God is perfect so he can’t create imperfect beings

if he made perfect beings they'd be subsumed into the Godhead

You have to use something. I guess you could just say 'God' instead of 'He' or 'She' but those two do make it a little more personal.

>can't creat self
>>what is jesus?

Which abrahamic god are you referring, shitposter?

>Arguments from reason = Sophistry
The peanut brain of an atheist at work. Well done, peanut brain! Clap for the peanut brain, everyone!

God wanted to create beings which were completely free, the only possibility was that the majority of them would destroy themselves. There's a lot of complex metaphysics involved, so it's not worth trying to rationally understand. Demons infest the minds of sophists

Attached: 1200px-Jan_Brueghel_de_Oude_en_Peter_Paul_Rubens_-_Het_aards_paradijs_met_de_zondeval_van_Adam_en_Ev (1200x775, 443K)

Because it would cause man to sin, breaking a rule from God himself?

I never understood this. And Christians always go through mental gymnastics about free will or whatever to justify it but in the end God made humans with the capacity to sin.

*He

>God is perfect so he can’t create imperfect beings
where the fuck did you get that retarded quote. it's incorrect, and therefore a bad premise for a thread.

fpbp

The more important question is: how can he be omnipresent and not be the only thing in existence?

/thread

Because he is eternal spirit, not created matter.
Because it's creation ex nihilo, not monistic emanationism.
Even if his power is immanent, behind all things, that doesn't reduce all things to his substance/essence.

So omnipresent, but not really?

>fpbp
That's the second post.

The point of Abrahamic religion is a central dogma. If two gods are there then they can attack one another. You can't serve two masters, as the King James says. It's a military ethic. You'd be less fearful of god if it were an equal share of power, hence satan being told as weaker. Satan thus took a mere third of the angles to try to overpower him with numbers. Only a third, that's to make satan look weaker too. Then they add the soliders, you, of the lord. If you want, you can choose satan. Humans are so weak though so abrahamic texts say ghosts are not real to negate you choosing satan's side.

It's a simple mind game about power plays. If there's two he screws himself. It's why the first thing he does is fight satan, so as to not share power.

Omnipresence doesn't mean omnisubstance.
Look up the essence-energy distinction.

>essence-energy distinction
not philosophy

What does omnipresence mean?

theology is about God.

we can understand how the warm and light of the sun is present all around and even through a plant, but a plant cannot be reduced to "the sun" itself, or even to "light".
There is an ontologic distinction between the Sun and the Plant, even though the Sun's energy permeates the plant in various ways.

This is just an analogy, hope it helps you understand omnipresence of God, while not reducing God to any particular object or phenomena.

>Omnipotence doesn't mean He can create false and contradictory things

Attached: shestov_060612_620px.jpg (620x416, 71K)

"Faith, only the faith that looks to the Creator and that He inspires, radiates from itself the supreme and decisive truths condemning what is and what is not. Reality is transfigured. The heavens glorify the Lord. The prophets and apostles cry in ecstasy, "O death, where is thy sting? Hell, where is thy victory?" And all announce: "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him." (Quoting 1 Corinthians 15:55, 2:9)

Furthermore, although a Jewish philosopher, Shestov saw in the resurrection of Christ this victory over necessity. He described the incarnation and resurrection of Jesus as a transfiguring spectacle by which it is demonstrated that the purpose of life is not "mystical" surrender to the "absolute", but ascetical struggle:

Just because we can articulate gibberish and string together disparate and contradictory ideas doesn't mean God can actualize them, nor does it mean omnipotence is questionable because it can't actualize all the gibberish our minds come up with.

Why use words when you don't intend to use them in communicable ways? To be omnipresent means to be present in all places at all times, the definition makes no such distinctions. To call God omnipresent simply means God is present in all places at all times. What you're telling me is that God is not omnipresent but something else. That something else is also just as unintelligible, just in a different way now. "God is everywhere—but really nowhere! God is everything—but really nothing!" Splendid, I've learned so much.

>omnipotence
>can do anything
>He can't do something
idk man

God is not different from the "creatures". Stop listening to moralizers, user

>That's the second post.
It's the first post of any value.