God does not follow the first principle of morality. Why not?

[Drich]

[quote='Ryantology' pid='346178' dateline='1349572914']
[quote]A being of perfect good should, by that very definition, never appear to be of lesser morality when his behavior is compared to inferior morals.[/quote]What you people seem to not comprehend is that if your "inferrior morals" are always changing to suit your current sin status then
God's Standard will never line up with what you have changed to suit the sins you are willing to live with. Leaving you with a problem Because of the gulf between your personal righteousness and God's one must be 'judged' as inferior to another. As you Have created a standard to become superior to God then it is not likly that you will or ever can see yourself as being les than Good. Which makes God the immoral one, each and every time.

[quote]According to you, God gave me free will specifically so I would choose either to submit or not to submit. What motivates me to choose one or the other?[/quote]You are born into one choice. For you have no choice NOT to submit. Submition is the only true choice you have been given.

[quote]And yet you oppose gay marriage and abortion and attempt to force God's Will on people who clearly do not wish to spend eternity with him, so obviously you do not adhere to your own beliefs in practice.[/quote]Again you have confused morality with God's law/Expressed Will. For I am trying (when I vote) to force my 'morality or my self righteousness onto you.

God's Will can Never be acheaved that is why Christ died.

[quote]I'm supposed to apologize to God because he made me inferior to himself? [/quote]You are simply supposed Seek God out. You have confused yourself with another religion.

[quote]This is the kernel of my point.

If God defines what 'Good' is, then any action I take which mirrors an act of God (in terms of intent; obviously not in magnitude of the deed) must also be Good. [/quote] The thing is with a mirror is always reflects absolutly everything a person does in front of it. Can you honestly say that you can do this? Can you truly mirror what God has done? If so (not a judgement) Then if God does seperates you from the rest of creation and banishes you to the void then simply say "let their be light" and mirror what God has done from that point on and you will be good.

[Ryantology]

What you people seem to not comprehend is that if your "inferrior morals" are always changing to suit your current sin status then
God's Standard will never line up with what you have changed to suit the sins you are willing to live with. Leaving you with a problem Because of the gulf between your personal righteousness and God's one must be 'judged' as inferior to another. As you Have created a standard to become superior to God then it is not likly that you will or ever can see yourself as being les than Good. Which makes God the immoral one, each and every time.

It does not matter how often human morals change, or to what they change. A perfectly good and moral being should, by any possible definition, always set a standard man cannot possibly even conceive of as flawed or inferior, the way I cannot possibly conceive of an infinitely large object because if I can identify it as being an object, it is only because it has limits and I can perceive them.

You are born into one choice. For you have no choice NOT to submit. Submition is the only true choice you have been given.

If only one option exists, then it is a farce to define it as a 'choice'.

Again you have confused morality with God's law/Expressed Will. For I am trying (when I vote) to force my 'morality or my self righteousness onto you.

Why would God's will and/or law conflict with his own morals?

God's Will can Never be acheaved that is why Christ died.

Sounds like what we in the 21st century call a design flaw.

You are simply supposed Seek God out. You have confused yourself with another religion.

According to the post I previously quoted, it is not a matter of simply seeking God. I am supposed to, in your words, "seek attonement for being outside of God's Righteousness". 'Atonement' implies that I did something wrong and I seek forgiveness for it. In this example, the thing I did 'wrong' was... what? Be precisely what the all-powerful Creator Of All Things made me to be?

I'm sorry I'm not more perfect, but if he is all-everything, the only reason I'm not is because he deliberately made me to be flawed.

The thing is with a mirror is always reflects absolutly everything a person does in front of it. Can you honestly say that you can do this? Can you truly mirror what God has done?

I mean, I could murder kids on a whim or dominate rape slaves, but since I have not done these things I must answer in the negative.

I am certain that if I possessed the abilities attributed to God, humanity would be much better off than they are under God's alleged fatherhood.

[quote]If so (not a judgement) Then if God does seperates you from the rest of creation and banishes you to the void then simply say "let their be light" and mirror what God has done from that point on and you will be good.

That probably will never happen, so I can't comment on it. However, I can do my best to emulate God's behavior by committing the acts I spelled out previously.

If God condones murder, genocide, rape and slavery, as he is repeatedly shown to do all over his holy book, these must be good. Otherwise, a paradox exists.

