• Bartricks
    6k
    I am not a Christian. I do believe in God. But I don't believe God created the world we live in. It doesn't look like the kind of place an all-good person would create. But Christians typically do believe that God created the world. Why?

    God is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent person. Those are the essential attributes of God (don't be tedious and question that - if you want to use the word 'God' to refer to a peach, that's fine, but you're just a berk).

    Possession of those attributes does not entail that one has created anything, much less the world. Indeed, if anything supposing God to have created this world creates problems - really quite big problems - that do not arise if one does not make that assumption.

    Being omnipotent involves being all powerful - being able to do anything. But it does not essentially involve actually doing anything. That is, one can be all powerful and not do a thing. A creature who is unable to refrain from doing things is not omnipotent.

    Being omniscient does not essentially involve creating anything either. And nor does being omnibenevolent.

    So, there is nothing in the definition of God that commits a Christian to the belief that God created the world.

    Perhaps it is the bible that commits them to it. I haven't read it, but I did just read the book of Genesis and it does not say there that God created the world. Rather, it is just a description of God creating a place. There seems no reason to think the place in question is here. Indeed, there seems good reason to think it isn't, given the description.

    For instance, in the place that God creates in Genesis people live for hundreds and hundreds of years. The average lifespan seems about 800-900 years! It's quite explicit about this. Now, that's not at all like here.

    And the place that God creates in Genesis he creates in 6 days. But this place - the world - seems to have evolved slowly.

    And events - such as a the flood - are described that do not seem to have occurred here (indeed, that do not seem capable of occurring here - the flood described in Genesis submerges everything, for instance....is there even enough water in the world to do that?). And an ark is created that can contain pairs of every type of animal, which does not seem logistically possible if it applies to all the variety of creatures that exist here.

    And though places are mentioned in the Genesis account that correspond to names that we have given to places here in the world, the book of Genesis seems to have been written before those places had those names. Take Egypt, Egypt is mentioned. But it is first mentioned as the name of a person - Egypt. And so Egypt is simply that person's land. There is no reason to think that Genesis is referring to place we call Egypt. Indeed, Egypt was not called Egypt at the time (Genesis was supposedly written in the 6th century BC, but Egypt acquired that name much later. That applies to other places too it seems. The Euphrates is mentioned. But the river that we call the Euphrates was not called that when Genesis was written. And so on.

    So, there is nothing in Genesis to suggest that it is an account of how all things that have come into being have come into being. It is just an account of how God made a place. And there is no reason to think the place being talked about is here, and positive reason to think it is not.

    Seems to me, then, that Christians are missing a trick: they are trying to square the genesis account of God's creation of a place with what we understand about how this place - the world - has come to be. But the Genesis account does not seem to be about this place at all.

    But perhaps I am wrong and there are passages in the bible that really do commit the Christian to believing that God created this place. So much the worse for the credibility of Christianity if that is true....but I wonder if it is true?
  • Vera Mont
    3.1k
    I do believe in God. But I don't believe God created the world we live in. It doesn't look like the kind of place an all-good person would create. But Christians typically do believe that God created the world. Why?Bartricks

    Maybe you're taking somebody else's unreliable word for what God is like. Who told you He's all-good?

    Christians believe their god created the world, because the Sumerian creation myth is in a book that was written down by Hebrews long after they picked up the oral tradition. Meanwhile, the Christians' founding figurehead changed the whole concept and identity of the Hebrew god. So they have the Saviour figure at the center of their religion, but His role depends on the God figure that's supposed to have engendered Him, which is a different person from the Jehovah of the OT. But the compilers of the Bible that modern Christians use as their source and final authority lived in Roman Europe 300 years later just lumped all the stories in together, regardless of their origins, ages and contradictions. So the Christians are confused and conflicted and all the time at odds with one another over doctrine.

    God is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent person. Those are the essential attributes of GodBartricks
    If you subscribe to that hyperbole, your conundrum is intractable and impervious to reason.
    (don't be tedious and question that - if you want to use the word 'God' to refer to a peach, that's fine, but you're just a berk)
    Is the choice really is between the absolute acceptance of that omni-doctrine and a peach? OK then I'm a berk, because both appear silly to me.
    So, there is nothing in the definition of God that commits a Christian to the belief that God created the world.Bartricks
    The commitment of Christians is not in a definition; it's in the acceptance of Jesus as their redeemer. A cornerstone of the doctrine is believing that story in the foundational book that starts "In the beginning...", which also enables the same God to be King of Heaven, which is important to Christianity wih it afterlife myth. But they do a lot of interpreting, ignoring and cherry-picking between that and the Ascension.
    They don't need to 'square the book' with the omni-God. They just need faith and short memories.
  • Bartricks
    6k
    Maybe you're taking somebody else's unreliable word for what God is like. Who told you He's all-good?Vera Mont

    OMG. Did you read the OP? It's true by definition. What did I say someone who quetsions that is? Focus on the issue.
  • Bartricks
    6k
    Christians believe their god created the world, because the Sumerian creation myth is in a book that was written down by Hebrews long after they picked up the oral tradition. Meanwhile, the Christians' founding figurehead changed the whole concept and identity of the Hebrew god. So they have the Saviour figure at the center of their religion, but His role depends on the God figure that's supposed to have engendered Him, which is a different person from the Jehovah of the OT. But the compilers of the Bible that modern Christians use as their source and final authority lived in Roman Europe 300 years later just lumped all the stories in together, regardless of their origins, ages and contradictions. So the Christians are confused and conflicted and all the time at odds with one another over doctrine.Vera Mont

    Again: you're not focussing on the issue.

