tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post4521410945470270145..comments2023-09-24T07:53:50.826-05:00Comments on The Atheist Experience™: Letter from hell!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-86025846367967647442010-09-17T11:42:38.936-05:002010-09-17T11:42:38.936-05:00Wow, you two sound like you're trying so hard ...Wow, you two sound like you're trying so hard to convince both yourselves and each other that the nonsense you're both spewing is anything but that- nonsense.magx01https://www.blogger.com/profile/14831638782847911405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-74819591346374430172008-03-13T07:43:00.000-05:002008-03-13T07:43:00.000-05:00rhology,now I have read your answer to my question...rhology,<BR/>now I have read your answer to my question.Yes my brother our names are written in the book of life that´s why we are going to meet in Heaven. I bless you in the Name of The Lord and Savior Jesuschrist.<BR/>if we don´t known each other here on earth, we are going to see us in THE ETERNITY WITH JESUSDer_kleine_Josuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13082705809927037953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-43030134422801549372008-03-13T07:36:00.000-05:002008-03-13T07:36:00.000-05:00I´m written in the book of life!!!Glory to my Lord...I´m written in the book of life!!!Glory to my Lord and my Savior Jesuschrist.This is all what matters.Everything else is just talk and talk...bla...bla...bla<BR/>Are you written in the BOOK OF LIFE? To be written in this Book, you need only to accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior. Do you want to accept Jesus as Lord and Savior? pray this :<BR/>God I don´t known you, but I want to believe in you.I believe That you send Jesus to die in the cross in order to forgive my sins.I recognize that I AM A SINNER and in this moment I ask you for your FORGIVENESS forgive me all my sinns!!! In this moment I accept Jesus as my Personal Lord and SAVIOR and I believe that now my name is written in the BOOK OF LIFE for ever. Thank you My God. In the Name of Jesuschrist<BR/>Amen.<BR/>"...16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life..." John 3:16<BR/><BR/>God bless you all!!!!!!!!Der_kleine_Josuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13082705809927037953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-26320706324184107332008-03-11T10:38:00.000-05:002008-03-11T10:38:00.000-05:00Apocalipsis, revelation Chapter 20 "...10 And the ...Apocalipsis, revelation Chapter 20 <BR/>"...10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where are also the beast and the false prophet; and they shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.<BR/>11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat upon it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.<BR/>12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne; and books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of the things which were written in the books, according to their works.<BR/>13 And the sea gave up the dead that were in it; and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.<BR/>14 And death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death, even the lake of fire.<BR/>15 And if any was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire..."<BR/><BR/>God bless youDer_kleine_Josuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13082705809927037953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-82021130671895547802008-03-10T15:44:00.000-05:002008-03-10T15:44:00.000-05:00with ALL CAPS and lots of exclamation points!!!!! ...<I>with ALL CAPS and lots of exclamation points!!!!! because, you know, those things make what you're saying more true) </I><BR/><BR/>Well, English isn't Iván's 1st language.<BR/>And my brain hurt so much from the exchange that anyone can read in this very combox that I had to take a whole 3 months off before coming back to it! I mean, just look at my blog, how it's sat dormant all that time, and... oh. Maybe not.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-76920246249482509142008-03-10T15:39:00.000-05:002008-03-10T15:39:00.000-05:00Let it never be said that kooks of a feather don't...Let it never be said that kooks of a feather don't flock together. Ivan posts wild-eyed, dribbling lunacy (with ALL CAPS and lots of exclamation points!!!!! because, you know, those things make what you're saying <I>more true</I>) about lakes of fire and threats of eternal suffering and all the usual childish scaremongering Christianity has to fall back on to compensate for its lack of rational arguments or evidence...and <I>of course</I>, those of us who are just a <I>teensy</I> bit skeptical and prefer a little more backup for such claims are the ones who have a "problem with reason."<BR/><BR/>Welcome to the black-is-white world of religious madness, kids!<BR/><BR/>By all means, you guys, don't ever change! Where else can we get such fantastic free entertainment? Honestly, watching a hippopotamus try to ride a unicycle isn't as funny as watching fundamentalist Christians try to think.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17933545393470431585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-66728239270784915752008-03-10T15:18:00.000-05:002008-03-10T15:18:00.000-05:00Yes, I have been saved by the grace of Jesus Chris...Yes, I have been saved by the grace of Jesus Christ. I will spend eternity with Him in heaven. I thank God because it is by His unmerited gift, not because of anything I've done or can do.<BR/><BR/>Parece que te veré allí, hermano.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-22728655725948538042008-03-10T15:08:00.000-05:002008-03-10T15:08:00.000-05:00hola rhology, I know very well what the unbeliever...hola rhology,<BR/> I know very well what the unbelievers think, because I was one of them 14 years ago and since then I preach the gospel of Jesus Christ my personal Savior and Lord. Thank you for your encouraging words. I bless you in the Name of the Lord Jesuschrist...<BR/>I have some questions for you: where are you going to be after your death?Are you saved? I hope you answer them very clearly.<BR/>Grace and peace for you too<BR/>IvánDer_kleine_Josuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13082705809927037953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-2288242799281044322008-03-10T14:05:00.000-05:002008-03-10T14:05:00.000-05:00Iván,Debes saber que este Martin tiene problemas c...Iván,<BR/><BR/>Debes saber que este Martin tiene problemas con la razón. No sabe como sabe cosas ni quiere saber la fundación. Pero Dios puede trabajar en muchas maneras y especialemente en la presentación del Evangelio de Jesús. <BR/>Quiero darte aliento en lo que haces; es también mi consejo que estudies un poco lo que creen los ateos para mejorar tu testigo. <BR/><BR/>Gracia y paz,<BR/>RhologyRhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-25829057943267401972008-03-10T13:49:00.000-05:002008-03-10T13:49:00.000-05:00dear Necio,necio in spanish, my mother tongue, mea...dear Necio,<BR/>necio in spanish, my mother tongue, means a person who says It doesn`t exist god.That`s why I call you Necio(in english senseless, fool, in german Dumm, doof, in french fou, insense)Proverbs 1:7 describes you very well:<BR/>"...7 The fear of Yahweh is the beginning of knowledge; But the foolish despise wisdom and instruction..."