[Drich]

Why would God's will and/or law conflict with his own morals?

Because God's will is to allow you the freedom to operate outside of His Law.

That probably will never happen, so I can't comment on it. However, I can do my best to emulate God's behavior by committing the acts I spelled out previously.

If God condones murder, genocide, rape and slavery, as he is repeatedly shown to do all over his holy book, these must be good. Otherwise, a paradox exists.

That probably will never happen, so I can't comment on it.

[Darkstar]

Why would God's will and/or law conflict with his own morals?

Because God's will is to allow you the freedom to operate outside of His Law.

Riiight...

---

---

[Ryantology]

That probably will never happen, so I can't comment on it.

There was more after that and you didn't respond to any of it. I'm sure this was an oversight and you'll address it in your next post.

[System of Solace]

Because God's will is to allow you the freedom to operate outside of His Law.

Free will? If God is powerful enough to do that, he surely would have had a better solution than wiping the earth clean with a flood. I'm sure a loving god wouldn't choose to let the people suffer because he isn't smart enough to design humanity correctly.

One again, we can look back at Epicurus. If god is omnipotent, he has the ability to prevent sin and evil- but he does not. Is he willing but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. If he is both, from whence comes evil? Is he neither? Then why call him god?

[Drich]

One again, we can look back at Epicurus. If god is omnipotent, he has the ability to prevent sin and evil- but he does not. Is he willing but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. If he is both, from whence comes evil? Is he neither? Then why call him god?

http://atheistforums.org/thread-11945.html

[Darkstar]

One again, we can look back at Epicurus. If god is omnipotent, he has the ability to prevent sin and evil- but he does not. Is he willing but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. If he is both, from whence comes evil? Is he neither? Then why call him god?

http://atheistforums.org/thread-11945.html

...I don't know why you are trying to use this to refute the epicurean paradox when it failed the first time. How about this: Is god able, but not willing to prevent suffering? Then he is malevolent. It is true that some suffering is the result of human mistakes, but how can you argue that taking cancer from a small child infringes on their free will?

[Greatest I am]

[

Children cannot be guilty of sin yet God kills them.

If you had an oppertunity to Kill Adolph Hilter, Joesph Stallin, Hirohito/Emperor Shōwa, Mao Zedong, Kim Il sung as a Child knowing full well what they would accomplish as an adult, would you be obligated to kill them? Or would you wait till after these three men collibrated and kill 1/3 of the worlds population at the time they lived? would you sacerfice the lives of hundreds of millions for the sake of the philosphy you live by, or would you do something about it? what would your responsiablity be if you absolutly 100% knew that their was an entire race of people bent on the destruction of the world?

God is in a position to Judge our actions before we commit them. In the case of those races/clans He decided to wipe out He did so in order to perserve His chosen people. He knew that even if the imediate generation posed no threat, that one generation down the pike would. So in order to perserve His people and subsequently inorder to perserve the linage of Christ and salvation for the rest of the world some people (even children) had to die.

Yet those of the Abrahamic cults, Christians, Muslims and other believers, do not reject this cowardly and immoral God.

Why not?

Because we know not "all people are basically good." That all are intrinsically sinful and whether we die as a Child or as an old man we all still owe a death to the life we have been given, and it is up to our sovern God to tell us when our life is forefit.

Regards
Drich
[/quote]

If I had the power of your God, I would not have to kill all those you listed above. I would not have given them life in the first place.

If you think they deserve death, then why did your God create them and let them do their thing in the first place?

Could you also point out where in this clip and child you see anything that is intrinsically evil?

I would agree that we can all do evil but that we are hard wired to cooperate or do good.

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy."

But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.


Having said the above for the God that I do not believe in, I am a Gnostic Christian naturalist, let me tell you that evil is all human generated. Evil is our responsibility.

Much has been written to explain what I see as a natural part of evolution.

Consider.
First, let us eliminate what some see as evil. Natural disasters. These are unthinking occurrences and are neither good nor evil. There is no intent to do evil even as victims are created.

Evil then is only human to human.
As evolving creatures, all we ever do, and ever can do, is compete or cooperate.
Cooperation we would see as good as there are no victims created. Competition would be seen as evil as it creates a victim. We all are either cooperating, doing good, or competing, doing evil at all times.

Without us doing some of both, we would likely go extinct.

