Originally posted by Adrift
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Atheism And Moral Progress
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by seer View PostReally Adrift I'm not following. I do believe that God's nature is immutably good. My nature is both good and bad - does that mean that my nature is objective?
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostBut those things are applied to interpersonal relationships and a god being eternal had no interpersonal relationships until, as is assumed, he created. What did he love, to whom was he charitable, generous, just, faithdful, or kind.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostIt's typically argued by Christian philosophers that there is interpersonal play within the Christian conception of the eternal God, namely between the persons of the Godhead within the trinity.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostIt sounds to me that you're entirely confused on what it means for God's nature to be identified with "the good." While your nature may do good and bad, it is not "the good," and "the bad." I suggest you read something like Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview by J. P. Moreland, William Lane Craig. That may help you understand where you're tripping up, because it seems the more I attempt to work through it with you, the more confused you're getting. I may just suck at explaining these sorts of things.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostBut those things are applied to interpersonal relationships and a god being eternal had no interpersonal relationships until, as is assumed, he created. What did he love, to whom was he charitable, generous, just, faithdful, or kind.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostAs Carp rightly said morality is not about interpersonal relationships, it is about ought and ought not. It could be that God did not display His moral character until He created sentient beings, but that character was always there, and unchangeable.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by seer View PostI have actually read Moreland, and watched many of Craig's debates. Yes God is the good - I fully agree. He has a particular kind of nature, but we also have a particular kind of nature. Both being objective - don't you agree?
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostOught and ought not would not apply to an eternal god existing alone. Ought and ought not do what to whom?Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostJim, the point is God would have a particular moral nature even if there were no sentient beings to interact with. Our existence or non-existence does not change that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostAnd my point is that a moral nature makes no sense for a being existing eternally alone doing nothing. That would explain the amoral nature of the universe itself. Morality is a human concept which applies only to social communities.Last edited by seer; 09-17-2019, 09:50 AM.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostGreat video! I especially appreciate the exercise of establishing epistemological duties in reasoned discourse, and I find this one of the greatest weaknesses of carpe's epistemology. carpe seems to want to argue that there are ways one can progressively reason out of wrongly held views, but in order to do so he implicitly holds right reason as an objective standard to progress towards.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostTo be clear, my view is that it would neither be subjective or objective (from God's point of view). If subjective, then God takes the horn of Euthyphro's dilemma that suggests that he wills the good. If objective, then God takes the horn of the Euthyrpho dilemma that suggests that the good is something that God recognizes beyond himself, and/or that he conforms himself to. I agree with Dr. Craig that God neither merely wills the good, nor that the good is something he recognizes outside of himself, but that by being the greatest conceivable being, a being of pure perfection, and creator of all that there ever was, is, and will be, is the good. His commands are based upon his very nature. From OUR perspective, then, the good is objective because God, by his very nature, is the basis of the "good."
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostWell since I believe that God is also immutably rational, the very laws of logic are sourced in His being. You seem to be suggesting that there are logical or moral truths that are independent of God.
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment