|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
 Posted - 12/19/2011 : 08:59:16 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| And since God only exists inside the heads of men, God's declarations of good and evil are man's declarations of good and evil. There's no difference. |
But just as your deceleration of what is good and what is evil is completely relative so is your deceleration that no God exists. You love to act as if you speak from authority here but the truth is that you speak with none, and you know it. The authority by which you believe that you speak with here is only existent in your own mind.
For proof, see the changing, non-absolute morality expressed in the Bible. Compare and contrast the moral declarations of "God" as recorded in Deuteronomy and Exodus with the moral declarations of "Jesus" in the New Testament. And then compare both with the changing, non-absolute morality expressed by almost all mainstream churches today for proof that man ignores the moral edicts of "God" on a regular basis, so that "God" is irrelevant to modern ethics anyway.
Then go read Ecclesiastes for proof that even the Bible says that it's impossible to know God's mind regarding any moral problem, thus proving that whether God's moral declarations are absolute or not is completely irrelevant, we are forced to rely on our own mortal ethics.
Then go back to the puppy-kicking dilemma, and remember that none of the "unknowns" you were concerned about had anything to do with God, and look back at your own lies about what I'd said, thus proving that for all your talk about God's absolute "decelerations," you don't personally pay heed to any of them (you only try to get others to do so), providing further evidence that they are utterly irrelevant even to upstanding Christian gentlemen.
Then go back in this thread and answer the questions put to you. |
First thing is first. Let's not put the cart in front of the horse here. So you agree that whether we live in a God created universe or a completely materialist universe that any deceleration by man about what is good and evil is completely relative, correct? And you also agree that only a deceleration by God (Creator of all that exists) of what is good and evil would be absolute, correct? If not then please convince me how man's decelerations of good and evil are absolute and/or God's decelerations of good and evil would be relative.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 09:19:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
And you also agree that only a deceleration by God (Creator of all that exists) of what is good and evil would be absolute, correct? |
No, I just proved that any declarations by God of what is good or evil are irrelevant, because (in part) fine Christians like yourself do not obey them. Apparently, God can offer all the moral declarations he likes, but he's utterly powerless to make anyone heed them, so they must not matter.
Besides which, since God (Creator of all that exists, if he exists) created evil, then God is evil, and any declarations he might make about what is good or evil are worthless. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 10:14:41 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| No, I just proved that any declarations by God of what is good or evil are irrelevant, |
You must be confused. You proved nothing but rather simply offered us your opinion. Again, you love to act as if you speak with authority here but the truth of the matter is that speak with none, and you know this.
| because (in part) fine Christians like yourself do not obey them. Apparently, God can offer all the moral declarations he likes, but he's utterly powerless to make anyone heed them, so they must not matter. |
My actions have zero effect on the fact that the Creator of the universe can make declarations regarding his creation that are absolute. Now if you want to start a tangent discussion on if God is helpless to make his creation obey him then that would be your decision.
Again, this is a completely relative statement. As a created being amongst billions of other created beings your deceleration of what is good and evil carries no more authority over what is good and evil then does mine.
| and any declarations he might make about what is good or evil are worthless. |
Based on what? Dave's decelerations of what are evil and good? So here Dave believes that his declarations trump the Creator of the universe's decelerations on what is good and evil. Oh brother! You really have no clue here what you are talking about here do you? Dave, no matter how much you think you have the authority, no matter how many debates you believe you have won here on SFN, no matter how highly you think of yourself you do not have the authority or power to trump the creator of universe when making decelerations about His creation, and the sad part is you already know all of this.
If you cannot acknowledge that which we all know is true, and that is all declarations of man declaring what is good and evil are relative and only declerations by God on what is good and evil can be absolute, than there is no reason to even move forward here.