<BR/><BR/>I�m not afraid of my Lord, He is my Savior...my elsdest brother and my Father; of course you don`t understand this, because you are LOST. Martin, you are not going to write a letter in the lake of fire, you are going to suffer for ever and I known that you are so foolish that you wait �till yot get there to understand that you need Jesus to be saved, but IT is going to be late for you. Repent and run to Jesus...HE IS STILL WAITING FOR YOU!!!<BR/>Jesus LOVES YOU and Martin I AM NOT AFRAID, I repeat it for you:<BR/> I AM NOT AFRAID<BR/>, because Jesus is my savior and LORDDer_kleine_Josuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13082705809927037953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-6137372708137597712008-03-09T14:15:00.000-05:002008-03-09T14:15:00.000-05:00As usual, a whole lot of claims with no evidence t...As usual, a whole lot of claims with no evidence to support them, and a major appeal to emotion, especially fear. Like most believers who simply do not comprehend reason, you just insist I should just believe you and that you don't have to prove anything you say. Your approach to life and the things you choose to believe is completely anti-intellectual, so much so that attempting to explain it to you is pointless. By all means, continue to make your own choices based on irrational fears. But unless you can <I>convince the rest of us with evidence</I> there are things we need to fear that only running to your deity of choice will solve, then your posts only make you sound hysterical. (I'll give you a helpful hint: Bible quotes are not evidence.)Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17933545393470431585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-4737878095045439922008-03-09T13:12:00.000-05:002008-03-09T13:12:00.000-05:00you see Martin how wrong is your answer. I said he...you see Martin how wrong is your answer. I said he wants to kill you und you would say:I'd say, "Really? Where? Show me." See, that's what I am talking about. Martin, if I show you the killer, it is to late for you. Run, run from the killer!!! You have still the time, Run to Jesus he wants to protect you, saving your soul and spirit. Dont run to the religion, Run to the lord allmighty. The heaven is going to be plenty of SINNERS that repent, and Hell is going to be full of "good people" who rejected Jesus as personal savior and lord. I dont have religion, I have a personal savior Jesuschrist who died because of my sins to give me and everyone who believes in him eternal life. <BR/>Jesus said I am the way ,the truth and the life, NOBODY goes to the Father WITHOUT ME(Jesuschrist) John 14:6<BR/>God bless you, Martin!!!<BR/>Jesus is waiting for you, run to him!!!Der_kleine_Josuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13082705809927037953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-77786102381232005122008-03-08T16:52:00.000-06:002008-03-08T16:52:00.000-06:00Actually, Ivan, if you were to warn me that someon...Actually, Ivan, if you were to warn me that someone is waiting down the street to kill me, I'd say, "Really? Where? Show me." See, that's the difference. A real killer is something you could provide evidence for. But your god, hell, heaven...all these supernatural and magical entities you guys talk about...well, it's harder to produce concrete evidence like that, isn't it? The problem is Christians just want us to believe without having to provide concrete evidence, and whenever we ask for some, you get all offended. But why should that be unreasonable of us?Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17933545393470431585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-88013629406284361412008-03-08T16:10:00.000-06:002008-03-08T16:10:00.000-06:00Nobody want to terrorize you. We are talking about...Nobody want to terrorize you. We are talking about the truth and facts described in the bible, but you are so fool that instead of saying. Is it hell real? You talk and talk and talk. What would you do if I warn you saying this: Hey, my friend, at the corner is somebody waiting for you, because he wants to kill you.An intelligent person would answer, Thank you very much, my friend, but a foolish person like you would say: Do you want to terrorize me and then he or she will be dead and without knowing Jesus he goes to HELL...and you are right, you are not going to have the time to write a letterDer_kleine_Josuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13082705809927037953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-73688219749415725622007-12-20T08:14:00.000-06:002007-12-20T08:14:00.000-06:00Hi 420,Thanks for your patience. Been busy, I hop...Hi 420,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your patience. Been busy, I hope you understand.<BR/>And any further response from me might be long in coming given the upcoming celebration of Christ's birth. Please be patient - this is an engrossing conversation and I count it worthwhile to give it more time! <BR/><BR/><I>I made a detailed post yesterday which I thought was on the baord</I><BR/><BR/>Oh man, I hate that! <BR/>I always write out my comments on Notepad and save them before posting. It's a failsafe... you might try it. It's a lesson learned the hard way, like yours. :-(<BR/><BR/><I>How does anyone know they lack knowledge about anything? Because they don't know.</I><BR/><BR/>I know I lack knowledge about chemistry. <BR/>Etc.<BR/><BR/><I>Not finite Godism!</I><BR/><BR/>No argument was offered to resolve this problem.<BR/>This is one of the problems with the Dad worldview.<BR/><BR/><I>The laws of physics, I think.</I><BR/><BR/>Not your dad?<BR/>Are these laws, then, greater than him?<BR/><BR/><I>My dad doesn't believes that the basis of punishment is the nature of the crime and the intention behind it, not the status of the person it was committed against.</I><BR/><BR/>Then he doesn't understand what INFINITE holiness is and what laws of morality are.<BR/><BR/><I><B>>And then you try to tell me that 14/infinity < 1,000,000/infinity. That's not very impressive thinking, but you can be forgiven b/c it's clearly all ad hoc.</I></B><BR/><I>I'll use your favourite word and claim a strawman here</I><BR/><BR/>Explain how it's a strawman. I always do. <BR/>And then resolve the problem, if you please.