Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: conservative_crusader
It seems to me that you are assuming omnipotence and/or omniscience on the part of your hypothetical God. Neither are necessary conditions of being Aquinus's uncaused cause. A lesser but still functional God who created the universe and the people on planet earth might create the malevolent being in error, or as an experiment.

Also to say that the God that creates beings cares about them is to presume your conclusion. You cannot be certain of this. Do we care about the bacteria in a petri dish? Yet God would be far further above us than we are above the bacteria. The Christian God of Love does care, but that God is only one possibility (though the truth as you see it?)

At the end of the day I think we are going to disagree on this one too. I think that Pascal's wager as stated with its 4 possible outcomes is so much simpler than the true set of possibilities with their varying possible outcomes that it is not a useful argument, unfortunately.

699 posted on 12/17/2004 9:44:17 AM PST by Thatcherite (Conservative and Biblical Literalist are not synonymous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 692 | View Replies ]


To: Thatcherite
"It seems to me that you are assuming omnipotence and/or omniscience on the part of your hypothetical God. Neither are necessary conditions of being Aquinus's uncaused cause. A lesser but still functional God who created the universe and the people on planet earth might create the malevolent being in error, or as an experiment."

Very neat argument, but I'm afraid we're misunderstanding each other. In order for god to have created the universe he does not have to be omnipotent nor omniscient. He merely has to be powerful enough to create everything that there is, and smart enough to be capable of mature thought. While I do believe in an omniscient and omnipotent god, realizing that you've created something that will doom your own creation, is something that can easily be discerned. And of course remedying that problem is perhaps just as easy for this supreme being that created everything.

"Also to say that the God that creates beings cares about them is to presume your conclusion. You cannot be certain of this. Do we care about the bacteria in a petri dish? Yet God would be far further above us than we are above the bacteria. The Christian God of Love does care, but that God is only one possibility"


Also very good, however; a god would care about his creation in much the same way a biologist would care about a new strain of microscopic organism. If some third party were to enter the laboratory with the sole purpose of overturning the petri dish, the biologist would stop this third party.

" (though the truth as you see it?)"

correct.

"At the end of the day I think we are going to disagree on this one too. I think that Pascal's wager as stated with its 4 possible outcomes is so much simpler than the true set of possibilities with their varying possible outcomes that it is not a useful argument, unfortunately."

But, if nothing else, you are better off to believe there is a god than to believe there is none.
710 posted on 12/17/2004 11:53:23 AM PST by conservative_crusader (The voice of truth, tells me a different story. The voice of truth says do not be afraid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 699 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson