Okay, now hear me out on this becuyase I know that when I first try to state my problem, so people won't be able to listen and think about whatever else I say but here goes.
Some of you know my mental diorders (Man I hate saying that, since it feels normal for me..) and how I am pretty much a boy of logic, reason and thinking since I have no emotions or moral code that guide myself or my direction. Now then onto my problem, I have worked myself into a thinking rut and it's pointing to one thing...The Christian God (if he exist) is not moral or not good and quite possibly both. Let that sink in for abit and now I will go on with my argument, I know at first it won't seem like it's going anywhere but hear me out.
My first argument.
God gave us "free-will" which is our ability to do and decide what we want and so forth. In order for him to have created us to have free-will, he himself must have free will and I don't think anyone woulld contend this. God has free will. But lets take a look at what that means and what God invariably is. God is Omniscient (all knowing) according to the Bible, but an all knowing being cannot have free will. The Bible states god knows the past and future but if you know your future actions, what choices will you make, and you cannot change them otherwise your knowledge would be wrong and you wouldn't be "all-knowing". A true omniscient being has no free will to choose actions; all it;s actions are predetermined. If your lost, let me explkain it like this.
"There is a light switch on the wall; God may either turn it on, or leave it off, but since God already knows the future, God knows he will turn it on. That is part of his knowledge. But what if God exercises free will and chooses not to turn it on. Is this possible? Nope."
If you knew a decisions you are going to make in the future... what would it mean? You would have no free will to change that choice. No option, no choices... based on the fact that you know it's going to happen, it is predestined and no amount of strong will can change it. The further in the future the predicted choice is, the less free will you have to change it! Imagine if for infinity you'd always known exactly what choices you were going to make and that you could never be wrong. You would never have a any free will in any choice...ever!
In effect God is an obersver, an omniuscient being has no free will, it;s entire future is set out and it has no choice but to follow it's predestined path. Out of the possible options in a situation, God always makes the best choice because it is perfectly benevolent. It cannot do something that is less moral or "good" than something else, because that would not be perfectly good, but merely second best good. In every situation, God only had one choice, the most moral and good one. God has no free/will. It can make no choices, there ar eno possibilities for an omniscient-benevolent God to choose from. In order to give God his free wil, we would have to take away his omniscient (all knowing nature) or take away his benevolence.
So since God has true free will now, this also means God is imperfect. Since God is not perfect it becomes possible for God to choose a less then perfect action. God, as the ultimate creator created goodness. God is also said to be perfectly good benevolent God. This means that fulfils every possibility of the goodness he has created. He is the be-a;; and end-all of goodness, perfectly good and unerringly good. If God was not 100 percent perfectly moral, God would not be perfect. Once again we have utter lack of free will.
God knows the nuances and complexities of every situation. God knows which actions are optimal, he knows which actions are perfectly good. Only God, I would guess, is capable of performing actions that are perfectly good. And he does so unnerringly, constantly, because he himself is perfectly good and never errors. He is all knowing and perfectly good, but this makes a problem for free will, in any situation, of all the possible things God could do, God does the pefectly morally right one. It never choses an inferior course of action because he is perfect. If he acted imperfectly, he would not be perfect.
So, in any situation, a perfectlly moral God has no choice: It must carry out what action is most good. God, in creating goodness, and being perfectly good, is completley limited to only a set, predetermined series of actions. In any situation, at any point in time or out of time, God has no free will: He must act robotically and automatically carry out the precise action that is perfectly good.
But herien lies contradiction: How can a God that has no choice be described as "moral"? A computer, for example, is amoral because it cannot make moral choices, it's programming defines it's actions accuratly. Likewise, God accutatly has to follow the optimally most perfect and moral path. God's morality is the same as a computers: He makes no truly moral choice. The contradiction shows up a fundemental flaw in the English used to describe God. It cannot be perfectly moral and moral. In short, it is known by three strong arguments now that God HAS to be either amoral (with no free will) or imperfect (with free will.)
Since we all know the Christian God himself has free will and is not a static unchanging computer, he must be imperfect.
So now we hit a problem the famouis Greek philospher Plato struggled with and is called the Euthypro dillemma. In brief, Plato puts forward two alternative positions that a religious person can take. That what God commands is right simply because God commands it or God commands what is right becuase it is right. The first of these alternatives, what might be called the fundamentalist position, seems to imply that God's command sets an arbutrary standard which we have no moral reason for following; we may indeed only follow it out of fear of the consequences of failing to do so. The second alternative is equally troubling for the religion. It seems to imply that the divine command is irrelevant to ethics and that ethical standards are established independent of religious considerations. It also sets limits on divine omnipotence by suggesting that God is compelled to act in a certain way because that is what is ethical as I established already.
God wills us to do good acts. Without God, a person can perform no good acts. All good acts are attributed to God but all bad acts are due to our rejection of God. However this is an inconsistency and is devoid of meaning when we think about the nature pf a "good act"/ God wills us to do good acts. This must means one of two things as Plato suggected."
1.If God will it, then it is good.