<BR/><BR/><I>Oh yeah, my dad.</I><BR/><BR/>OK, so please describe your dad's relationship to moral law.<BR/><BR/><I>What question do you beg?</I><BR/><BR/>That would be <B>you</B> begging the question.<BR/>You claim some kind of self-existent rights of the indiv. But whence do they come? On what are they based?<BR/><BR/><I>Why what?</I><BR/><BR/>Why base my actions on empathy for fellow humans? Give me a good reason, one that goes beyond YOU, b/c if it's just YOU then I can just as easily see why any statement you make is overturned by ME. Unless there's some standard beyond us.<BR/><BR/><I>which one do you disagree with?</I><BR/><BR/>No, I mean your original statement:<BR/>>>Right, *reality* is a supernatural >>invisible >>not-part-of-the-universe-but-outside-it >>daddy.<BR/><BR/>"God" is not synonymous with "reality".<BR/><BR/><I>this is civil, fulfilled in christ, and applicable today?</I><BR/><BR/>1) Did I say that civil laws are fulfilled in Christ? No.<BR/>2) Yes, this is civil. No, not applicable today.<BR/><BR/><I>Deuteronomy 23:1</I><BR/><BR/>Wow, did it really say "wounded in the stones"? Ha, I'll have to check the KJV. Sometimes it can be unintentionally pretty funny!<BR/>It's referring to someone who's been emasculated - they couldn't enter the inner assembly of Israelite men for worship in the OT. <BR/>Ceremonial, yes.<BR/><BR/><I>I thought before that you said breaking infinite goodness deserves infinite punishment</I><BR/><BR/>It does, I was referring to earthly punishment, but I wasn't clear enough.<BR/>However, a man whose sins are forgiven by God may be held liable on earth for a murder he committed and be justifiably executed for his crime.<BR/><BR/><I>He planned what all along, that Adam would sin and He'd need to kill his son and for people to believe in that for salvation?</I><BR/><BR/>Right except for the "kill his son" part. Jesus is God and it was His plan to sacrifice Himself all along.<BR/><BR/><I>But the odd thing is, you don't have an objective way either. You can only trust that you know what good is.</I><BR/><BR/>Naked assertions do not make an argument. Define how it's not objective.<BR/><BR/><I>But not all, because God doesn't change... oh wait.</I><BR/><BR/>Wait about what?<BR/>"God never changes" does not equal "God never does different things in time and space". You've committed a category error.<BR/><BR/><I>but since they have changed,I *KNOW* that God can lay arbitrary laws.</I><BR/><BR/>Just b/c sthg changes doesn't mean it's necessarily arbitrary. that's a non sequitur.<BR/>Wow, two classic fallacies in as many paragraphs! You're on a roll.<BR/>The BASIS of a law makes it arbitrary or not.<BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>RhologyRhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-77161559576996420562007-12-17T11:41:00.000-06:002007-12-17T11:41:00.000-06:00I made a detailed post yesterday which I thought w...I made a detailed post yesterday which I thought was on the baord, but for some reason it's invisible now, so forgive me if I'm a little brief.<BR/><BR/>>And how does he know he lacks that<BR/>>knowledge?<BR/><BR/>I'd read this wrong before, without the "how", but the question baffles me now. How does anyone know they lack knowledge about anything? Because they don't know. I'm not sure what you mean.<BR/><BR/>>Your position is just finite godism and<BR/>>falls prey to the stock refutations.<BR/><BR/>Le Gasp! Not finite Godism!<BR/><BR/>>What holds the universe together?<BR/><BR/>The laws of physics, I think.<BR/><BR/>>If he is infinitely good, it's the >exact same thing as "holiness". But >somehow any breaking of infinite >goodness is not an infinite >transgression.<BR/><BR/>Right, that "somehow" is simply a different view on the way people should be punished. My dad doesn't believes that the basis of punishment is the nature of the crime and the intention behind it, not the status of the person it was committed against. An exception would be children and the mentally disabled, because they can be easier to take advantage of than most people.<BR/><BR/>>And then you try to tell me that<BR/>>14/infinity < 1,000,000/infinity.<BR/>>That's not very impressive thinking,<BR/>>but you can be forgiven b/c it's<BR/>>clearly all ad hoc.<BR/><BR/>>Fine, I'll give you another chance to<BR/>>unstick yourself. <BR/><BR/>I'll use your favourite word and claim a strawman here, because I'd never suggested anything of the sort. Therefore I don't need forgiveness for this non-occurring incident.<BR/><BR/>Nor do I need a chance to unstick myself.<BR/><BR/>>That's correct.<BR/>>We have to appeal to a fixed standard >of reference. What do you suggest as an >alternative?<BR/>>We've seen it, I don't know why I'm<BR/>>asking. <BR/><BR/>Hmmm, tough question. Oh yeah, my dad.<BR/><BR/>>"The rights of the individual" -<BR/>>begging the question.<BR/><BR/>What question do you beg?<BR/><BR/>>"Empathy" - why?<BR/><BR/>Why what?<BR/><BR/>>Not as much as you like setting<BR/>>[strawmen] up apparently.<BR/><BR/>For my comment to be a strawman, you must think god doesn't possess at least one of these attributes.<BR/><BR/>a)Supernatural<BR/>b)invisible<BR/>c)outside the universe<BR/><BR/>So which one(s) do you disagree with?<BR/><BR/>>OT laws are civil, ceremonial, and >moral.<BR/>>Civil = applicable for the Israelite >theocracy.<BR/>>Ceremonial = fulfilled in Christ.<BR/>>Moral = applicable today.<BR/><BR/>Deuteronomy 22:10<BR/>Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together.<BR/><BR/>this is civil, fulfilled in christ, and applicable today? how about this one?<BR/><BR/>Deuteronomy 23:1<BR/>He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD.<BR/><BR/>Maybe you can make sense out of this, but I certainly can't.<BR/><BR/>>The punishments for breaking them vary- <BR/>>you have to check the context. And you<BR/>>read the OT in light of the NT.<BR/><BR/>I thought before that you said breaking infinite goodness deserves infinite punishment, and now you're telling me that the punishments can vary, which are two conflicting ideas. That was your argument, but I suspect it will change now.<BR/><BR/>>His plan INCLUDES the fulfilment of the<BR/>>ceremonial laws in the Lamb of God,<BR/>>Jesus Christ. He planned it all along.<BR/><BR/>He planned what all along, that Adam would sin and He'd need to kill his son and for people to believe in that for salvation? Sounds..... far fetched, like jack and the beanstalk. Can you why I'm sceptical of this?<BR/><BR/><BR/>>1) You still have no way to tell me an >objective basis for judging anythg >"immoral".<BR/><BR/>Every time you mention it, I'll tell you "my dad". But the odd thing is, you don't have an objective way either. You can only trust that you know what good is.<BR/><BR/>>2) I've explained at least 3 times why<BR/>>God's laws are not arbitrary. Respond<BR/>>to the points or concede already.