God Is Not Omnipotent?

[JoeMama]

St. Augustine (354-430) was one of the founders of the Roman Catholic Church. He well understood that Christianity was like a house of cards; if the church dared to admit to even a single error in the Bible, who could say there wasn't an error on every page? The resurrection story might then be false and everyone's hopes for salvation are in vain. This is what he said:

"The most disastrous consequences must follow upon our believing that anything false is found in the sacred books. If you [even] once admit into such a high sanctuary of authority one false statement, there will not be left a single sentence of those books which might be explained away as false"--St. Augustine in Epistula, p. 28.

With Augustine's warning in mind, consider the following statement by a writer in Judges:
"The LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.” — Judges 1:19

God could handle the mountain inhabitants, no problem, but the God who was powerful enough to create the sun, moon, Earth, and the heavens, was impotent against warriors riding iron chariots? Is this true, or is the Judges writer declaring something that is false?

Also consider this:

Matthew says God can do anything: "With God all things are possible.” — Matthew 19:26
But it was not possible for the impotent God to defeat the valley warriors with their iron chariots, so is Matthew here declaring something that is false?

If the answer is yes, how many other Bible statements can be "explained away" as false? Is perhaps the creation story not true?

[JoeyKnothead]

Try again. The passage says that God was with Judah, not that he wasn't able to help them because their faith was not enough. You are scrabbling for excuses.Now your links to your earlier explanation (I don't just ignore them) argues that God had helped tribes to overcome equally well - armed opponents so there must be some reason why they failed this time. Lack of faith is an easy get out. So God would not be with them if he wasn't going to help. What it looks like is that there were mundane reasons why the other battles succeeded but mundane reasons why that one didn't. God was nothing to do with it. That, not insufficient Faith, is the better answer.

We see it all the time, the folks who praise God in victory, but never blame him in defeat.

[JoeMama]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #20]

Jehovah's Witness has been on this forum for about 12 years. Has he ever conceded that there are serious problems with the Bible--contradictions, important errors, and absurdities?

If the answer is No, I wouldn't be surprised. He evidently long ago took to heart the admonition from St. Augustine that I've twice before shown to the forum, about NEVER conceding that the Bible is in error, lest the skeptic then says, "If it's wrong here, couldn't it be wrong somewhere else, too? Or, many other places? How can we be sure that almost all of the creation story and Genesis and the New Testament is not false, and therefore Christianity is likewise false?

So, never admit even one error, for the apologist will slide down a slippery slope that will lead to his doom.

Now, I claim that absolutely ANY claimed error in the Bible can be explained away (in the minds of the religionist and extreme faithful), though that very often puts the apologist in a position where he has no choice but to claim the truth of what he knows is a lie. That's what professional apologists do, to help prevent the faithful from losing faith. Not that there is necessarily something wrong with that. For a great many, their faith is all they have.

Still......Here is what a favorite skeptic of mine had to say:


"As long as people believe in the miraculous inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, of course they accept every page as literally true, and think that there could not be any contradiction between the different accounts or representations of Scripture. The worst of all such pre-conceived ideas is, that they compel those who hold them to do violence to their own sense of truth. When religious prejudices come into play, people are afraid to call things by their right names, and without knowing it themselves, become guilty of all kinds of evasive and arbitrary practices; for what would be thought quite unjustifiable in any other case is here considered a duty, inasmuch as it is supposed to tend toward the maintenance of faith and the glory of God!" --T.W. Doane, "Bible Myths and Their Parallels in Other Religions."

[TRANSPONDER]

Without the excellent Defendors of the Faith we atheists would have nothing to talk about, so it's as well that they try to explain what appears to be problems with the Bible. And in fact the links made me thing - 'If they were able to beat iron chariots before, why not this time? God could help them do it before, why not now?'

JW's explanation that they must have lacked Faith is as good as I've come to expect (like the week long Passover for the priests ) And all I could do was put a counter explanation which does not (despite my 'try again)' disprove what JW posted. It is just a counter -explanation. And it has its' own problems for me.

If the Israelites had beaten the iron chariots before (assuming they had - I should check the texts) why had they failed this time? Why (if I was right) did the writers not have another success? I had to consider that we have another 'truth they were stuck with' - that the Hebrews had not in fact been able to clear the Canaanite plain. Spin apart, there could be a historical basis to the conquest, which I had always seen as pretty much legendary.

