|
Are you bored? Why don't you tell God how you feel about Him? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| chach |
We have identified 4 tensions in your reponses, which represents a tension quotient of 100% (where lower is better). The average tension quotient for this activity is 71%.
It is important to be clear about what we mean by "tension" here. A tension between two beliefs does not necessarily indicate that they are logically inconsistent with each other. It refers rather to a lack of fit: so, for example, two beliefs will be designated as being in tension if some (farily) sophisticated reasoning is required in order to reconcile them with each other. Sometimes you will already be aware what form such reasoning might take; other times, you will not.
Tension 1: Anything goes?
You have claimed both that God is sovereign and that the good and the just are simply those things God wills as being good and just. The trouble is this suggests that literally anything could become good or bad if God commands it. Even the most morally repugnant act you can imagine is potentially morally good. As 17th-century philosopher Ralph Cudworth put it: 'nothing can be imagined so grossly wicked, or so foully unjust or dishonest, but if it were supposed to be commanded by this omnipotent Deity, must needs upon that hypothesis forthwith become holy, just, and righteous.'
How bout having his own Son cruicfied in order to save the world. Crucifiction the last time I read was "torture". If we are talking the God of Abraham or so the test put it then how about mercilessly flooding the earth killing millions of people. Gods will is completely soverign in any every situation that humans categorize their reality
Tension 2: Empty omnibenevolence?
Your view that the good and the just are merely a function of God's will is at the very least in danger of making your belief in the omnibenevolence of God empty. If goodness is just those things that God wills as good, then saying that God is good seems only to amount to saying he exercizes his will. C. S. Lewis puts the point as follows: 'if good is to be defined as what God commands, then the goodness of God Himself is emptied of meaning and the commands of an omnipotent fiend would have the same claim on us as those of the 'Righteous Lord''.
God is the maker of Universe and everything in exisitance anything He wills happens. He controls all boundaries of what we as human merely consider physical real or measurable. Who are we to question God's omnibenevolence? Man can't even begin to crack into the mind of God.
Tension 3: How can God obligate?
If the good and the just are merely those things that God wills as being good and just, then it isn't clear how God's commands can impose a moral obligation upon us. In particular, there is nothing beyond the mere fact of a command to explain where His moral authority comes from. It seems the only reason it can be wrong not to follow God's commands is just because He has commanded that it is wrong not to follow his commands. But obviously this gets us precisely nowhere, since the issue at stake here is why God's commands impose a moral obligation in the first place.
God obligates because his will is perfect. Humans have free will to do as we please to follow Gods will or not. God is good his commands are not to place a moral restriction but because he cares and loves us. God never created dammnation for the human creation. His command and will were not to damn but to save through Christ.
Tension 4: No reasons for morality?
If there are no standards of morality other than God's will, then morality itself seems to be beyond reason. God's commands are merely a function of his whim. There can be no reason for Him to prefer not killing over killing, monogamy over adultery, or indeed any particular state of affairs over its opposite. The consequence is that morality becomes a matter of aribitrary caprice.
If it is so then I know if I followed Gods will and commands I would live a healthy long meaningful life. But unfortuantly our sinful nature destroys us from coming into contact of the Holiness of God. Only through the blood of the true messiah Jesus Christ are we able to join God the way he intended from the beginning. It becomes more of an belief and faith then a philsophical measureable test. |
|
|
| {b.s.e.} |
| quote: | Originally posted by Adam420
There is no god. Can we get on with things now please? |
Interesting times, the Kali Yuga is.
One's entire concept of spirituality and religion seems to be based on Catholicism (Read: Holy Roman Empire) and harsh monotheism - we still bear the scars as a people from the tortuous centuries of the Dominicans' Inquisition, be it through genetic memory or collective unconscious. It is not difficult to see through the lies of organised religion, particularly those of the Catholic Church and a shrewd and rather carcinogenic view on the soul and spirituality has emerged within the last 20 years; that is, it is not considered to exist.
It is my conjecture that we are all on a unique path to enlightenment, and we take our time - some take longer than others.