Again, you can agree with my statement or if you disagree with my statement then convince me that man's decelerations of good and evil are absolute and/or convince me that God's delecrations of good and evil are relative or the conversation is over.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 10:28:25 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| No, I just proved that any declarations by God of what is good or evil are irrelevant |
You did no such thing. All that you did was to claim that your deceleration about the universe trumps the deceleration of the one who created the universe and who also created you. What a dumb thing to say using some dumb logic. Dave when you can make your own universe and all the creation that goes into said universe then and only then can you declare what is good and evil in that universe and your decleration will trump all, even the little twerp created being who is insisting that his decelerations trump the Creator of the universe's decelerations. See Dave, when you become Creator of all that exists then you get to trump all. That is how it works. You have it backwards right now. The creation (you) has no authority over and does not trump the Creator (God) no matter how highly the creation thinks of himself.
You have done nothing here but declare God evil using your own relative declaration of good and evil. As the created being you would have to prove God is evil based on His deceleration of what is good and evil and not yours because as we all know the Creators decelerations trump the created beings decelerations every time. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 12/19/2011 10:42:26 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 13:14:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
You must be confused. You proved nothing but rather simply offered us your opinion. Again, you love to act as if you speak with authority here but the truth of the matter is that speak with none, and you know this. |
I have complete and total authority over what my opinion is. It's ridiculous of you to keep trying to claim that I speak as though I'm not offering my opinion. If opinions are to be ignored, then we can all ignore you, since that's all you've got, too.| My actions have zero effect on the fact that the Creator of the universe can make declarations regarding his creation that are absolute. |
Your actions reflect on whether the moral edicts of the creator matter. It's clear that they don't. If you refuse to obey, then what the creator thinks is good or evil is simply irrelevant. Makes no difference to anything here on Earth, and the actions of people here on Earth is what this thread is about.| Now if you want to start a tangent discussion on if God is helpless to make his creation obey him then that would be your decision. |
If the creator's rules are constantly ignored, then they may as well not exist at all.| Again, this is a completely relative statement. |
When did I say otherwise? Why do you keep acting as if relative morality is somehow substandard to something else? There is nothing else. God's morality is relative, and so is man's. There is no absolute morality anywhere in the universe other than in the heads of deluded fools like yourself.| As a created being amongst billions of other created beings your deceleration of what is good and evil carries no more authority over what is good and evil then does mine. |
Why does that bother you?| Based on what? Dave's decelerations of what are evil and good? |
Indeed! What else matters?| So here Dave believes that his declarations trump the Creator of the universe's decelerations on what is good and evil. |
Yes, my morality trumps that of any fictitious character.Oh brother is right. The word is "declarations." Decelerating is what happens when you hit the brakes in your car.| You really have no clue here what you are talking about here do you? Dave, no matter how much you think you have the authority, no matter how many debates you believe you have won here on SFN, no matter how highly you think of yourself you do not have the authority or power to trump the creator of universe when making decelerations about His creation, and the sad part is you already know all of this. |
The thing I have that your creator doesn't is that I exist.| If you cannot acknowledge that which we all know is true... |
You're confused: I grant your fictious sky-daddy no authority at all over anything.| ...and that is all declarations of man declaring what is good and evil are relative and only declerations by God on what is good and evil can be absolute, than there is no reason to even move forward here. |
There's no possible way to move your argument forward without evidence of God's existence. You can't provide any, so if moving forward is your goal, the only way to do that is by addressing my arguments. You can start by telling us how the Bible is wrong when it clearly shows God's moral edicts to have changed over time, proving them to not be absolute.| Again, you can agree with my statement or if you disagree with my statement then convince me that man's decelerations of good and evil are absolute and/or convince me that God's delecrations of good and evil are relative or the conversation is over. |
You refuse to acknowledge that I've even provided an argument about why God's declarations of good and evil are relative (you simply ignore it in favor of trying to get me to agree to something I would never agree to), so therefore the conversation ended a couple of posts ago.
