- Joined
- Jul 18, 2005
- Messages
- 1,135
- Reaction score
- 0
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Cloud9;
"This response will be short, not for a lack of interest in discussing moral philosophy... we've actually never gotten to Kant, etc. and I get the impression that we won't be heading in that direction as it seems that moral philosophy and religion and/or belief in God are one and the same for you.
For me they are mutually exclusive. One can be moral (and immoral) without belief in God, and believe in God and be immoral (and moral). Belief in God is not a requirement for morality.
Exactly. You possess the same moral core as I do rather you are an agnostic, atheist, Christian, tribesman or what ever. It is this common moral core which dictates the fact that anyone, regardless of religious convictions, can live a moral life.
Romans 2: 13-15;
13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.
14 When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them
Cloud9;
"It's not a question of whether God gave them a chance or not. It's a question of whether an infinitely omnipotent and omnipresent being could arrive at a better solution than simply flooding the earth."
If that is what God did, then that was the perfect solution. Don't forget about the whole omnipotent thing. God knew that He was going to flood the earth long before He put His plan for our creation in motion.
One benefit to being eternal and timeless is that even if God ever did make a mistake, he could go back to that point and keep executing alternative solutions until the optimum outcome materialized.
Cloud9;
"You have kids, so we can think of it this way, I can tell my kids to do X or else get a spanking (for example). Is that the best solution I can come up with? No. Surely our minds are a bit more sophisticated than a 2, 3, 4, 5 yr old, etc."
I tell my kids that if they climb on the chair they will fall. My sons would not learn why they are not suppose to climb on the chair if I keep it from them, so I warn them and let them climb it any way (which drives my wife crazy). When they fall and cry, I say "I told you what would happen if you chose to disobey my rule".
I get so much crap for homeschooling my children, with one such accusation being that I am trying to shelter them. If sheltering one's children is bad, then why should God do it?
With respect to the flood, God gathered all of his kids and put them in the family SUV. God kept his children safe in the SUV while he killed all of the (literal) monsters that had run amuck in the house.
I was listening to a technology interview of Charles Ostman and Katherine Albrecht on Coast to Coast AM the other day, and they mentioned something about scientists discovering a new, more efficient and compleat methid to program their creations. They would give their creations a base programing (= common moral core) and let them loose in a structured environment so as to experience it for them selves.
That sounds like what God is doing with us.
Cloud9;
"Now, here we have an infinite and omnipotent mind. His best solution (out of an infinite number of solutions) was to flood the earth? Seems like a silly solution to me."
I believe that it is safe to assume that the infinite, omnipotent, omnipresent intelligence knows better then you, His creation, does.
C-
"Fear is a not a good basis for any relationship. I do not subscribe to a concept of an omnipotent God where fear is a requirement."
B-
You are not suppose to know the path before you walk the path. If you did, you would not get the lesson of the path.
C-
Your response does not negate that God (as taught in Christianity) is one to be feared.
That's correct. God is to be feared.
Until you open yourself to that fear you will not understand it.
It is not an iron fist.
2 miscellaneous points:
*I did not give evidence of God, I gave evidence of a higher reality.
*The logic problem- My kneejerk reaction was to say that God could create such a rock in space....thus nullifying it's waite and a lifting motion all together.....or that God could create such a rock and then turn gravity off, thus creating a rock that He could not lift, and then lifting it anyway.
I did not answer "yes" or "no" because the question has a false premise: that God would contradict his own law. Though the question seems clever, it is pure, refined sophistry.
I am sorry to say that at this point I must bow out of our conversation. I have personal happenings which need my attention.
I will let you have the last word between us (for now
).
Again, it is nice to see an abortion debate that did not come to blows.
Thank you for that.
I look forward to speaking with you in the future.
"This response will be short, not for a lack of interest in discussing moral philosophy... we've actually never gotten to Kant, etc. and I get the impression that we won't be heading in that direction as it seems that moral philosophy and religion and/or belief in God are one and the same for you.
For me they are mutually exclusive. One can be moral (and immoral) without belief in God, and believe in God and be immoral (and moral). Belief in God is not a requirement for morality.
Exactly. You possess the same moral core as I do rather you are an agnostic, atheist, Christian, tribesman or what ever. It is this common moral core which dictates the fact that anyone, regardless of religious convictions, can live a moral life.
Romans 2: 13-15;
13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.
14 When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them
Cloud9;
"It's not a question of whether God gave them a chance or not. It's a question of whether an infinitely omnipotent and omnipresent being could arrive at a better solution than simply flooding the earth."
If that is what God did, then that was the perfect solution. Don't forget about the whole omnipotent thing. God knew that He was going to flood the earth long before He put His plan for our creation in motion.
One benefit to being eternal and timeless is that even if God ever did make a mistake, he could go back to that point and keep executing alternative solutions until the optimum outcome materialized.
Cloud9;
"You have kids, so we can think of it this way, I can tell my kids to do X or else get a spanking (for example). Is that the best solution I can come up with? No. Surely our minds are a bit more sophisticated than a 2, 3, 4, 5 yr old, etc."
I tell my kids that if they climb on the chair they will fall. My sons would not learn why they are not suppose to climb on the chair if I keep it from them, so I warn them and let them climb it any way (which drives my wife crazy). When they fall and cry, I say "I told you what would happen if you chose to disobey my rule".
I get so much crap for homeschooling my children, with one such accusation being that I am trying to shelter them. If sheltering one's children is bad, then why should God do it?
With respect to the flood, God gathered all of his kids and put them in the family SUV. God kept his children safe in the SUV while he killed all of the (literal) monsters that had run amuck in the house.
I was listening to a technology interview of Charles Ostman and Katherine Albrecht on Coast to Coast AM the other day, and they mentioned something about scientists discovering a new, more efficient and compleat methid to program their creations. They would give their creations a base programing (= common moral core) and let them loose in a structured environment so as to experience it for them selves.
That sounds like what God is doing with us.
Cloud9;
"Now, here we have an infinite and omnipotent mind. His best solution (out of an infinite number of solutions) was to flood the earth? Seems like a silly solution to me."
I believe that it is safe to assume that the infinite, omnipotent, omnipresent intelligence knows better then you, His creation, does.
C-
"Fear is a not a good basis for any relationship. I do not subscribe to a concept of an omnipotent God where fear is a requirement."
B-
You are not suppose to know the path before you walk the path. If you did, you would not get the lesson of the path.
C-
Your response does not negate that God (as taught in Christianity) is one to be feared.
That's correct. God is to be feared.
Until you open yourself to that fear you will not understand it.
It is not an iron fist.
2 miscellaneous points:
*I did not give evidence of God, I gave evidence of a higher reality.
*The logic problem- My kneejerk reaction was to say that God could create such a rock in space....thus nullifying it's waite and a lifting motion all together.....or that God could create such a rock and then turn gravity off, thus creating a rock that He could not lift, and then lifting it anyway.
I did not answer "yes" or "no" because the question has a false premise: that God would contradict his own law. Though the question seems clever, it is pure, refined sophistry.
I am sorry to say that at this point I must bow out of our conversation. I have personal happenings which need my attention.
I will let you have the last word between us (for now
Again, it is nice to see an abortion debate that did not come to blows.
Thank you for that.
I look forward to speaking with you in the future.