2. Good acts are not defined by God.
Obviously the God is the basis of Good acts as the Bible states then we must select the first option, becuase the second would imply the existance of another Creator, a creator of absolute of Absolute Morals and Good acts which would contradict the single-Creator caluse of monotheism.
Based of these arguments and the arguments from above we now know two things for sure.
1. God is right and good simply becuase he says so.
2. God has free will and is therefore imperfect.
Imperfect as we stated earlier means God can choose an option that is less perfect or good and thus we come to the conclusion of my argument.
God is either an amoral computer and thus has no morals or is not truly "good" for he is imperfect and defines himself as good. It is possible for God to make mistakes and even follow his own interest. And now for some verses in the bible that lead me to believe God could be evil and can be validate as just with my argument above.
*Note* I own the International Bible and King James Bible. I am qouting the International but I have cross referenced the King James to make sure the storys and verses where the same and no mistranslated or blantly differant.
The doctrine of original sin.where children are punished for the sins of their parents hardly seems the act of a good god. Before it has always been, God says it is good and so it is perfect but my argument has proven that it may not always be perfect. God punished Adam and Eve with death, pain, suffering and caused the evil of all mankind yet they "sinned" before they knew the differance between good and evil. How could a truly good God punish someone for criems they do not understand. Let us compare this to a modern situation. A 3 year old child is told not to do something without understanding why. he does it and is sentenced to die. Seems highly unreasonable and quite evil by our logic and becuase of my argument, God's logic is no better then ours. I am also aware that many claim evil sporuts from mankind but this is false as the bible ad mits the line below.
"I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)
Since God as I have argued, is imperfect, then the above shows what kind of God we are dealing with. He admits to creating evil, not that humanity did or a fallen being or Satan, he creates evil and he createds disasters as well as good. He can do so on a whim.
Now then. I am two lazy..MUCH to lazy to qoute entire stories from the bible so I will leave you with a few stories to poknder in the bible with my argument.
1.2 Kings 2: 23-24 (God kills 42 children with bears becuase they call one of his prophets...baldie.)
2. 1 Kings 1: 20: 30 (God makes a wall fall and kills 27,000 of an army retreating from some Isrealites.)
3. Numbers 16: 16-49 (God kills anyone who complians. 14,950 all together.)
4. 1 Samuel 2 6: 6-11 (God kills someone for ACCIDENTLY touching the Ark of Covenant.)
In conclusion, in my opinion God seems to be an imperfect being deciding what is right simply because he says wo who is all egotistical and evil.
Is there something I am missing, is there some thing I can;t grasp about God and if so what is it? That's my questions. I jsut want to know what it is I am missing that makes you believe him so good.
Some of you know my mental diorders (Man I hate saying that, since it feels normal for me..) and how I am pretty much a boy of logic, reason and thinking since I have no emotions or moral code that guide myself or my direction. Now then onto my problem, I have worked myself into a thinking rut and it's pointing to one thing...The Christian God (if he exist) is not moral or not good and quite possibly both. Let that sink in for abit and now I will go on with my argument, I know at first it won't seem like it's going anywhere but hear me out.
My first argument.
God gave us "free-will" which is our ability to do and decide what we want and so forth. In order for him to have created us to have free-will, he himself must have free will and I don't think anyone woulld contend this. God has free will. But lets take a look at what that means and what God invariably is. God is Omniscient (all knowing) according to the Bible, but an all knowing being cannot have free will. The Bible states god knows the past and future but if you know your future actions, what choices will you make, and you cannot change them otherwise your knowledge would be wrong and you wouldn't be "all-knowing". A true omniscient being has no free will to choose actions; all it;s actions are predetermined. If your lost, let me explkain it like this.
"There is a light switch on the wall; God may either turn it on, or leave it off, but since God already knows the future, God knows he will turn it on. That is part of his knowledge. But what if God exercises free will and chooses not to turn it on. Is this possible? Nope."
If you knew a decisions you are going to make in the future... what would it mean? You would have no free will to change that choice. No option, no choices... based on the fact that you know it's going to happen, it is predestined and no amount of strong will can change it. The further in the future the predicted choice is, the less free will you have to change it! Imagine if for infinity you'd always known exactly what choices you were going to make and that you could never be wrong. You would never have a any free will in any choice...ever!
In effect God is an obersver, an omniuscient being has no free will, it;s entire future is set out and it has no choice but to follow it's predestined path. Out of the possible options in a situation, God always makes the best choice because it is perfectly benevolent. It cannot do something that is less moral or "good" than something else, because that would not be perfectly good, but merely second best good. In every situation, God only had one choice, the most moral and good one. God has no free/will. It can make no choices, there ar eno possibilities for an omniscient-benevolent God to choose from. In order to give God his free wil, we would have to take away his omniscient (all knowing nature) or take away his benevolence.
So since God has true free will now, this also means God is imperfect. Since God is not perfect it becomes possible for God to choose a less then perfect action. God, as the ultimate creator created goodness. God is also said to be perfectly good benevolent God. This means that fulfils every possibility of the goodness he has created. He is the be-a;; and end-all of goodness, perfectly good and unerringly good. If God was not 100 percent perfectly moral, God would not be perfect. Once again we have utter lack of free will.