Also:| All that you did was to claim that your deceleration about the universe trumps the deceleration of the one who created the universe and who also created you. What a dumb thing to say using some dumb logic. |
The logic is sound once you admit the conclusion that God is fake.| Dave when you can make your own universe and all the creation that goes into said universe then and only then can you declare what is good and evil in that universe and your decleration will trump all, even the little twerp created being who is insisting that his decelerations trump the Creator of the universe's decelerations. |
Who gave you the authority to trump my authority?| See Dave, when you become Creator of all that exists then you get to trump all. That is how it works. |
No, it isn't.| You have it backwards right now. |
No, I don't.| The creation (you) has no authority over and does not trump the Creator (God) no matter how highly the creation thinks of himself. |
The Creator (hoax) has no authority over me or anyone else. If you want to live like a slave, that's your prerogative, but you don't get to declare it to be anyone else's.| You have done nothing here but declare God evil using your own relative declaration of good and evil. |
Indeed! Why do you have a problem with that? You do the same thing.
(Good job on spelling "declaration" correctly, once.)| As the created being you would have to prove God is evil based on His deceleration of what is good and evil and not yours because as we all know the Creators decelerations trump the created beings decelerations every time. |
Only if the creator is a dogmatic bully who exists. Since you can provide no evidence for its existence, the question of whether or not it would refuse to listen to reason regarding morality must be left open for now. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 14:37:38 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| I have complete and total authority over what my opinion is. It's ridiculous of you to keep trying to claim that I speak as though I'm not offering my opinion. If opinions are to be ignored, then we can all ignore you, since that's all you've got, too. |
I too said that it was your opinion, several times. I stated that you like to speak as if your opinion had some authority.
| Your actions reflect on whether the moral edicts of the creator matter. |
My actions reflect if they matter to me. They do not reflect whatsoever on whether the creator of the universe can declare what is evil and what is good in the universe that he created.
| It's clear that they don't. If you refuse to obey, then what the creator thinks is good or evil is simply irrelevant. |
Whether I obey is irrelevant to whether the creator of the universe can declare what is good and evil in his own creation. Can/does the Creator force me to do that which is good is a tangent discussion that you can start separately if you decide to.
| Makes no difference to anything here on Earth, and the actions of people here on Earth is what this thread is about. |
But that is just your opinion as you truly have no idea.
| If the creator's rules are constantly ignored, then they may as well not exist at all. |
But from your limited perspective as a mortal man there is absolutely no way that you could know this. It's just another one of your assumtions which leads to your over confident opinion of something of which you could have no idea.
| When did I say otherwise? Why do you keep acting as if relative morality is somehow substandard to something else? |
I did no such thing. All I did was point out that man's morality is relative. You dreamed up the "substandard" part all on your own.
Just your humble little opinion and nothing else.
| God's morality is relative, and so is man's. There is no absolute morality anywhere in the universe other than in the heads of deluded fools like yourself. |
But of course that is just more of opinions. The Creator of all that exists can dictate morality, it's his creation. And just because you currently have freedom to choose any morality you desire does not change this fact.
| Why does that bother you? |
It does not bother me. I am the one who keeps pointing it out.
| Based on what? Dave's decelerations of what are evil and good? |
Indeed! What else matters? |
If you are the creator of the universe and all that exists then nothing else matters.
| Yes, my morality trumps that of any fictitious character. |
I would agree. But it is nothing more than your opinion that the creator of the universe is a fictitious character.
| The thing I have that your creator doesn't is that I exist. |
According to your opinion.
| You're confused: I grant your fictious sky-daddy no authority at all over anything. |
As if the Creator of the universe would need your authority or opinion for anything.
| There's no possible way to move your argument forward without evidence of God's existence. You can't provide any, so if moving forward is your goal, the only way to do that is by addressing my arguments. You can start by telling us how the Bible is wrong when it clearly shows God's moral edicts to have changed over time, proving them to not be absolute. |
Not true. We don't even have to refer to the Christian God here. My point was/is/has been that if this universe and all this exists was created by a god then that god would have authority to declare what is good and evil in that creation. I don't understand why this is so hard for you to grasp. Who can challenge the authority of the creator of all that exists, you? When you can make begin to exist that which previously did not exist then I will begin to think that you might be able to challenge his authority.