[1213]

No. Significance is that even if the people of the plains had a panzer regiment of Abrams tanks, God should still (if He was omnipotent) have enabled the tribe of Judah, since he was 'with them', to push them handily into the sea. Which is what God signally fails to do,..

and

IF God was with Judah in the valley, but Judah still lost the fight, doesn't that imply that God didn't have the ability help Judah win?

Not necessary. I don't have enough information to say what and why exactly happened, but it is possible that Judah for some reason just didn't manage to do it, even when God was with him. For example, maybe he was fearful and therefore couldn't do it and God just didn't force him to go to do the job.

[TRANSPONDER]

No. Significance is that even if the people of the plains had a panzer regiment of Abrams tanks, God should still (if He was omnipotent) have enabled the tribe of Judah, since he was 'with them', to push them handily into the sea. Which is what God signally fails to do,..

and

IF God was with Judah in the valley, but Judah still lost the fight, doesn't that imply that God didn't have the ability help Judah win?

Not necessary. I don't have enough information to say what and why exactly happened, but it is possible that Judah for some reason just didn't manage to do it, even when God was with him. For example, maybe he was fearful and therefore couldn't do it and God just didn't force him to go to do the job.

You are being evasive. If Judah was fearful and therefore couldn't prevail against the people of the plains,

(a) it would have said 'he could not prevail because he was fearful' not 'They had iron chariots' because as JW pointed out, they had beated iron chariots before.

(b) God would not 'be with them'. If he was, he could have made them prevail even if if they were all hiding under rocks - if God was omnipotent, which clearly he isn't. Not according to the passage.

[1213]

...
(a) it would have said 'he could not prevail because he was fearful' not 'They had iron chariots' because as JW pointed out, they had beated iron chariots before.
...

Ok, thanks for JW for that. In that case the problem then could not be the iron chariots. Still, if Judah could not do the job, it doesn't necessary mean God had some limits.

[TRANSPONDER]

...
(a) it would have said 'he could not prevail because he was fearful' not 'They had iron chariots' because as JW pointed out, they had beated iron chariots before.
...

Ok, thanks for JW for that. In that case the problem then could not be the iron chariots. Still, if Judah could not do the job, it doesn't necessary mean God had some limits.

Well it rather suggest He does, as if he was 'With Judah' and it was known that He was, you'd expect them to prevail wouldn't you? Or it would be ' "And the Lord saithed: Thee hast not Faith enough so I cannot flay these fellows before thee, so pull ye back, and wait thee a bit until thee get thy corage up and let's have another bash".

The implication and suspicion is that Judah could not prevail because they thought God was with them but he wasn't. Either because they were falling short in some way (in which case the OT usually has God explain exactly why they aren't gotten right with Him) or he isn't there at all and never was, which I'm betting on because that theory explains all the problems and yours doesn't.

[1213]

Well it rather suggest He does, as if he was 'With Judah' and it was known that He was, you'd expect them to prevail wouldn't you?

I expect that they would have a chance, but, people are weak, in is possible that Judah could not do it because of his own reason, not because of God.

[brunumb]

Well it rather suggest He does, as if he was 'With Judah' and it was known that He was, you'd expect them to prevail wouldn't you?

I expect that they would have a chance, but, people are weak, in is possible that Judah could not do it because of his own reason, not because of God.

The chariots of iron are clearly indicated as the reason for defeat, and even with God being there to assist, he did not or could not help.

[TRANSPONDER]

Well it rather suggest He does, as if he was 'With Judah' and it was known that He was, you'd expect them to prevail wouldn't you?

I expect that they would have a chance, but, people are weak, in is possible that Judah could not do it because of his own reason, not because of God.

Then that is admitting that God could not do a particular thing. Otherwise you have to (as you tried) make the Bible mean what it doesn't say - that there was a reason Judah didn't win other than God was not able to help them win. You have to invent excuses like their faith was lacking. The 'Ghost Bible' apparently says: 'They couldn't not drive out the people of the plains because they hadn't faith and God would not help those without faith'. This is the problem with Faithbased Interpretation - it replaces what the Bible says with what you want it to say.