This, to me, explains why there is evil in the world quite well.

Be you a believer in nature, evolution or God, we should all see that what Christians see as something to blame, evil, we should see that what we have, competition, deserves a huge thanks for being available to us.

There is no conflict between nature and God on this issue. This is how things are and should be. We all must do what some will think is evil as we compete and create losers to this competition.

Regards
DL

----------------------------

Strangely, Christianity helps me on this issue.

Theistic evolution.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ProfMTH#g/c/...F680C1DBEB

Regards
DL

---

[

...god is not basically good either.

By what standard? Yours? who are you to judge God? Your answer:_________________ my response:

Who are you to deny others the right to judge God when you yourself have judged him good and worthy of your adoration?

Even though he is a genocidal maniac who even has his own son needlessly murdered. Even Hitler would not be so devoid of morals or instincts.

Regards
DL

[genkaus]

'Morality' is an ever changing standard from person to person, culture to culture and generation to generation. So the the question should be 'who's morality' are you suggesting God follow and why?

The secular morality - because it gives everyone the independence to follow his own morality.

Why does this 'morality' trump all others?

Because it allows other moralities to exist and doesn't call for their eradication.

What authority is your answer based on?

Logic and reason.

If you had an oppertunity to Kill Adolph Hilter, Joesph Stallin, Hirohito/Emperor Shōwa, Mao Zedong, Kim Il sung as a Child knowing full well what they would accomplish as an adult, would you be obligated to kill them? Or would you wait till after these three men collibrated and kill 1/3 of the worlds population at the time they lived? would you sacerfice the lives of hundreds of millions for the sake of the philosphy you live by, or would you do something about it? what would your responsiablity be if you absolutly 100% knew that their was an entire race of people bent on the destruction of the world?

There would be no obligation on my part to act either way even if I did know the end result - after all, I have not undertaken the responsibility
of the well-being of the entire human race. Your god on the other hand....

What you fail to understand is that I do not 'own' any of those lives. They are not mine to take or sacrifice - they belong to the people who live them. Sacrificing even a single person for the sake of my philosophy would go against my philosophy - thus I cannot sacrifice them whoever they may be or whatever they may do. Your god, apparently, fails to understand this simple concept.

God is in a position to Judge our actions before we commit them. In the case of those races/clans He decided to wipe out He did so in order to perserve His chosen people. He knew that even if the imediate generation posed no threat, that one generation down the pike would. So in order to perserve His people and subsequently inorder to perserve the linage of Christ and salvation for the rest of the world some people (even children) had to die.

Are you saying that your god didn't have the capacity to eliminate the future generation if and when they posed the threat? Your god sounds more like one of the demons of mythology or one of those evil kings - you know, the ones who here a prophecy that some first born would defeat them so they go on to kill every available first borns.

Because we know not "all people are basically good." That all are intrinsically sinful and whether we die as a Child or as an old man we all still owe a death to the life we have been given, and it is up to our sovern God to tell us when our life is forefit.

And this is why the very basis of Christianity in corrupt and evil.

"Your code begins by damning man as evil, then demands that he practice a good which it defines as impossible for him to practice. It demands, as his first proof of virtue, that he accept his own depravity without proof. It demands that he start, not with a standard of value, but with a standard of evil, which is himself, by means of which he is then to define the good: the good is that which he is not.

It does not matter who then becomes the profiteer on his renounced glory and tormented soul, a mystic God with some incomprehensible design or any passer-by whose rotting sores are held as some inexplicable claim upon him—it does not matter, the good is not for him to understand, his duty is to crawl through years of penance, atoning for the guilt of his existence to any stray collector of unintelligible debts, his only concept of a value is a zero: the good is that which is non-man."
- Ayn Rand. I disagree with her on quite a few things. But here, she has you spot on.

---

God's 'morality' is known as Righteousness and you are right it does not change. That is because it is an absolute standard in which none of us can (nor is expected) to live up to.

Then it is his righteousness itself that is corrupt.

By what standard? Yours? who are you to judge God? Your answer:_________________ my response:

By the standard of rationality.

---

Again you have confused morality with God's law/Expressed Will. For I am trying (when I vote) to force my 'morality or my self righteousness onto you.

God's Will can Never be acheaved that is why Christ died.

Nope. Unless his 'expressed will' is not a reflection of his morality.