God knows the nuances and complexities of every situation. God knows which actions are optimal, he knows which actions are perfectly good. Only God, I would guess, is capable of performing actions that are perfectly good. And he does so unnerringly, constantly, because he himself is perfectly good and never errors. He is all knowing and perfectly good, but this makes a problem for free will, in any situation, of all the possible things God could do, God does the pefectly morally right one. It never choses an inferior course of action because he is perfect. If he acted imperfectly, he would not be perfect.
So, in any situation, a perfectlly moral God has no choice: It must carry out what action is most good. God, in creating goodness, and being perfectly good, is completley limited to only a set, predetermined series of actions. In any situation, at any point in time or out of time, God has no free will: He must act robotically and automatically carry out the precise action that is perfectly good.
But herien lies contradiction: How can a God that has no choice be described as "moral"? A computer, for example, is amoral because it cannot make moral choices, it's programming defines it's actions accuratly. Likewise, God accutatly has to follow the optimally most perfect and moral path. God's morality is the same as a computers: He makes no truly moral choice. The contradiction shows up a fundemental flaw in the English used to describe God. It cannot be perfectly moral and moral. In short, it is known by three strong arguments now that God HAS to be either amoral (with no free will) or imperfect (with free will.)
Since we all know the Christian God himself has free will and is not a static unchanging computer, he must be imperfect.
So now we hit a problem the famouis Greek philospher Plato struggled with and is called the Euthypro dillemma. In brief, Plato puts forward two alternative positions that a religious person can take. That what God commands is right simply because God commands it or God commands what is right becuase it is right. The first of these alternatives, what might be called the fundamentalist position, seems to imply that God's command sets an arbutrary standard which we have no moral reason for following; we may indeed only follow it out of fear of the consequences of failing to do so. The second alternative is equally troubling for the religion. It seems to imply that the divine command is irrelevant to ethics and that ethical standards are established independent of religious considerations. It also sets limits on divine omnipotence by suggesting that God is compelled to act in a certain way because that is what is ethical as I established already.
God wills us to do good acts. Without God, a person can perform no good acts. All good acts are attributed to God but all bad acts are due to our rejection of God. However this is an inconsistency and is devoid of meaning when we think about the nature pf a "good act"/ God wills us to do good acts. This must means one of two things as Plato suggected."
1.If God will it, then it is good.
2. Good acts are not defined by God.
Obviously the God is the basis of Good acts as the Bible states then we must select the first option, becuase the second would imply the existance of another Creator, a creator of absolute of Absolute Morals and Good acts which would contradict the single-Creator caluse of monotheism.
Based of these arguments and the arguments from above we now know two things for sure.
1. God is right and good simply becuase he says so.
2. God has free will and is therefore imperfect.
Imperfect as we stated earlier means God can choose an option that is less perfect or good and thus we come to the conclusion of my argument.
God is either an amoral computer and thus has no morals or is not truly "good" for he is imperfect and defines himself as good. It is possible for God to make mistakes and even follow his own interest. And now for some verses in the bible that lead me to believe God could be evil and can be validate as just with my argument above.
*Note* I own the International Bible and King James Bible. I am qouting the International but I have cross referenced the King James to make sure the storys and verses where the same and no mistranslated or blantly differant.
The doctrine of original sin.where children are punished for the sins of their parents hardly seems the act of a good god. Before it has always been, God says it is good and so it is perfect but my argument has proven that it may not always be perfect. God punished Adam and Eve with death, pain, suffering and caused the evil of all mankind yet they "sinned" before they knew the differance between good and evil. How could a truly good God punish someone for criems they do not understand. Let us compare this to a modern situation. A 3 year old child is told not to do something without understanding why. he does it and is sentenced to die. Seems highly unreasonable and quite evil by our logic and becuase of my argument, God's logic is no better then ours. I am also aware that many claim evil sporuts from mankind but this is false as the bible ad mits the line below.
"I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)
Since God as I have argued, is imperfect, then the above shows what kind of God we are dealing with. He admits to creating evil, not that humanity did or a fallen being or Satan, he creates evil and he createds disasters as well as good. He can do so on a whim.
Now then. I am two lazy..MUCH to lazy to qoute entire stories from the bible so I will leave you with a few stories to poknder in the bible with my argument.
1.2 Kings 2: 23-24 (God kills 42 children with bears becuase they call one of his prophets...baldie.)
2. 1 Kings 1: 20: 30 (God makes a wall fall and kills 27,000 of an army retreating from some Isrealites.)
3. Numbers 16: 16-49 (God kills anyone who complians. 14,950 all together.)
4. 1 Samuel 2 6: 6-11 (God kills someone for ACCIDENTLY touching the Ark of Covenant.)
In conclusion, in my opinion God seems to be an imperfect being deciding what is right simply because he says wo who is all egotistical and evil.
Is there something I am missing, is there some thing I can;t grasp about God and if so what is it? That's my questions. I jsut want to know what it is I am missing that makes you believe him so good.
