42 replies to this topic

[Kierkecraig]

What attributes must a being have in order to be called God?

[Beowulf]

Grief.

This sounds like the is-there-a-rock-so-heavy-that-God-can't-lift-it kind of question.

If I ever have a vision of the Almighty, I'm sure I that I will-know-it-when-see-it without being able to define it.

Beowulf

[A Random Catholic]

Omniscience; Omnipotence; Immanence; and Noncontingency

PS: Beowulf- I once read an atheist who framed that question, "Can God microwave a burrito so hot that even He can't eat it?"  Cute...

Edited by A Random Catholic, 15 October 2004 - 01:09 PM.

[Jarrod]

Kierkecraig, on Oct 15 2004, 01:04 PM, said:

What attributes must a being have in order to be called God?

Aside from the usual attributes (like all powerful, etc.), I suggest these:

• Has and uses creative power
  
• Benevolent Ã?¢â?‰?? Epitomizes love
  
• Exudes order in action and creation
  
• Ever expanding through creation
  
• Freely accessible

[t2t2]

Noncontingency

Did you throw that one in to eliminate the LDS God?  Just curious.

[TrespassersW]

Quote

Omniscience; Omnipotence; Immanence; and Noncontingency

Actually, if someone just had the first two, I don't think I'd be saying "No you're not God!"

I think I'd just let 'em be...

[A Random Catholic]

t2t2, on Oct 15 2004, 01:52 PM, said:

Noncontingency

Did you throw that one in to eliminate the LDS God?�?�  Just curious.

Yeah, that's pretty much it.  By the way, I do know Latter-day Saints who don't think that Heavenly Father is contingent...

(edit) It's not a rhetorical trick though- I sincerely believe that God must necessarily be non-contingent, and so believed before I was a critic of LDS theology.

Edited by A Random Catholic, 15 October 2004 - 02:14 PM.

[Kierkecraig]

If Omnipotence and Omniscience are necessary attributes, then how do you define Omnipotence and Omniscience?

[t2t2]

I do to.  I've been in some long conversations about that.  Their ability to deconstruct that word to fit their views left my head spinning....

[ssbn623]

A Random Catholic, on Oct 15 2004, 01:08 PM, said:

Omniscience; Omnipotence; Immanence; and Noncontingency

PS: Beowulf- I once read an atheist who framed that question, "Can God microwave a burrito so hot that even He can't eat it?"  Cute...

Random, I need a little help with the terms "Immanence" and "Noncontingency".

These terms are not common language among non-Catholics and my little cheap Webster's isn't up to the task of clarifying them.

I'm interested in the Catholic ( a Catholic's?) perspective on this.

Have you read C.S. Lewis' "The Problem of Pain"? He does a nice job of discussing the conflict between omnipotence and omnibenevolence (which you didn't mention but still...)

[BCSpace]

Quote

Yeah, that's pretty much it. By the way, I do know Latter-day Saints who don't think that Heavenly Father is contingent...

(edit) It's not a rhetorical trick though- I sincerely believe that God must necessarily be non-contingent, and so believed before I was a critic of LDS theology.

That's alright.  Seeing as how there is no ex nihilo in the Bible and seeing as how there is Theosis in the Bible, God, by Biblical definition, must be contingent.

On a more humorous note, I perceive that trinitarians believe that God is either an egg, a cup of water, or a milkshake.

Now I had an extraordinarily good milkshake once, is God now in me?  

[t2t2]

Seeing as how there is no ex nihilo in the Bible and seeing as how there is Theosis in the Bible, God, by Biblical definition, must be contingent.

Not true.  God's works must be.  But not God.

[A Random Catholic]

ssbn623, on Oct 15 2004, 02:20 PM, said:

A Random Catholic, on Oct 15 2004, 01:08 PM, said:

Omniscience; Omnipotence; Immanence; and Noncontingency

PS: Beowulf- I once read an atheist who framed that question, "Can God microwave a burrito so hot that even He can't eat it?"�?�  Cute...

Random, I need a little help with the terms "Immanence" and "Noncontingency".

These terms are not common language among non-Catholics and my little cheap Webster's isn't up to the task of clarifying them.

I'm interested in the Catholic ( a Catholic's?) perspective on this.

Have you read C.S. Lewis' "The Problem of Pain"? He does a nice job of discussing the conflict between omnipotence and omnibenevolence (which you didn't mention but still...)