We are all looking at the same cube, and we all can only see one side - a relative square if it weren't for our scientific measurements, at this point. Your description of reality (mine, and hers, and his..)is entirely subjective and a lot of people have died [horribly) over this argument, to make an understatement. Live well, treat your brother and sister with love, and see what happens (if anything) when you die. You don't have many other options, really. If nothing else, you've left the world a better place than when you came in, and surely that can be your only charge.
In my humble opinion, of course.
I am aware of the massive comma splicing. |
|
|
| dj_alfi |
| the test is massively flawed |
|
|
| Settimo |
| No God in the heavens, waste of time to follow something you can't and will never find. I am God, you are God, we are all God. Taoism explains a lot of things... |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
Interesting times, the Kali Yuga is.
One's entire concept of spirituality and religion seems to be based on Catholicism (Read: Holy Roman Empire) and harsh monotheism - we still bear the scars as a people from the tortuous centuries of the Dominicans' Inquisition, be it through genetic memory or collective unconscious. It is not difficult to see through the lies of organised religion, particularly those of the Catholic Church and a shrewd and rather carcinogenic view on the soul and spirituality has emerged within the last 20 years; that is, it is not considered to exist.
It is my conjecture that we are all on a unique path to enlightenment, and we take our time - some take longer than others.
We are all looking at the same cube, and we all can only see one side - a relative square if it weren't for our scientific measurements, at this point. Your description of reality (mine, and hers, and his..)is entirely subjective and a lot of people have died [horribly) over this argument, to make an understatement. Live well, treat your brother and sister with love, and see what happens (if anything) when you die. You don't have many other options, really. If nothing else, you've left the world a better place than when you came in, and surely that can be your only charge.
In my humble opinion, of course.
I am aware of the massive comma splicing. |
Hello there, Harley!
| quote: | Originally posted by dj_alfi
the test is massively flawed |
And your argument is very compelling ;)
| quote: | Originally posted by Settimo
No God in the heavens, waste of time to follow something you can't and will never find. I am God, you are God, we are all God. Taoism explains a lot of things... |
Aren't we mixing up Hinduism with Taoism here? |
|
|
| dj_alfi |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
And your argument is very compelling ;)
|
| quote: |
Tensions
We have identified 4 tensions in your reponses, which represents a tension quotient of 100% (where lower is better). The average tension quotient for this activity is 71%.
It is important to be clear about what we mean by "tension" here. A tension between two beliefs does not necessarily indicate that they are logically inconsistent with each other. It refers rather to a lack of fit: so, for example, two beliefs will be designated as being in tension if some (farily) sophisticated reasoning is required in order to reconcile them with each other. Sometimes you will already be aware what form such reasoning might take; other times, you will not.
Note: If you did not modify your concept of God so that it no longer contained a logical impossibility, the tensions that follow are not necessarily tensions internal to your belief system. Also, given you do not believe that God exists, you should read the analysis below as referring to 'Anything that counts as God...' rather than 'God'.
Tension 1: God is sovereign
You claimed that God is sovereign in the sense that he has absolute authority over the whole of existence. However, if you think there are moral standards that are independent of God's will, then it seems at the very least he does not have authority over the domain of morals. Moreover, God's independence is threatened, since it appears that his goodness is dependent upon the extent to which he conforms to independent moral standards. |
No, I didnt say that. I answered No when I it asked me if I believed in God, then it asked me alot of questions about gods characteristics. It asked me to adjust my "concept of God so that it no longer involves a logical contradiction".
However, the "god"/test introduced itself as "a God in the Abrahamic tradition". How can I adjust my concept of something that is pretty much described in detail in the bible? and how can i make something illogical logical?
so i just answered the questions going by the old testament, it seems to be the canon in this cult.
however, not everyone believes in god, seeing as not everyone falls for that 2000+ year old propaganda, but they still have what most christians would consider good moral standards (im of course excluding american christian fundementalists here).
