Where's God?

[Ed1wolf]

So, @Ed1wolf - can you tell us...
Does God command something because it is good, or is it good because God commands it?
I don't think we've had a satisfactory answer from you yet, and it really is wonderful news if you really have solved this ancient puzzle.

God commands something because it is good and His commands are based on His character which is goodness itself.

 

[Ed1wolf]

My squeaks mean something to me.

They mean nothing objectively even to you if there is no God. You use language even in your head when you think. If it doesnt have an objective foundation, then you cant even really talk to yourself in your head.

 

[All Becomes New]

Yes, it certainly does depend on the nature of the lie. And while you may never have been placed in a position where lying was a virtuous act, it's not hard to imagine one.

Well, I have no reason to think that it in reality depends on the nature of the lie. You can say "it's not hard to imagine" about a lot of things, but that doesn't mean what you imagine is actually True. For example, sometimes I have paranoid delusions. This doesn't mean my delusions are actually reflecting reality, it just means I have certain thoughts going through my head. Now the thing is about these paranoid delusions is that I can often know on some level that they are not actually true, but because there is an emotional component to them, I cannot fully "convince" myself they are not true. But I can still know intellectually that what the thoughts I am having actually have a very low probability of them actually being true. The point I want to make here is that based on my own history, I have little reason to actually believe my delusions, so this leaves me with the idea that perhaps they are not in fact true. So I've learned over time not to trust my delusions.

So given I have no evidence in my own life that it depends on the lie, based on my own life, then I'm not sure it really matters what I can imagine or not. BTW, hypotheticals are usually a very poor representation of reality by definition.

I've bolded this to make sure you don't get the wrong idea about me being a delusional person all the time.

 

[Under_the_moon]

I think God is everywhere. In that particular picture he gave the surgeon the gift of knowledge in what he is doing and a steady hand. The nurses the gift to be able to handle their roll in it. Looks like a technician in there too who would have a gift of reading the machines. They may or may not know it but its all gifts. I have a hard time getting around this forum, I don't have a steady hand and have always struggled in school. But I have a gift, everyone does. The person on the table would be gifted in something too. If he chose to accept its a gift from God or just a whim that he plays or played a part in this world to make it a better place is his choice.
What would life be if there was no death? Christian or atheist it would get incredibly boring. Not to mention the world can only support so many people. Looking at it in an open mind death is something impossible to live without in my opinion. But there is life after death with God.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

God commands something because it is good and His commands are based on His character which is goodness itself.

Textbook circular reasoning. Thank you, Ed. You have proved my point.

 

[Ed1wolf]

ed: He is referring to humanity after we rebelled against God and became corrupted but those who return to God will be restored to spiritual greatness in this world and physical greatness in the next universe.

dm: And the Jews that were killed in the Holocaust, do you say they were "corrupted rebels", or that they were destined to spiritual and physical greatness?

Some were, some were not.

dm: You have told us the only way to this greatness is by believing certain stories such as the virgin birth and the resurrection. I think most of the Jews in the Holocaust rejected such stories as fables (for good reason). Since that was there opinion, and most likely would have been their opinion for life, were they headed to a hopeless destiny as corrupted rebels? And were they headed for horrors that were millions of times worse than the Holocaust? And was the only way out by somehow believing a tale that they saw no evidence for?

Some may have converted before they died. But as I demonstrated earlier Christ taught that there are different levels of hell, so depending on why they rejected Christianity and how they lived their lives they may have been sent to the better parts of hell which may not be much worse than an ordinary life on earth.

dm: You are not making much of a case that the Jews in the Holocaust had infinite value.

The fact that their decisions have eternal consequences shows they have infinite value.

dm: I, on the other hand, can make the case that we all need each other, and that there is something within everybody of great worth. The Holocaust was a travesty against people of worth.

Apparently you dont always need people that live in the womb. What is in everybody that is of great worth? You say that they had worth but the Nazis thought they didnt. How do you know who is right?

dm: Speaking of tales in the Bible, here is our story for today:

And as the king of Israel was passing by upon the wall, there cried a woman unto him, saying, Help, my lord, O king.
And he said, If the LORD do not help thee, whence shall I help thee? out of the barnfloor, or out of the winepress?
And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow.
So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son.
And it came to pass, when the king heard the words of the woman, that he rent his clothes; and he passed by upon the wall, and the people looked, and, behold, he had sackcloth within upon his flesh.
Then he said, God do so and more also to me, if the head of Elisha the son of Shaphat shall stand on him this day. (2 Kings 6:26-31)

Wait, what? Women arguing that since I left the other woman eat my boiled son, therefore I get to eat hers? Outrageous! Where is the moral outrage at the loss of respect for human dignity?

