WTF? You are not sure? Not even when it comes to a baby?

I could see you know creating the universe and life.

Streakygod pondering and creating,"Let me see. Stars...good.......(wont mention galxies, I'll let the humans figure that one out later). Plants......check......animals.....check.....Humans and babies......exelent......Humn, but how should I allow them to die? Ok, natural death, war, famine, disease. Oh, and I may or may not allow babies to drowned in water."

You're not certain? THEY'RE JUST BABIES!

I would play with my boobs all day (hey, I'm a guy ... what did you expect?)

But the existence of other gods would COMPLETELY change my answer >.>

a simple "No, no other gods but you" would have sufficed...

As solo, supreme dictator of all... i would create existence of everything just for my own amusement

I would help and hinder as i see fit, kill and create at will, build and destroy... for my own entertainment...

I would pit groupings of people against one another solely to see what happens within the realm of possiblity

(since im not the noobish god of abe... i can see all possibilities, i just dont know which WILL happen without a doubt... mainly to keep my own sanity >.&gt

I'll wont say much more, as its obvious what type of god i am ^_^

but...

I would NEVER.... NEVER let lesser beings know of my existence

ever...

i uh... didnt see a theist only sign, thought it was open to all knuckle-heads

want me to delete anything?

(and did i win a cookie? ^_^ )

If I were God, death, drowning and tragedy would be my creations thus the meaning (if any) purpose (if any) and consequence (if any) of those things would be mine also to dictate. I would also be the creator of babies, and of water and again, the meaning purpose and consequence of those things would also be mine to dictate.

If I were God, I would have an entirely different perception to a human of the matter of a baby drowning in water. I would not see the event coloured by human expectations, I would see it coloured by a deities expectations. I would see drowning as the thing I had created it to be, and death as the thing I had created it to be. Human beliefs about death and death itself are different creations, each providing a unique aspect to my one creation as a whole. One would not outweigh the other. I would allow death and subvert death at my own discretion given my extensive knowledge and understanding, not at the discretion of beliefs based upon limited knowledge within my creation.

What this answer means, explicitly, is sometimes (probably) I would allow it, sometimes (probably) I wouldn't, I would intervene. As god, moreover, I could quite well choose to do both in the same instance, save the baby and leave the baby at once, as God I could make both outcomes exist equally. (and leave it to the humans experiencing life and death to choose, on some level, which one they want to live out).

Yes, but you make the point in your question that I am choosing what to do, with the powers of God. If I am God, then I am privy to all of the above and I am entitled to make my decision within that framework. What humans do not understand about my godly point of view does not make my point of view anything that humans claim to understand.

Actually all my post speaks to your question, really, but I added this because I could see it would require clarification.

I am God. Everything is a prop which I can use at my discretion. As God I am quite capable of using everything as a prop at my discretion, AND everything not you as a prop at your discretion, AND everything not Eloise as a prop at her discretion. I can do this because I am God.

The baby that drowns is not being punished, that is a human construct around death. Death is my prop, it's not what you say it is it's what I say it is because I am God, you see? As God, because I created everything, death is like choosing a colour for my living room wall. And moreover if death is blue, life is green I'm God I can choose blue and green for the same wall.  Humans experience one wall, but there are two, And since I am God and know them both, I can also paint them both a different colour.

Drowning baby question: No. Death happens.  

If I was "the great eye in the sky," I would do a couple of things right off the bat.

Presuming I was given the powers of God after the original God had them, I would explore the entirety of existence. In short, I would go everywhere and see everything. But, perhaps, I wouldn't even need to travel anywhere because I could quite possibly just perceive everything immediately. Ah, even if I could just perceive, I would still want to go around and experience everything there is.

After that, I would attempt to do whatever God does. I can't really imagine what he does now, but I would do whatever it is God would do. However, I think I would do away with the requirement of people to worship me if they wanted to be in my favor. I think that I would leave the option up to them, without consequence. It sounds like I am painting a different picture of Christianity (slightly) because I am trying to do just that.