Some may even say "non-believers" have a higher standard of morals than christians, i won't go into great detail, seeing as you have probably read the chapthers revolving this in Richard Dawkins The God Illusion already.
| quote: | Tension 2: God is omnipotent
If there are moral standards independent of God's will that mean he cannot command what is evil and thereby make it good, then at least arguably this is a limit on his power. Therefore, there is a tension between your claim that God is omnipotent and your belief in an independent, objective morality. |
Of course there are moral standards independent of gods will, because god does not exist. No tension here, just poorly designed test/quiz.
| quote: | Tension 3: God has freedom of will
You claimed that God has freedom of will, in that he is at liberty to exercize his power in any way he chooses. However, assuming that it is morally wrong to command what is evil, then God cannot command people to do what he knows to be morally wrong. |
No, I said alot of people believe that god has freedom of will. But he does not, for he does not exist.
However if god had existed, and needed some dirty work done down on his precious planet earth, he could simply make what is evil good, even for just a tiny second. That is just one of his AWESOME powers, that makes him what he is not.
| quote: | Tension 4: God can obligate?
You claimed that there are moral standards that are independent of God's will. However, it is widely accepted that God's commands do in fact obligate (or to put this another way, that any being that counts as God must have the ability to obligate through its commands) - that it would be morally wrong not to follow a command given by God. This suggests at the very least that some aspect of morality flows from God.
There is, of course, no logical inconsistency in conceiving of a God whose commands do not obligate, but that would nevertheless be a rather strange conception of God. |
Any commands given by god are nothing but the ears playing tricks on a psychotic mind or evil lies to fool the masses into believing something is right or just in the "eyes of the lord".
test=stupid
alfi=geniuz |
|
|
| chach |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Hello there, Harley!
And your argument is very compelling ;)
Aren't we mixing up Hinduism with Taoism here? |
Fine lira don't look at my repsonses jeez :o
I hate you ! :mad: |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by chach
Fine lira don't look at my repsonses jeez :o
I hate you ! :mad: |
Haha, sorry, I haven't had the time to respond to the most elaborate posts yet. If you look at my replies, I only wrote quick comments :p |
|
|
| bas |
The only thing I didn't really like about this is when they asked if God can make torture right and just. I don't think it's a very fair question to ask. Can he make it right and just? I'm sure he can, but didn't God also give mankind free will? This test makes it sound like one day God says "oh by the way go ahead and torture the innocent" given what we as mankind already believe to be wrong. Would a lot of people just say "well it is God's will" and go with it? Yes of course, there are plenty of idiots in the world...does that make it right and just? I don't think so.
Stupid philosophisers. |
|
|
| Faj27 |
| quote: | Originally posted by bas
The only thing I didn't really like about this is when they asked if God can make torture right and just. I don't think it's a very fair question to ask. Can he make it right and just? I'm sure he can, but didn't God also give mankind free will? This test makes it sound like one day God says "oh by the way go ahead and torture the innocent" given what we as mankind already believe to be wrong. Would a lot of people just say "well it is God's will" and go with it? Yes of course, there are plenty of idiots in the world...does that make it right and just? I don't think so.
Stupid philosophisers. |
I was thinking the same thing :p |
|
|
| Lomeli |
| All beliefs are false. |
|
|
| woscar |
| quote: | Originally posted by bas
The only thing I didn't really like about this is when they asked if God can make torture right and just. I don't think it's a very fair question to ask. Can he make it right and just? I'm sure he can, but didn't God also give mankind free will? This test makes it sound like one day God says "oh by the way go ahead and torture the innocent" given what we as mankind already believe to be wrong. Would a lot of people just say "well it is God's will" and go with it? Yes of course, there are plenty of idiots in the world...does that make it right and just? I don't think so.
Stupid philosophisers. |
The point of that question is to know whether you believe that 'good' and 'evil' are defined by God or defined by humans. If you believe that God can "make torture right and just" then you are asserting that morality is not a human construct based on minimizing suffering, but only arbitrarily defined by God. ;) |
|
|
|
|