<BR/><BR/>Um, we're still discussing that.<BR/><BR/>>3) We are bound by SOME OT Law.<BR/><BR/>But not all, because God doesn't change... oh wait.<BR/><BR/>>4) Even if we were bound by all of<BR/>>them, you'd still make the same<BR/>>complaint.<BR/><BR/>You caught me, laws can only be arbitrary if they've changed at some point. If they haven't changed, then it'd only be my personal preference that they're arbitrary, but since they have changed, I *KNOW* that God can lay arbitrary laws.<BR/><BR/>>Since it's not His nature to do so,..<BR/><BR/>I won't bother responding here because we've moved that conversation up ni the chain a bit, so it'd be redundant to address this.FourTwentyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02628866114690624169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-67293376845853542842007-12-15T13:41:00.000-06:002007-12-15T13:41:00.000-06:00Hi 420,Please point me to how my dad's worldview f...Hi 420,<BR/><BR/><I>Please point me to how my dad's worldview fails, as I believe that I've defended my viewpoint.</I><BR/><BR/>Done it. You never responded to my points.<BR/>1) >Inconsistency. Sin against an<BR/>>infinitely holy God is an infinite<BR/>>debt.<BR/>>But maybe your dad is not all-holy. Is<BR/>>he?<BR/><BR/>My dad doesn't claim holiness of any sort. he claims goodness. And it's not inconsistant. By your reasoning, stealing a chocolate bar from the richest person in the world would carry a much bigger fine than stealing a chocolate bar from a poor child.<BR/>2) From <A HREF="http://atheistexperience.blogspot.com/2007/11/letter-from-hell.html#c1111873143705185775" REL="nofollow">here</A>:<BR/>>What knowledge does he lack?<BR/><BR/>He doesn't know the future, he doesn't know the position of every atom and molecule of the universe, he doesn't know our thoughts.<BR/><BR/>>And how does he know he lacks that >knowledge?<BR/><BR/>Yep.<BR/><BR/>>Did he create everything?<BR/><BR/>From my understanding, yes.<BR/><BR/>>If he did, >how can he lack knowledge<BR/>>about it?<BR/><BR/>He just set things in motion. If someone has kids, do they know everything about their kids? No. They may know a lot, but not "everything".<BR/>---/---<BR/><BR/>Your position is just finite godism and falls prey to the stock refutations. <BR/>What holds the universe together?<BR/><BR/>3) >Inconsistency. Sin against an<BR/>>infinitely holy God is an infinite<BR/>>debt.<BR/>>But maybe your dad is not all-holy. Is<BR/>>he?<BR/><BR/>My dad doesn't claim holiness of any sort. he claims goodness. And it's not inconsistant. By your reasoning, stealing a chocolate bar from the richest person in the world would carry a much bigger fine than stealing a chocolate bar from a poor child.<BR/><BR/>----/----<BR/><BR/>If he is infinitely good, it's the exact same thing as "holiness". But somehow any breaking of infinite goodness is not an infinite transgression.<BR/>And then you try to tell me that 14/infinity < 1,000,000/infinity. That's not very impressive thinking, but you can be forgiven b/c it's clearly all ad hoc.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Fine, I'll give you another chance to unstick yourself. <BR/><BR/><I>a) Trust God’s word that He is good</I><BR/><BR/>That's correct.<BR/>We have to appeal to a fixed standard of reference. What do you suggest as an alternative? <BR/>We've seen it, I don't know why I'm asking. <BR/>"The rights of the individual" - begging the question.<BR/>"Empathy" - why?<BR/>"My dad says it's no good". - It's the same as what I'm saying, but it's appealing to a made-up worldview rather than one that is rationally defensible.<BR/><BR/><I>You love the word strawman</I><BR/><BR/>Not as much as you like setting them up apparently.<BR/><BR/><I>That's an IF. I asked if *YOU* would have felt empathy, or feared some sort of punishement</I><BR/><BR/>I have no idea. I also can't speculate on what a square circle would sound like.<BR/><BR/><I>Any of them, take your pick.</I><BR/><BR/>No, I'll take God's pick if that's OK.<BR/>OT laws are civil, ceremonial, and moral.<BR/>Civil = applicable for the Israelite theocracy.<BR/>Ceremonial = fulfilled in Christ.<BR/>Moral = applicable today.<BR/>the punishments for breaking them vary - you have to check the context. And you read the OT in light of the NT.<BR/><BR/><I>if we aren't, God has changed His reasoning</I><BR/><BR/>His plan INCLUDES the fulfilment of the ceremonial laws in the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ. He planned it all along.<BR/><BR/><I>because if we aren't bound by OT law, it shows that God is willing to give us arbitrary laws at best, or immoral laws at worst.</I><BR/><BR/>1) You still have no way to tell me an objective basis for judging anythg "immoral".<BR/>2) I've explained at least 3 times why God's laws are not arbitrary. Respond to the points or concede already.<BR/>3) We are bound by SOME OT Law.<BR/>4) Even if we were bound by all of them, you'd still make the same complaint.<BR/>5) we are bound by all NT Law, which is no less God's Law than OT Law.<BR/><BR/><I>If it was God's nature to change his mind (see above) then God changing his mind would still be considered good</I><BR/><BR/>Since it's not His nature to do so, I don't know how to answer the question.<BR/>Speculating about what the world would be like if, say, the law of non-contradiction weren't in effect is impossible. Like this.<BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>RhologyRhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-57453391753701510592007-12-14T12:06:00.000-06:002007-12-14T12:06:00.000-06:00>What you told me was enough. And I>already explai...>What you told me was enough. And I<BR/>>already explained myself. I trust the<BR/>>reader to have seen what I said and your<BR/>>lack of response to it.<BR/><BR/>Please point me to how my dad's worldview fails, as I believe that I've defended my viewpoint.<BR/><BR/>>I have no reason to trust my own<BR/>>personal preferences to do that. I'd<BR/>>end up like you in that case.<BR/>>One can't compare the standard of<BR/>>comparison to sthg that is not a<BR/>>standard of comparison. Why is this so<BR/>>hard to grasp?<BR/><BR/>Who put God as the standard... Himself? Convenient. Were still at square one.<BR/><BR/>We only have two ways to decide if God is Good<BR/><BR/>a) Trust God’s word that He is good<BR/>b) Use some sort of reasoning to determine his goodness.<BR/><BR/>If you see a third option, or don't see a problem with either of these options, let me know.<BR/><BR/>>But not successfully. An example is the<BR/>>"my dad" example. All but the God of<BR/>>the Bible collapse into internal<BR/>>inconsistencies upon examination.<BR/><BR/>Again, I'd love to see the inconsistencies of my worldview.<BR/><BR/>>That's just a pitiful concession from >you. Duly noted.