(July 10, 2017 at 10:16 pm)Khemikal Wrote: 1. This just keeps getting worse and worse. Whether or not a person will change their mind..and whether or not they -can-....are not even remotely the same subject. God may never change his mind about those children he sent a bear to kill...but could he have?
2. There we go. So god -can- change his mind, he just doesn't. Not at all the mindless amoral automaton. Bit of a recalcitrant monster, on account of it, though. Oh well, give and take?
3. Just as "moral agent" is an insufficient description of any given human being....nevertheless, either god is capable of good -and- evil or god simply is what it is. Amoral, same as a rock, a tree, my t-shirt.
Yet again you bring up another interesting point. You contend that god -could- change his mind..but, knowing the outcomes of this or that, doesn't. Well, what is it that god refers to in making that timeless decision? What metrics, what specifics? What is weighed, today, in full view of eternity, that causes god to decide one way or another on some moral matter?
Here, lets use some specific examples.
Whats good about gods plan (I assume god makes his decisions based upon whether or not they fulfill that plan, primarily). [4]
What's bad about death? [5]
What's good about salvation? [6]
-Mind you, there's no impetus that you respond on the boards...but when you consider the answers that immediately spring to your own mind, in your own head....just remember what I said about your own moral foundations.
I wasn't going to answer because the way you discuss things with me is obnoxious. However, it seems like other are at least curious as to my answers.
1. My point is I don't think the term is appropriate to an omniscient being. Changing one's mind implies new information being added (whether factual, emotional, further reflection, etc.). That is simply does not apply under the definition of omniscient.
2. No, that is not what I said. I said God could have chosen otherwise. Not the same thing. It is possible that God could never have created the universe...yet he did.
3. Having a nature consisting of "perfect moral qualities" would prohibit God from doing evil. Since God's actions will illustrate these moral attributes, the actions would be in fact moral. That certainly does not fit the definition of amoral.
4. It's good because it's God's plan--stemming from his perfect moral qualities.
5. Physical death itself is neither good nor bad morally speaking.
6. a. It's better than the alternatives (annihilation or hell)
b. A relationship with God is better than no relationship with God (and all that comes with that).
