Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeDidn't you talk about how God should do things?
Where did I say I knew what God should do? I asked why He doesn't adhere to His own moral code (not mine) and behave as He tells us to behave? And why are you okay that He doesn't?
Originally posted by @kellyjay"God should follow the moral standards that apply to Him " is tautologically true."
Didn't you talk about how God should do things?
"Frost:...Would you say that there are certain situations - and the Huston Plan was one of them - where the president can decide that it's in the best interests of the nation, and do something illegal? Nixon: Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal."
Isn't that so for God?
1 edit
Originally posted by @kellyjayNo.
Didn't you talk about how God should do things?
I spoke of how God Himself says things should be done. (And asked why He doesn't do them). Why do you keep bringing me into the argument rather than simply addressing the question? (It should worry you that you replicate Eladar in this respect).
Originally posted by @eladarSo you might like the consensus theory, which seems to fit the religious definition for knowledge.
Did I claim most people would like the truth?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth#Consensus_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge#Religious_meaning_of_knowledge
I'm a pragmatist. If something doesn't work then it isn't true. Might makes right doesn't work well as a moral foundation. As you know.
Originally posted by @apathistAs I've said in this forum before, it's not exactly a "might makes right" issue. It's more of a "right makes might" issue.
So you might like the consensus theory, which seems to fit the religious definition for knowledge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth#Consensus_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge#Religious_meaning_of_knowledge
I'm a pragmatist. If something doesn't work then it isn't true. Might makes right doesn't work well as a moral foundation. As you know.
Originally posted by @js357No
"God should follow the moral standards that apply to Him " is tautologically true."
"Frost:...Would you say that there are certain situations - and the Huston Plan was one of them - where the president can decide that it's in the best interests of the nation, and do something illegal? Nixon: Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal."
Isn't that so for God?
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeI'll get back to you, your on my list, my growing list of people I owe replies to.
No.
I spoke of how God Himself says things should be done. (And asked why He doesn't do them). Why do you keep bringing me into the argument rather than simply addressing the question? (It should worry you that you replicate Eladar in this respect).
Originally posted by @js357God's laws are for man, a creature filled with sin, not God, who is without sin.
"God should follow the moral standards that apply to Him " is tautologically true."
"Frost:...Would you say that there are certain situations - and the Huston Plan was one of them - where the president can decide that it's in the best interests of the nation, and do something illegal? Nixon: Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal."
Isn't that so for God?
1 edit
Originally posted by @sonhouseNot true.
But according to your bible, your god attacked people, and that is a clear might makes right situation. So your own god uses that method.
When God attacks people, it is because those people are full of sin, and God cannot abide sin. "Might makes right" is a man-made morality system which doesn't address sin and so, is therefore insufficient to describe God's system, which is against sin.
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke" would have no objection to the statement 'God could if He so wished' kill Mr X (in the sense that an omnipotent deity would have the power to do so) but not with the statement that God 'is at liberty to kill Mr X while maintaining his status as the moral law giver.' The Christian position that it's okay for God to tell us not to kill, but morally at liberty to do so Himself' (not subject 'to His own' moral code) is bordering on the bizarre. "
The point is, God 'should' be different from us, by His very definition as the moral law giver. The argument that God can 'do what he likes' with his own creation is probably the most repugnant put forward by some Christians. - I would have no objection to the statement 'God could if He so wished' kill Mr X (in the sense that an omnipotent deity wou ...[text shortened]... izarre.
A God, worthy of worship, would instruct us to 'do as I do, not just do what I say.'
Are you not calling into question here how God should and should not behave?