<BR/><BR/>Le Gasp! I just don't want you stealing my answer. get over it.<BR/><BR/><BR/>>><I>Right, *reality* is a supernatural >>invisible >>not-part-of-the-universe-but-outside-it >>daddy.</I><BR/><BR/>>Strawman. <BR/><BR/>Really? Are you saying that God isn't one or any of these things? I'm pretty sure these are all attributes of tgotb. You love the word strawman :)<BR/><BR/>>The statement "The God of the Bible<BR/>>exists" is a true statement,<BR/>>corresponding to reality.<BR/>>God and His creation form reality.<BR/>>What's your alternative?<BR/><BR/>The statement is not true. My dad said so, and he created the universe.<BR/><BR/>>1) What if empathy or punishment DIDN'T<BR/>>enter my mind? How would an atheist<BR/>>judge that to be evil?<BR/><BR/>That's an IF. I asked if *YOU* would have felt empathy, or feared some sort of punishement. And I'm not here to defend an atheist's view, I'm here to show you mine.<BR/><BR/>>Yes, but with God we can be sure that<BR/>>He punishes JUSTLY.<BR/><BR/>We're back to the "how do we know" dilemma, replacing "good" with "just".<BR/><BR/>>Do you need me to link to my "Comparing<BR/>>atheistic preferences..." post AGAIN?<BR/>>I'm not going to rewrite it.<BR/><BR/>I already read that article and found it to be lacking, as you made the exact same statements as you have in here, just in greater detail.<BR/><BR/>>His character and nature, essence.<BR/><BR/>all basically the same thing<BR/><BR/>>1) Which ones?<BR/>>2) Why would it mean that [we should<BR/>>still be bound under OT law?<BR/><BR/>Any of them, take your pick.<BR/>And it would mean we should still be bound under OT law because if we aren't, God has changed His reasoning, something you're saying God can't do. It poses a further problem, because if we aren't bound by OT law, it shows that God is willing to give us arbitrary laws at best, or immoral laws at worst.<BR/><BR/>>Not at all, for now morality is not >arbitrary, not based on a whim. It's >unchangeable since God's character is >unchangeable. The Euthyphrean dilemma >is thus solved, as are all silly >assertions that God could "change His >mind and send Christians to hell if He >wanted to".<BR/><BR/>How so? If it was God's nature to change his mind (see above) then God changing his mind would still be considered good, since the definition of good is modelled after his character.FourTwentyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02628866114690624169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-3168294122800625602007-12-14T09:17:00.000-06:002007-12-14T09:17:00.000-06:00Hi 420,You don't even know all of my dad's views a...Hi 420,<BR/><BR/><I>You don't even know all of my dad's views and rules, so how could you put the worldview to the test? And even still, what did you find lacking?</I><BR/><BR/>What you told me was enough. And I already explained myself. I trust the reader to have seen what I said and your lack of response to it.<BR/><BR/><I>It may be a fixed point reference, but in order to decide whether that point is good or bad, you must judge it with your own personal preferences.</I><BR/><BR/>I have no reason to trust my own personal preferences to do that. I'd end up like you in that case. <BR/>One can't compare the standard of comparison to sthg that is not a standard of comparison. Why is this so hard to grasp?<BR/><BR/><I>So far all I've seen is statements that he is good because (basically) He says he is, but that is very circular logic that can be used by anyone.</I><BR/><BR/>But not successfully. An example is the "my dad" example. All but the God of the Bible collapse into internal inconsistencies upon examination.<BR/><BR/><I>When, or if, I get a decent one from you, I'll do so. </I><BR/><BR/>That's just a pitiful concession from you. Duly noted.<BR/><BR/><I>Right, *reality* is a supernatural invisible not-part-of-the-universe-but-outside-it daddy.</I><BR/><BR/>Strawman. <BR/>The statement "The God of the Bible exists" is a true statement, corresponding to reality. <BR/>God and His creation form reality. <BR/>What's your alternative?<BR/><BR/><I>Empathy or punishment don't enter your mind? I can say the same thing about your worldview, it's just a risk one would be willing to take.</I><BR/><BR/>1) What if empathy or punishment DIDN'T enter my mind? How would an atheist judge that to be evil?<BR/>2) Many societies reward behavior that our society would punish. That's no standard.<BR/>3) How could one say the same about my worldview, given how I've explained how it has an objective basis for morality? that's just a throwaway statement with no merit. What's the argument?<BR/><BR/><I>You ignore theirs, they punish you.<BR/>You ignore God's, He punishes you.</I><BR/><BR/>Yes, but with God we can be sure that He punishes JUSTLY. <BR/>Do you need me to link to my "Comparing atheistic preferences..." post AGAIN? I'm not going to rewrite it.<BR/><BR/><I>then what would you add? </I><BR/><BR/>His character and nature, essence. <BR/><BR/><I>Wouldn't that mean that we are still bound by old testament laws?</I><BR/><BR/>1) Which ones?<BR/>2) Why would it mean that?<BR/><BR/><I>Then change my entire argument by replacing "define" and any derivatives, to a grammatically appropriate version of "it's in His character", the argument is essentially the same. </I><BR/><BR/>Not at all, for now morality is not arbitrary, not based on a whim. It's unchangeable since God's character is unchangeable. The Euthyphrean dilemma is thus solved, as are all silly assertions that God could "change His mind and send Christians to hell if He wanted to". <BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>RhologyRhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-47232444288744814432007-12-12T10:21:00.000-06:002007-12-12T10:21:00.000-06:00>In thought experiments, I've tried a>whole bunch ...>In thought experiments, I've tried a<BR/>>whole bunch of them, yes. I'm always<BR/>>willing to put another to the test,<BR/>>though.<BR/>>That's what I did with your "dad", for<BR/>>example.<BR/><BR/>You don't even know all of my dad's views and rules, so how could you put the worldview to the test? And even still, what did you find lacking?<BR/><BR/>>By comparing it to the unmoving >standard, the fixed point of reference, >and judging it by the criteria He has >revealed.<BR/><BR/>It may be a fixed point reference, but in order to decide whether that point is good or bad, you must judge it with your own personal preferences. If you judge it with someone else's preferences or criteria, then we come to the same conclusions as before, anything can be defined as good. So far all I've seen is statements that he is good because (basically) He says he is, but that is very circular logic that can be used by anyone.<BR/><BR/>>Now, please answer your own question.