What the Bible God Cannot Do

[Jagella]

No doubt a list detailing the limitations of the Bible god would be very long, but for the purposes of this OP allow me to offer the following:

• *He cannot restore amputated limbs.
  *He cannot heal injured spinal-cords.
  *He cannot author a book that his followers can agree on.
  *He cannot convince most people that he even exists.
  *He cannot convince most of his "chosen people" that Jesus is his son and the Messiah.
  *He cannot get most of his followers to love their enemies.
  *He could not get his own son to love his enemies.
  *He cannot get his word out without "middlemen."
  *He cannot control his wrath.
  *He cannot forgive those who he believes have harmed him without demanding the bloody death of his own son.
  *He cannot stop Jagella from detailing what he can't do.

Question For Debate: Do you deny any of these limitations of the Bible god?

[Divine Insight]

One has to remember that this idea of GOD might not be the actual GOD, but - as the Gnostic's believed, is a false idea of GOD.

I stopped reading right there.

The topic of this thread is, "What the Bible God Cannot Do."

If you want to run off talking about what other Gods might be able to do that's fine. But that would have nothing at all to do with the Biblical God that you have just proclaimed to be a "false idea of GOD".

I'm well aware that the Eastern Mystics don't have these types of problems in their mystical philosophies. So I really don't need to read a lecture on that.

[William]

[Replying to post 11 by Divine Insight]

But that would have nothing at all to do with the Biblical God that you have just proclaimed to be a "false idea of GOD".

Actually what I said DI was that this is what the Gnostics believed about the OT idea of GOD.

One cannot really say for sure that Jesus was even speaking about the OT idea of GOD anyway, although - of course - one is free to believe whatever one wants to about that.

I stopped reading right there.

Like each of us, you are a free agent and can refuse to read anything you chose not too. No skin off my nose brother.

What I wrote - it wasn't just meant for you anyway...

So I really don't need to read a lecture on that.

As usual, you presume a lot and since you choose to be ignorant of what I wrote, that is not the most logical step for you to take, but *whatever*.

[Jagella]

[Replying to post 7 by Jagella]

When somebody doesn't bother to do something she reasonably would do if she could, then it is reasonable to conclude that she cannot.

I could conclude that, but I could also conclude that she will not, even if she could if she wanted to.

In order to save belief in the Bible god, it is necessary to come to that conclusion. So no matter how many centuries go by with no positive evidence of actual miracles, Christians can always insist that TIMITS is biding his time, and some day WHAM!--he'll come bursting through the clouds to prove to us all that he is very real. As we wait many books will be written by apologists assuring us that not only has TIMITS proved himself long ago but some day he will prove himself again. So yes, we are told TIMITS has not only done everything on my list, but he will do so again. In either this past or this future, TIMITS works when we cannot see him working. So that's where Christian faith comes in; we must believe in the power of TIMITS even though it is hidden from us.

The problematic thing here is that it would be I who chooses to assume what is reasonable for her to do, and my conclusions will be based upon that - insufficient -knowledge alone.

I often act without proof and have found that basic reason is sufficient to get my work done. I've found that if somebody or something never does something I might reasonably them to do, then most often it is because they cannot. So I can say with confidence that TIMITS cannot do anything on my list.

[William]

[Replying to post 13 by Jagella]

In order to save belief in the Bible god, it is necessary to come to that conclusion.

To be sure, in order to have belief in any idea of GOD, except Deist, it is necessary to come to that conclusion.

So no matter how many centuries go by with no positive evidence of actual miracles, Christians can always insist that TIMITS is biding his time, and some day WHAM!--he'll come bursting through the clouds to prove to us all that he is very real.

Personally speaking, I see this idea of GOD as dangerous because it allows for those who believe in this type of event the luxury of sitting back and not doing anything positive to make the changes, while their leaders work to make sure it those positive changes do not occur. Example.

As we wait many books will be written by apologists assuring us that not only has TIMITS proved himself long ago but some day he will prove himself again. So yes, we are told TIMITS has not only done everything on my list, but he will do so again. In either this past or this future, TIMITS works when we cannot see him working. So that's where Christian faith comes in; we must believe in the power of TIMITS even though it is hidden from us.

I argued with JW's when I was in my early 20's, that it would be better for us to be caught in the act of contributing to building the kingdom rather than waiting for Jesus to return and do it for us. Apparently that isn't scriptural...but I think I got the idea by reading words to such affect which are attributed to Jesus...you know - do unto others - help each other etc...

More recently I have come to the realization that the story of his return was concocted by bible writers in order to get the followers living in the hope whilst serving the 'GOD ordained authorities' who make them slaves to systems of disparity which are contrary to the 'kingdom of GOD'.

That way, Christian's will continue to believe until such a time as it becomes obvious that they have been deceived from the start, which would have to involve some watershed event to which the bible never prophesied. By then it will be too late to do anything about it.

I often act without proof and have found that basic reason is sufficient to get my work done. I've found that if somebody or something never does something I might reasonably them to do, then most often it is because they cannot. So I can say with confidence that TIMITS cannot do anything on my list.

Given that my understanding is the Earth is the actually body/brain/form of an intelligent self aware extremely creative entity of which we are all aspects of and in many ways, data collectors for --- essentially this amounts to an invisible entity in the sky, although the form at least is visible, and the creativity is also visible.

[KingandPriest]

To answer the OP, I deny all of these limitations of God as described in the bible. I think you pointed out a list of things you have not seen or think to be true, and have not proven any of them true.

When somebody doesn't bother to do something she reasonably would do if she could, then it is reasonable to conclude that she cannot. For instance, it makes good sense that the Bible god would convince the Jews that Jesus is the Messiah if he could convince them. Since most Jews don't believe Jesus is the Messiah, then the logical conclusion is that he cannot convince them. Otherwise, you must conclude that the Bible god doesn't bother to convince them Jesus is the Messiah.

Whose reasoning should we use? Just because you feel something is reasonable in your opinion, that does not make it generally reasonable.

For some, it is reasonable to force their child to comply with certain standards. For others is it just as reasonable not to force their child to comply. So again, I ask, whose reasonable standard are you using to come to this conclusion?

So, do you really want to go with that?

There are things which God has himself he cannot do. One, for example, is lying.

Let's cite our sources. You are citing Hebrews 6:18:

...so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie

We should also cite Luke 1:37:

For nothing will be impossible with God.

Do you see the contradiction?

NO, that verse in Luke 1:37 is taken out of context. You are plucking a verse that is a part of a conversation and taking a part of a statement to fit your point. This is why you have the wrong conclusion.

For any other readers point of reference, the conversation in question states:
Luke 1:34-38
"34 And Mary said to the angel, How will this be, since I am a virgin?
35 And the angel answered her, The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy"the Son of God.
36 And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren.
37 For nothing will be impossible with God.
38 And Mary said, Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word. And the angel departed from her."

If nothing is impossible with god, then he can lie.

I would say that there is a difference between god and God. If you are making the point that god or gods can lie, I will agree with you 100%. It is different however if you are making the point that God can lie.

It seems like we are talking about two different things here. There is a difference between the idols that some follow or the individuals who proclaim themselves as the god of their own lives, and God the Father who is the creator of Heaven and the physical world.