In a deistic fashion, I've been thinking every once in a while, what if God is not omnipotent and omnipresent? I'm starting to believe God is limited. When, I read the bible God sending angels to do his bidding. For example, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, God sent two angels to scout the cities and report back to him, I thought God was everywhere? Now is God really omnipotent? In the "end of the world" Jesus will lead angels down to earth to destory all sinners, why doesn't God do it himself/herself? Throwing this in for the hell of it. The novelty question,"Did god create evil?" I would say yes. There was a reason why God told Adam to not eat from the tree of "knowledge of good and bad." What was God's remark after Adam ate from the tree? "They have become like us knowing good and bad." Most people would like to believe God is inexplainable, but I believe God can be explained. Agree or disagree? I'm tired and what I type may not totally make sense.
Hi Yama Tombo, Depends on what you define as 'God' and what you mean by 'explained'. Throw in different religious perspectives and you're probably going to get a multitude of answers. IMHO, I personally believe in a divine force that is neither good nor evil. God is being lived out here and now, in the blink of an eye and in our every breath. God is also beyond us and bigger than we can ever imagine. God/goddess/divine force will eternally be a contradiction as well as a soul-deep understanding within me. Your examples of god using angels to send messages or carry out his will - again, I would say that the angels, the message, the intent is god itself in a form that humans can perceive/understand. I'm tired so I probably don't make sense either. Interesting question.
well firstly and formost as a christian i do believe in God however i do not fully believe in the modern bible. the orignial old testiment were written in hebrew manuscripts which was then translated into greek some few hundred yrs later. the new testiment however was originally in greek manuscripts and both the old and new testiment was translated into hundreds of different languages. but during the middle ages most of the christian world only spoke latin therefore the bible was translated into this. the bible was translated into early english (anglo saxon) about 500 yrs later. when the first bible was translated into english the Pope had the guy executed due to the fact that latin was the modern language and his teaching was against the church which he believed to be against the bible. the Pope had anyone with a bible which was not latin to be executed and he sent people to burn all translation of the bible. it was not until the invention of the printing press that bibles of the different languages was mass produced. there was a scholar (not sure of his name) that published a greek/latin parallel translation and he stated that the latin bible was extremly inaccurate to the original hebrew/greek bible. since then was numerous different versions of the english bible before the bible you see today. the bible we see today has been translated and "changed" many times and even now there are still controversy of the correct version of the bible. the finding of book of judus contradicts the new testiment. im not sayin that the bible is a complete nonsense, i have read it myself, im jus sayin that what you are readin are not the original scripts of the bible. but if God send down his angels isnt God indirectly still controlling the situation? for example the general of an army might not physically fight a battle but by sending in his troops he is still doing the same task. i think ive read or heard somewhere that God is not ready to show his form on earth, and if this is the case it makes perfect sense for God to send down his angels. Jesus is ment to represent God on earth as the son of God. just because Jesus is leading the angels, does that still not mean its the act of God?
Take the last sentence first: whether the book/gospel of Judas contradicts the NT is not relevant if the book of Judas is not the word of God. Walk into any bookstore today and you'll find a hundred books written just last year that contradict the Bible. That's a big "so what." As for the rest, have you any idea what the controversies are about? Have you any idea how the Bible was put together?
the controversies i am talking about does not refer to what has actually been written in the scripts but merely the translations which are thought to be inaccurate. who decided what is the word of God? the books that are in the bible which we see today were determined by the jewish scholars, rabbis and the early christians. they decided what is the word of God and they left out anything which they thought did not give God his divine power. fair enough if you believe that God convinced them which book to include, i have no disrespect for your belief. the Bible was put together and judged by men.
Oh. And I suppose you can read Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Latin? Or is it that you're well-read on the issues that scholars face in this field? Dude!! Either way, I'm impressed!! Are you sure that's the way it happened? That doesn't quite sound right. ---- We drifted to far into religion to stay in the Philosophy. Even the original post itself was skirting close the border. Therefore, moved to Religion.
Then there will be no final justice. And if that be so, then screw morality -- we should all "eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die."
well no i cant read those languages.. but for example i am chinese and i listen to manderin music which was originally english, even then the manderin version does not say the same thing as the english version. its the same with subtitled films, the subtitles are not always the same as the words spoken. any languages which are translated get changed and it is a bit far fetch to presume that the Bible which has been translated in many other languages before it was translated into english is accurate to the word. and yes that how the bible was put together. search on the net for "canonicity" if you really want to know
I don't see that as immoral as such? Is that not what humans are here for - to "eat, drink and be merry"? It is possible to do this in a moral way, surely?
What if we have the original texts? What if the English Bible (and any other language, for that matter) was translated from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts? Then you know that the canon was established by practice. People here, there, and elsewhere were independently treating the same "books" as the word of God. A council vote eventually put the stamp of approval on that which was already being done in practice.
Take two: If God is not all-powerful, then he won't be able to lay down punishment on lawbreakers so as to achieve justice for the oppressed. There will be no ultimate justice. In that scenario, "you'll get away with it" -- whatever bad behavior "it" is. So, you might as well be bad. Long live your favorite villian. The Joker had the right idea after all, you know?
nonetheless who decided what was the word of God? the council voted on what was more favourable to them. just out of interest, do you think the bible is accurate? and also during the time of the first printing press (1500ad i think) when the bible was mass produced, its was not unusual for words or characters to be missin from the books. its not like today where each book are identical. it was very common back then to have missin words or phrases taken out.
its me again even translation from the original will be inaccurate. the hebrew symbol for 10 is exactly the same for 1000. there are a lot of double meanings in the hebrew language therefore the translator will be guess the correct term.
I thought you couldn't read Hebrew? "Guessing" is too harsh a word. You're not being fair to people who get PhD's studying languages and cultures. For someone who speaks a foreign language I would have expected a larger appreciation for how much a person really can learn and know.
That's not what the council voted on. They voted on what was the word of God. I thought you read about this? Come on, the Bibles today were not translated or copied from European printings. They were translated and copied from original-language manuscripts, from which the original texts can be reconstructed.
i cant read hebrew but it doesnt take a genius to see that the two symbols are the same. guessin is a harsh word but its true. imagine you was translatin a sentence and it read " i saw 'x' amount of men". if 'x' was both the symbol for 10 and 1000, which one would you choose? yes, they may know the language fluently but they was not there at the time to determine the true facts. it is not just the symbol for 10/1000, there are many other words with double meaning (cant think off the top of my head) in hebrew. i remember watching a program few months ago about the translation of the bible and how important words were often mis-interpretated.
Well, now that those bright people on TV have corrected all of the mistranslations, what's the problem?
i can see this lasting a long time like i said they wasnt there at the time to know the true facts therefore the "tv" people also does not know the true answer. they emphasised on the mistranslation not corrected it.
Good point but the reason is because God cannot look at sin. He couldnt even look at his own son Jesus who died on the cross and bore our sins. I do belive God is omnipresent. And omnipotent. but i also belive that there are some things God cannot do. God cant sin.. or if he did he would not be God. And if God can do anything could he make a more powerfull being than himself? could he make a stone soo big he couldn't lift it. Could he make a blade so sharp that it can cut him? I say no, that He cannot. Oh and if you belive God can be explained then please enlighten us because that is what schoolars have been trying to do for 1000's of years sooo good luck with that one. :Angel:
