A God-limited God - My Theodicy

[Roger Clough]

A God-limited God - My Theodicy

A theodicy is a justification of God's ways to man.
This is my theodicy, based on the Bible and
reason. Comments appreciated.

Most of the so-called "contradictions" in the Bible,
such as a loving God lashing out at sinners,
practically committing genocide, or a loving God
allowing tsunamis to happen, or a loving God allowing
evil and suffering in this world, can be attributed
to a misunderstanding of God's true nature.

For reason, as well as the Bible, indicate that God has
willingly limited his possible actions in this world
to accord with his own pre-existing righteousness as well as
the pre-existing truths of necessary reason.

Thus that Christ had to die on the cross, instead of having the
sins of mankind simply forgiven by God, can be justified
by God's righteousness. That is, even God must obey
his own justice.

Similarly, God must obey the physics of his creation.
Physical disasters happen. God can't make 2+2 =5.
God lets the rain fall on the just as well as the unjust.

And God has given man free will, so that men can
do evil as well as good.

Although God has unlimited power in the kingdom of Heaven,
in this imperfect, contingent world he has had to limit his
powers of action.


- Roger Clough

[spudb...@aol.com]

Roger, you may be correct, yet the world is still a place red in truth and claw. Don't be surprised, if your theodicy, which works well for you, doesn't work so good for all. It's like a medicine that only is 30% effective. You still want to keep it around, but you must, as a physician, be aware of the limitation. On Free Will, we have the free will to like something or hate something. But that something still pushes on anyway. The tsunami still flows despite your prayers. So free will, is really just free opinion.

A God-limited God - My Theodicy

A theodicy is a justification of God's ways to man.
This is my theodicy, based on the Bible and
reason. Comments appreciated. 

Most of the so-called "contradictions" in the Bible,
such as a loving God lashing out at sinners,
practically committing genocide, or a loving God 
allowing tsunamis to happen, or a loving God allowing 
evil and suffering in this world, can be attributed 
to a misunderstanding of God's true nature. 

For reason, as well as the Bible, indicate that God has
willingly limited his possible actions in this world
to accord with his own pre-existing righteousness as well as
the pre-existing truths of necessary reason. 

Thus that Christ had to die on the cross, instead of having the
sins of mankind simply forgiven by God, can be justified
by God's righteousness. That is, even God must obey  
his own justice. 

Similarly, God must obey the physics of his creation. 
Physical disasters happen. God can't make 2+2 =5.
God lets the rain fall on the just as well as the unjust.

And God has given man free will, so that men can
do evil as well as good. 

Although God has unlimited power in the kingdom of Heaven, 
in this imperfect, contingent world he has had to limit his 
powers of action.


- Roger Clough

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

[meekerdb]

On 1/18/2013 1:19 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
> A God-limited God - My Theodicy
>
> A theodicy is a justification of God's ways to man.
> This is my theodicy, based on the Bible and
> reason. Comments appreciated.
>
> Most of the so-called "contradictions" in the Bible,
> such as a loving God lashing out at sinners,
> practically committing genocide, or a loving God
> allowing tsunamis to happen, or a loving God allowing
> evil and suffering in this world, can be attributed
> to a misunderstanding of God's true nature.
>
> For reason, as well as the Bible, indicate that God has
> willingly limited his possible actions in this world
> to accord with his own pre-existing righteousness as well as
> the pre-existing truths of necessary reason.
>
> Thus that Christ had to die on the cross, instead of having the
> sins of mankind simply forgiven by God, can be justified
> by God's righteousness. That is, even God must obey
> his own justice.

That's just silly. He is still described as punishing sins, and in particular the sin of
not believing in him and not worshiping him.

>
> Similarly, God must obey the physics of his creation.
> Physical disasters happen. God can't make 2+2 =5.
> God lets the rain fall on the just as well as the unjust.

That's the god of deism, not Christianity.

>
> And God has given man free will, so that men can
> do evil as well as good.

Men didn't create small pox, cholera, or childhood leukemia.