I've always wished that the Christian story didn't require us to have so much riding on this life, a mere speck in the scope of existence. Why is so much riding on such a short period of time? If I were God, I would not make the life we are currently living the only shot. I would remove the "shot." If I were God, why couldn't I make it so all of my creations (however I created them) would be in at least a semi-positive or free-to-do-your-desire environment? I don't know, I am just considering a type of utopia that God would be the head of. Something like Plato's ideal society but with modern conceptions of human rights and liberties. Bah. Just saying that sounds like utter nonsense.

So this question has been fun, but I am beginning to feel silly. Essentially, If I were God, things would be different in the eternal scope of things; this life would not be the one shot.

That's my answer as of having human powers, as a human to not allow babies to drown with all the power I have and all the knowledge I have is the best I can do. 

What I have tried to explain in my post is that having God powers I would do far far more than I can do as a human. Death and life would not be opposed to each other, babies that died would also live, people that saw death would also see life, I would make this, no matter how impossible it seems to you, as real as the nose on your face. If I was God, I Could.

I would not take death and suffering away from the creation, if anything I would add to the creation, more potential, more risk and more experience. As I fathom unlimited god like power, I would add, not subtract from the boundaries of creation. As God I have unlimited power to give the baby infinitely more than a tragic death without ever taking the death away from it or anyone else and so I would.

The only reason, Brian, is that you are granting me the hypothetical omnipotence of God to respond with, with the omnipotence of God I would do more than prevent death in a world that needs death to remain viable, I would shake up the whole foundation of the process, I would make death nothing, and add to entire worlds to life. 

Oh No, Brian, I definitely do buy that a deity sees and allows suffering and death. But who are we to take the high ground? We humans do the same. With our beliefs and understanding about death and suffering I would have to say it's got to be worse for us, since it is to us that death and suffering are ultimate, bad, and irreversible. to God they are, as you pointed out earlier, merely a prop in a large production.  

As it means so much to us to avoid suffering then it falls to us to prevent it, whether you believe in god or not, it is the same. Why should we care if in God's reality a baby lives and dies and death is nothing? in OUR reality we percieve suffering and in our reality we deem ourselves to do something to prevent it.

So in short, if I was God, I would wield all my power and extend the world beyond death the baby would never have to die or experience death, but its death would remain a real event. And as a human I would wield all my power and save the baby. It's a matter of how much power I have to use, not how much compassion I have for the baby.

I'm not embarrassed.

If I had known you were going to pull this bullshit, then I wouldn't have even read this topic. But since it's too late for that, I'd have to kindly ask you just who the fuck you think you are to answer a question for me. Just because you are unable to examine issues from a larger perspective than your very own doesn't mean the rest of us have the same deficiency.

If this is your idea of what suffices for a passable argument, then I would suggest you stick to your "poetry."

I agree.  Now the question is, "Should God do away with water, or babies?"

Why not make people able to breathe water as well as air?

and such pitiful HUMAN constructs at that >.>

Why should an all powerful being, that can do anything and created everything, act out of fear of one of it's own creations? What is so moral about God acting as though it believes that death is final and suffering is irrevocable? That makes no sense. If you were God would you opt to have a big chunk of your creation be mysterious and frightening to you? Why would you do that? and why would that be moral to do that?

I want you to explain why, if you were all powerful, you would reject suffering? If you had power over everything including suffering and death, what cause would you have to reject those things off hand. 

This is not an excuse about humans being limited, and I have never even once claimed that humans cannot fathom the mind of God. If you read back carefully you will see I have referred to human limitations as volition. I have referred to what humans do believe about death and suffering, not what they are limited to believing. Our limits of understanding need not be any different from the any perspective of a God we can imagine, the thing is that they are, and whilesoever they are they are our limitations alone to (within) consider our moral choices. If we want to think as though we were God we can and I have. You asked me to think as God and I did.

God doesn't need an excuse if he has done nothing wrong. The issue here is the yardstick by which we judge right and wrong. To retiterate, frame human suffering and death on earth in the context of boundless eternity. Is it wrong?

Indeed and my point exactly.

If as you say "God answers to no one" then this is NOT a being I would worship or bow to.

We in civil society do NOT bow to dictators. We query and inquire and decide for ourselves, but what we DON'T DO is bow to a dictator.

And again, is if what you claim would be fact(as if). Then anyone who cant or is unwilling to give me a valid explanation will not garner from me any position change, even your claimed God.