    Does the concept of God - defined as I defined God - entall that God created the world? No.

    Does the bible commit a CHristian to believing that God created the world? So far as I can see, no.
  • Vera Mont
    3.1k
    What did I say someone who quetsions that is?Bartricks

    A berk, I think.
    What "issue"? People believe whatever they want.
  • Bartricks
    6k
    Is the choice really is between the absolute acceptance of that omni-doctrine and a peach? OK then I'm a berk, because both appear silly to me.Vera Mont

    Yes. I think that's what you are.
    he commitment of Christians is not in a definition; it's in the acceptance of Jesus as their redeemer. A cornerstone of the doctrine is believing that story in the foundational book that starts "In the beginning...", which also enables the same God to be King of Heaven, which is important to Christianity wih it afterlife myth. But they do a lot of interpreting, ignoring and cherry-picking between that and the Ascension.
    They don't need to 'square the book' with the omni-God. They just need faith and short memories.
    Vera Mont

    Again, relevance to the OP??
  • Bartricks
    6k
    A berk, I think.
    What "issue"? People believe whatever they want.
    Vera Mont

    No, some people believe what they think they have reason to believe and stop believing what they recognize they do not have reason to believe. Not berks though.
  • Vera Mont
    3.1k
    It's true by definition.Bartricks

    OK
  • BC
    13.1k
    Well, why do you not believe that God created the world? What justification do you have for this belief?

    IF God is omnipotent, who else could have created the world? Some other omnipotency?

    The belief that God created the world goes back to the development of creeds (over a fairly long period of time). "I believe in God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth".

    A lot of what Christians believe is based on their early roots in Judaism. The Jews, per Genesis 1:1, believed that God created the heavens and the earth.

    A God-Creator 'works' because we seem to require a beginning to everything, somehow. Big Bang or Fiat Lux.

    The more we talk about the nature of God; what God did or did not do; what God is or is not like, etc. the deeper into the indefensible we get. Our claims about God are indefensible because we can't know God. In my opinion (talk about hubris!) God (the Father) is above and beyond our knowing. God (the Son) is the knowable person of God.

    Christians chatter and natter on about God (the Father) as if he was as familiar to them as the manager of the local Safeway supermarket. Christians make as many unsupportable statements about Jesus (and the Holy Ghost). Why do they do this?

    I tend to think that we are better off NOT thinking that God is all-loving. God might oversee without intervention. Omniscience is a major stumbling block for our alleged free will. If God is all knowing, I'm content thinking that we have zero freedom of action. For that matter, I'm not sure God is omnipotent either. (A limited God presents other problems.)
  • 180 Proof
    14k
    Christians typically do believe that God created the world. Why?Bartricks
    Mostly, like children, many "believe" the ancient fairytale "God created the world" is literally true due to their incorrigible scientific illiteracy and superstitious gullibility. And for once we agree: this world is conspicuously inconsistent with any notion of "an all-good, all-loving creator God".
  • Bartricks
    6k
    Well, why do you not believe that God created the world? What justification do you have for this belief?Bitter Crank

    I think the burden of proof would be on the person who thought God did create the world.

    There seems no positive reason to suppose God created this world. And there seems positive reason to think God did not create it, given how ugly some of it is.

    So, the default is that God did not create this world, not that he did.

    And as for Christians, it seems to me that there is nothing in the creation story in the bible that commits them to thinking that God created this world. It would be more reasonable for them to believe that Genesis is a story about another place, not here.

    Note, I am not interested in a psychological or sociological or historical explanation of why it is that Christians typically believe God created the world.

    I am interested in whether there is any good philosophical reason for them to do so.
  • Bartricks
    6k
    A God-Creator 'works' because we seem to require a beginning to everything, somehow. Big Bang or Fiat Lux.Bitter Crank

    But that kind of argument does not get one to God, but to uncreated things. That is, from the fact that there are created things, one can conclude that there are also uncreated things. Nothing commits one to supposing that there is just one uncreated thing that is responsible for all else, much less that it is God.

    The more we talk about the nature of God; what God did or did not do; what God is or is not like, etc. the deeper into the indefensible we get. Our claims about God are indefensible because we can't know God. In my opinion (talk about hubris!) God (the Father) is above and beyond our knowing. God (the Son) is the knowable person of God.Bitter Crank

    It is hubris to think you know that we can't know what God is like. If God wants us to know what he is like, then he can do that. And he has, for we can know that God exists and we can know something of what God's character is like from our reason. From our reason we know that God wants us to be people of a certain character or characters - well, we can reasonably suppose that God's character resembles one of them.