Brent
Christianity : The belief that a walking dead Jewish deity who was his own father although
he always existed, commits suicide by cop, although he didn't really die, in order to give
himself permission not to send you to an eternal place of torture that he created for you,
but instead to make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh, drink his blood,
and telepathically promise him you accept him as your master, so he can cleanse you of an
evil force that is present in mankind because a rib-woman and a mud-man were convinced by
a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

[Craig Weinberg]

The reasoning we can use to justify God's ways to man are identical to those we could use to justify the idea that Satan is actually the creator of the universe, and just uses the fiction of God to further torment and tyrannize man. If I were the Devil, I would dictate the bible exactly as it is, full of contradiction and irrelevant genealogy, sprinkled some profound wisdom and lurid violence.

But alas, the Bible is just a book pieced together from scraps and re-written over centuries. Shakespeare was a better writer. Billions of people will live their whole lives without ever reading it, and their lives will be no worse for the loss. The bible is creepy if you ask me. It is no blessing.

Craig

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

Many are called, but few are chosen.


[Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net]
1/19/2013
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-18, 17:31:03
Subject: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/2oOpYw773iUJ.

[Roger Clough]

Hi meekerdb

God causes everything to happen, so good, evil,
cholera, good health, etc. Some of these he prefers, some not.

[Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net]
1/19/2013
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen
----- Receiving the following content -----

From: meekerdb
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-18, 17:12:35
Subject: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.

[Craig Weinberg]

On Saturday, January 19, 2013 6:22:38 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg  

Many are called, but few are chosen.

You mean many are called in error by an omnipotent-yet-incompetent God, or that they are intentionally called and abandoned by  a all-loving-yet-consistently-cruel-and-indifferent God?

[John Mikes]

Brent,

you phrased beautifully your reply. Could be shorter:

   "  -  hogwash  -  ".

JM

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[meekerdb]

On 1/19/2013 3:44 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi meekerdb  

God causes everything to happen, so good, evil,  
cholera, good health, etc. Some of these he prefers, some not. 

Fine, but in that case there's no reason for me to admire, worship, or take any moral instruction from him...even if he existed.

Brent

[Bruno Marchal]

Glad you agree with me (and St Thomas) that God is obedient to some
amount of logic and arithmetic. Even God cannot make 17 into a prime.
Note that in Plotinus, and apparently (accepting some definitions) in
computationalism, matter is eventually (in "logical time") the product
of God's lack of control on our 1-indeterminacy on the border of the
"divine intellect" (Noùs). That's is coherent with the general
platonist idea that, basically, matter is evil, but I am not sure I go
as far as the traditional Platonists on this.

Bruno

>
>
> - Roger Clough
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Everything List" group.

> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com
> .

> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
> .
>

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

[Bruno Marchal]

Which Christianity? Apparently here too there might be an important
difference between European Christianism and American one. In Europa
most christians are not literalist. They don't believe in Fairy tales,
but they can divide on the opportunity to tell this to the weak
people, which some believe to not been spiritually mature enough to
search for the "possible" real thing.

Bruno

>
>>
>> And God has given man free will, so that men can
>> do evil as well as good.
>
> Men didn't create small pox, cholera, or childhood leukemia.
>
> Brent
> Christianity : The belief that a walking dead Jewish deity who was
> his own father although he always existed, commits suicide by cop,
> although he didn't really die, in order to give himself permission
> not to send you to an eternal place of torture that he created for
> you, but instead to make you live forever if you symbolically eat
> his flesh, drink his blood, and telepathically promise him you
> accept him as your master, so he can cleanse you of an evil force
> that is present in mankind because a rib-woman and a mud-man were
> convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
>
>>
>> Although God has unlimited power in the kingdom of Heaven,
>> in this imperfect, contingent world he has had to limit his
>> powers of action.
>>
>>
>> - Roger Clough
>>
>

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

Then you believe that God exists.

That's a good start.

 

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: Craig Weinberg

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-19, 09:55:18

Subject: Re: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/sTqccu4P5KoJ.

[Craig Weinberg]

On Sunday, January 20, 2013 2:08:09 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

Then you believe that God exists.

