13 Sep 12
Originally posted by KellyJayNo worries at all, KJ. I apologize as well, since I am sure I could have made the same arguments in a way that you would have found more clear and less offensive.
Let me come back to this later, but say this to you first.
I'm sorry I went off on you my bad I will not offer an excuse.
Kelly
14 Sep 12
Originally posted by LemonJello"Okay, so you're fine with the entailment of your view that you and all other creatures have absolutely no rights. If that is satisfactory to you, then whatever. "
[b]Rights, you have rights before your Creator...really?
Okay, so you're fine with the entailment of your view that you and all other creatures have absolutely no rights. If that is satisfactory to you, then whatever.
God
setup the universe so everyone who dies is simply going through the process
NO MATTER how they die.
So it doesn ...[text shortened]... hing wrong with X. At least that is the intention. Alas, it doesn't always pan out.[/b]
We are talking about a Creator God, how would you hold God accountable?
Kelly
14 Sep 12
Originally posted by LemonJello"So it doesn't matter how persons die? Really? I thought some deaths involved much more pain, suffering, etc, than others. You do not take such things to matter? "
[b]Rights, you have rights before your Creator...really?
Okay, so you're fine with the entailment of your view that you and all other creatures have absolutely no rights. If that is satisfactory to you, then whatever.
God
setup the universe so everyone who dies is simply going through the process
NO MATTER how they die.
So it doesn ...[text shortened]... hing wrong with X. At least that is the intention. Alas, it doesn't always pan out.[/b]
I agree, I believe I'd love to go quickly before I knew I was dying I'd like to be
dead, instead of a long drawn out painful process; however, even there if some
very important good could come from it the pain could be a small price to pay
for some things in life so pain isn't a good measuring stick for all things.
Kelly
14 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by LemonJello"I can say that for the purpose of our debate because it's what your own accounts indicate under literal interpretation. I thought you knew that already. "
[b]Rights, you have rights before your Creator...really?
Okay, so you're fine with the entailment of your view that you and all other creatures have absolutely no rights. If that is satisfactory to you, then whatever.
God
setup the universe so everyone who dies is simply going through the process
NO MATTER how they die.
So it doesn hing wrong with X. At least that is the intention. Alas, it doesn't always pan out.[/b]
I look at this like murder is a legal term it is defined in such away that not all
killings are claissified as murder; however, according to law some are. So you
have God who already has control over all life and death and you want to take
some of His judgments and say these deaths are bad even while He setup all
to die for cause.
Kelly
14 Sep 12
Originally posted by LemonJello"I think you're a bit confused on the nature of rights. They don't exist merely in virtue of agreement; and they are not conferred by virtue of another. They are not established by agreement or fiat. If a right exists, it does so regardless of what agents think about it. Otherwise, the obligations that attend rights would not be binding. If you think otherwise, then your view devolves into a sort of moral skepticism where there basically can be no moral obligations at all. So, these questions really seem to miss the mark. "
[b]Rights, you have rights before your Creator...really?
Okay, so you're fine with the entailment of your view that you and all other creatures have absolutely no rights. If that is satisfactory to you, then whatever.
God
setup the universe so everyone who dies is simply going through the process
NO MATTER how they die.
So it doesn ...[text shortened]... hing wrong with X. At least that is the intention. Alas, it doesn't always pan out.[/b]
There seems to be a debate now in America where some want to keep on
making the claims that God gave us rights that they did not come from man,
but others who for whatever reason want to take God out of the equation and
say that govenment grants us our rights. A God given right no man can take
away; however, all those given by the govenment can change with a stroke of
a pen at any time. If you are going to tell me that you have rights I want to
know how you came about and aquired them!? Did you just say I believe this
is good and true so everyone is now being held to this standard even if they
don't agree with you, did someone else grant it to you, did you and a few others
come up with some logic that justifies your rights before all other men?
This is the "Mere Christianity" debate all over again, what makes a right a right
that even God must obey it?
Kelly
14 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by LemonJello"I did not say you have to accept God's doing something like that; but, you are committed to its being God's right to do something like that. I deny that I have trashed God, and I deny that I have trashed you. After all, all I did was state and elaborate on some entailments of your very own view. They have nothing even remotely to do with how I personally view God (I think He is a non-existent) or yourself (I think you're a great guy).
[b]Rights, you have rights before your Creator...really?
Okay, so you're fine with the entailment of your view that you and all other creatures have absolutely no rights. If that is satisfactory to you, then whatever.
God
setup the universe so everyone who dies is simply going through the process
NO MATTER how they die.
