Subject:
|
Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 15 Nov 2001 19:50:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
920 times
|
| |
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Simpson writes:
> God by no means has created morality. By no means does Absolute Ultimate
> Goodness (whatever that may be) receive its definition by God. God could no
> sooner make objectively evil good than he could create a square circle.
> God may do all things that can be done, but he may not do the absurd.
Hmm. One of the long-standing concepts of God is
"greater-than-which-nothing-can-be-thought." That is, of course, a
formulation of the ontological argument and is therefore insufficient to
prove His existence, but let's assume it (those of us who don't already
believe it). Having said that, a being that can do the absurd is greater
than a being that cannot, so I would think God *can* do the logically
impossible; in fact, if He's the ultimate being, he *must* be able to do the
logically impossible. Actually, for my interest, the accomplishment of the
logically impossible is a pretty good definition of a miracle.
I'm not sure I understood your notion of the source of morality, except
that you state that God didn't create it, and that confuses me. Didn't He
create everything? And is He or isn't He subject to it? If He is, then
we're back to something greater than God. If He's not, then we're back to
how do we know He's good?
> > Whether God created morality or not, is He subject to it? That is, if He
> > is not subject to morality, I am unable to imagine how one can conclude that
> > He is good, except by faith.
>
> Oh, he absolutely is.
Well, okay. But why? And how do we know? I don't mean in a
Euthyphro-ish way, but where does He stand in relation to morality? And on
what basis to we judge?
> > I was 10), but I've noticed your quotes by [Lewis] on several occasions.
>
> Yes, I've been much influenced by Saint Jack.
His writing is tremendously accessible and is a good starting point for
those seeking to articulate their beliefs, but I think he sometimes relies
too much on questionable analogies and false dichotomies. But at least he's
readable!
Dave!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
117 Messages in This Thread: (Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|