David Gould

Tercel,

Sorry for butting in but I noticed that while you are answering the age old question of 'If God told you to be bad, would you be bad?' you also have thrown in an old one of your own.

As no objective morality can be demonstrated to exist, my assumption is that morality is subjective. Thus, according to the SS officer, what he is doing is morally right. According to the Jew (and to me) what he is doing is morally wrong.

There is no objective standard.

What my subjective standard derives from is, however, a fairly logical progression.

1.) I do not like to suffer and thus avoid it where possible.
2.) It appears to me that others do not like to suffer.
3.) As I empathise with others who appear to be suffering and do not like it, I suffer when they do.

Thus, all suffering is bad and should be reduced or if possible removed - it should never be caused by me if I can avoid it.

And also, 'Thou shalt not murder' is not an objective standard of morality either as humans subjectively determine what is and is not murder (it is a legal term). Aztecs had laws that prohibited 'murder' but human sacrifice was fine becasue it was not defined as such. Thus, they were keeping at least that part of the ten commandments. (they were of course worshipping false idols and so forth - however, they did not condone murder.)

You need a biblical definition of what murder actually is. It is obviously does not cover stoning someone to death for adultery - that is not murder in the Bible. It obviously does not include the killing of children after taking a city in war - that is not murder in the Bible.

Can you help me define this 'objective' term a little better?

It would be much appreciated.

Scrutinizer

Theli,

You're still thinking in temporal terms. For instance, here's a quote of yours (I've bolded particular parts):

The very point I was making is that the only reason we think the demise of the universe and the demise of you haven't happened yet is because we have a limited perspective. As a matter of fact, however, they are happening, right "now" from God's perspective. Please try as best you can to comprehend this, even though it's very difficult. You're assuming that the demise of the universe simply hasn't happened yet as a matter of fact. What I'm proposing is that the demise of the universe is happening, but that our mode of perception (i.e. time) makes us think it is going to happen later in a temporal sense.

Now, I don't understand why "free will" is precluded simply because God is seeing all of past, present and future as "now". In my opinion, we can still make decisions from within (i.e. free will decisions) even though we wouldn't have chosen differently.

God can interact with the universe at particular moments in time from our perspective. From our perspective God may act to do something tomorrow. From God's perspective he's simply acting "now".

Okay, so why would "free will" not exist if God were timeless?

Okay then, God didn't create ex nihilo, he created from nothing other than his will. That's what's usually meant by creation ex nihilo, though.

I think you mean invalidates. But I don't think you need "time" to have action or cause anything. I strongly suggest you take a look at the "God's Long Countdown" thread Tercel linked to in a previous post.

Regards,

- Scrutinizer

Theli

Tercel...
I didn't mean "make" as in "force you to" do anything.

What I was saying is that because of your free will that you have the ability to do "evil" deeds. If god existed, and created everthing, he also created our free will in such a manner that it could cause us to do evil. And then he creates agony, and let us feel it for an eternity in hell, wich he also created. He created the will to do evil, created agony, and let us feel it. I don't see why we should be punished for it.

Isn't your personality based on past experiences, and of your brains construction?
So, if you were "evil" it wouldn't really be your own fault, would it? Then why should your soul be punished for an eternity for it?

That's abit different, don't you think?
According to you, god did not only create the knife, but also the possibility for you to kill someone with it.
The only way I see that god exists is if he just created a world with twisted rules, and then looks at it from a distance, while his creation goes berserk. The idea that all this was a plan of some great superintelligent being is highly questionable.

What's so stupid about it?
Do you think there is no possibility for it to happen?
What if god want's to test your faith...

Well... that is a good question. The way I see it is that the bombing of the military targets, such as training camps was necessary. If they hadn't, the talibans would most probably attack again.

Mostly because I would not do it, because I feel sorry for the victim. Hehehe, it might sound abit corny, but if my actions delibratly hurts someone else in some way, I hurt too.

You are talking about yourself as a narcissist here. If you are a Nazi and your victim was a Jew, you would probably consider yourself superior to him. Mainly because of your alledged genetic superiosity wich makes the Jew a lesser animal. And also you are doing the will of Hitler, who you consider a righteous man, and through that you draw the conclusion that your actions also must be righteous. This is however false logic.
And another thing, you would probably not be a Commander if you were an atheist. Hitler was a believing christian, and your atheism might be seen as a sign of disobedience in his ideology.

Calling your own authority supreme, turns you into a drone. You will never even question your authoritys commands or agenda, and because of this it overides your own free will. You are then no longer a free thinking human, but more of a weapon, an embodyment of your supremes authoritys will.
It's highly questionable also, if you really think your actions are for the better of the human-race. You might rather use this as an excuse for yourself to overide your own conscience, to be able to follow your supreme authority's will.

Well... obviosly his moral reasons has been affected by his narcissism.
1. First because he consider himself superior.
2. He consider his own actions justified, since they are the will of a supreme authority (Hitler).
3. He is blinded by a good cause. Strenghten mankind.
These things can very well desensitize (hope I spelled that right) a person, and put that person in a blind zeal. That's why his actions are wrong.