That's a good start.

Can't I point out the absurdity of a belief without being accused of having it?

 

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

So you belong to the liberal thought police then.

Not only can one not have freedom of speech, one cannot

have freedom of beliefs. Liberalism is fascism, it seems.

 

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: Craig Weinberg

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-20, 14:18:16

Subject: Re: Re: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/gdJXht6KYKUJ.

[meekerdb]

On 1/20/2013 3:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

Even God cannot make 17 into a prime.

And He cannot make it not prime either.  So I guess he doesn't exist.

Brent

[Craig Weinberg]

On Sunday, January 20, 2013 2:43:42 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

So you belong to the liberal thought police then.

Haha of course.  How could it be possible for anyone to see the contradiction of the concept of God without 'belonging to the liberal thought police'?

Not only can one not have freedom of speech, one cannot

have freedom of beliefs. Liberalism is fascism, it seems.

You are welcome to your beliefs, I am just explaining to you why they don't seem to make sense. I could decide that you just belong to the conservative apologists for irrationality but I don't see how that adds to my case. Conservatism may well be fascism, but I don't see what that could possibly have to do one way or the other with the logical inconsistency of a God who is functionally indistinguishable from Satan or randomness.

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

They don't make sense to you but they do make

make sense to me. Could it be that you are a low

information, low understanding person ? 

 

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: Craig Weinberg

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-20, 15:00:34

Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/KZUcYogq65wJ.

[Craig Weinberg]

On Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:06:07 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

They don't make sense to you but they do make

make sense to me. Could it be that you are a low

information, low understanding person ? 

You can say that it makes sense to you, but I think that you just want it to make sense. I don't know that it makes you any kind of person or not, but I try not to draw conclusions about people based on the collection of ideas which they happen to have inherited.
 

[Spudb...@aol.com]

Does anyone have an issue with thinking about God as an alien intelligence, which created the Hibble Volume (aka Universe)? Michael Shermer sort of put this concept together, perhaps in the hope of getting people to think, or possibly, to tick-off Christian Fundamentalist? I have no problem with this conceptualization. Is there a psycho-social, downside to this way of thinking?

 

Or, maybe I have just gone off the deep-end, and "Flying sphagetti monster" here I come?

[Craig Weinberg]

What would an alien intelligence help explain the origin of the universe? Wouldn't you just have to explain the origin of this alien intelligence?

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

Could a blind man stub his toe ?

 

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: Craig Weinberg

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-20, 21:35:50

Subject: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/wiperHBOCuMJ.

[Roger Clough]

Hi spudboy100

 

Yes, God is an alien intelligence because he does many

things we consider unjust.

 

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: spudboy100

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-20, 21:11:13

Subject: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

[Craig Weinberg]

On Monday, January 21, 2013 4:54:58 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

Could a blind man stub his toe ?

Anyone can stub their toe.
 

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

 

But nothing would exist for a blind man,

since he can see nothing.

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: Craig Weinberg

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-21, 09:11:18

Subject: Re: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Gp6t1_UEDC0J.

[Craig Weinberg]

On Monday, January 21, 2013 9:19:36 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

 

But nothing would exist for a blind man,

since he can see nothing.

Blind people can hear and feel and think, smell and taste, touch. Everything exists to the extent that it can be detected directly or indirectly.
 

[Stephen P. King]

On 1/21/2013 9:19 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
> Hi Craig Weinberg
> But nothing would exist for a blind man,
> since he can see nothing.

Dear Roger,

Why are you hung up on vision? I think that Craig is including all
possible senses.

--
Onward!

Stephen

[Spudb...@aol.com]

Eventually, I sure would. But it would be a nice to know anyway. At this point to gather the evidence (what would that be??) would lead us to an actual conclusion and theory. Or we'd somehow be communication with this super ETI that created things. If we're speaking with a live mind, or a recording, then we'd have the answer(s). Which would likely lead to better questions.