| You refuse to acknowledge that I've even provided an argument about why God's declarations of good and evil are relative (you simply ignore it in favor of trying to get me to agree to something I would never agree to), so therefore the conversation ended a couple of posts ago. |
But you never provided a valid argument just your opinion. Don't even confuse yourself here by using the Christian God. I am saying if a god created all that exisitis then that same creator would also have the power and athority to dictate that which is good and evil in his creation. Who could oppose the creater of the universe, whether it be the Christian God or not? You?
| The logic is sound once you admit the conclusion that God is fake. |
God is fake is just your opinion and you have failed to prove that the creator of the universe would not have authority in that same universe. You have only given us your opinion that the creator would not have authority in his own universe. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 15:17:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
I too said that it was your opinion, several times. |
Yes, you were stating the obvious as if it were some sort of fault.| I stated that you like to speak as if your opinion had some authority. |
It does for me.| My actions reflect if they matter to me. They do not reflect whatsoever on whether the creator of the universe can declare what is evil and what is good in the universe that he created. |
If they're allegedly "absolute," then yes, your actions do reflect on them.| Whether I obey is irrelevant to whether the creator of the universe can declare what is good and evil in his own creation. Can/does the Creator force me to do that which is good is a tangent discussion that you can start separately if you decide to. |
That the alleged creator allows evil to be performed is itself evil, and so the creator's edicts should be ignored.| Makes no difference to anything here on Earth, and the actions of people here on Earth is what this thread is about. |
But that is just your opinion as you truly have no idea. |
So you disagree that people can ignore the creator? That makes him more evil.| But from your limited perspective as a mortal man there is absolutely no way that you could know this. |
It's logically necessary. It isn't a matter of "knowing," it's a matter of a logical argument without flaws.| It's just another one of your assumtions which leads to your over confident opinion of something of which you could have no idea. |
No, it's a conclusion, not an assumption.| I did no such thing. All I did was point out that man's morality is relative. You dreamed up the "substandard" part all on your own. |
No, the sneering you've done at relative morality is quite obvious.| Just your humble little opinion and nothing else. |
Not at all: there is no evidence of any absolute morality anywhere. It's just like a leprechaun.| But of course that is just more of opinions. |
Then provide evidence of an absolute morality.| The Creator of all that exists can dictate morality, it's his creation. |
Prove it. Prove that there is a creator, and then prove that his morality is absolute.| And just because you currently have freedom to choose any morality you desire does not change this fact. |
It's not a fact.| Why does that bother you? |
It does not bother me. I am the one who keeps pointing it out. |
Yes, you're obviously pointing it out because it bothers you.| Based on what? Dave's decelerations of what are evil and good? |
Indeed! What else matters? |
If you are the creator of the universe and all that exists then nothing else matters. |
Nice try at changing the subject.| I would agree. But it is nothing more than your opinion that the creator of the universe is a fictitious character. |
It's the utter lack of evidence that's caused me to have that opinion.| The thing I have that your creator doesn't is that I exist. |
According to your opinion. |
According to all available evidence.| As if the Creator of the universe would need your authority or opinion for anything. |
Your God obviously needs people's opinions.| Not true. We don't even have to refer to the Christian God here. My point was/is/has been that if this universe and all this exists was created by a god then that god would have authority to declare what is good and evil in that creation. |
Why? I see no logical connection between "created the universe" and "has authority to declare what's good and evil." Provide a logical argument with the former as a premise and the latter as conclusion.| I don't understand why this is so hard for you to grasp. |
Because it isn't logical.| Who can challenge the authority of the creator of all that exists, you? |
Why not? Since when does "creator of the universe" imply "ultimate authority on everything?" What if the creator is a dick?| When you can make begin to exist that which previously did not exist then I will begin to think that you might be able to challenge his authority. |
My son is ten years old already. Where do I go to challenge this hypothetical god's authority? Is there a form I need to fill out?| But you never provided a valid argument just your opinion. |
That isn't even true. My argument was based on what the Bible itself says. You just ignored it. You didn't even acknowledge that I'd written it.| Don't even confuse yourself here by using the Christian God. |
Why not? It seems to be the #1 creator god who dictates morality. There are plenty of other creator gods out there who don't bother giving people rules to live by. They obviously aren't the gods you're talking about.| I am saying if a god created all that exisitis then that same creator would also have the power and athority to dictate that which is good and evil in his creation. |
And yet you won't say why.| Who could oppose the creater of the universe, whether it be the Christian God or not? You? |
So you're saying that to have authority, one must have no opposition? That's just bizarre. I guess police don't have any authority so long as there are criminals.| God is fake is just your opinion and you have failed to prove that the creator of the universe would not have authority in that same universe. |
Switching the burden of proof now, are you? You're the one claiming that god has such authority. Prove it.| You have only given us your opinion that the creator would not have authority in his own universe. |
And you have only given us your opinion that it would. No evidence, no nothing. Since I don't think a creator god even exists, and you have provided no evidence that one does, I have no need to prove that it wouldn't have this authority you wish to grant it.
