What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Catholic_Lady]

I have to ask, what if the descriptions of god in the OT -and- the NT are both equally accurate?  What if god is the slaughterer of children -as well- as your prince of peace?  People have been known to be this complicated....I presume that it would not be beyond the ability of a god to possess depth of character?  Perhaps god approves of both the suffering martyr, and the explosive one?  I know that you don't, I know that I don't............

They contradict each other many times, so I would find this hard to reconcile. Jesus specifically talked about how awful it is to hurt children and how few things upset Him more. If the description of God was 100% correct and complete in the Old Testament, there would be no reason for Jesus to come and teach us differently.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I think morality comes from the fact that life (especially human life) is sacred. And life is sacred because God made it sacred, and told us that it is sacred.

Would that be the same god who invented death, and issued it as punishment to every human who has every lived for a "sin" committed only by the first two? Would that be the same god who created Kaposi's Sarcoma, viral pneumonia, earthquakes, asteroids which wipe out 99% of all living things, and so on?

Tell us more about how he holds life to be sacred.

And so hurting/destroying something sacred is always objectively and definitively wrong.

If you're against killing in any circumstance, why do you give your god a pass? He's the greatest killer in history, according to your own Bible.

That's why I believe we must treat all life with dignity and respect. Because living things have a certain dignity to them.

I gather that you don't take antibiotics, then? Do you offer the shark your arm when you're paddling in the surf?

No, not all life is sacred. Your own actions give the lie to this platitude, lovely though it sounds.

Do you have any children?

And that is why I believe we must treat humans especially well above plants and animals, because God made our lives at a higher level than those of other living things of the earth.

I really don't care about your superstitions. We're talking about morality.

[Aoi Magi]

Would killing her in self-defence as a last resort still be wrong?

It would certainly be -legal-...lol.  Would I do it?  Without hesitation.  With joy.  With pride.  I'd need a smoke after a kill that satisfying.

I know you would, that's why I didn't ask it to your psychopathic self

When a lion kills a deer, from the lion's perspective it is doing good because it is ensuring the survival of it's pride, but from the deer's perspective it is evil... from our perspective it is neither good nor evil because that is how nature works.

That's some high level thinking, for a lion, I think...but what does that matter, are you a lion?  Am I?  Does morality refer to lions?  Personally, I think a dead deer is a good deer.  They're -terrible-... :wink:

Morality would apply to the lion and deer IF it was a "universal" truth...which it is not.

[Catholic_Lady]

Sorry that I won't be able to read through the 15 pages of discussion. But replying to OP, good isn't "universal" because the concept of "good" and "evil" is man-made. For example, you mentioned "murder" as universal truth, however murder IS part of nature, and nature doesn't see it as good or bad. Animals have to murder each other in order to survive, even non-living matter will need to murder each other to make progress, like galaxies swallowing up other galaxies. We determine what is good or bad through our own perspective, and yes, it is subjective. Let's say in our society murder is wrong, but what if a psychopath tries to murder your children? Would killing her in self-defence as a last resort still be wrong? When a lion kills a deer, from the lion's perspective it is doing good because it is ensuring the survival of it's pride, but from the deer's perspective it is evil... from our perspective it is neither good nor evil because that is how nature works.

Thank you for the response, Aoi.

Killing in self defense is not wrong, I agree with you there. What would you say about societies that believe killing is good? Let's use Isis as a current example. They are a whole society and culture of people who believe that killing infidels is good. Would you say that since they believe this is moral, they are thus acting morally? Or do you think they are definitively acting immorally even if they believe otherwise. I think my takeaway from this discussion is that most atheists do not believe in moral truths.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Parkers, I will answer your questions. What are your questions?

Haven't you been reading my posts? Go back through the thread and you'll see them. You asking me to repeat myself is getting tiresome.

I think I've already answered this by saying I don't believe the stories in the OT actually happened literally as they are written. Meaning, I don't believe things like God telling Moses that he will kill the first born of the Egyptian families. I don't believe any of this "behavior" ever happened.

Based on what?

[Silver]

This bitch is becoming tiresome.

No wonder I'm gay.

[The Grand Nudger]

Why is contradiction a problem?  I have many contradictory attributes.  You probably do to.  God can't?  There were once, btw, christians who thought that the god of the NT was not the same god as the god of the OT, that NT god was here to save us from OT god.  "Jesus" -different- teachings are those which contain thought crimes, hell, and vicarious redemption.  These three are the least moral teachings in the bible, so far as I'm concerned.  Different, but not better.

(an atheist can believe in or hold to any moral truth, being an atheist has nothing to do with moral truths, the only sort of truths one cannot hold and simultaneously be an atheist are those "truths" which stem from a god)

[Catholic_Lady]

Catholicism allows you to cherry pick, you are being called to account for why you have chosen a particular set of stories over another as literal truth relative to allegory.   Some other things in the OT matter...like sin and generational curses.  Don't you think?  This "god" fella is from the OT, he matters.

A catholic should not cherry pick catholic teaching. So as long as you still believe in Catholic teaching, you are ok. Whether or not you literally believe Moses spoke to a burning bush, or Eve was tempted by a snake, or Jonah was inside a whale for 3 days, is not important, so long as you adhere to Catholic teaching which is made up of the teachings of Christ, many of which contradict the OT. I have already explained why I don't consider this "cherry picking" but I can see I have not done a good enough job of explaining myself.

[Silver]

Why is contradiction a problem?  I have many contradictory attributes.  You probably do to.  God can't?

You're going about it all wrong.  Man created god, so of course god his faults.  God is the veritable mirror or man, so god is just as man is.

[Thumpalumpacus]

What if god is the slaughterer of children -as well- as your prince of peace?  

<singing> He who made kittens / put snakes in the grass ...