Another apologist with his "clever" questions

[FallentoReason]

It's not that simple. God being god, he can make whatever proposition true. In the universe next door, the resident God said 2 + 2 would equal 5, and they tell me it's logical over there. 

Patently impossible and illogical, but hey, we -are- talking god....so?

But perfectly logical as a concept. 

I'm sure you're familiar with Kant's imperatives..? Suppose you need to really badly pass an exam. You will it that selling cheat sheets is universally acceptable. Now cheat sheets are the norm, which means the lecturers have to change the way exams are done to remove the problem, I dunno, a unique set of questions for each student on the computer. Your universal rule didn't logically help you achieve your will, and coincidentally it's often regarded that cheating is wrong. Logic + morals = pretty good explanation.

Meh, it exposes tacit assumptions about both morality and logic that are understandable for Kant, as a person of a time and place, but that's as far as it goes for me.

And yet, to this day it leaves one of my contemporaries without a response

That the source of morality must be good? If achieving your will is a good thing for oneself, then the logic behind it must be inherently good. That inherent good resides with the creator of such logic and rules and abstract truth.

Yes, for exactly that.  Firstly, the notion that a god is a source of morality is an undemonstrated assumption..secondly, why couldn;t an evil god -also- be a source of morality?  We, as parent;s, know all about this.  "Don't do what I did son".  There's no logic in your statements above, only convenience.

Undemonstrated assumption?? Please Rhythm! I can only type so much, but I will repeat myself, this time in code:

[God]

 var global.morality as integer

if (global.morality == 0) {
     print "you are bad"
}

if (global.morality == 1) {
     print "you are good"
}

[/God]


and re:evil god - because the opposite of "good", whatever it may be, will contradict the will. 

Sorry, I think I used the wrong word. What I mean is trivial morals - roll the dice and those are the morals you get in that universe. 

Do you think our morals are something other than a roll of the dice?  If we were different our morals would be too.

And they would be different in yet another universe. Yes.

No, because a father that would do that doesn't seem to get Kant, and therefore cannot be God.

I'm not sure if I'm reading this right, or you're just not making an ounce of sense..but plenty of shitty dads managed to produce awesome sons.  ????

It's not logical to treat someone badly if you want them to be good. E.g. you want to teach your son that doing the dishes is good. For some unknown reason (which is precisely why I disagree) you want to achieve this by treating him badly. Will it that every son who does the dishes gets smacked. Your son refuses to do the dishes. Logic does not compute.

If god was a dick, I think that universe actually has no god. Unless the trivial logic in that universe lines up with the trivial self-portrayal of its god, then any apparent god that exists is either lacking in god-like attributes, or is made up.

If god was a dick, god would be a dick..all other things would remain unchanged.  The world would still be as it is.  The sun would still rise in the east and set in the west. The notion that god exists is arguable, the world as it is is not.

I agree.

 Gods -are- made up, even if some god exists somewhere.

That's quite the contradiction you've got.