Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The question assumes there is a standard by which we judge God.
The answer to your question is to point out that God is essentially axiologically perfect. The term "essentially" denotes within this context "by nature" or by "definition".
God is perfect not because He conforms to some standard of perfection external to Himself, but rather, by virtue of His essence or nature as the Summum Bonum. Analogously we say that a triangle has three sides because it is by defintion, a three sided object.
And you also assume a deity can not lie.
The question assumes there is a standard by which we judge God.
The answer to your question is to point out that God is essentially axiologically perfect. The term "essentially" denotes within this context "by nature" or by "definition".
God is perfect not because He conforms to some standard of perfection external to Himself, but rather, by virtue of His essence or nature as the Summum Bonum. Analogously we say that a triangle has three sides because it is by defintion, a three sided object.
But there needs to be an understanding of what mean by 'perfection'. After all, a being that was perfect should be able to lie perfectly without ever getting caught out. Can God lie perfectly?
Sir, once again, you ask a question I have already answered. God can no more lie than a bachelor can be married or a triangle can be four sided. Simply adding on the qualifying adverb "perfectly" to "lie" does nothing in the way of showing the act to be something God can possibly do.
Sir, once again, you ask a question I have already answered. God can no more lie than a bachelor can be married or a triangle can be four sided. Simply adding on the qualifying adverb "perfectly" to "lie" does nothing in the way of showing the act to be something God can possibly do.
And the first question? Why do you think it is acceptable to do so?I would have done what Rahab did when she hid the spies.
Read the first two Books of the Bible. God "introduces" (defines) Himself by many characters in the Books. An interested one among them, which you probably do not understand, is God says: I am "jealous".
I know many here have asked me questions and for whatever reason I either was unable to respond, chose not to respond, or did not see the question and thus have left the questioner feeling overlooked.
Therefore I propose that in this thread, if anyone wants to ask me a question post it and I will address it. Since there are numerous questioners and I am but one, I ask that you only present one question to me. Not two or three or ten, no statements or claims, but just one question. No memes, gifs, sarcasm or cynicism. No jokes, and nothing that would cause this thread to be closed.
No questions about why I haven't answered this question or that.
So if anyone has a question that fits that criteria the ask and I shall attempt a worthy response. If there passes an interval of time between the last question I answer, then the first person to have asked a question can ask another one and so in turn following that order.
Think carefully about what you will ask and make the question succinct as possible.
Thank you.
Not this site. I have been a member of quite a few different Christian forum sites though.
Many schools offer "Ph".D.
Does that count?
God cannot lie. So the hypothetical is one that is impossible.
Who made that definition?I think you do not know what a definition mean.
God is defined to have a set of contents (characters or natures). The one in your question is one of them.
Ok. Where I come from we call that a premise.The question assumes there is a standard by which we judge God.
The answer to your question is to point out that God is essentially axiologically perfect. The term "essentially" denotes within this context "by nature" or by "definition".
OK. Defining words is ok. But that´s not the problem here.God is perfect not because He conforms to some standard of perfection external to Himself, but rather, by virtue of His essence or nature as the Summum Bonum.
Except that "three sides" is a factual, concrete, easily veri- or falsifiable trait (a proper definition), whereas "Bonum" is an unspecific (and, as we hear, defined by God) value judgement. So what you have so far are two terms defining each other - which doesn´t allow for the epistemological progress of excluding anything that isn´t provided by that definition.Analogously we say that a triangle has three sides because it is by defintion, a three sided object.
How did you determine that lieing is incompatible with being perfect (i.e. something that God cannot do), while drowning millions of people is (i.e. something God can do quite fine)?Sir, once again, you ask a question I have already answered. God can no more lie than a bachelor can be married or a triangle can be four sided. Simply adding on the qualifying adverb "perfectly" to "lie" does nothing in the way of showing the act to be something God can possibly do.
I wouldn't say jealously was a defined component of perfection.
How did you determine that lieing is incompatible with being perfect (i.e. something that God cannot do), while drowning millions of people is (i.e. something God can do quite fine)?
The question remains the same: How did you determine what a perfect being can and can not do?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?