Where did you find this Creation of God doctrine? I have looked on the internet for the subject. I have found many theist's aswell as atheist's wich uses Ex Nihilo to explain their believes on the universe's "creation". But I have never seen anyone who have embedded god into the Ex Nihilo meaning. If you would have said "Creatio Ex Nihilo per Deus" Then your doctrine would be correct. But it would be a self-contradiction. That's what I was trying to say.

Theli

The creation of the universe? or the destruction? They would both be simultainesly.
And if the future would coexist with the past and the present they would also be fixed. If you say that a point in time exists tomorrow where I get run over by a car, there would be no way for me to avoid that, right?
If I was able to avoid it, then the future would be changable, but the past is not. And my present would exist, since it's the point in time wich seperates the changable future from the unchangable past.

But, how could we do that? If god was able to see the future, aswell as the past, they both must be unchangable. If I used my free will in order to change the course of my life (even the slightest) then god's previous vision of my future would be false, since it has changed. Note also that "previous" can't exist for him, it's all "now". It's a self-contradiction.

If god's action's were all happening simultainesly (now) for him, he couldn't really be seen as a conscious being, could he? How could he change his mind about something? His mind would be set at a single point, and could not chance, since the changes would have to be simultainious with his previous state of mind, and would never have changed in the first place.

But the person who calls that Creatio Ex Nihilo is quite wrong.

If time didn't exist then there will be no particular order for the changes to happen. Here's alittle example... If you consider a lamp being turned OFFs an initial state, and then turned ON, and then turned OFF again.
Is the lamp turned ON or OFF right now?
In a spacetime, it would have been turned OFF, since the OFF-state existed last in the course of time.
But what would happen if time didn't exist?
The lamp would be turned ON and OFF at the same time, while still being in the initial OFF state. So... would the lamp be ON or OFF? Has it ever been ON at all?

Ok, now I'm tired... It's time for me to go to my OFF-state.
Thanks for reading my incoherent rantings and goodnight... :-)

Tercel

It seems to me that you are arguing that since we are constructed physically of many smaller particles which together determine our actions, and that our choices come as a direct result our being "victims" of our enivronment, so to speak, we are not responsible for the choices we make, and instead God is the one responsible on the basis that he created the initial conditions which inevitably would lead to us doing evil. Correct?
I would simply say that I do not think we are deterministic beings: I would suggest that although physical reality is deterministic, we are more than only a physical entities and that our consciousness is not entirely explicable in terms of deterministic material physics - There is something more to us than animate matter which sets us above complex robots who respond to their environment and gives us a true moral responsibility for our actions, or so I believe.

The Bible would appear to suggest that what God creates is created "very good", and that any twisting of the rules is not caused by God but rather by other spiritual powers and evil humans working against God. As for watching while it goes berserk: Would you prefer that God annihilated everything evil or with the possibility for evil that exists?
I think it is presumptuous to assume that this cannot be the plan of a superintelligence: The Bible seems to indicate that everything ends up better than average - Jesus and Paul both comment that the problems that currently exist are tiny compared to the greatness the final victory of good.

It's hard to find anything on the web that states straight out that Creation Ex Nihilo includes God using his own will and creative power. It seems to be assumed that it should be implicitly understood from the statement that God created ex nihilo.
I did, however, manage to dig up this:
"the doctrine of creation ex nihilo —that is, "creation out of nothing." The idea that God simply called the universe into existence by His own power, without using any pre-existing materials," from <a href="http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-135.htm" target="_blank">here</a>

Tercel

Theli

Well... Semicorrect.
First of all, I don't believe god exists. And secondly, I don't really know what the consciousness really is.
But what I know, is that if god created us (along with our brains), then he must have known it's weaknesses and the ability to commit sins (evil). It's not just our faults, so why are we the ones to suffer?
If you think of a psychotic killer... What would cause someone to become "p.k"? Either psycologic, being beaten as a child, or likewise.
Or braindamage. Caused at birth, or at an accident, or by chemical imbalance.

The p.k would most likely burn in hell (if such a place existed) for his crimes against humanity. But how is it really his fault? Why should his soul suffer for this?

Of course the bible would say a such thing. "Everyone" wich denies the christian god (demons and unbelievers) is responsible for evil. I've heard this crap one too many times.
Personally I find the bible barbaric.

If I were to choose?
Well... then I would like him to destroy those nasty demons and monsters with horns, who causes natural disasters, viruses and diseases, and then leave us alone with our free will intact.
Oh, yes... And eradicate religion.
But then again, I'm not in a position to make such demand.

I took a look at it. But I wouldn't use their doctrine, since they have apperantly already assumed that god in a part of the words "ex nihilo". I'd rather go with the straight (word for word) translation.


Thanks for responding...

[ February 03, 2002: Message edited by: Theli ]</p>

Tercel

I think most Christians would agree that he should only ever be punished for what is his fault and what he had control over.

Um, The demons are not supposed to deny God as in disbelieve, but rather they go against God despite knowing he exists. Also, it's a bit unfair pining everything on "unbelievers": Christians are doubtless responsible for more than just a little bit of evil too.

Tercel