Questions to ponder -

Consider a hypothetical omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity who is the creator of all of the cosmos and life within it, who is also the ultimate source of all morality. For the sake of argument, we'll call him Joe. Joe gives (some of) the life forms he created the ability to reason and the free will to decide for themselves what they believe. Joe does not unambiguously reveal himself or his moral code to the life forms he created.

Within the constraints of that definition....

Is it possible for Joe to make a mistake?
Is it possible for Joe to change his mind? Under what circumstances?
Under what circumstances might Joe alter his moral code?
Is Joe bound to any moral code? If so, could Joe perfom an act which would be against the moral code his creation is bound to? Could he instruct/require mortals to do so?
Is it moral for Joe to bind life forms to his moral code, and punish/reward them according to their (non-)belief and (non-)worship?

---

I recognize that this hypothetical exercise is problematic from the start - in that there's wiggle room with respect to the definition of certain terms used. It's a philosophical exercise that I've been noodling over for awhile and wanted to get written down. With the understanding that the exercise is flawed, I'm going to try and get my part of this mental exercise started...

As Joe is both omnibenevolent (all-good) and the ultimate source of morality, logically I believe that it's reasonable to conclude that Joe cannot perform an act that is not good and moral. By definition, whatever Joe does is good and moral, no matter how it may offend our mortal sensibilities.

Is it not then reasonable to conclude that if Joe performs an act, which by definition must be good and moral, that it is also good and moral for his mortal creations to perform the same act? Certainly if Joe were bound to the same definition of good and morality as his mortal creations, it would logically follow - provided that Joe's moral code is not subjective. It would seem that logically what is good for the goose, is good for the gander - if an objective standard for good exists.

Consider Joe's qualities of omnipotence and omniscience. Joe has the power to do whatever he wishes, and perfect knowledge of the future, past, and present. Is it logical to conclude that a being who has perfect information, and absolute power to do anything could not perform an act which had unintended consequences. Joe has the power to put any parameters on creation he wants, and the perfect knowledge of how it will turn out. I can only conclude that Joe cannot possibly make a mistake by performing an act which does not turn out exactly as he knows it will.

Under what circumstances might Joe change his mind? Keeping in mind the conclusion that Joe cannot make a mistake, I do not think that Joe would ever find it necessary to change his mind, given that he is acting with absolute power and perfect information - that is, unless he was acting without purpose and a plan. In other words, I think it would be necessary for Joe to be acting in an ad hoc fashion in order for him to consider changing his mind.

I am glad you brought this up because God's actions in the OT have seemed odd to me. For example when you speak of a deity changing his mind I remember the situation where Moses convinced God to not destroy Israel at Sinai.

Although according to the idea of omniscience he had to already know that he would not destroy Israel so his anger/threat was a farce. Which would also mean all of his mentions of "I will show mercy if" were a farce too because he always knew what would happen. It does make the whole idea even more insane but I think that really only attacks the conservative view of God's nature.

Hopefully I did not just completely miss part of your point and I realize that you are dealing with multiple issues with this idea but I just wanted to focus on that one.

Quote:Consider a hypothetical omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity

I think those qualities are mutually exclusive.

Perhaps his omnipotence makes the other qualities work together. Like a universal cheat code.
That's right. I'm calling god a cheater. Not the worst name I called him.

In all honesty though, god couldn't possibly be any of those things.
Nothing is infinate.

(January 1, 2012 at 2:18 am)padraic Wrote:

Quote:Consider a hypothetical omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity

I think those qualities are mutually exclusive.

So do I. This thread is an attempt to demonstrate exactly that.

(December 31, 2011 at 2:17 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Consider a hypothetical omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity who is the creator of all of the cosmos and life within it, who is also the ultimate source of all morality.

Pffffff!
Far too tiresome.
And more importantly: He disapproves of my fun charity!
So He can shove it!

(December 31, 2011 at 2:17 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Within the constraints of that definition....

Is it possible for Joe to make a mistake?

No

Quote:Is it possible for Joe to change his mind? Under what circumstances?

No

Quote:Under what circumstances might Joe alter his moral code?

I don't know, but if we are talking about God and I put on my Christian hat (its lovely, warm and fuzzy XD) then I would say that God doesn't make up the moral law.

Quote:Is Joe bound to any moral code? If so, could Joe perfom an act which would be against the moral code his creation is bound to? Could he instruct/require mortals to do so?

Potentially 'Joe' may be required to do and not to do different things from his creations because he has a different role than them.

Quote:Is it moral for Joe to bind life forms to his moral code, and punish/reward them according to their (non-)belief and (non-)worship?

It would seem a bit silly.