Ask a Christian philosopher a question

[bhsmte]

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.

 

[anonymous person]

And you also assume a deity can not lie.

Is this a question? If it is I will attempt to address it. If not I won't because I am only addressing questions at the moment.

 

[bhsmte]

Is this a question? If it is I will attempt to address it. If not I won't because I am only addressing questions at the moment.

It is a statement, based on your posts.

 

[David Colin Gould]

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?

 

[anonymous person]

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.

 

[David Colin Gould]

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.

Then what do you mean when you say that God is perfect?

 

[bhsmte]

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.

Prove it.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I would have done what Rahab did when she hid the spies.

And the first question? Why do you think it is acceptable to do so?

 

[Eyes wide Open]

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 wouldn't say jealously was a defined component of perfection.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

.

 

[Eyes wide Open]

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.

What negative character traits that you have would you like to change?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Not this site. I have been a member of quite a few different Christian forum sites though.

Riiiiiiggghhhttt...

 

[Eudaimonist]

Many schools offer "Ph".D.
Does that count?

I'm not insisting that anyone have a Ph.D. to call themselves a philosopher. Socrates never had one, and yet he is arguably a philosopher.

I do want to know what someone means when they call themselves a philosopher. Do they have a Ph.D, and where? Or, if not, just what are they claiming about themselves?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

God cannot lie. So the hypothetical is one that is impossible.

And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet. Ezekiel 14:9

For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie. 2 Thessalonians 2:11


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[quatona]

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.

Who made that definition?

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. Where I come from we call that a premise.

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.

OK. Defining words is ok. But that´s not the problem here.
The problem is: Who or what determined that Summum Bonum includes "cannot lie"?
After all, we learned in the other thread that Summum Bonum doesn´t mean "cannot commit genocide" and means "can do anything, if it serves a greater purpose (which may be beyond our understanding). I´m not seeing how interpreting "Summum Bonum" as "can not lie" is consistent with this line of reasoning.

Analogously we say that a triangle has three sides because it is by defintion, a three sided object.

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.
I think you need to decide whether you want to accept the "Bonum" in "Summum Bonum" to be whatever God does (in which case you can´t exclude anything), or whether you want to apply an exteriour standard in order to conclude what "Bonum" means, practically, concretely.

 

[quatona]

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.

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)?

 

[quatona]

There´s something else I find confusing:
When asked "If God would command you to lie...?" you said "I would do it."
You did not say "God, by virtue of being the Summum Bonum (perfect) can´t tell others to lie. So this couldn´t have been God".
So being perfect - by whatever standard you arrive at these judgements - includes "Cannot lie" but not "Cannot command lies".
The question remains the same: How did you determine what a perfect being can and can not do?

 

[juvenissun]

I wouldn't say jealously was a defined component of perfection.

It has to be. You do not understand.

 

[juvenissun]

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)?

We do not determine that. We try to understand that.

 

[juvenissun]

The question remains the same: How did you determine what a perfect being can and can not do?

You define it. Then see the consequences.