<BR/><BR/>When, or if, I get a decent one from you, I'll do so. <BR/><BR/>>You'll notice I'm not dealing with your<BR/>>"dad" anymore since the ad hoc<BR/>>worldview you've built around that<BR/>>rhetorical device has been shown to<BR/>>contain a logical inconsistency.<BR/>>That's one way to know who's right.<BR/><BR/>You haven't shown me any inconsistency, and I can even give you evidence that my dad is real. I haven't asked for evidence of yours, for the sake of discussion.<BR/><BR/>>My case is made here.<BR/><BR/>More of the same, I've read it twice to make sure I didn't miss anything, but you've made pretty much the same arguments you have here, and the most important question I have of "how do you know that God is good" isn't answered without using the same sweeping assumptions you're using here. If there's a part in specific you'd like me to address, please post it.<BR/><BR/>>B/c reality doesn't start and stop with<BR/>>a HUMAN.<BR/><BR/>Right, *reality* is a supernatural invisible not-part-of-the-universe-but-outside-it daddy.<BR/><BR/>>I see no reason not to carry out my own >will even if it conflicts with another >person's, even leads them to harm or >death or loss, in an atheist worldview.<BR/><BR/>Really? I'm not defending an atheist's worldview, but am I reading that right? Empathy or punishment don't enter your mind? I can say the same thing about your worldview, it's just a risk one would be willing to take.<BR/><BR/>>Fine, then I as another human take them<BR/>>away and don't care about them.<BR/>>Might now makes right, it would appear.<BR/>>And there's no GOOD nor BAD. There just<BR/>>is that struggle.<BR/><BR/>You ignore theirs, they punish you.<BR/>You ignore God's, He punishes you.<BR/><BR/>Explain the difference?<BR/><BR/>>In the biblical worldview, the might<BR/>>that IS right is the definition of<BR/>>goodness. His power is arrayed against<BR/>>evil. And there's a way to tell the<BR/>>difference.<BR/><BR/>Come again? How do we know he is against evil and, further, only evil? If it's any form of "he told us so; he is good because it's his character; he is the ultimate good;" yadda yadda don't waste your keystrokes.<BR/><BR/>>By His character, yes, I'd say that's<BR/>>correct.<BR/>>I don't know about "merely", though.<BR/><BR/>If not merely. then what would you add? Goodness is defined by His preferences, His character, and ___(blank)___<BR/><BR/>>Your "if" statements imply a few things<BR/>>that made me call strawman:<BR/>>1) that God might change His mind,<BR/>>inside time, about applying "good" and<BR/>>"bad" to Action X (which He doesn't do)<BR/><BR/>Wouldn't that mean that we are still bound by old testament laws?<BR/><BR/>>2) that what He "defines" as good is<BR/>>therefore good (it's not that He<BR/>>*defines* them as good, it's that good<BR/>>flows out of His character and<BR/>>therefore that which conforms to His<BR/>>character is good)<BR/><BR/>Then change my entire argument by replacing "define" and any derivatives, to a grammatically appropriate version of "it's in His character", the argument is essentially the same.FourTwentyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02628866114690624169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-63148641459519602462007-12-12T08:36:00.000-06:002007-12-12T08:36:00.000-06:00420,Internet's back up, that's good! Did you try ...420,<BR/><BR/>Internet's back up, that's good! <BR/><BR/><I>Did you try them all?</I><BR/><BR/>In thought experiments, I've tried a whole bunch of them, yes. I'm always willing to put another to the test, though. <BR/>That's what I did with your "dad", for example.<BR/><BR/><I>What level can you know that some thing are good and some things are bad, besides personal preference.</I><BR/><BR/>By comparing it to the unmoving standard, the fixed point of reference, and judging it by the criteria He has revealed.<BR/>Now, please answer your own question.<BR/><BR/><I>my Dad said so as well, so we're at a stalemate. How do we know who is right?</I><BR/><BR/>You'll notice I'm not dealing with your "dad" anymore since the ad hoc worldview you've built around that rhetorical device has been shown to contain a logical inconsistency.<BR/>That's one way to know who's right.<BR/><BR/><I>Care to copy and paste your argument?</I><BR/><BR/>My case is made <A HREF="http://rhoblogy.blogspot.com/2007/11/contrasting-atheistic-preferences-and.html" REL="nofollow">here</A>.<BR/><BR/><I>So how is this any better than a secular believer who states that they want the right to live, and everyone they know wants the right to live.</I><BR/><BR/>B/c reality doesn't start and stop with a HUMAN. <BR/>I see no reason not to carry out my own will even if it conflicts with another person's, even leads them to harm or death or loss, in an atheist worldview.<BR/><BR/><I>"We have given ourselves these rights because we want them, and that's that"</I><BR/><BR/>Fine, then I as another human take them away and don't care about them.<BR/>Might now makes right, it would appear. And there's no GOOD nor BAD. There just is that struggle.<BR/>In the biblical worldview, the might that IS right is the definition of goodness. His power is arrayed against evil. And there's a way to tell the difference.<BR/><BR/><I>so can we say that goodness is defined merely by His preferences and character?</I><BR/><BR/>By His character, yes, I'd say that's correct. <BR/>I don't know about "merely", though. <BR/><BR/><I>Which is the exact conclusion I was alluding to.</I><BR/><BR/>Your "if" statements imply a few things that made me call strawman:<BR/>1) that God might change His mind, inside time, about applying "good" and "bad" to Action X (which He doesn't do)<BR/>2) that what He "defines" as good is therefore good (it's not that He *defines* them as good, it's that good flows out of His character and therefore that which conforms to His character is good)<BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>RhologyRhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-39217747690683278472007-12-11T09:48:00.000-06:002007-12-11T09:48:00.000-06:00>Sorry, ice storm yesterday and Internet>was down ...>Sorry, ice storm yesterday and Internet<BR/>>was down all day. Ugh.<BR/><BR/>No Worries Bro.<BR/><BR/>>I trust God is the ultimate good b/c:<BR/>>1) there's no other option that works<BR/><BR/>Did you try them all?<BR/><BR/>>2) we DO know, after all, on some level<BR/>>that some things are good and some are<BR/>>bad<BR/><BR/>What level can you <B>know</B> that some thing are good and some things are bad, besides personal preference.<BR/><BR/>>3) God told me He is.<BR/><BR/>That's not a good reason at all, because my Dad said so as well, so we're at a stalemate. How do we know who is right?<BR/><BR/>>Where's the argument for this? I've<BR/>>written many lines describing the<BR/>>foundation beyond my personal<BR/>>preference.<BR/>>I didn't write the Bible. I conform to<BR/>>it.