But I've already shown that the Christian God's morality is not absolute. Your attempts to switch the conversation around to whether some hypothetical not-necessarily-Christian god has some sort of authority simply on the grounds of being the creator is just a dodge to avoid having to admit that I provided exactly what you asked for previously. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 16:08:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
I too said that it was your opinion, several times. I stated that you like to speak as if your opinion had some authority.
|
Dave does speak with some authority:
He is basing his arguments on science, logic, and critical thinking. This is by far the best paradigm known to Man for acquiring knowledge, with a track-record that far surpasses any knowledge gleaned from Divine Inspiration.
Which means that Dave's authority trumphs Bill scott's.
Bill, even if there was a God who's authority on Good and Evil is absolute, how could any man know what God thinks? From whence does your authority on Good and Evil come?
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 18:11:30 [Permalink]
|
Here's bill's "proof" that there's a cuddly sky-daddy:
Prepare to be underwhelmed
That, and the fact that some prisoners get a squirt of dopamine when someone treats them nicely and with respect 
Keep trying, god-boy |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 12/19/2011 : 20:12:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Don't even confuse yourself here by using the Christian God. I am saying if a god created all that exisitis then that same creator would also have the power and athority to dictate that which is good and evil in his creation. |
Just to be crystal clear in this little diversion of yours, Bill:
Your proposition (without limiting the discussion to the Christian God) is that all possible creator-god concepts include the ability to dictate morality, correct?
That it is impossible to even imagine a god that can both create the universe and lack the power to correctly declare good and evil universally, yes?
If so, that's all you need to prove: that there can be no imagined creator-god who cannot tell right from wrong. You just need to logically demonstrate that nobody can even think of any psychotic creator-gods.
Unless, of course, it was your intention in your argument that the creator-god need not be correct in what it dictates to be good or evil. If it was your intention to say that things are "good" only because this hypothetical creator-god declared them to be "good" (which is known as divine command theory) then you're declaring that the creator-god's morality can be completely arbitrary. And in that case, who cares that it comes from a creator-god?
On the other hand, if you're a moral naturalist, then you think that this creator-god declares things to be good which really are intrinsically good. In which case if the creator-god is also perfectly good, then it cannot do things which are intrinsically evil and is thus not omnipotent. Nor did it create good or evil, and is thus not creator of all things. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
chefcrsh
Skeptic Friend
Hong Kong
380 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2011 : 01:17:03 [Permalink]
|
Hmmm god must have put this in the entirely unrelated chaotic path of links I took today. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/good-minus-god/
To say that morality depends on the existence of God is to say that none of these specific moral judgments is true unless God exists. That seems to me to be a remarkable claim. If God turned out not to exist — then slavery would be O.K.? There’d be nothing wrong with torture? The pain of another human being would mean nothing?
