(July 7, 2014 at 10:16 pm)Esquilax Wrote:(July 7, 2014 at 11:23 am)SteveII Wrote: Esquilax--are you assuming that God causes an "evil" event or allows an "evil" event? There is a big division in Christianity between these two positions.
I don't think that the position that God causes an evil event to happen is defensible logically nor an accurate interpretation of the Bible. So, your argument that the "God's mysterious intentions...is irrelevant...because motives aren't the sole determining factor when deciding moral issues", does not progress your hypothesis because then motive is not an issue.
There are some christians that believe that god is in control of all things, and that nothing happens without his say so. In that scenario, god is directly responsible for everything that happens.
Don't mistake your christian beliefs for the only possible christian beliefs. If you'd watched the video, you'd see the context in which I was working: so often people will give praise to god for the good things, while in the same breath handwaving away the bad with mysterious ways. Even here, we often get the "who are you to judge god?" attitude, presuming some added complexity or motivation for god that's lost to us. My point is that one doesn't get to merely assume some vague special motive that clears up all wrongdoing- and the biblical god has some crimes to answer for even just reading through his exploits in the past- and nor is one absolved of a crime because they refuse to justify their actions, leaving their motives mysterious.
We're especially not justified in making that assumption when we have no referent to derive information from, beyond a book of claims supposedly authored by the being we're making the assumption about. It's circular reasoning: I know god has a good justification for any action because this book he divinely inspired tells me that any action he takes is justified, so I must just not know which justification yet. Well, that's very convenient for god, but we don't take "by definition, I'm justified in any action I take, but I don't have to tell you how," as a valid excuse for actions from anyone else, and god isn't even bothering to argue as to why we should for him.
Any claim of mysterious ways, or higher moral standing or what have you, relies on the unspoken presumption that if god claims it, it's automatically true. But atheists don't make that leap, and so the assertion that god is justified by mysterious ways itself needs to be argued for, and not merely claimed.
Just as with any philosophy, competing religious views must be scrutinized, compared, and one needs to decide which view is more plausible. I am not making the mistake that my beliefs are the only possible christian beliefs. However, I am not going to make arguments from a religious view I do not hold.
To clarify, I believe God has foreknowledge of what is going to happen--contrasted against the view that God predetermines everything (Calvinism/Reformed Doctrine). I do not think that God predetermining events is logical and is not consistent with what is revealed about the nature of God.
You are bothered by not being able to always comprehend motives for God's actions. Let's suppose that God exists. Do you think that a human mind could begin to comprehend a non-physical being that always existed (something that you cannot possibly wrap your head around), that has the power and intelligence to speak the unimaginable complexity of the universe into being (including time), whose mind is big enough to know all past and future events simultaneously? I am not trying to hide behind the "mysterious ways" argument, but you cannot demand a motive or "crimes to answer for" because it is illogical that a finite mind could hold details on an infinite number of future events--which is God's perspective.
Another small point. You said that "Any claim of mysterious ways...relies on the unspoken presumption that if god claims it, it's automatically true." Do you think that it is more plausible that an infinite God (as described above) would make false claims or true claims?