Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jayhawker Soule · 03-12-2002, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ShottleBop:
ReasonableDoubt, these are the closest That last sentence, of course, gives one pause.

Yea. I sure hope my great-great-grandfather was a good guy. Aslo, I'm not all that convinced about the "slow to anger" stuff.

03-12-2002, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt:


Yea. I sure hope my great-great-grandfather was a good guy. Aslo, I'm not all that convinced about the "slow to anger" stuff.

That spells determinism, doesn't it!

theophilus · 03-12-2002, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bd-from-kg:
In this thread I want to consider how it can be just for an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God to punish anyone.

While the argument applies to any choice, it’s simpler (and gets immediately to the point) to apply it to the one crucial choice – the choice to accept or reject God. By this I mean the decision (whatever its exact nature) which ultimately determines whether one enjoys eternal bliss. Also, in this context, by God’s “punishing” someone I mean withholding from him the gift of eternal bliss.

Now let’s consider Smith, who has chosen to reject God. It seems to me that there are three possibilities:

(1) If Smith had been subject to different environmental influences, he would not have rejected God. But God knew that, and chose to subject Smith to the environmental influences that he actually experienced. In so choosing, He determined that Smith would reject Him. In this case, how can it be just for God to punish Smith for doing something that He is responsible for?

(2) Smith would have rejected God no matter what environmental influences he might have been subject to. In other words, it was “in his nature” to reject God, and nothing could have changed this. But God, as Smith’s Creator, is obviously responsible for Smith’s innate nature. By making Smith the kind of person he was, He is responsible for Smith’s rejecting Him. So once again, how can it be just for God to punish Smith for something that God is responsible for?

(3) Smith might have accepted God even given the same inner nature and the exact same environmental influences. But this entails that at some point Smith made a choice such that he might have chosen differently given the exact same situation and the exact same “internal state” (i.e., the same character, disposition, transient impulses, fleeting thoughts, immediate perceptions, etc.) that he in fact had at that moment. And moreover, his choice to reject God must have been traceable to one or more such choices – i.e., choices such that he might have chosen differently under the exact same circumstances. But in what sense can such choices be said to have been Smith’s choices? If he truly might have chosen differently, nothing about Smith could have been responsible for the choice he made. Such a choice by definition has no cause; it is purely random. One might say metaphorically that Smith’s choice was a product of a cosmic roll of the dice. But how can it be just for God to punish Smith for the outcome of a cosmic roll of the dice?

In all of these cases it seems clear that it would be unjust for God to punish Smith. But these cases essentially exhaust the logical possibilities. And of course, “Smith” might be anyone. So it follows that it would be unjust for an “omnimax” God to punish anyone under any conditions.

Three problems present themselves immediately:
1. This is all speculative and therefore meaningless when talking about any particular god (not God) who may be under consideration. Now, if you want to talk about God (the God who has revealed himself in the Bible) then you must begin with what he has said, not how you imagine things are.
2. What is your standard of justice? As an atheist, by what authority do you apply this to God who, as the Creator, is the standard by which his creation is judged, not the other way around.
3. Even if you're right (which you're not), so what. Arguing about whether a god can do what he wants is silly. Besides, what you're actually saying is, "If I was god" this is how things would be. Which merely demonstrates once again that atheism is not an intellectual matter but a moral position, i.e., asserting onself to be God in place of the creator.

[ March 12, 2002: Message edited by: theophilus ]

Bill Snedden · 03-12-2002, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theophilus:
2. What is your standard of justice? As an atheist, by what authority do you apply this to God who, as the Creator, is the standard by which his creation is judged, not the other way around.

By what authority does your god claim to be the standard? Simply by virtue of creation? Because he's super powerful? Who died and made him king?

That's somewhat tongue in cheek, but I'd really like someone to have a go at answering this. "Divine right" was pretty much trashed during the Enlightenment, but this one vestige remains. Modern social and political systems are built upon the understanding that authority is only legitimized by consent. How and why should your god be exempt from this understanding?

Regards,

Bill Snedden

Jayhawker Soule · 03-13-2002, 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theophilus:
... Now, if you want to talk about God (the God who has revealed himself in the Bible) then you must begin with what he has said, not how you imagine things are.

