Calzaer

Getting a reply from SOMMS is like playing hot potato, or bidding on e-bay. Only the last guy who said something before SOMMS returned gets an answer.

Philosoft

SOMMS, it seems like you're focusing on God's power rather than God's authority. God would indeed have the power to cause a state-of-affairs to obtain, but it doesn't follow that he has the moral authority to do so.

Bill Snedden

Your axiom, not ours. However, even on some of your own assumptions it's unwarranted. viz:

I can affirm this and yet still deny Man's lack of moral autonomy. I submit that it is possible that God could have chosen to so endow Man. In fact, it would be a undeniable testament to his glory and demonstrate him to be a creature truly worthy of worship.

So unlike the malignant demon you claim to worship...

And, of course this is false, as centuries of thought, research, and argument have demonstrated. One might as well deny evolution....oops...

Regards,

Bill Snedden

Bill Snedden

I should have been more specific.

You stated that we are not slaves, because we have the freedom to reject your god. Of course, you conveniently ignore that the penalty for rejecting your god is eternal suffering. Now, my point was: this is no different from a slave's "freedom" to reject his master by choosing to commit suicide.

The point is that a slave's "freedom" is constrained completely by his master's wish. In other words, a slave only has as much freedom as his master permits.

Now, please elucidate for me the "freedoms" that I enjoy absent the will of your god. Maybe attempting that futile task will help you see exactly what I'm on about.

Arguing by analogy is not assuming the conclusion of the argument. If you are unable to grasp the "subtlety" of this method, I suggest you simply refrain from using or critiquing arguments in that form.

So you say, but without any proof. And you had the temerity to accuse me of petitio principii??

There is no qualitative difference in the arguments I have employed. That you fail to see this is telling of your seeming need to focus on minutiae in order to avoid dealing with the issue. Take a look at theophilus' longer post to me. He got right to the point and flat out denies that Man has autonomy. He as much as admits that his god rules by virtue of his might, not any presumed moral law.

And, of course, that's the major assumption you're making as well: Might makes Right. God is bigger and stronger than we are, he gets to make all the rules. As evidenced by:

Assuming once again that Might makes Right.

Special pleading.

And again we see you confirm that, just as with the slavemaster, our feelings, our intuitions, our sense of justice, means nothing to your god. Might makes Right is apparently the whole of the law. God's moral authority to rule over us depends solely on his position and status, without reason and without justice. Truly a mockery of morality.

I really should thank you. You've argued my position most eloquently...

There are theists (and it may be that theophilus and SOMMS fit this mold) who claim that atheists and other unbelievers are "god-haters." Well, I feel obliged to point out two things:

1) I started this discussion in an attempt to defend a particular conception of divinity from what I felt could justifiably be argued as slander: ascribing to the godhead characteristics that would justify it being labeled a "slavemaster." Claiming that god "owns us" as chattel and can do with us as he wills.

I maintain that if God exists, He will necessarily be the most Enlightened being in existence. If Man, with his limited abilities, can conceive of the evil of slavery, surely God with his infinite capacity for knowledge can see no less. If slavery is truly evil, then God would never treat his creations in such a fashion.

2) If it be argued that atheists and unbelievers are "god-haters", then I must also argue that theists of this stripe are "Man-haters". I see no reason to believe that such a dichotomy must be accepted. If God created Man in His image, then surely to hate one is to hate the other...

Regards,

Bill Snedden

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Bill,
Not at all Bill. YOU tell me about the freedoms you enjoy. YOU are the recipient of freedom my friend. You can do whatever you want. Lay it on me.



You misunderstand Bill. I'm not saying your use of analogy is invalid. I am saying this particular analogy is inaccurate because it starts off 'we have no freedom'. It's the 'we have no freedom' part of the analogy that I disagree with. It's the 'we have no freedom' part of the analogy that you use to show we are 'trapped' because we must make a choice. Nobody buys this, because everybody has freedom.

I would hear you out Bill if you could explain how you equate 'we must choose if we are for/against God' with 'we have no freedom'.
I am quite suprised that anyone would actually think this.






I tell you what...I will concede this whole post if you can explain to me why you think IF God exists AND He created everything THEN He has no authority over it and doesn't own it.


Simple as that.






Might has nothing to do with it. IF He created it...THEN He owns it. Period. IF He created it...THEN He has authority over it. Period.