<BR/><BR/>Care to copy and paste your argument? I believed your argument was essentially that men cannot decide what is good or bad beyond personal or societal preference. If there's more to your argument, I've missed it. You've given me three rebuttals on the top and I'm taking issue with them all. The best you have is trust.<BR/><BR/>>I say that that which undergirds my<BR/>>personal preferences (since I prefer to<BR/>>follow the Bible) is better than your<BR/>>personal preference b/c mine reflect<BR/>>the absolute standard of goodness<BR/>>whereas yours are based on nothing more<BR/>>than personal preference, which begins<BR/>>and ends with you and is also liable to<BR/>>be changed at any moment based on your<BR/>>whim.<BR/><BR/>Again, I need to know how you decide that the Bible is the absolute standard of goodness.<BR/><BR/>>Which is what I was saying.<BR/>>And which is irrelevant, since this is<BR/>>a question of ultimate foundations. All<BR/>>such questions are circular since they<BR/>>deal with the foundations of reasoning.<BR/>>1) All such arguments do so.<BR/>>2) This is far better than "I said so,<BR/>>b/c I said so. And that's THAT." <BR/><BR/>So how is this any better than a secular believer who states that they want the right to live, and everyone they know wants the right to live. When pressed with the question of "Why do you value "sruvival so much? Why is it the basis of your morality" is answered with "We have given ourselves these rights because we want them, and that's that"<BR/><BR/><BR/>>1) It's not MERELY His personal<BR/>>preference; it's also a reflection of<BR/>>His character.<BR/>>2) And therefore of reality. Of how<BR/>>things really are, good and bad<BR/><BR/>Most people's preferences are based upon their character, so can we say that goodness is defined merely by His preferences and character?<BR/><BR/>>B/c your critiques so far have not<BR/>>reflected your statement of b) that you<BR/>>made here.<BR/>>You need to reformulate your critiques<BR/>>and try again.<BR/><BR/>To recap (so we don't have to keep scrolling up)<BR/><BR/>My scenario:<BR/>--If he defines bludgeoning rats with rocks as "good", then it is. If says that it's bad for us to do it, but ok for him to do it, and defines that as "good", then according to Him, it is.--<BR/>Was based on these 3 principles that you said you'd believed in:<BR/>a)God is Good<BR/>b)God defines good (based on what "flows out of him", or his character [or preferences])<BR/>c)God can only do good because it's his character.<BR/><BR/>Interestingly, you claim a strawman argument against my "if" statements. And if that's not enough, at the end of your latest post you state:<BR/><BR/>"<I>God's desires and actions never diverge, so yes, God can and does do anything He wants. And it's always good.</I>"<BR/><BR/>Which is the exact conclusion I was alluding to. So how can it be a strawman if you agree with the conclusion? You've just stated that anything that God does is good, by His definition of good alone.FourTwentyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02628866114690624169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-28132726419685687852007-12-11T08:46:00.000-06:002007-12-11T08:46:00.000-06:00Hi 420,Sorry, ice storm yesterday and Internet was...Hi 420,<BR/><BR/>Sorry, ice storm yesterday and Internet was down all day. Ugh.<BR/>I trust God is the ultimate good b/c:<BR/>1) there's no other option that works<BR/>2) we DO know, after all, on some level that some things are good and some are bad<BR/>3) God told me He is.<BR/><BR/><I>you can't recognize goodness beyond your own personal preferences.</I><BR/><BR/>Where's the argument for this? I've written many lines describing the foundation beyond my personal preference.<BR/>I didn't write the Bible. I conform to it.<BR/><BR/><I>How can you say that your personal preferences on what "ultimate good" is are better than another man's preferences?</I><BR/><BR/>I don't say that. I say that that which undergirds my personal preferences (since I prefer to follow the Bible) is better than your personal preference b/c mine reflect the absolute standard of goodness whereas yours are based on nothing more than personal preference, which begins and ends with you and is also liable to be changed at any moment based on your whim.<BR/><BR/><I>I don't call it circular, it IS circular.</I><BR/><BR/>Which is what I was saying. <BR/>And which is irrelevant, since this is a question of ultimate foundations. All such questions are circular since they deal with the foundations of reasoning.<BR/><BR/><I>The bucks stops there... so your argument is essentially "And that's THAT". </I><BR/><BR/>1) All such arguments do so.<BR/>2) This is far better than "I said so, b/c I said so. And that's THAT." <BR/><BR/><I>One might also say it's just His personal preference.</I><BR/><BR/>1) It's not MERELY His personal preference; it's also a reflection of His character.<BR/>2) And therefore of reality. Of how things really are, good and bad.<BR/><BR/><I>a)God is Good<BR/>b)God defines good (based on what "flows out of him", or his character [or personal preferences])<BR/>c)God can only do good because it's his character.</I><BR/><BR/>Be careful with b), but you're pretty much on the money here, so kudos to you.<BR/><BR/><I>How is it a straw man to make a scenario based on beliefs that you've admitted are yours?</I><BR/><BR/>B/c your critiques so far have not reflected your statement of b) that you made here. <BR/>You need to reformulate your critiques and try again.<BR/><BR/><I>I didn't imply that God doesn't, or shouldn't, get special privileges based on his definition of goodness.</I><BR/><BR/>Critics of the Bible do so all the time, so I was just heading you off at the pass. But if you weren't going to go there, it's cool, just don't worry about it.<BR/><BR/><I>Claiming "strawman" to any simple question that you might not want to answer is either a lie, or disingenuous at best. </I><BR/><BR/>I claim strawman when you base questions on a false formulation from you of my beliefs. <BR/><BR/>God's desires and actions never diverge, so yes, God can and does do anything He wants. And it's always good.<BR/>God defines goodness by His character. Or better said, "good" = "that which aligns with God's character". <BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>RhologyRhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-35994629946530443182007-12-07T11:52:00.000-06:002007-12-07T11:52:00.000-06:00>That's just the thing, I compare it to>the ultima...>That's just the thing, I compare it to<BR/>>the ultimate good.<BR/><BR/>So, how do you know, or why do you trust, that God is the ultimate good?<BR/><BR/>>It just so happens that my opinion of<BR/>>what is good lines up with the fact of<BR/>>what the ultimate good is.