Think now about our personal relations — how we love our parents, our children, our life partners, our friends. To say that the moral worth of these individuals depends on the existence of God is to say that these people are, in themselves, worth nothing — that the concern we feel for their well being has no more ethical significance than the concern some people feel for their boats or their cars. |
I mean it's either that or we would have to believe in apparent order from random chance...
|
| Edited by - chefcrsh on 12/20/2011 04:31:08 |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2011 : 12:51:36 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by chefcrsh |
| To say that morality depends on the existence of God is to say that none of these specific moral judgments is true unless God exists. That seems to me to be a remarkable claim. If God turned out not to exist — then slavery would be O.K.? |
It is irrelevant whether God exists or not. Any man made declaration of good and evil would be relative. Some men have declared slavery evil while others have said no.
| There’d be nothing wrong with torture? |
It is irrelevant whether God exists or not. Any man made declaration of good and evil would be relative. Some men have declared torture evil while others have said no.
| The pain of another human being would mean nothing? |
It is irrelevant whether God exists or not. Any man made declaration of good and evil would be relative. And here is a prime example. Here in the good ol US of A we abhor and detest honor killings. Many places over in the Middle East consider this perfectly acceptable behavior. So here we have a fine example of how relative man's declarations are. When following man's morality the answer to whether honor killings are evil or not depends on which part of the world you are standing in when you ask the question. Only a declaration by the creator of the universe on what is good and evil could ever be called or considered as absolute.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2011 : 13:11:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Some men have declared slavery evil while others have said no. |
Some Christians have declared slavery evil based on the Bible, while other Christians have declared slavery good based on the Bible. What does the Christian God actually think about slavery? He once condoned it. Did Jesus ever condemn it?| And here is a prime example. Here in the good ol US of A we abhor and detest honor killings. Many places over in the Middle East consider this perfectly acceptable behavior. So here we have a fine example of how relative man's declarations are. When following man's morality the answer to whether honor killings are evil or not depends on which part of the world you are standing in when you ask the question. Only a declaration by the creator of the universe on what is good and evil could ever be called or considered as absolute. |
Yet most of those who abhor honor killings worship the same god as those who engage in honor killings. Why is this god allowing his followers to either (A) dismiss a good thing or (B) practice an evil thing? What does god really think about honor killings? Is he pro or con? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2011 : 13:16:40 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| If so, that's all you need to prove: that there can be no imagined creator-god who cannot tell right from wrong. |
You are making this much more difficult than it needs to be. I am not saying at all that it is impossible for the creator of the universe to not know right and wrong. First off, who's standard of right and wrong are you referring to here, yours?
What I have been saying all along is that creator of the universe, whether it be the Christian God, any other god or the FSM, this creator of the universe is the only one who can declare what is good and evil in their created universe and it be absolute. As the creator of the universe who could ever challenge his authority to declare good from evil, you? Any declaration of good and evil by his created beings would have to be considered relative, because it is.
And that is what kills me the most. You sit here and speak as if you are going to declare that the creator of the universe is wrong and then declare that this is what is really good and evil all based on what Dave, the created being, has declared is good and evil. Dave, as the created being, is trying to tell the creator how he needs to run his creation. How foolish, silly and illogical. Logically and philosophically the creation would always be subject to the creator, whoever this creator may be, and not the other way around, Dave.
| I stated that you like to speak as if your opinion had some authority. |
It does for me. |
Well that and $.50 will get you a nice warm cup of coffee.
| My actions reflect if they matter to me. They do not reflect whatsoever on whether the creator of the universe can declare what is evil and what is good in the universe that he created. |
If they're allegedly "absolute," then yes, your actions do reflect on them. |
Your confused. Whether the creator can or ever will enforce or subject his declarations of good and evil on his creation is a completely different discussion then the discussion of "Are the creator of the universe deceleration's absolute?" It may be that the creator has simply not yet brought his creation into subject of his declarations.
| That the alleged creator allows evil to be performed is itself evil, and so the creator's edicts should be ignored. |
But who's definition of evil are you using here, yours? Your definitions of good and evil are completely relative and so I am ignoring them.