Carefully read the above Bill. You'll notice there is no incursion of God's omnipotence that derives His ownership and authority.





Uh huh...prove it.



What? You want me to smack you up side the head with John 3:16? I'm sure your tired of that verse by now.


Your missing the point here Bill. If God exists...THEN man is subservient to God. Not the other way around. God doesn't have to answer to man...get permission from man...ask man if it's ok to do something. Etc.

What you fail to see is that God is omniscient and Holy...completely sinless. There is no one better to judge, own or rule. Period. There is no malice in God that you find in man. Your whole argument Bill is that you find the idea of God owning everything horrible BECAUSE if man were to do this it would be horrible. It would violate your precious post-enlightenment propaganda. I completely agree with this.

However, the fact of the matter is Bill, we aren't talking about man...we are talking about God.



Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

camerono

When it comes down to it:

man's mind is finite. His brain is only so big and is made of only so many calculating cells. This means that his understanding too is finite.The only way that we are even able to conceive of things that are far larger than us or move far faster than us is by giving those things (like the speed of light) a number. This shows that even if God WERE omnipotent, omniscient or omni anything, we STILL wouldn't be able to do anything more than IMAGINE it. In fact there is no reason for ANYONE to even consider that he is omni because we have NEVER witnessed infinity.

Infinity is a concept in the first place. It really only has applications in mathematics, or in the case of religion, it is a blanket statement which deceives us of what is even a possible truth: that God is more powerful than us, or at least has the ability to influence people.

All of the things done by God, besides the plagues, have been done by people. Crusades and the like have all been persued by people "in the name of" God. At best this garauntees that God is a great conspirator. It in no way leads, logically to him being omnipotent or omniscient.

Why an omnipotent, omniscient, and apparently omnibenevolent being would 1)waste his time creating a spec of life on some random planet, is beyond me. Why would he then allow us to either go to ETERNAL damnation or ETERNAL salvation based on a FINITE (and terribly short amount of time when compared to ETERNITY) amount of time spent on planet Earth?

It is a ridiculous concept that you are trading a number of years be they good or bad, or INFINITY in which ever you chose first. Why wouldn't he simply MAKE all of us good using his omnipotence and send us all to heaven and end the universe on a good note?

camerono

"I tell you what...I will concede this whole post if you can explain to me why you think IF God exists AND He created everything THEN He has no authority over it and doesn't own it.


Simple as that."

Since no human has ever created a sentient, self-aware thinking and able creature, it is illogical to jump to the conclusion that if we did we would have RIGHTFUL ownership of it. Unless you consider children as the property of their parents to do with as they please.

Even then you have to realize ownership is very much a concept specific to some human societies. There are actual tribes that exist in Africa and South America that do not work on a basis of ownership.

Sorry I'm not as cool with my quoting.

camerono

Originally posted by theophilus
"Well, you are confusing categories, and you know it. The slave owner did not "create" the slave. If you want to hold God accountable to some "objective" standard of justice, then you must first demonstrate that justice is a meaningful concept in a materialistic universe and that your standard is objectively determinative for all existents."

Justice IS completely arbitrary in a universe as you describe it, which is also the same universe that we live in. It is decided by the morals of the society. Some of the common, in fact many, morals in MOST societies today coincide with those of Christianity, and have NOTHING to do with what you believe, just with how you act.

If two people live identically moral lives and one believes in God and one doesn't, it is an INjustice to have only one of the two, equally good people go to heaven. This make Christianity a members only type of situation which isn't moral at all. They might as well just say, "No girls allowed!"

Calzaer

Anyone else find it fucking hilarious to hear a theist say the words "prove it"?

Fiach

It is equally funny to see them squirm, twist, and evade when they say "Jesus is Lord". And we say "Prove it."

They may say, "God so loved us he sent his only begottong son, etc." We say, "prove it."

They may say the Earth is only 60 centuries old. We say "prove it".

They may say there was a "world wide flood with 2.3 billion cubic km of water. Noah and his alleged sons collected two or 7 of every animal type from North America, South america, Australia, New Zealand, Africa, New Guinea, and arctic regions. Return the animals to each of those places, and magically God removed all of that water." We say,"ha, ha, ha,giggle, giggle, Prove it."

They say "Jesus walked on water." We say, "prove he walked on land."

Fiach