<BR/><BR/>But MY DAD is the ultimate good. My view lines up perfectly with his. We obviously disagree, but my dad's word is true, so you must be in the wrong.<BR/><BR/>>Now one might ask YOU: As an atheist,<BR/><BR/>Stop right there. I am NOT an atheist. I've already stated that I never have been an atheist. The rest of your question is void because it's a strawman, and only applies to someone who is an atheist, and I've already stated that I am not. I get my views from my dad, the initial creator.<BR/><BR/>>I would never say that I have no idea<BR/>>of what good is. God is the ultimate<BR/>>good, that's how I know.<BR/><BR/>Again, you can't recognize goodness beyond your own personal preferences. How can you say that your personal preferences on what "ultimate good" is are better than another man's preferences? You've already stated that an atheist can't recognize goodness beyond preference, what gives you this power of recognition?<BR/><BR/>>You may not like it, you may call it<BR/>>circular.<BR/><BR/>I don't call it circular, it <B>IS</B> circular.<BR/><BR/>>Getting down to ultimate questions like<BR/>>this will always lead to charges of<BR/>>"circularity", since the buck stopped<BR/>>there. There's nothing further to<BR/>>appeal to.<BR/><BR/>The bucks stops there... so your argument is essentially "And that's THAT". No need for debate, the buck stops here everyone! You'd figure that ultimate questions have ultimate answers, but we find nothing of the sort, the buck stops here!<BR/><BR/>>It's a far sight better than not having<BR/>>any idea how to call sthg good or bad<BR/>>beyond I like it and I don't like it.<BR/><BR/>How or why? Using reasons like this let you appeal to a false God rather than the true one, being my dad.<BR/><BR/>>Which flows out of His character, His<BR/>>identity one might say.<BR/><BR/>One might also say it's just His personal preference.<BR/><BR/>>You're trying to force the Euthyphrean<BR/>>dilemma on me thru imposing a strawman<BR/>>on me, apparently implying that the >*correct* formulation of my position<BR/>>solves the dilemma. I agree.<BR/><BR/>I'm not trying to pin anything on you. I'm taking three statements that you've made and devising a scenario from them.<BR/><BR/>a)God is Good<BR/>b)God defines good (based on what "flows out of him", or his character [or personal preferences])<BR/>c)God can only do good because it's his character.<BR/><BR/>How is it a straw man to make a scenario based on beliefs that you've admitted are yours? And if I may ask you to part with your thoughts, what's the correct formulation of your position that solves your dilemma?<BR/><BR/>>It's a totally different question,<BR/>>however, to ask whether it's<BR/>>permissible for me to do sthg that God<BR/>>is permitted to do.<BR/><BR/>I never asked anything, I'd just stated a scenario. I didn't imply that God doesn't, or shouldn't, get special privileges based on his definition of goodness.<BR/><BR/>>Strawman, again implying that my actual<BR/>>position does solve the dilemma you'd<BR/>>like to pin on me. The admissions are<BR/>>gratifying, thank you.<BR/><BR/>A strawman is a statement about someone that doesn't represent their beliefs. What I've done is ask a question. Claiming "strawman" to any simple question that you might not want to answer is either a lie, or disingenuous at best. I called your previous question a strawman, because your question asserted atheism on my part. My question makes no implications on your views. If you believe it does, point out the strawman, instead of simply stating "strawman". So I'll ask again:<BR/><BR/>Can God justify doing anything He wants, because it's his definition of good? Why or why not.<BR/><BR/>>It means that His actions do not<BR/>>violate His character.<BR/><BR/>In your opinion, does does God define goodness from his character, or does He model his character from his definition of goodness?FourTwentyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02628866114690624169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-58457079211248481422007-12-07T08:06:00.000-06:002007-12-07T08:06:00.000-06:00Hi 420,if you have no opinion on what is good and ...Hi 420,<BR/><BR/><I>if you have no opinion on what is good and leave your trust in someone else's definition, then how can you can you recognize goodness of any sort, if you have no basis for comparison?</I><BR/><BR/>That's just the thing, I compare it to the ultimate good. <BR/>It just so happens that my opinion of what is good lines up with the fact of what the ultimate good is.<BR/>Now one might ask YOU: As an atheist, since you have nothing to compare to to define "good" and "bad", how do you know beyond personal preference the difference?<BR/>And as we've of course seen, you don't know.<BR/><BR/><I>how can you understand that good flows out of God's character if you have no idea of what good is</I><BR/><BR/>I would never say that I have no idea of what good is. God is the ultimate good, that's how I know.<BR/>You may not like it, you may call it circular. Getting down to ultimate questions like this will always lead to charges of "circularity", since the buck stopped there. There's nothing further to appeal to.<BR/>It's a far sight better than not having any idea how to call sthg good or bad beyond I like it and I don't like it.<BR/><BR/><I>That's strange, because, as you've said, God defines what good is. It's HIS definition.</I><BR/><BR/>Which flows out of His character, His identity one might say.<BR/><BR/><I>If he defines bludgeoning rats with rocks as "good", then it is. </I><BR/><BR/>You're trying to force the Euthyphrean dilemma on me thru imposing a strawman on me, apparently implying that the *correct* formulation of my position solves the dilemma. I agree.<BR/><BR/><I>If says that it's bad for us to do it, but ok for him to do it, and defines that as "good", then according to Him, it is.</I><BR/><BR/>It's a totally different question, however, to ask whether it's permissible for me to do sthg that God is permitted to do.<BR/>God has not permitted me to kill anyone whenever I deem their crime too great. God, however, since He sees and knows all, and since all have broken the law and are capital criminals, is fully justified killing anyone He wants at any time. <BR/>Me not murdering (ie, unlawfully taking someone's life) and God killing are both good.<BR/><BR/><I>So God can justify doing anything He wants, because it's his definition, correct? </I><BR/><BR/>Strawman, again implying that my actual position does solve the dilemma you'd like to pin on me. The admissions are gratifying, thank you.<BR/><BR/><I>He can't violate the "good" but what does that mean if He defines the "good" in the first place?</I><BR/><BR/>It means that His actions do not violate His character.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>RhologysRhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.com