Christians say, “God is omnipotent. He is all-powerful. He can literally do anything, including giving people superpowers, etc. God can do ANYTHING. He could make pigs fly with a snap of the fingers; he could create infinite universes with just speaking it into existence.” But, at the same time, these same people say, “God had to send his son to die because it was the only way.”
Okay, then God is not all-powerful then, lol. He’s not omnipotent. That’s literally the opposite of omnipotence. If God is omnipotent, then he literally had infinite options. In fact, if he’s this powerful, then sending his son is a really dumb idea and makes zero sense.
I don’t know if this comparison makes sense, but in The Flash TV show, when they were fighting a speedster named Savitar, there was a building with metahuman power dampeners so you can’t use your powers inside this building. Savitar was going to kill Iris West, so what would be the smart thing to do??? Maybe put Iris in this building because Savitar can’t use his powers inside it. Case closed. It would make no sense for this option to be here but then for Team Flash to say, “We know this easier and smarter option exists, but Iris, you dying is the only way we can stop Savitar and save you.”
See what I mean? Point is, if God is omnipotent, then Jesus dying wasn’t the only way. Jesus being tortured so he could feel all the pain of sin was not necessary. If you’re saying this was the only way, then fine, but don’t say God is all-powerful and limitless, because clearly there are limits to God’s own power.
George Carlin: “He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money!”
The more you think about it, the less sense it makes.
If you actually read the book, it makes so little sense you will weep for humanity.
God gives little kids leukemia, or at least allows it, which goes to the problem of evil, that if God is all-knowing and all-encompassing and still allows evil to occur, or has a plan that involves evil occurring, then God is not all-good, God is himself part evil. If God is omnipotent, then there is no reason for evil to exist beyond him having cruel fun at our expense. And that’s not even getting into the non-human suffering.
Christianity likes the idea that Lucifer disobeyed God and was cast down, but Lucifer IS god, just as much as God is, just as much as we are or the stones and moss in nature are. Lucifer couldn’t do anything other than God’s plan, because omnipotence.
So the only way the supposedly omnipotent God thought to run the universe requires a large chunk of the souls he created to be cast into hell forever. Why? What the fuck was the point of that? God is petty, spiteful, vindictive, callous and cold. Or not omnipotent. One or the other. You know what? Either way I’m not going to “worship” it.
And then there’s the most obvious third answer, that there’s no god, which is the only option that makes sense at this level.
You need to get more shorter showers.
None of it ever made sense to me, even when I was a kid. How does torturing Jesus to death remove MY sins? He gets killed, that somehow absolves my sins, and now I’m obligated to worship him, and do whatever some guy in a robe tells me that Jesus wants me to do?
Or God. Or maybe both, because they’re kind of the same person, along with Dead Jesus, who is just as bossy as both God and Jesus.
And let’s not get into Communion. The first time that was explained to me, I was appalled. Then I was told about Transfiguration, and I was like “You people are out of your fucking minds,” but I was only about 8, and nobody was interested in my opinions on religion. Decades later, and my disbelief has only increased.
Non-religious but likes plot analysis.
An important factor here is free will. Without free will, one may easily have a perfect utopia of the kind you think an omnipotent God should be able to achieve. But it would be a meaningless utopia; like a kid playing with toy figurines, just deciding everything we say and do.
God doesn’t want that, and thus self-impose a limit on the omnipotence to not interfere with our free will. We are children that need to be taught, rather than marionetted to “save us” from the negative urges of free will.
Here, the (self-)sacrifice of Jesus enters. It is not about God using Jesus to fulfill some perverse quota of pain and suffering that God has decided is due before we are allowed into heaven. It is more about what humanity must experience for the lesson that makes heaven remotely possible as a concept. Only through pain and suffering will we come to understand how our actions affect the world and those around us. Jesus takes (some of) the pain and suffering “in our place” with the aim that the message will resonate with people throughout the ages to teach us about love and understanding, making the concept of a heaven possible despite our nature as (non-brainwashed) beings of free will.
In reality, even after 2000+ years, we still seem pretty far off the mark. Maybe the lesson didn’t take the way it was intended; free will is a fickle thing. Or maybe God is playing an even longer game.
I think God set it up so we could save ourselves.
From whom? Why do we need saving in the first place?
God is supposed to be a father figure, right? And this alleged father says, “I give you complete free will to choose to believe in me or not,” right?
The reward for faith and obedience is eternal life in a utopic paradise. The punishment for disbelief is eternal, irreversable torture and pain.
A father who tells his children that he will only give them one chance to learn isn’t a good father.
A good father is patient and kind. A good father understands that a child will mess up and need to learn some lessons on their own. A good father would never consider the complete destruction of his child for the sake of his own ego. A good father would be terribly pained by his child’s pain and suffering. A good father would do everything in his power to prevent that pain.
The idea that the only way “up” is through required love doesn’t sound like love.
Imagine seeing a parent out in the world. Imagine hearing that parent say “If you don’t love me the way I want you to love me, then I will kill you” to their child. That would not be a good parent. That would be a petty, abusive, manipulative piece of trash. You would do well to save that child from that parent.
God doesn’t exist.
