1 edit
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeGod is not subject to any moral law. If you think he is, who would you suggest to hold him accountable? His actions are NEVER to be morally evaluated. They are always good, because it is against God's nature to do something bad or evil, since He is the principle and measure of Goodness to begin with.
A 'moral agent' is a being who is able to "make moral judgements based on some notion of right and wrong and to be held accountable for these actions. A moral agent is "a being who is capable of acting with reference to right and wrong." (Dictionary definition).
By saying 'God is not a moral agent' you are saying He is not able to make moral judge ...[text shortened]... respond to these questions by merely asking a question of your own it will be summarily ignored.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI politely suggest you spend some time with the Old testament. Then come back and say 'it's against God's nature to do something bad' while keeping a straight face.
God is not subject to any moral law. If you think he is, who would you suggest to hold him accountable? His actions are NEVER to be morally evaluated. They are always good, because it is against God's nature to do something bad or evil, since He is the principle and measure of Goodness to begin with.
God is accountable to the moral standard he puts upon his creation, or else is reduced to the cliche. 'do as I say, not as i do.'
2 edits
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeFirstly if God didn’t exist and the Bible weren’t His Word, there would be no basis to say that an objective standard for good and evil exists, and therefore, brutality would be neither good nor bad.
I politely suggest you spend some time with the Old testament. Then come back and say 'it's against God's nature to do something bad' while keeping a straight face.
God is accountable to the moral standard he puts upon his creation, or else is reduced to the cliche. 'do as I say, not as i do.'
Secondly, would you care to cite one example from the old tastament where Gods actions are not morally justifiable in your opinion, and why and why according to your beliefs they aren't?
Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk... no matter who's life He takes, when He takes it, how He takes it, or why He takes it, it is good....No. Human perception of good is not based on what our masters want. We are an unruly bunch. I will listen to the gods when they speak to me.
The larger debate is over natural law and divine arbitration, whether they are both true, or if one is true.
Originally posted by apathistWithout God, 'good' and 'evil' are a matter of personal preference. So what makes ones opinion right and another's opinion wrong without an objective standard?
No. Human perception of good is not based on what our masters want. We are an unruly bunch. I will listen to the gods when they speak to me.
1 edit
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkOne example?!
Firstly if God didn’t exist and the Bible weren’t His Word, there would be no basis to say that an objective standard for good and evil exists, and therefore, brutality would be neither good nor bad.
Secondly, would you care to cite one example from the old tastament where Gods actions are not morally justifiable in your opinion, and why and why according to your beliefs they aren't?
Here's 12 to get things started.
http://www.alternet.org/12-craziest-most-awful-things-god-did-old-testament
(And as explained, it is not my beliefs that judge God's morality but His own moral standard laid out, for example, in the 10 Commandments).
1 edit
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeIf you assume that God does in fact exist, why would he not be allowed to give life and take it away if and when he sees fit?
One example?!
Here's 12 to get things started.
http://www.alternet.org/12-craziest-most-awful-things-god-did-old-testament
(And as explained, it is not my beliefs that judge God's morality but His own moral standard laid out, for example, in the 10 Commandments).
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkLet's call it 'divine responsibility.'
If you assume that God does in fact exist, why would he not be allowed to give life and take it away if and when he sees fit?
Think of it this way, if you created life in your bedroom (let's say in your sock drawer) and said life developed into small intelligent beings that had dreams and aspirations, would you. as their creator be perfectly entitled to take away their life whenever you saw fit and for whatever reason? Would you be beyond responsibility, accountable to no one, simply because you gave them life and are more powerful than them?