IRON MAN

Think outside the box ...



You are saying it is not logically possible for God to change his mind?

What I know of my wife is my own perception. What I believe about her is what she tells me, and what I think I can perceive.

The same goes for your God. You don't have any knowledge about his nature that did not originate from Him. As long as He is telling the truth, then you may be right. But you don't know that. You believe it, but you don't know it.

For me to truly know my wife infallibly, I would have to be able to read her mind. You would have to likewise have some inside knowledge of your God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_numbers

+1 squared = +1

-1 squared = +1

Square root of +1 = +/- 1

Square root of -1 =

I appreciate your responses.[/QUOTE]

Valmont

Hardly analogous to the scenario laid out in the original post. God is seen neither to command or even condone the killing. Yes, He does not intervene but divine non-intervention is a much wider theological problem and there are more than a few on it already out there.

Catquas

I think Valmont's answer is quite a good one, because "God" is not simply an all-powerful creator. He is also good. This means that the moral intiutions which I follow come to me because they are his will. In other words, I can say that he is "good" because his will is consistent with my moral intuitions. It is still possible, however, that my moral intiutions are a result of his will. In fact, for me morality is God's will, and God's will is morality. There is no difference. But the feelings I have inside, those moral intuitions, are not the same as morality. What is moral is what God wants us to do. A moral intuition is simply a feeling. The two are very different. But God might still have caused my moral intuitions; this is what I believe.

So if a being came down and told me to betray my moral intutions, and it was clear that the purpose of the action was not "good" (something in some way compatable with my moral intutions), then this would be strong evidence that "God" does not exist. This is because the defintion of the word "God", at least the one I believe in, is all-powerful, creator, and good, where "good" means having a will which is in accordance with my moral intuitions.

So both morality and my moral intutions come from God.

David B

Nonetheless he allegedly demanded human sacrifice. And did you not say in a thread above 'The God in whom I have faith would not ask such a thing'?

I would argue that there is something highly unusual in non existant beings demanding anything! Are you saying that these deities actually exist?

When you say 'story', do you mean 'account' (factual) or 'story' (fiction or fable)? If the former, then if the Tale of Abraham leading Isaac to Sacrifice has any truth to it at all, how can you eliminate the possibility that Abraham was deluded, as the people who think god is telling them to kill people are generally thought to be these days?

David B

Valmont

<snip>No I believe that the early Bronze Age population of the Levant believed that they did and that they demanded human sacrifice.

Fable is a good word. It is virtually impossible to subscribe to a literal interpretation of the Tanakh. We know, for instance, that the story of Noah could not have happened and is rather based on the Mesopotamian myth of Ut-Napishtim.

The story of Abraham and Isaac on Moriah, I see as a meditation upon the nature of God, moving beyond primitive notions of blood propitiation, as well as looking forward, as I said, to the life, death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

His Noodly Appendage

Unadulterated genius. I have to hand it to you, it takes balls to make that claim.

Lots of theists claim that we poor sinful atheists, having no god to guide us, worship ourselves and thus make up whatever morals we want, on the spot - we can believe anything we want to do is right, and do it with a clean conscience.

This is of course unadulterated rubbish; we carefully explain that we worship *nobody*, least of all ourselves, that no, we do NOT write our own ticket, and that it's sure as hell no free ride.

Look where your claim leads, though. You can take whatever you want to be right, and call it God's will. You can take anything you want to be wrong, and call it against God's will. Anything backing you up, you can call proof, and anything that challenges you, you can call false. You exclude the possibility of ever being wrong - your moral intuition is a direct pipeline to the defined source of morality.

So, you write your own ticket, but forge god's handwriting. Moral infallibility with divine backing, for your every whim. Have you considered starting a cult?

Catquas

I agree. Since I think that God gives all people a concience, which is an impulse to follow his will, it makes perfect sense that atheists have morals as well.

Well, it depends what wants we are dealing with. I believe that moral intuition is quite distinct from other kinds of desires. If I want it to be right that I can steal some food I want, then I can't convince myself that this is a result of a moral intuition; it is obviously a result of hunger or desire for good taste. But it is true that I can take anything that comes from my moral intution and call it God's will. The obvious problem with this is even if moral intution is distinct from other desires and emotional impulses, it is quite difficult for humans to distinguish between them. I have to believe, however, that the general thrust of my intuition is correct. Love your neighbor as yourself is the essence of this. If I am presented with a source which seems to disagree with my intuition, such as a large number of people, a wise person, or the Bible, then I might reconsider what I think my intuition is telling me.

This gets to questions of epistemology. How do we ever really know anything? How can a theist be absolutely certain of the will of God? How can an atheist be absolutely certain about what is moral and what is not? How can we even be sure anthing exists? At some point, we just trust our feelings.

I mean, even if God does exist why follow him? I don't do it to avoid eternal punishment because I don't believe in that.

I'm not saying that everything I think is moral is necessary God's will. I'm saying that I would not follow a God who was in direct contradiction with the majority of my moral intuitions. I don't follow God because he is powerful, omnicient, or a creator. I follow him mostly because he is good.

So yes, I can be confused about my moral intuitions. Yes, what I say is moral may not be. I am nowhere close to being infallable. I would never claim that my moral intuitions are proof that something is moral, especially to anyone else. My moral intuitions make me think certain things are moral, but I never would use this to try to convince another person; they can't even see into my mind. They do convince me, however, because that is how the mind works - it tends to respond to its contents. You can't disbelieve something you already believe.

I would, however, say that a moral claim which is in direct contradiction with my view of God's will is wrong. This is simply because if I believe something is right, I can't very well believe anthing except that the negation of that belief is wrong.

David B

But people having what could reasonably be called a conscience can be plausibly explained by evolutionary theory.

Why invoke magic (which in the end is what any supernatural claim implies, IMV) in order to explain something that doesn't invoke magic?

David B

Catquas

Because I am not trying to say that the existence of morality proves God exists. I already believe God exists, and that it is moral to follow his will, and that we can learn a lot about his will from the Holy Spirit, which is a direct contact with God in our minds. I think from these premeses, a logical conclusion would be that he caused our moral intuitions.

David B

OK, fair enough. It's late now, and I'm off to bed soon. If I plough through all of this thread in the morning, or any other thread you can point to, is there a post which explains why you already believe god exists? If so, please point me to it. Else, could you please explain your rationale for your belief. Then we could see if it stands up to sceptical examination. If so, I'd have to change my views.

David B (subscribes to the view that an unexamined faith is not a faith worth having)