Immanence means He's fully present everywhere.  Noncontingency means He's not in any way dependent on anything else.  He is the sole cause of everything He does, and is Himself uncaused- the unmoved mover.  I have read The Problem of Pain and I agree.  Incidentally, I don't know that God must necessarily be benevolent (although discussing other possible ways of being God is a trifle absurd); in any event, I'm glad He is.  By the way, "the conflict between omnipotence and omnibenevolence" is called theodicy.

[A Random Catholic]

BCSpace, on Oct 15 2004, 02:28 PM, said:

On a more humorous note, I perceive that trinitarians believe that God is either an egg, a cup of water, or a milkshake.

Now I had an extraordinarily good milkshake once, is God now in me?  

Analogies for the Holy Trinity are invariably lame.  Throw rocks at them.

[BCSpace]

Quote

On a more humorous note, I perceive that trinitarians believe that God is either an egg, a cup of water, or a milkshake.

Now I had an extraordinarily good milkshake once, is God now in me?   

Quote

Analogies for the Holy Trinity are invariably lame. Throw rocks at them.

Didn't I do that just now?  

[A Random Catholic]

Certainly you did.

My own father used the analogy of one man who was a father, a son, and an uncle.  That, of course, would be Modalism.  D'Oh!

[tubaloth]

I like the some of the words of Joseph Smith

We here observe that God is the only supreme governor and independent being in whom all fullness and perfection dwell; who is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient; without beginning of days or end of life; and that in him every good gift and every good principle dwell; and that he is the Father of lights; in him the principle of faith dwells independently, and he is the object in whom the faith of all other rational and accountable beings centers for life and salvation. (Joseph Smith, Lectures on Faith 2:2)
(Joseph Smith, Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith's Teachings, edited by Larry E. Dahl and Donald Q.Cannon [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1997], .)

In knowledge there is power. God has more power than all other beings, because he has greater knowledge; and hence he knows how to subject all other beings to Him. He has power over all. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 Vols. 5:340)
(Joseph Smith, Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith's Teachings, edited by Larry E. Dahl and Donald Q.Cannon [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1997], .)

[A Random Catholic]

tubaloth, on Oct 15 2004, 03:15 PM, said:

I like the some of the words of Joseph Smith

We here observe that God is the only supreme governor and independent being in whom all fullness and perfection dwell; who is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient; without beginning of days or end of life; and that in him every good gift and every good principle dwell; and that he is the Father of lights; in him the principle of faith dwells independently, and he is the object in whom the faith of all other rational and accountable beings centers for life and salvation. (Joseph Smith, Lectures on Faith 2:2)
(Joseph Smith, Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith's Teachings, edited by Larry E. Dahl and Donald Q.Cannon [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1997], .)

In knowledge there is power. God has more power than all other beings, because he has greater knowledge; and hence he knows how to subject all other beings to Him. He has power over all. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 Vols. 5:340)
(Joseph Smith, Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith's Teachings, edited by Larry E. Dahl and Donald Q.Cannon [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1997], .)

Great Googly-Moogly!  I like some of those words as well!  I'm not sure I understand the "principle of faith dwelling independently in God" thing, and the notion that he is omnipotent because he is omniscient implies a quality contingent upon another quality, which therefore couldn't be "omni" (I think).  But

Quote

We here observe that God is the only supreme governor and independent being in whom all fullness and perfection dwell; who is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient; without beginning of days or end of life; and that in him every good gift and every good principle dwell.

Rawk on, Joseph!

Edited by A Random Catholic, 15 October 2004 - 03:25 PM.

[alienward]

Kierkecraig, on Oct 15 2004, 01:04 PM, said:

What attributes must a being have in order to be called God?

From lds.org:

Quote

From latter-day revelation we learn that the Father and the Son have tangible bodies of flesh and bone and that the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit, without flesh and bone

Gods must be human personages and be made of either flesh and bones or spirit.

[TrespassersW]

Quote

We here observe that God is the only supreme governor and independent being in whom all fullness and perfection dwell; who is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient; without beginning of days or end of life; and that in him every good gift and every good principle dwell.

I'd be interested in how he reconciles this statement with some of his other teachings (such as D&C 130:22 or the King Follett Sermon).

Does anyone know if Mr. Smith posts here on occasion?