If such a being can "Poof" make the universe, then it should be capable of giving me a reason why a baby would die a slow painful death of drowning.

In reply to the initial post:

This is foolish, not to mention that it is simply suppose to trap believers, a rather cruel thing to do from my perspective.

However, as much as I understand my faith I shall respond in the most appropriate way that I am capable.

Simply put, I am a human being and as such I am incapable of ever having the powers of God, thus your question cannot be answered.  To answer it would be to answer it as a human being without the powers of God, and my answer then would be that I would run into the water and save the baby.

Yeah, good idea, and we could be faster than speeding bullets and stronger than speeding locomotives and able to leap tall buildings in a single bound and...

You're still talking about this? The baby is drowning, for crying out loud! Do something! C'mon use your godly powers, any of you! Do we have to do everything ourselves?! Aw, screw it! *takes off shoes and swims towards the baby*

Goddamn god. Just goes to show you can't rely on any deity.

Now that was truly beautiful. Yeah, destroy everything, make a monument to non-existence.

PS. Thank you for reminding me of FF6, now that's a cool game.

I'll answer that second.

Yes.

If I were God, I would make a universe that operated mechanistically under consistent physical laws, make damn sure sentient races evolved, and then spend quite a large amount of time and effort personally and carefully creating completely fucked up religions that are very close to one another, but mutually exclusive, on each and every world where intelligent life evolved.

Furthermore, I'd make sure that by the use of a single, mind-bogglingly simple cipher, every holy text in existence in every language on every planet could be found to say 'SUCKERS!!!!'

That's what I'd do. Because I know me well enough to know that if I had the power of God... I'd be a total fucking prick about it.

WTF?

What "greater good" is there to a baby swallowing water and having their lungs fill to the point of asphixiation(sp)?

Again, if you ARE all powerful YOU DON'T HAVE TO ALLOW IT.

"We wouldn't understand" is a cop out and an utterance in ignorance.

My point in this question is to show the broken concept of "all powerful" and  that of "all loving".

I guess we are going round robin here.

Ok, so here are God's "choices". Which is a paradox in and of itself. But that is for another thread.

1. Allow babies to drowned.

2. Never have babies drowned.

Your constant explanation has been, "We are not God".

Which is not my point. My point is that if I were God it would not happen EVER!

Further more,  if God choses to allow it, why the heck wouldn't you, or anyone for that matter DEMAND an explanation.

Why should I blindly worship or follow someone, even a human, without question? Blindly following a person, celebrity, politician, political party or god, is a great way to end up in a cluster F.

And to reiterate reiteration myself. WE DON'T UNDERSTAND, and your claimed sky daddy supposedly has the KEY to understanding and wont clue us in(actually more like CANT because he is imaginary), and somehow you feel he owes us no explanation.

FINE, don't expect me to kiss his ass then. I like my explanations with a little meat on them before I change a position.

All you seem to be doing is making excuses to hold a position.

Which means it was aimed at my answer as well. I don't see how it doesn't apply to me. You were saying?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. No, I'm sorry. That's the stupidest fucking thing I've seen on this forum from an atheist in at least a month. The reason why I am angry is because I deluded myself into believing that you actually were interested in discussing the issue. Had I read all of the posts in the topic before I posted, I would have seen that you were deliberately trying to set a trap. Which is beyond fucking low. You might as well call yourself the Kirk Cameron of atheists.

Completely irrelevant. I don't think you could have brought up a more irrelevant point that actually mentioned babies.

What claim?

Ooh, I'm shaking. Big scary Brian is going to get his big guns out? You're fucking pathetic, man. Your pathetic attempt at some sort of twisted and severely brainfucked Socratic irony is a testament to that.

Well, really, my constant explanation is that God can do better than prevent a baby drowning and supposing that with a god power I did do more then intervening on the drowning would be redundant.

I do see that your point is that you would not allow drowning, or any suffering at all that is to your senses unnecessary and cruel. I understand that.

Now you're talking, Brian! Of course you would demand an explanation and you would want that explanation to be satisfactorily tangible to you as a human. That is not too much to ask of an omnipotent God at all. If it is, and do take note that I think it's not, then screw God, of course. 

LOL, don't ask me, you should know by now I don't endorse that.