Uhh you do know this was a seige right and there was no food? The king was showing his shock and outrage about what both women had done by ripping his clothes and wearing sackcloth, that is what the ancient hebrews did.

 

[Ed1wolf]

Speak for yourself. You purport to derive meaning from Yahweh. So you are without meaning if he doesn't exist.

Yahweh could exist or not, and it would make no difference to me.

No, all humans derive meaning from God whether they want to or not. It would make a difference to you in an ultimate sense, whether you want to believe it or not. if God didnt exist then you would not exist.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Well, I have no reason to think that it in reality depends on the nature of the lie. You can say "it's not hard to imagine" about a lot of things, but that doesn't mean what you imagine is actually True. For example, sometimes I have paranoid delusions. This doesn't mean my delusions are actually reflecting reality, it just means I have certain thoughts going through my head. Now the thing is about these paranoid delusions is that I can often know on some level that they are not actually true, but because there is an emotional component to them, I cannot fully "convince" myself they are not true. But I can still know intellectually that what the thoughts I am having actually have a very low probability of them actually being true. The point I want to make here is that based on my own history, I have little reason to actually believe my delusions, so this leaves me with the idea that perhaps they are not in fact true. So I've learned over time not to trust my delusions.

So given I have no evidence in my own life that it depends on the lie, based on my own life, then I'm not sure it really matters what I can imagine or not. BTW, hypotheticals are usually a very poor representation of reality by definition.

I've bolded this to make sure you don't get the wrong idea about me being a delusional person all the time.

First of all, I'm very sorry to hear that you suffer paranoid delusions. It's interesting to hear how you find ways to deal with them. Being able to watch and be aware of our own thinking is a fascinating skill.

About lies: all I mean is, we can think of situations in which lying would indeed be a virtuous act, and I'm sure many of us have encountered them. My point is that this shows lying - simply saying something that is not true - is neither a moral nor an immoral act in and of itself; what matters is whether you do it for moral or immoral reasons.

 

[All Becomes New]

About lies: all I mean is, we can think of situations in which lying would indeed be a virtuous act, and I'm sure many of us have encountered them. My point is that this shows lying - simply saying something that is not true - is neither a moral nor an immoral act in and of itself; what matters is whether you do it for moral or immoral reasons.

I guess I would just say I've never actually been in that situation. I perhaps consider myself blessed that I haven't, but this doesn't mean it's a given that it accurately reflects reality. That doesn't mean I've never done anything wrong, it means I've never been in the position where it was necessary for me to choose between the lesser of two evils in order to do the moral thing to do. That's perhaps because I believe morality is objective and I don't believe doing the right thing is ever actually the wrong thing to do. But take demon possession as an example. I'm sure there are lots of things a person who is demon possessed has compromised themselves on.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

I guess I would just say I've never actually been in that situation. I perhaps consider myself blessed that I haven't, but this doesn't mean it's a given that it accurately reflects reality. That doesn't mean I've never done anything wrong, it means I've never been in the position where it was necessary for me to choose between the lesser of two evils in order to do the moral thing to do. That's perhaps because I believe morality is objective and I don't believe doing the right thing is ever actually the wrong thing to do. But take demon possession as an example. I'm sure there are lots of things a person who is demon possessed has compromised themselves on.

Well, the classic example I've heard of is a person sheltering Jews in WWII from the Nazis. The Nazis come to their house, and ask, "Do you have any Jews here?" Surely, knowing that an affirmative answer will result in their capture and execution, the moral thing to do is to lie, and say "No."

 

[All Becomes New]

Well, the classic example I've heard of is a person sheltering Jews in WWII from the Nazis. The Nazis come to their house, and ask, "Do you have any Jews here?" Surely, knowing that an affirmative answer will result in their capture and execution, the moral thing to do is to lie, and say "No."

This was brought up to me earlier. The answer I gave was what's the evidence it actually happened the way it was reported?

