title.

peace