RE: Conscience and the Moral Argument as Evidence for the Goodness of God.
July 8, 2023 at 12:18 pm
(This post was last modified: July 8, 2023 at 2:04 pm by Bucky Ball.)
(July 8, 2023 at 11:02 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(July 8, 2023 at 12:06 am)Bucky Ball Wrote: As we all know from the study of Anthropology, there are no moral behaviors which are general and universal.Your arrogant mike-drop was a bit premature. The dilemma ignores the third alternative which is this: God is identical to the Good and to be good is to participate in that divine nature.
For example the Hebrews practiced child sacrifice, (there is at least one example in the Bible). Your premise is false.
Your OP is refuted easily by Euthyphro's Dilemma "Is the pious (τὸ ὅσιον) loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?"
and by Epicurus, "“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him Gog"
You're welcome.
You're welcome.
Nope. (Speaking of arrogant, telling Euthyphro he ignored an important point). LOL That's covered in BOTH Euthyphro and Epicurus ... it's why I posted both. Read them again.
A real god can't "be identical" to only a portion of Reality. It means there are external definitions which are necessary to define your god, eternally It's meaningless. How is "good" defined, and where did evil come from, if your god is eternally (only) "good" ? Why is any distinction necessary ? Was it "good" *along with* evil or did "good" begin when evil was defined ?
(You're welcome).
Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble. - Joseph Campbell
Militant Atheist Commie Evolutionist
Militant Atheist Commie Evolutionist