 

[InterestedAtheist]

This was brought up to me earlier. The answer I gave was what's the evidence it actually happened the way it was reported?

Well, first of all, that particular incident sounds quite likely. In fact, I'd be very surprised if it had never happened. After all anyone who is already hiding Jews from the Nazis has a strong motivation to lie when asked if there are any Jews hiding in their house, otherwise why would they have hidden them in the first place?
But it doesn't really matter if it can be proved or not. It only matters that it's a plausible and realistic scenario. That's all the proof we need that lying is not necessarily an immoral act.
For example, consider ten dice. Now, is it possible to throw them all at the same time and have them land on six, giving a total of sixty? Of course it is! Have you ever done it, or seen anyone do it? Very probably not. But that doesn't mean we should say it is impossible.

 

[All Becomes New]

Well, first of all, that particular incident sounds quite likely. In fact, I'd be very surprised if it had never happened. After all anyone who is already hiding Jews from the Nazis has a strong motivation to lie when asked if there are any Jews hiding in their house, otherwise why would they have hidden them in the first place?
But it doesn't really matter if it can be proved or not. It only matters that it's a plausible and realistic scenario. That's all the proof we need that lying is not necessarily an immoral act.
For example, consider ten dice. Now, is it possible to throw them all at the same time and have them land on six, giving a total of sixty? Of course it is! Have you ever done it, or seen anyone do it? Very probably not. But that doesn't mean we should say it is impossible.

There's a problem though...

Do you really expect the gestapo to just believe the people who may or may not be hiding Jews to be honest, when being honest could potentially cost them something? Doesn't seem to be thought through very well. What are the gestapo going to do if they are lying about hiding Jews? Are they just going to accept the answer given because people are honest?

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Hope

There's a problem though...

Do you really expect the gestapo to just believe the people who may or may not be hiding Jews to be honest, when being honest could potentially cost them something? Doesn't seem to be thought through very well. What are the gestapo going to do if they are lying about hiding Jews? Are they just going to accept the answer given because people are honest?

Hopefully their lie was in deed as well as word, with the Jews safely hidden in a secret room or under the floorboards where they Gestapo would not find them if they searched.
Wouldn't you agree that it would be an immoral act to hand people over to be executed (if done out of a desire to see them executed ) and a moral act to try to save their lives?

 

[doubtingmerle]

They mean nothing objectively even to you if there is no God. You use language even in your head when you think. If it doesnt have an objective foundation, then you cant even really talk to yourself in your head.

You are still back to arguing that God defined the English language?

Get serious. God never wrote an English dictionary. If you think he did, please point us to the document that defines what God says that words written in English will mean.

Do you say the same thing when a non-Christian policeman talks to you? "Words mean nothing objectively even to you if there is no God. You use language even in your head when you think. If it doesnt have an objective foundation, then you cant even really talk to yourself in your head."

Do you say the same thing when a non-Christian boss talks to you? "Words mean nothing objectively even to you if there is no God. You use language even in your head when you think. If it doesnt have an objective foundation, then you cant even really talk to yourself in your head."

Is any non-Christian ever able to talk to you, without you complaining that words have meaning only if you are a Christian?

 

[doubtingmerle]

I didnt say your life is not real, only that your definition of what a meaningful life is not. Jeffrey Dahmer felt he was living a meaningful life too. So which one is right?

Oh for crying out loud. That is the very thing we are arguing about!

Click at the arrow beside my name to reach the post you replied to. Then follow back 5 posts into this exchange. I have been arguing that my life is real and you have been arguing that it is not. Now you agree with me that my life was real.

Once again, we find you arguing for the exact opposite of what you have said before. Are you having fun arguing with yourself?

 

[Pommer]

I guess I would just say I've never actually been in that situation.

What are delusions but lies one tells to oneself?

 

[Ed1wolf]

Previously you have told me that Webster's Dictionary is biased and has incorrect definitions.

Now it turns out that God has objectively defined the English language? I wasn't aware of that. Can you please refer me to a resource that tells me how God defines the words we use in English?

No, human language is based on the language of the Triune Godhead.

 

[Pommer]

No, human language is based on the language of the Triune Godhead.

Somebody go wake Chomsky!

 

[doubtingmerle]

No, human language is based on the language of the Triune Godhead.

How do you know that the words in the English Language come from the language of the Triune God?