A Smart Christian - Page 3

imported_luckyme · #1 12-05-2005, 03:18 PM

it sounds like you're referring to Gid, the creator of God of this universe, who may well have some limitations placed on him by Gid, however minor, and whether we can know them or not. Why or why not?

DavidL · #2 12-05-2005, 03:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
it sounds like you're referring to Gid, the creator of God of this universe, who may well have some limitations placed on him by Gid, however minor, and whether we can know them or not. Why or why not?

[/ QUOTE ]

In your scenario it appears that Gid is greater than God. Is Gid omnipotent, or was he too created, and if so, by whom?

You can argue that God was created by A, who was created by B, etc, ad infinitum. For the effect to follow the cause, all creation must take place at a certain point of time. Therefore either time is greater than everything, or there is a being who is not subject to time, that created time. Such a being could not be created.

Given the hypothetical nature of any scenario, it is possible that (an omnipotent, eternal) God created Gid, gave Gid certain powers, and, as a further exercise of divine prerogative, voluntarily subjected Himself to some or all of the "laws of Gid".

Alternatively, if you're suggesting that Gid is simply the omnipotent creator of God, then all we're doing is toying with names.

As to the question of why, please re-read my post. I believe that God has created the very idea of reason itself. Therefore God is not subject to reason. Otherwise, reason would be greater than God, and would therefore be created by another being, i.e. God (or call Him wahtever you like).

imported_luckyme · #3 12-05-2005, 04:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You can argue that God was created by A, who was created by B, etc, ad infinitum. For the effect to follow the cause, all creation must take place at a certain point of time. Therefore either time is greater than everything, or there is a being who is not subject to time, that created time. Such a being could not be created.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I'm not arguing anything. I was wondering how, given your statement - [ QUOTE ]
I believe that God has created the very idea of reason itself. Therefore God is not subject to reason.

[/ QUOTE ] how there was any way we could use reason to rule out the Gid/God possibility? You certainly wouldn't be allowed to pull out some "well that's unreasonable" argument against it, or would you? Why would cause and effect, or time or any of the things that we experince apply to beings that are premised to be beyond such limitations?

chezlaw · #4 12-05-2005, 06:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that Dr Schaeffer's statement in point 3 (which is correct, IMHO) contradicts his statements in point 4, where he makes assumptions whose implication belie the omnipotent nature of God.

According to Dr Schaeffer:

(Point 3): "In philosophy, many errors result from supposing that the conditions and limits of our own finite existence apply to God"

[/ QUOTE ]

Your refer to how correct and articulate point 3 is but it is wrong. Philosophers are exploring what follow from claims made about gods properties i.e if by god being omnipotent you mean ... then ... follows.

No errors about anything result from this method. They do however show that most people who talk about the omnipotence etc of god are talking nonsense.

chez

#5 12-05-2005, 06:31 PM

Not so smart on this answer:

[ QUOTE ]
4. Can god make a rock so big that he can’t lift it?

...

God cannot change His nature.

[/ QUOTE ]

John 1:
1| In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
14| The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

Matthew 24:
36| "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

Philippians 2:
5| Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6| Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7| but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
8| And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death — even death on a cross!

NotReady · #6 12-06-2005, 12:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Not so smart on this answer:

Quote:
4. Can god make a rock so big that he can’t lift it?

...

God cannot change His nature.

[/ QUOTE ]

His answer was correct. Jesus was both God and man. As man, He was subject to change. He was born then matured. He learned. As man, he wsn't omniscient. And He died, then was resurrected. As God, He is the same yesterday, today and forever.

#7 12-06-2005, 02:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Not so smart on this answer:

Quote:
4. Can god make a rock so big that he can’t lift it?

...

God cannot change His nature.

[/ QUOTE ]

His answer was correct. Jesus was both God and man. As man, He was subject to change. He was born then matured. He learned. As man, he wsn't omniscient. And He died, then was resurrected. As God, He is the same yesterday, today and forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't want to have a religious/Christian argument... because I'm not a Christian, so my motivation is about nil. However, as a former Christian, I would disagree with you. The verses I quoted show that God BECAME flesh. Jesus existed before he ever came to earth. He was not a MAN at that point, and he is not a MAN now (according to Christian doctrine). He BECAME a man... his nature changed. As a man, Jesus did not consider himself to be equal in nature to God. However, before and after being a man, Jesus is in nature, equal to God.

[ QUOTE ]
"As man, He was subject to change. He was born then matured. He learned. As man, he wsn't omniscient."

[/ QUOTE ]

Is Jesus omniscient now? If so, then his nature changed. Jesus is God, so God can change his nature.

NotReady · #8 12-06-2005, 02:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]

He BECAME a man... his nature changed.

[/ QUOTE ]

He became a man but His divine nature did not change. Christian theology has been consistent at least since Augustine - Jesus has two natures, divine and human. And no, no one understands it very well. It's similar to the Trinity, God is three and also one. There's no logical inconsistency because the different aspects are taken in different senses. There's much on both these topics that can help with the difficulties, but they are both doctrines that we can't fully grasp.

[ QUOTE ]

Is Jesus omniscient now?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure concerning His human nature. I will say these concepts are in the Bible and are impossible for us to understand fully.

imported_luckyme · #9 12-06-2005, 02:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Jesus was both God and man. As man, He was subject to ....

[/ QUOTE ]

HE can't be both. It's possible to look at it like a shared possession of a body along the lines of Multiple Personality Disorder ( if it exists) but at the level where a person exists ( I am not my arm) I can only be a person ( by definition, since I am something else I am not a person). So to say, God shared a body with this guy Jesus would capture something meaningful. To say 'he' was both destroys the person 'jesus' because people don't have god qualities. "They" were both, sharing the carpenters body. Entity I, jesus the man. Entity 2, the god. The is no dual 'he'.

NotReady · #10 12-06-2005, 02:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]

"They" were both, sharing the carpenters body. Entity I, jesus the man. Entity 2, the god. The is no dual 'he'.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a mystery. In can only be stated, it can't be explained. Many analogies have been used but are always lacking. All I can say about it is the Bible presents this concept and it's perfectly logical to believe that God would be above our logical capabilities.