[Spudb...@aol.com]

Rclough-you have me dead to rights. Busted on that one. That tends to be my attitude, because sometimes accepting, is really not caring. God's will, so screw. That sort of attitude. Or maybe its a way for people to cope, by not caring? But if caring does no good..? Round and round we go.

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

That's quite a stretch. You really expect me to believe

that a rock in the path of a blind man walking would

be detected by him ? Of course he could detect it with his cane,

but what if he had none ?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/I8qwrsvyd5IJ.

[Roger Clough]

 

In actual fact I have fallen by tripping on a slight misfit of the pavement stones

I didn't see.

 

 My ladyfriend has done the same, I saw it happen

while we were walking and we had to take her to the hospital with

a broken bone in her hand.

 

 

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: Stephen P. King

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-21, 14:41:19

Subject: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.

To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Craig Weinberg]

On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:12:10 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

That's quite a stretch. You really expect me to believe

that a rock in the path of a blind man walking would

be detected by him ? Of course he could detect it with his cane,

but what if he had none ?

Then he detects it when he trips over it. Having eyes allows us to extend the range of our tripping and changes the quality of the experience as well.

Craig
 

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

This get sillier the more realistically we examine your claim.

 

It would also make an interesting experiment to record with a videocam

 set off with a trip wire that could be posted on Youtube.

 

How fast is the object of perception created in the brain? 

How fast would the rock be created ?

Would it start being created at the point of contact, or all over ?

Would that be faster than the blind man's reaction time ?

Would there be a heat of solidification required ?

Would that heat or cool the surrounding area ?

 

Would the creation of the rock show up on a videocam

    recording the eventCould we hear that happen ? What would the creation of a rock sound like ?

 

How does the speed of creation of the rock compare with the blind man's

reaction time to contacting the rock ?

What would his perception look like to a blind man?

 

Etc.

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: Craig Weinberg

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-22, 15:43:19

Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: A God-limited God - My Theodicy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Y--Z92oZB8oJ.

[Craig Weinberg]

On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 6:39:17 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

This get sillier the more realistically we examine your claim.

 

It would also make an interesting experiment to record with a videocam

 set off with a trip wire that could be posted on Youtube.

 

How fast is the object of perception created in the brain? 

There is no object created in the brain. Perception is an experience which is accessed through the sensitivities of the brain to the body and the body to the world.
 

How fast would the rock be created ?

The rock is not created, except geologically. You really have no idea what I'm talking about.
 

Would it start being created at the point of contact, or all over ?

Not created - noticed in the experience of contact.
 

Would that be faster than the blind man's reaction time ?

What does faster have to do with anything. If you can see, then you detect the rock at a distance from your body. If you can't see, then you detect the rock as it contacts your body or a prosthetic extension of your body. Eyes extend the sense of your brain into a public optical context.
 

Would there be a heat of solidification required ?

Would that heat or cool the surrounding area ?

You are way out in your own strawman version of my view. Would what require a heat or solidification? Kicking a rock?
 

 

Would the creation of the rock show up on a videocam

    recording the eventCould we hear that happen ? What would the creation of a rock sound like ?

Rocks sound like rocks when you kick them. They show up on videocam without being created - they are detected by the photosensitive CDC, but that is as far as it goes. That photosensitivity is not shared by any organism which interprets it though emotional or cognitive sensitivity.
 

 

How does the speed of creation of the rock compare with the blind man's

reaction time to contacting the rock ?

What would his perception look like to a blind man?

There is no rock 'created'. You are thinking of a caricature of idealism and projecting it onto me, and I suspect that you always will. Not your fault, but you aren't going to learn anything if you don't understand what I'm proposing.

Craig

[Roger Clough]

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

Obviously you don't want to have a rational discussion.

 

 

 

----- Receiving the following content -----

From: Craig Weinberg

Receiver: everything-list

Time: 2013-01-23, 12:37:35

Subject: Re: A blind man creating a rock by tripping on it.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/MTWN9ki8gS4J.

[Craig Weinberg]

On Thursday, January 24, 2013 4:45:15 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg

 

Obviously you don't want to have a rational discussion.

Obviously you can't defend your criticism.