Oh, you mean such revelations as: "He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD." -- Deut 23:1

kctan · 03-13-2002, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill Snedden:


By what authority does your god claim to be the standard? Simply by virtue of creation? Because he's super powerful? Who died and made him king?

That's somewhat tongue in cheek, but I'd really like someone to have a go at answering this. "Divine right" was pretty much trashed during the Enlightenment, but this one vestige remains. Modern social and political systems are built upon the understanding that authority is only legitimized by consent. How and why should your god be exempt from this understanding?

Regards,

Bill Snedden

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT !!!!!!!!!!

Only that this little god thingy can't seem to be able to show his might.

Bill Snedden · 03-13-2002, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by kctan:
MIGHT MAKES RIGHT !!!!!!!!!!

Well that's certainly one possible answer, however I don't think that many Christians would use it or stand behind it.

theophilus has raised an important point. In order to argue or speak about divine "injustice", some extra-divine standard of justice must exist or be posited to exist. Obviously, I have no problem that at all. IMO, justice is a human concept, inextricably rooted to human needs and desires and defined in human terms; no "god" required. This "definition" or framework is, also IMO, self-evident. Our systems of law and justice are designed to meet human needs and function as though that is their purpose.

On the other hand, theophilus (and others) argue that "justice" is somehow divine in origin and that the authority to determine and implement "justice" is exclusively reserved to the deity or its authorized agents.

I'm suggesting that the "divine lawgiver" theory bears a burden of proof. Not one of existence (that's for another thread

), but on moral authority. By what right does this lawgiver claim the authority to determine justice for sentient beings? If not "might", what is it?

Regards,

Bill Snedden

Blu · 03-13-2002, 07:33 AM

Again and again as I read things written in the forum, I am convinced that atheism is really an anti-Christian movement. People who quote the Bible to try to make people understand why they are atheist doesn't make much sense to me.

Who says Christianity is accurate in trying to describe things that are considered spiritual?

Who says the Christian definition of God is what God is supposed to be?

Jamie_L · 03-13-2002, 07:58 AM

When you are an atheist in the Western world, the single biggest thing that makes being an atheist difficult is the Christian majority. Encountering this day after day, personally and on a larger scale, makes you frame much of your discussion with respect to Christianity. It doesn't mean we are atheists because we are anti-Christian. It just means battles with Christians are the ones we are used to fighting - and the ones we expect to fight most in the future.

I'm sure atheists in Muslim countries frame their discussions in such a way that an outsider would think they are anti-Islam.

Jamie

Blu · 03-13-2002, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jamie_L:

When you are an atheist in the Western world, the single biggest thing that makes being an atheist difficult is the Christian majority. Encountering this day after day, personally and on a larger scale, makes you frame much of your discussion with respect to Christianity. It doesn't mean we are atheists because we are anti-Christian. It just means battles with Christians are the ones we are used to fighting - and the ones we expect to fight most in the future.

I'm sure atheists in Muslim countries frame their discussions in such a way that an outsider would think they are anti-Islam.

Jamie

My response:

I see your point. I think discussions on a non-religious idea of God would be more interesting. That would also be a hell of a lot more challenging.

Where is the Universalist view? Has anyone even heard of the Universalist (I am not referring to Wicca)?

I think I am leaning more towards a Universalistic view on "God" where Brian Greene's book on Quantum Mechanics is spiritually fulfilling.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-13-2002, 07:33 AM	#18
Blu Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: In this Universe Posts: 199	Again and again as I read things written in the forum, I am convinced that atheism is really an anti-Christian movement. People who quote the Bible to try to make people understand why they are atheist doesn't make much sense to me. Who says Christianity is accurate in trying to describe things that are considered spiritual? Who says the Christian definition of God is what God is supposed to be?

03-13-2002, 07:58 AM	#19
Jamie_L Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: U.S. Posts: 2,565	When you are an atheist in the Western world, the single biggest thing that makes being an atheist difficult is the Christian majority. Encountering this day after day, personally and on a larger scale, makes you frame much of your discussion with respect to Christianity. It doesn't mean we are atheists because we are anti-Christian. It just means battles with Christians are the ones we are used to fighting - and the ones we expect to fight most in the future. I'm sure atheists in Muslim countries frame their discussions in such a way that an outsider would think they are anti-Islam. Jamie

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.