    And what's this stuff about God the son? First, is God his own son? How does that make any sense? And you have contradicted yourself. You've said God is unknowable and knowable.
  • jgill
    3.5k
    If God wants us to know what he is like, then he can do that. And he has, for we can know that God exists . . .Bartricks

    Sunday School babble. Have one more for good measure, then toddle off to beddy bye. :roll:
  • BC
    13.1k
    I find that your post is not yielding much light.

    If God wants us to know what he is like, then he can do that. And he hasBartricks

    Really.

    Note, I am not interested in a psychological or sociological or historical explanation of why it is that Christians typically believe God created the world.Bartricks

    You might find more enlightenment about the matter if you don't insist on only "philosophical" reason.
  • Bartricks
    6k
    What was the point of that post?
  • Bartricks
    6k
    Really.Bitter Crank

    Yes.

    You think you already know that God is unknowable. That's both extremely arrogant and obviously confused, for if you don't know anything about God then you don't even know what you're using that word to refer to, do you?
  • jgill
    3.5k
    ↪jgill
    What was the point of that post?
    Bartricks

    When you sober up you'll get it.
  • Vera Mont
    3.1k
    It's true by definition.Bartricks
    It's nice to have the definitive definition of God. It's nice to have the last word on all matters theological. But it's a teensy bit odd to do that and then come with that burden of proof thingie at other people. It's almost like you were attacking John Cleese with a banana.
  • jgill
    3.5k
    It's almost like you were attacking John Cleese with a banana.Vera Mont

    Which would have made more sense and been far more entertaining.
  • javi2541997
    4.9k
    I think the main issue of your OP is that you are trying to explain Genesis with critical thought or reasoning. We have to keep in mind that "Genesis", "Bible", "old Testament", etc... are based on metaphors. These are the responsible to explain the creation of the world and why all are here.
    Christians believe in God because otherwise would be contradictory. Christianity is based on the role of Jesus as a prophet and he spread his messages on one belief: the faith of God's mercy.
    Without God, a Christian would be "naked".

    It goes further than that. A Christian already believes in God's existence, he is not using Christianity to believe but encourage the existence itself.
  • Bartricks
    6k
    That's question begging. You are just assuming at the outset that God does not exist and that christianity is bollocks, yes? Stop that.
  • javi2541997
    4.9k
    If you are afraid of seeing how other users start doubting on Christianity, why did you start this OP then?
  • Bartricks
    6k
    The OP isn't about that, is it? It's about the coherence of Christianity and whether there is any justifying reason why Christians typically believe God created the world.
    Justifying reason, not explanatory reason.
    It's not a 'have a pop at christianity' thread.
  • javi2541997
    4.9k
    Yes, I understood your OP. That's why I explained that Christians use faith to encourage God's existence rather than reason.
    It looks like that in your first post you try to explain Genesis and Christianity with reason or critical thinking.
  • Cuthbert
    1.1k
    I am interested in whether there is any good philosophical reason for them to do so.Bartricks

    I think this sort of belief is said to be a matter of faith because there are no justifying reasons of the kind that would satisfy in other circumstances. For example, Michaelangelo made the statue David. The justifying reasons for believing this lie in a train of documents, witness accounts, etc together with some plausible dismissals of implausible alternative theories. Contrast: God made the world. We are not committed to believing this on pain of being inconsistent with other beliefs. It certainly seems to be the case. It makes perfect sense. It's the kind of thing God might do. Knowing the character of God as much as we can, it's in character. But there's no audit trail. It's a matter of faith.
  • Vera Mont
    3.1k
    God is. (Shut up and don't question his existence!)
    God is perfect, omni-everything. (because I said so.)
    Why do Christians believe my version of God made the world? (I'm not only uninterested in interpretation and explanation, I'll heap verbal abuse on anyone who attempts it.)
    Discuss.
  • Gregory
    4.6k


    The first verse of the Bible says God created the heavens and earth. Are you saying that this was another dimension (odd) or that God used something to create with?
  • Bartricks
    6k
    I am saying that Genesis is not an account of God making this world. The place described does not resemble this one and to insist it is this place generates problems that would not arise otherwise.

    Whether this place - which is referred to as 'the world' - is made or not is another matter.

    'Odd' is not a rational criticism.
  • Bartricks
    6k
    But if the bible does not say that God created the world, and if the concept of God does not imply it either, and if supposing it to be true creates problems that would not exist otherwise, then it should be given up. It has no philosophical or scriptural justification.
  • Bartricks
    6k
    Again, you are just begging the question.
    You already think christianity is stupid, yes? That, for you,is in the bank. You think it,so it must be true. End of. You can't defend it. You just know it.

    What I am doing is applying reason to the matter. I am questioning a basic assumption that many Christians make about the bible,but that is not in the bible.

    Imagine that most people think something is illegal that isn't in fact illegal. And furthermore this thing that most people think is illegal actually operates to cultivate disrespect for the law in general. Well, then it'd be good to point out that the thing everybody has been thinking is illegal is not, in fact, illegal.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.