So it doesn hing wrong with X. At least that is the intention. Alas, it doesn't always pan out.[/b]
Why do you think I bring up shocking examples like that? I am trying to make localized consistency arguments where I essentially say, alright, if you claim X, then that commits you to Y; and, guess what, Y is totally and utterly absurd. If I did this perfectly convincingly, you would say oh yeah, you're right Y is totally absurd, so there must be something wrong with X. At least that is the intention. Alas, it doesn't always pan out."
I believe that on judgment day everyone's actions, words, inactions, unsaid
words, their whole lives will be put on full display even God's with respect to us.
I believe that on that day we will see good and evil on full display and we will
all give an acount even God, and I believe that we all will judge the things we
all see with nothing hidden what is right or wrong. I think that is why God
allowed evil to run its full course to end the debate about right and wrong and
reveal both good and evil for what they are. We are called witnesses for a
reason since we are living through lives that have good and evil in them.
I trust God, I believe He does all things well, and I am willing to go through
life no matter what it has in store for me knowing I'm loved and everyone else
I know and don't know are too. This is not a belief that only good things will
happen to me, it is a belief that now matter what happens, in this life where
I can take nothing with me when I die that the important things are those
others here not the things in this world.
Kelly
14 Sep 12
Originally posted by LemonJello"(I think you're a great guy)."
[b]Rights, you have rights before your Creator...really?
Okay, so you're fine with the entailment of your view that you and all other creatures have absolutely no rights. If that is satisfactory to you, then whatever.
God
setup the universe so everyone who dies is simply going through the process
NO MATTER how they die.
So it doesn ...[text shortened]... hing wrong with X. At least that is the intention. Alas, it doesn't always pan out.[/b]
[blushing!]
Thank you, again so sorry for me being an A$$ to you before. 🙂
Kelly
14 Sep 12
Originally posted by KellyJay"So it doesn't matter how persons die? Really? I thought some deaths involved much more pain, suffering, etc, than others. You do not take such things to matter? "
"So it doesn't matter how persons die? Really? I thought some deaths involved much more pain, suffering, etc, than others. You do not take such things to matter? "
I agree, I believe I'd love to go quickly before I knew I was dying I'd like to be
dead, instead of a long drawn out painful process; however, even there if some
very important good could co ...[text shortened]... o pay
for some things in life so pain isn't a good measuring stick for all things.
Kelly
Not enough coffee (poor excuse) I read this again and wow what an ugly post.
🙁
I agree, I believe I'd love to go quickly before I knew I was dying, so I'd like it
to be over instead of a long drawn out painful process! If some very important
good could come from it the pain could be a small price to pay for some things
in life, so I think that pain isn't a good measuring stick for all things.
Kelly
15 Sep 12
Originally posted by KellyJayHow is that question relevant? The issue is about whether or not we have rights, not whether or not we have the power to successfully force others to respect our rights. In my opinion, you muddy the waters in these discussions by confusing the following different things: (1) rights and (2) the power to police rights. Just because I lack the power to "hold God accountable" does not mean that God is not accountable. If I hold a right, then God as a moral agent is accountable unto that fact. Period. That's the way it works, since my possessing a right basically entails that other moral agents are thereby obligated in some way. My possessing the right has nothing to do with my power, or lack thereof, to police the right. In fact, one could hold a right while at the same time being totally powerless when it comes to policing it. Their lack of power in that case doesn't somehow mean that the right vanishes, and it doesn't mean that other agents are somehow not accountable or obligated. Their lack of power makes them vulnerable and open to violation of their rights; but it doesn't somehow make them without rights at all.
"Okay, so you're fine with the entailment of your view that you and all other creatures have absolutely no rights. If that is satisfactory to you, then whatever. "
We are talking about a Creator God, how would you hold God accountable?
Kelly
What I would appreciate from you is more explanation and reasoning why you think God has the right to do anything whatsoever with His creation. There are no reasons I can see to think that is true, and there are many reasons I can see to think it is false. For starters, there is nothing analytic to the notion of creation that makes it definitionally or even obviously true that a creator can do whatever he wants with his creation. We often naturally attach this idea to objects of creation because, generally speaking, we think one can do what he likes with his own property. However, there are salient cases when it becomes very non-obvious or even patently false that one can do whatever he likes with what he has created. Generally speaking and off the top of my head, I would say they include cases where (1) the creation is, wholly or in part, not the creator's property (2) the creation is of value to someone other than the creator (3) the creation is of value in and of itself or (4) the creation is a moral patient. All of these general categories relate to God's creation, so we can examine them in turn and see why they go against the idea that it is permissible for God to do whatever with His creation. An example that relates to (1) is my life. My life is my own. Period. It is not God's life. It's mine. He may be my creator, but my life is mine. There are no reasons I can see to think that God is free to do whatever He wants with it. Sorry, God, but my life is not your property. We could probably think of many examples that relate to (2). One could create something that is very valuable to other persons. In that case, it's not obvious that the creator is free to just do whatever he wants with it. It may be that he has some obligation to consider the interests of all parties involved. Regarding (3), again it is not clear that the creator is free to do whatever he wants with his creation. If something is valuable in and of itself, then there should be abiding reasons for others to care about its preservation, so the creator should be rationally bound to such considerations too. And (4) is probably the most straightforward case: for (4), it follows by definition that the creator cannot do just whatever with his creation. A moral patient, by definition, is such that it matters how one treats it, and not just derivatively so.