| So you disagree that people can ignore the creator? That makes him more evil. |
And yet if the creator forced you into subject against your will you would be all up in arms over that calling him the evil task master and opponent of free will. See here is the problem, Dave wants to rule his own world and be subject to nothing where he alone can declare what is good and evil in his own eyes. The trouble is that if there is a creator of all that exists then Dave recognizes that his beliefs on good and evil would be trumped by the creators declarations of what is good and evil. Since Dave does not want his own beliefs trumped he rationalizes in his mind that there is no creator. He next dreams up silly little explanations of how all that exists could come from nothing. Once he has tricked his mind into believing that something can come from nothing he is then free to believe that that which is considered good and that which is evil is all in how Dave sees it.
| It's logically necessary. It isn't a matter of "knowing," it's a matter of a logical argument without flaws. |
But your argument is that you, as the creation, can trump the creator of all that exists when defining good and evil. To say that your argument is flawed and lacks any logic is the understatement of 2011. Sorry, Dave, but the creation is always subject to the creator.
| No, it's a conclusion, not an assumption. |
But it is nothing but your silly little opinion that you have even concluded anything.
| Why? I see no logical connection between "created the universe" and "has authority to declare what's good and evil." Provide a logical argument with the former as a premise and the latter as conclusion. |
Better yet, why don't you provide a logical argument of why the creation would not be subject to his creator in a created universe? To say, for no other reason than it is your belief, that the creator of the universe would have no authority in a universe that he created is completely illogical and without premise.
| Why not? Since when does "creator of the universe" imply "ultimate authority on everything?" |
The better question to ask is, when has it not?
| What if the creator is a dick? |
More faulty logic on your part. Your personal opinion of the creator, which is relative, has no bearing on if his creation would be subject to him as the creator. Based on your logic I could conclude that President Obama had less or no authority as president simply because I think that he is a dick. Obviously my opinion on Obama has no effect on his ultimate authority as president just as your opinion on the creator has no effect on his ultimate authority as the creator.
| My son is ten years old already. Where do I go to challenge this hypothetical god's authority? Is there a form I need to fill out? |
As I just said, when you can make to exist that which did not exist before then you are heading in the right direction. Until then you are fool to even consider that as the creation you will challenge the authority of the creator. Not only that but your folly is void of any logic.
| Switching the burden of proof now, are you? |
No
| You're the one claiming that god has such authority. Prove it. |
What makes you believe that a creator would not have authority over his creation? It's illogical to think that way.
| But I've already shown that the Christian God's morality is not absolute. |
You have done no such thing. You gave us your opinion and nothing more.
| Your attempts to switch the conversation around to whether some hypothetical not-necessarily-Christian god has some sort of authority simply on the grounds of being the creator is just a dodge to avoid having to admit that I provided exactly what you asked for previously. |
Oh horse feathers. My recommendation that we use a generic god as creator who would be subject over his creation was just an attempt to keep you from going off on your wild tangents. However that did not even stop you. I should have figured.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
kytheskeptic
New Member
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2011 : 13:34:00 [Permalink]
|
Hey Bill--What is the Moral Standards that god follows? If god had a Moral Standard, whatever it means for god to be "righteous" or "holy", the criteria for that is not the same criteria that we follow. So the 10 commandants and obedience to them can't be god's moral standard.
If he's "Holy" and he's "Righteous", there's some other moral standard that he follows. Because there must be a difference in kind, not a difference in degree. That's an important point to make.
A difference in degree would be that god follows the same rules as we do, he just follows it perfectly... Totally righteous... Never murders, never lies, never steals... Well, we know that's not true...
If his morality is different in kind, then that means he follows a totally different standard all together. Where is that standard published in the bible? Where do we find a list of what god can or can not do? What deed can god possibly commit that would disqualify him from being holy, making him unrighteous? Is it genocide? No... genocide is permissible like the great flood... Is it murder? Deception? What conceivable action can god do, and cannot be holy?
You do know what that means right? When you're praising god, you should have an idea, what it means for being holy.
If god is completely arbitrary, if just whatever he says goes and is right, that's not morality. That's arbitrary, that's amorality. That's an amoral god, he's just doing what he's doing. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
The Lord works in mysterious ways....
