This is an example what I described in the OP as possibly a false dichotomy - you shot down the omnipotent god idea, but then went right to “no God”. Why didn’t you consider that there’s a non-omnipotent god?
That’s just not much of a description. What else does one know about him other than his non-omnipotence? Did he create the universe? Has he always existed? Does he intervene in the physical world? etc. etc. etc.
E-Sabbath has provided one answer, with the Norse theology.
I’m surprised no one has brought up Rabbi Harold Kushner, best known for the book WHEN BAD THINGS HAPPEN TO GOOD PEOPLE. His posited that the Lord God of Israel may well be all-loving and super-powerful BUT not all-powerful, whether by His very nature, or by His permitting the existence of something besides Himself (the Creation). The latter concept being that the very possibility of a Creation necessitated to some extent the withdrawal of God so that there is some leeway/freedom/slack in the Creation which God may ultimately repair & redeem but does not immediately control.
Basically, Rabbi Kushner calls for us to try to understand God, to love & obey & at times forgive Him for His limitations and to work with Him for the repair of the Creation (tikkun olam). Interestingly enough, he also mentions the Christian concept of God suffering with us through Jesus and ultimately bringing redemption through that Divine com-passion.
duplicate post
Post #7.
Are we talking “God” as title for the current most powerful intelligent entity in the universe? Ican work with that concept.
In The World According to Me, “God” is everything. (All-One! 
) So God is omnipotent AND impotent. God is male and female and both and neither. God is love and hate and indifference. God is creation and destruction and bloom and decay. Can’t grok it? Neither can I. Neither can anyone. What we can do is split God into different aspects, and anthropomorphize and study those through prayer and meditation and song and worship, and doing that creates gods and gives those Divinity (as all things created are Divine, IMHO) like our Divinity.
So yes, since there is nothing God isn’t, God is flawed. God is also perfect. Now doesn’t that clear everything up? 
WhyNot,
Agnostic Neopagan
Sure, I’ll consider that as an intellectual exercise (could you pass the bong?) and it does solve the problem of evil. But unfortunately, one of Imperfect God’s deficiencies is the ability to make His existence apparent to me.
If I have an absentee landlord whom I’ve never met, whom I never have to pay, and who allows my building to crumble into disrepair from neglect, how is that different from having no landlord—even if it is rumored he laid the bricks himself?
:smack: Of course.
I’m not arguing for the existence (or non-existence) of an omnipotent god, so I’m not sure what I could describe. I’m just wondering why it seems to be an all-or-nothing type of belief these days with the majority of people.
Because their God has to be bigger than the next guy’s God, and you can’t get much bigger than All-Powerful, All-Knowing, All-Seeing SuperGod!
If there is a god then (S)he is omniscient,which means that he has complete knowledge of the whole spectrum across good,evil and things that we cant even imagine.
This means that god logically is neither totally good nor totally evil but all things.
We’ve had plenty of people in the past telling us that god has spoken to them and that they are passing on the message to the rest of us but we’ve never had god speak to us all directly and tell us that he’s totally good so that we 've only got their word for it.
Also as a previous poster said( if there is a)god is god and by definition perfect,if there is a flaw it is in our understanding of god not in god itself.
Do you acknowledge that this is your own private definition of “god”, and not a standard dictionary definition?
No. There have been plenty of gods worshiped throughout history that were not omniscient. Why does your definition of god include omniscience? And why should we accept your definition over any other?
What if we found that he DID exist in an imperfect form? Is he worthy of worship? And if he’s perfect, does THAT qualify him for worship status? And is it ok for god to say “worship me or else!”??
Interesting questions, perhaps worthy of a thread of its own. I have no idea what, if anything, would qualify a god for worship.
Nor I. Admiration, maybe…if he was as good as his reputation would lead one to think. But he’s not even a little bit up to the praise people lay on him – with absolutely nothing to back it up. I find it astounding.
Among the properties which I feel would make a God unworthy of worship would be a desire to be worshipped; ergo, if there were a god worthy of worship, we would refrain from worshipping it out of respect for its wishes.
The only reason that I can see for a rational person to worship a God is if the god is directly threatening them with very real dire consequences if the person does not bow down to them; in that case, worship is prudent on the part of the victim. Definitely not deserved on the part of the God though.
Nothing, as far as I’m concerned. Worship is never the proper response to someone or something, and a halfway decent God would tell you to get off your knees and stop grovelling right off.
God is all powerful, but that does not mean He uses that power for everything. He created free will for man and I believe for angels/demons. Using His power directly in everything would go against our free will, so He delegates the use of His power and also the responsibility to us. God’s will is still being done and it allows us free will. God is able to correct any misuse of His power, and has already planned it out ‘before the creation of the world’.
Allowing for a less then all powerful God would mean that He would be incapable of allowing free will in achieving the greatest glory to God.