God is just really into child sacrifice. For real, it’s a central tenet. Jesus. Abraham. David. Noah. Lot. Job.
“God is more important than your family” is literally a theme throughout.
I remember my dad drunk driving us three kids home rambling at us how if a man put a gun up to each of our <10yo heads, and that man demanded my father say he didnt believe in god or he would shoot us, my father was drunkenly proud to scream in front of his god and children how he would watch that man blow our brains out.
He wonders why we don’t talk to him.
God damn. I’m sorry.
Omnipotent ≠ Intelligent
You’ve re-framed an old philosophical problem: Why does (an omnipotent, benevolent) God allow evil? See Theodicy on Wikipedia
I feel like I have to put the disclaimer that, although I am spiritual, I’m not religious. Anyway:
then Jesus dying wasn’t the only way.
Correct. I don’t think many people, Christian or otherwise, really disagree with you here. I chose to drive 20 minutes to eat ramen today. Was that the only way? Well, only way to what, exactly? To feed myself? No—there are plenty of closer options with which I could’ve sustained myself, but in my picking the ramen, I now have satisfied that craving which I’ve had for a few weeks. Even though I won’t still taste the ramen two days from now, I’ll still be satisfied that I had some today.
In the case that you are trying to make a legitimate criticism of the story rather than the vapid “Christianity is stupid” posts that dominate this platform, I’d prompt you to be much more specific in what you mean by “way.” The only way to what? What specifically are you positing was God’s goal in allowing the crucifixion of Jesus?
Personally, I take the Bible as almost entirely allegorical. So if you want my subjective take on this post, it’s about as good as asking why Superman has to be weak to kryptonite.
There’s no way to rebut the argument you’re trying to rebut without circular logic of “the bible is true because the bible says it’s true”.
If you start with the premise that Christianity is as true as Santa Claus until proven otherwise, nothing you said makes any sense.
The entire shower thought already accepts the premise of Christianity. Otherwise there’s no conversation here. I already said that I’m not religious. I just know enough about the Christian faith and theology to entertain an argument under that premise.
There’s no way to rebut the argument you’re trying to rebut without circular logic of “the bible is true because the bible says it’s true”.
Also, yes. That’s not a flaw of the argument—that’s pretty much the fundamental idea of God as Logos. Look into it if you want to, but I’m not here to force anyone into any belief. I just encourage people to understand things before they criticize them.
Additionally, I’d suggest that you look into the idea of God as Logos. Your idea of omnipotency has been criticized before, mathematically.
Whenever someone brings God or any other omnipotent supernatural being into the realm of reality and try to have a semblance of a logical reasoning, everything just falls apart and stops making sense.
It is a common belief among evangelicals that the universe and everything in it was created 6000 years ago. Naturally you can tell them that it can’t be right because we’ve found dinosaur bones hundreds of millions of years old. Common response to that is God buried those fake bones to test your faith. On the surface it makes sense because of course omnipotent being can create anything it wants. However once you dig slightly deeper the entire premise turns into a complete farce. You say to yourself, why not 1000 years instead of 6000? Why not 100 years? Why not five years or even five days? Five minutes? Yes, it’s entirely possible for omnipotent being to have created the entire universe five minutes ago put fake memory into everyone and we won’t know it. You can basically just make up stuff and that makes just as much sense.
My point is once entertain the existence of God then anything and everything is possible to the point where having an intellectually honest conversation no longer matters. To me this is a mathematical equivalent of dividing by zero. This is why I believe science and religion are diametrically opposing beliefs that cannot be bridged.
I’m sure my reasoning would bounce off just one question later, but my next question would be that if god knows everything then why does he test people’s faith? He doesn’t need to, since he knows already whether you have faith or not. Also, are hundreds of million years old dinosaur bones really the most brilliant way of testing someone’s faith?
He’s all powerful, but He’s just fueled by blood is all.
You see, the blood is the life and that is why God is all powerful, He just needs lots of blood! It’s simple.
(It’s not even a joke, according to Bible. Paraphrased a little bit)
Blood for the Blood God?
Blood for the Emperor, Skulls for the Golden Throne!
The entire Christian story is a giant plot hole because it tries to make us root for a hero who is just too powerful. I can buy a character who is all-seeing and all-powerful and in control of everything, but I CANNOT buy that character being purely good. Any character that controls everything and yet bad things happen, is a morally grey character at best. Him being that powerful and yet we’re supposed to see him as purely good, just doesn’t work.
Not to mention, the Bible depicts him doing a lot of very evil things. No reasonable person can read this character as purely good.
The hero being in control of everything doesn’t work because there can be no believable villain. They try to create a villain, a nemesis, to say God isn’t behind the bad. They made Satan to be the antagonist, but they try to have it both ways by making God still be all powerful and ultimately plan everything Satan does.
And then they want God’s climactic heroic act to be suffering the punishment for mankind’s sin in our place but the whole idea is a plot hole because it only works if there is someone demanding mankind be punished for our sins. Who is demanding that? Satan? The story might work better if it were Satan but they want us to believe it is God himself, which renders the sacrifice pointless. Some argue that it wouldn’t be just for God to just let people off for their crimes without some form of punishment, but I don’t see how punishing himself fixes that.
