Creator God Gets to Make the Rules

[arewethereyet]

pffft

[The Grand Nudger]

The answer IMHO is this: the authority of any creator is justified by the degree it participates in the nature of the ultimate Creator, one that is identitcal the the God of Classical theism.

That's actually a really crisp description of subjectivist warrant.  I don't think it's going to convince anyone that isn't already a subjectivist, it will probably fail to convince quiet a few that already are....and I really do wonder why there would even need to be any sort of explanation or justification of authority in a subjectivist world.

[The Architect Of Fate]

The answer IMHO is this: the authority of any creator is justified by the degree it participates in the nature of the ultimate Creator, one that is identitcal the the God of Classical theism.

No amount of creation grants inherent authority

[Silver]

It's interesting he distinguishes classical theism, because this god character disappeared completely thereafter. There is no indication of the existence of a god in our modern world.

[no one]

To be fair, there never was.
Just scared, foolish, hoomans concocting explanations of the natural sciences around them, and attributing them to magic.

[Angrboda]

The answer IMHO is this: the authority of any creator is justified by the degree it participates in the nature of the ultimate Creator, one that is identitcal the the God of Classical theism.

Are you suggesting that someone may lack autonomy because of their relationship to another? I see great possibilities for this principle.

[Rev. Rye]

Yes, unfortunate as it is, it amounts to the kind of power it has. It if has the power to exert its control, punish those who disobey, then it can do what it wants. Still doesn't make it right from our perspective if what we're seeing and interpreting is gross injustice of humanity.

That's a fundamental problem with most religions; they were created in a world where autocracies were the norm and questioning whether the authorities were unjust could be really fucking dangerous (unless, of course, you had an army able to depose the other guy). And, if Plato's Apology is any indication, just asking the same question Ten did in the OP could easily get you killed.

Now we live in a world (or at least a part of it) where we can see that sort of power for what it is: dictatorial. And despite the strong efforts of the far right, the world is evolving away from that. But religions haven't; Hell, one of the names we, as English speakers, use for God, comes directly from feudalism.

[Nolin Lane]

If there is a Creator god, is he allowed, by virtue of being the creator and controller of everything, to do what he wants? Even if it is unjust? Even if it doesn't make sense to his creations?

Does he have the right to kill us, to manipulate us, to demand worship?

Like, I'm talking about "right" as in we aren't allowed to be upset, we have no authority to stand on to challenge him because he made us, he owns us. We have no justification for our rebellion because we were created for his purposes.

To provide a direct answer, NO.  However it's more complex from a human psyche perspective. 

Would you allow another "human" to manipulate you and demand worship?  What makes it ok for a "god" to demand that and treat you that way?

For most people its a fear of the unknown with death.  Many will gamble that if they follow "god" they'll avoid "hell". 

Problem is there is no proof of either.  So it becomes battle of deciding will I risk it because none of this makes sense or will l go along to avoid the fantasy of what might happen. 

Strange dilemma for many. 

Thanks for posting.  Good questiion.

[Peebothuhlu]

If there is a Creator god, is he allowed, by virtue of being the creator and controller of everything, to do what he wants? Even if it is unjust? Even if it doesn't make sense to his creations?

Does he have the right to kill us, to manipulate us, to demand worship?

Like, I'm talking about "right" as in we aren't allowed to be upset, we have no authority to stand on to challenge him because he made us, he owns us. We have no justification for our rebellion because we were created for his purposes.

Given the opening parameters of your thought experiment, the answer is simply "Yes'.

IF a Creator being creates something, thence that being is 'making' everything involved in said thing.

Of course, where things turn ploin shaped is when the ascribes of a Creator then go on to posit a whole raft of things that simply do not seem to line up with the said premise.

The creator being created everything. Though (Somehow) it both [redermined everything to unfold into its present state and YET also allows for 'Free will', which means that some aspects of its creation are no longer following dai predetermination... Somehow.

Then there's the assertion that said Creator being MUST be 'All loving'... while very easily defined happenings of "Not loving' and 'Un loving' demonstrably happens.

Hope that helps.

[The Grand Nudger]

If the answer to the question of right and wrongmaking properties is always and only "did you make the thing" then it follows that whoever made it can break it. Lowly human worms that we are, we have more complicated and nuanced ideas of ownership and of warrant - but these are the rules of heaven - or so the story goes. Honestly, most of the setup is just redundant noise. I can simplify the whole bit to "if a thing were true, that thing would be true".

Now, even asking "is he allowed" suggests that you don't believe the makers rule of right and wrongmaking properties. What you'll end up getting alot of answers to is the question "is he gonna" or "can he" - not the same question..unless...again, gonna and canhe are the right and wrongmaking properties. At which point begin again at step one.