Now, if you consider the life of a human person, doesn't that satisfy pretty much all 4 categories? It satisfies (1) because the life of a human person belongs to said person; it is not God's property. It satisfies (2) because the life of a human person is something widely valued amongst other humans; just think of all the other persons who value your own life. It satisfies (3) unless you want to claim that we do not have inherent value. It satisfies (4) as well; persons are such that they have the capacity to suffer and be harmed, etc, and as such it matters how one treats them and not just instrumentally as a means to an end.
So, if you consider just a single human person's life, it seems you have many reasons to think the claim that God has the right to do whatever with His creation is false.
15 Sep 12
Originally posted by KellyJayYou seem to be sort of contradicting yourself. Before you acted like the specifics of how one dies does not matter because God is taking them through the same God-directed "process". Now you're saying that the specifics do matter. Which is it?
"So it doesn't matter how persons die? Really? I thought some deaths involved much more pain, suffering, etc, than others. You do not take such things to matter? "
I agree, I believe I'd love to go quickly before I knew I was dying I'd like to be
dead, instead of a long drawn out painful process; however, even there if some
very important good could co ...[text shortened]... o pay
for some things in life so pain isn't a good measuring stick for all things.
Kelly
15 Sep 12
Originally posted by KellyJayYes, that's basically what I am saying. Your accounts show God sanctioning things like genocide. Yes, those are bad things and constitute bad deaths. I'm not sure why you think it mitigates this when you say that God had a cause in mind. Didn't Hitler also have a cause in mind? Does that mean we cannot say that the Holocaust was bad? Are you denying that your own accounts, taken literally, show God engaging in things like genocide? If not, then what are you trying to say? That we should think Hitler-directed genocide is bad, but God-directed genocide isn't?
"I can say that for the purpose of our debate because it's what your own accounts indicate under literal interpretation. I thought you knew that already. "
I look at this like murder is a legal term it is defined in such away that not all
killings are claissified as murder; however, according to law some are. So you
have God who already has control ove ...[text shortened]... His judgments and say these deaths are bad even while He setup all
to die for cause.
Kelly
15 Sep 12
Originally posted by KellyJayIf one side is arguing that rights come from God, and the other side is arguing that rights come from man; then I think both sides are wrong. As I already hinted, rights do not get established by fiat or consensus; they are granted neither by individuals nor by groups. The idea that someone or some group could simply grant you rights is no less absurd than the idea that someone or some group could simply take your rights away. So I think both sides of this argument you describe are pretty confused.
"I think you're a bit confused on the nature of rights. They don't exist merely in virtue of agreement; and they are not conferred by virtue of another. They are not established by agreement or fiat. If a right exists, it does so regardless of what agents think about it. Otherwise, the obligations that attend rights would not be binding. If you think otherw ...[text shortened]... ty" debate all over again, what makes a right a right
that even God must obey it?
Kelly
If you are going to tell me that you have rights I want to
know how you came about and aquired them!?
Well, you go first. Walk the walk, don't just talk the talk. You claim that God has all these rights to do whatever the heck he wants. So you go first: explain God's rights. If you are going to tell me that God has rights I want to know how He came about and acquired them!?
however, all those given by the govenment can change with a stroke of
a pen at any time
Well, all those given by God can change with His whims at any time. If you're going to tell me that God grants rights through fiat, then no reason to think He cannot just rescind them through fiat as well. Of course, as we already discussed, on your view we have no rights at all. So I guess you don't have this problem. 🙄
15 Sep 12
Originally posted by KellyJayOkay. But you already agreed with me before that, for example, things like earthly pain and suffering matter. I am not going to let you keep contradicting yourself on this. You cannot say they matter and then turn around and imply they do not matter since we cannot take anything with us. Either they matter or not. Which is it?
"I did not say you have to accept God's doing something like that; but, you are committed to its being God's right to do something like that. I deny that I have trashed God, and I deny that I have trashed you. After all, all I did was state and elaborate on some entailments of your very own view. They have nothing even remotely to do with how I personally v ...[text shortened]... that the important things are those
others here not the things in this world.
Kelly