Have you also taken part in labelling God as omnipotent and omnipresent independent existence,
because Christians supposedly all do exactly that?
But let us not dismiss it and look at this label in detail.
What you can do is not put a "full stop" after creation, but a comma. After all, the story that has begun is still in full swing.
A Christian can certainly say that he believes in the omnipotence of God, who, in full possession of omnipotence, created the earth and the universe.
At the same time, however, a Christian can believe that a creation will go its way from the moment it is set in motion.
If you feel uncomfortable or offended by the personal pronome of God, fill the term with one which suits you more, but spare the discussion about the term itself, in order to freely tackle the subject.
This interpretation allows us to imagine God as something that grants creation a life of its own, because what is the point in a God who always knows everything about anything, exactly what precisely happens, when exactly, by whom exactly, how exactly and where exactly.
It is compelling logic to consider this aspect as ridiculous, to say the least.
Such creation would completely lose its meaning and, begun under such conditions, would be immediately and confidently abandoned, recognising the nonsensical nature of its continuation.
So I could say that when God created paradise,
he was not really satisfied with its composition and when he realised that it would not develop a life of its own, under the conditions so far set, he pulled a big prank. After all, this very realization I call a logical thought (as an attempt of interpretation).
God introduced the rather static state - paradise, animals and human creatures who are neither particularly happy nor particularly sad, and who all live in eternal and infinite bliss with each other - to the serpent.
He threw sand in the gears.
Knowing that the human creature, because after the end of the paradisiacal state it was endowed with consciousness and reason, WILL go its own way. It can be interpreted that God does not wish to exert any detailed influence on this independent life, as he "lets it go on".
As clear as God is about the fact that the human mind will get confused and man will fall into error, it is also clear that from Genesis on God has gone from being a creator, manipulator (like in the great flood) to an additional state of a wondering spectator. Which I see as the consequence of Genesis and the further books of the bible.
That is why God can not use omnipotence in our respect,
for a reason, which is caused in the time factor of existence itself. As an ongoing one.
Just as a person has no deliberate influence on the fact that his hair should grow or that his breath should stop flowing or his heart should stop beating. He could only make rough corrections, but not fine-tune anything.
A person can commit suicide and thereby exert absolute influence on his hair growth, his breathing and his heartbeat. But you wouldn't call that fine-tuning.
God shared power with man at the very beginning of the story of man's creation.
Because man is in full fact empowered, he is henceforth responsible for his individual actions. It is not for nothing that they say "knowledge is power".
Knowledge can indeed be very agonising
and power is not something that really makes you happy, especially with no chance in sight to share it. On the contrary, holding power is one of the most exhausting and challenging states imaginable (ask single moms or dads). Equally, power can be extremely boring. It creates tension between these two states.
Because this is the case, a person in power needs some rules that allow him to recognise where he is abusing power and where he needs power in order to be able to act at all.
At this point, the paradox that makes man the absolute plaything of God and God the absolute player is resolved,
because from now on both mankind and God play in co-production.
At the same time, it is also clear that God has become involved in the human game. The part of God that has humanised itself is the part that has dissolved in all people or is in them as a "divine spark". This is reminiscent of the saying: "God is in you and you are in God".
The other books of the Bible can be understood as a continuation of the story and what we humans of past and present experience as trial and error, as gaining and losing knowledge. Depending on how we use our power.
The Christian set of rules,
summarised in the Ten Commandments, is therefore not to be understood as an unfair instrument from the perspective of realising one's human power, but as a realistic recognition of all cosmic players (God and humanity) in relation to each other, but as humans, developing independently in detail, i.e. within a set of rules for the sake of self-knowledge.
Where it gets interesting is when the differences become blurred,
and where one could explain the mysteriousness about oneself by saying that where the difference between God and humanity is fluid, and one begins to confuse one with the other, there lies something wonderfully truthful. Where God, as dwelling in man, marvels and where man, as dwelling in God, recognises.
Just to be clear, in such a state of being high, I will also come down to earth again.
I cannot always be on LSD, can I. Let's reserve that for special occasions.
The Ten Commandments are not written
so that they would never be broken, they are written because it is perfectly clear that they WILL always be broken.
Every mother and father knows that their child will break the rules they have set. Shall they decide against them?
It is crystal clear to parents that as the first creators of their child, they are also the first creators of its rules. Who else would they designate? Similarly, it is clear that God, as the creator of man, is the first rule-maker, who else should be named?
Reminder: If you again are in trouble with the term God, or if you are not coming from a Christian background, make your personal translation in order to put yourself out of trouble.
Don't forget the snake
If a person doesn't want to see his power, he turns the whole thing around and says: "God Almighty made me the way I am, with my faults and weaknesses. And then he punishes me for it because of them? Even though I can't help being a sinner because God made me that way. Then he also says: "Besides, I don't believe in God. And I certainly don't believe in a God like that." To which I would answer: "Congratulation!"
Indeed, when you put it like that, it can only seem absurd.
If you don't challenge your mind to think any further, you have just performed the remarkable act of feeling that you have bounced off the paradox you have just discovered.
But now demands to be freed from this paradox.
A fine example of opposing one's power, but also of not giving anyone the mandate to resolve the contradiction. Since the only one in having that mandate is the individual himself. After all, he can talk to God, can't he? Since he, at the same time, would also perform self talk.
But if the individual remains too impressed by the talk of God's omnipotence and believes himself to have no power at all, then he is mistaken, because of course he has all the means at his disposal to become aware of his thoughts. To become aware of Gods voice from within.
He can, of course, pretend that he does not understand the matter. And would be demonstrating an act of self-deception.
I mean, really, I wouldn't want to kill that very divine spark, since I may kill a lot of what I call "myself".
Overall, I would think that the style used in the Bible,
especially the books of the Old Testament - can be seen as deliberate and intentional means of exaggeration, similar to how we exaggerate advertising in our modern media.
In order to convey a message effectively, it MUST even be presented in this exaggerated form, because otherwise it might be easily overheard or overlooked.
So there is talk of a "vengeful", "angry" and "jealous" God. You can behave in a fearful or hostile way. But clearly you cannot overlook these very humanly traits.
You can also understand the language as metaphorical exaggeration.
Pictures:
Helmut Bischoff (German Painter) with whom I had a little cooperation a very long time ago on a book I had written named "Paradise found".