Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Keith · 07-18-2003, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth

"And I pointed out that, with your definition of God and our moral imperative to obey him without question, you do not have any basis for saying the 9/11 attacks against America were morally wrong. God could have told them to do that, in which case it would not be morally wrong. Or God could tell you or anyone else to commit an act of terrorism, in which case it would not be morally wrong."

A false god couldn't have told the terrorists to do it. And God can't order anyone to commit an immoral act because God can't command, or act against, his own nature.

Keith · 07-18-2003, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pain Paien

"That could be construed as a condescending emotional attack.
Shame on you."

I'm sorry that I got so far behind in my responses. I'm not even sure that I can catch up with all of them. I will try to answer several people's points in some of my responses. I've been extremely busy these days and I wish I could devote a lot more of my time to this.

Biff the unclean · 07-18-2003, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Keith
A false god couldn't have told the terrorists to do it. And God can't order anyone to commit an immoral act because God can't command, or act against, his own nature.

And yet the terrorists all claim god is ordering them to do it. They shout his praises as they kill thousands of innocent people.

How can you claim that an order-to anyone-to kill their own child is a moral act? How can you read the OT and claim its god isn't immoral?

Pain Paien · 07-18-2003, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Keith
A false god couldn't have told the terrorists to do it. And God can't order anyone to commit an immoral act because God can't command, or act against, his own nature.

You have no reason to believe that the "true" god didn't command it. You've already admitted that the only relavent moral criteria (and one which overrides all others) for an act is what god tells you. Just because for us to do it would be immoral, doesn't mean god can't order it, by your own reasoning.

Mageth · 07-18-2003, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Keith
A false god couldn't have told the terrorists to do it.

How do you know your God didn't tell them? But that's not the point; the point is, under your system, your God could tell someone to commit a terrorist act and that someone would be morally bound to obey. Just look at some of the things God supposedly told the Israelites to do in the OT. So under your system you have no basis to condemn the actions of terrorists as immoral.

And God can't order anyone to commit an immoral act because God can't command, or act against, his own nature.

But you said God gave the Israelites the Laws in the OT, at least some of which (e.g. killing rebellious children) you consider immoral. And in the OT God commanded the Israelites to commit genocide...

And why would God's nature include anything concerning terrorism at all? Are there other gods that your God's nature prevents him from terrorizing? And look at God's supposed actions against the Egyptians to free the Israelites - terrorist acts for sure, yet your God's nature didn't prohibit him from doing them.

Keith · 07-18-2003, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth

"If Nazi Germany indeed had such a moral system, then yes, that moral system could be used to justify such an act under that moral system.

That's why it is good there were and are other moral systems - of the U.S., other countries, and a developing global moral system - that held (and holds) that Germany's treatment of the Jews (and other actions by Germany) was immoral and had to be stopped. In other words, other moral systems were used to justify stopping Germany."

If the moral system of the Nazi's was justified under their own system, then why is it "good" that there were other moral systems held by other societies which held that Germany's treatment of the Jews was immoral and had to be stopped? Are you now changing your mind about the basis for morality?

Mageth · 07-18-2003, 02:02 PM

If the moral system of the Nazi's was justified under their own system, then why is it "good" that there were other moral systems held by other societies which held that Germany's treatment of the Jews was immoral and had to be stopped? Are you now changing your mind about the basis for morality?

No. It should be obvious that I consider it "good" under a moral system to which I ascribe, a moral system that (unlike yours and that portrayed by the Bible) holds that genocide is, has been, and always will be bad, and that moral systems that support genocide (or terrorism, killing children, etc) are bad and should be changed by persuasion if possible or, if necessary, stopped by force, as was the case with Nazi Germany.

Keith · 07-18-2003, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth

"No. It should be obvious that I consider it "good" under a moral system to which I ascribe, a moral system that (unlike yours and that portrayed by the Bible) holds that genocide is, has been, and always will be bad, and that moral systems that support genocide (or terrorism, killing children, etc) are bad and should be changed by persuasion if possible or, if necessary, stopped by force, as was the case with Nazi Germany."

Then are you saying that what you consider to be morally "good" (or morally "right") is not the same thing as the STANDARD by which societies judge the goodness or rightness of morality? Is this an admission that your "societal consensus" standard is Amoral? I'm still wondering...what is the relevance of what YOU consider morally "good"? It sounds like you are trying to distance yourself from your own societal consensus standard when it is applied to, for example, the Nazi's.

Keith · 07-18-2003, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth

"How do you know your God didn't tell them? But that's not the point; the point is, under your system, your God could tell someone to commit a terrorist act and that someone would be morally bound to obey. Just look at some of the things God supposedly told the Israelites to do in the OT. So under your system you have no basis to condemn the actions of terrorists as immoral."

This assumes that an individual can commit terrorism and not even know it is morally wrong. Under your moral view this must be a real possibility. Under Christianity it is not.

Biff the unclean · 07-18-2003, 03:03 PM

I would say that it is pretty obvious that any claims that morality has its source in the bible's god can be dismissed as this character shows no signs of even knowing what morality is. And so could not possibly be the source of it. Much like the claims that it (the god) is the source of the Earth and sky, when it doesn't even know what the Earth and the sky are.

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

07-18-2003, 01:54 PM	#345
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Originally posted by Keith A false god couldn't have told the terrorists to do it. How do you know your God didn't tell them? But that's not the point; the point is, under your system, your God could tell someone to commit a terrorist act and that someone would be morally bound to obey. Just look at some of the things God supposedly told the Israelites to do in the OT. So under your system you have no basis to condemn the actions of terrorists as immoral. And God can't order anyone to commit an immoral act because God can't command, or act against, his own nature. But you said God gave the Israelites the Laws in the OT, at least some of which (e.g. killing rebellious children) you consider immoral. And in the OT God commanded the Israelites to commit genocide... And why would God's nature include anything concerning terrorism at all? Are there other gods that your God's nature prevents him from terrorizing? And look at God's supposed actions against the Egyptians to free the Israelites - terrorist acts for sure, yet your God's nature didn't prohibit him from doing them.

07-18-2003, 02:02 PM	#347
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	If the moral system of the Nazi's was justified under their own system, then why is it "good" that there were other moral systems held by other societies which held that Germany's treatment of the Jews was immoral and had to be stopped? Are you now changing your mind about the basis for morality? No. It should be obvious that I consider it "good" under a moral system to which I ascribe, a moral system that (unlike yours and that portrayed by the Bible) holds that genocide is, has been, and always will be bad, and that moral systems that support genocide (or terrorism, killing children, etc) are bad and should be changed by persuasion if possible or, if necessary, stopped by force, as was the case with Nazi Germany.

07-18-2003, 03:03 PM	#350
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	I would say that it is pretty obvious that any claims that morality has its source in the bible's god can be dismissed as this character shows no signs of even knowing what morality is. And so could not possibly be the source of it. Much like the claims that it (the god) is the source of the Earth and sky, when it doesn't even know what the Earth and the sky are.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.