Debate : 14677


Off-Topic / Debate / 14677	14676 \| 14678

Subject:	Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Thu, 15 Nov 2001 20:54:41 GMT
Viewed:	958 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes: > > Sort of, but I'm not sure that I agree with it. Why should an infinite > > being be constrained by our notions of impossibility, even if those notions > > seem absolute to us? > > I dunno. What makes you so sure that he shouldn't be? Is it a logical fallacy > to say that he shouldn't be? Is there a flaw with such a belief that makes it > invalid? A few posts back I put forth "God is that being greater than which nothing can be thought" as a rhetorical assumption. It's not my personal belief, but, in my attempt to understand the Christian source of morality, it seemed an okay starting point. Now, I realize that the Ontological Argument is flawed as a means of proving the existence of God, but once one assumes His existence, I'm not sure I can understand any definition of Him that allows something greater to be imagined. Ignoring for a moment the question of evil, it seems to me that a being that can do something is greater than a being that cannot do something. I can imagine, at least conceptually, a being that can accomplish the impossible, and, since I can think of it, God must be greater than that (accepting the earlier assumption). > > I would argue that [morality] describes something that can't be > > as readily demonstrated to be external to man. > > Demonstrated, no. At least not within our abilities. Unfortunately, that's the god-of-the-gaps argument restated; we can't posit something unverifiable and then use it as an escape clause as needed. If we can't verify it, then it's not really useful in empirical thought. > But again, is there a logical problem with the belief that morality is > fixed "ulitmately"? Certainly you've argued against relative morality-- would > you argue for it here? I'm not sure I understand the point of the objection... I'm still arguing in an effort to understand the Christian viewpoint. I don't hold Christians (or anyone else) accountable for my view of morality, but I don't understand how a Christian reconciles his view morality with God and His goodness (the latter of which I recognize you and I aren't discussing) in terms of how each applies or relates to the other. Dave!

Message has 2 Replies:

		Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
(...) Very Descartian of you :) I think the only rebuttal I can say is "Why must it be that way?" I guess I just don't see a problem with a God for whom certain things are impossible, such as the absurdity of changing 4+3=9, while leaving the rest (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
(...) You're saying (in essence) that if God exists, that existence must by definition be without limits. If that's what you're getting at, then I think you need to take a look at how you are using impossible. Impossible, by my understanding, is (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
(...) I dunno. What makes you so sure that he shouldn't be? Is it a logical fallacy to say that he shouldn't be? Is there a flaw with such a belief that makes it invalid? (...) Demonstrated, no. At least not within our abilities. But again, is there (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

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

Custom Search