Response to Quatona about Morality of God in Existence of God Thread

[Ed1wolf]

Ed1wolf said: ↑
No, I am not declaring something a priori good, we know Gods law is good because of all the good things it has brought to the world and also we know it is good because of our own experience with Him has been confirmed good by our consciences.

qua: So, in the end it´s you and your human valuations that determine that God is good. Which is the very opposite of God being the standard for determining what´s good.
You can´t have the cake and eat it, too.

ed: No, we determine that God is the standard for determining good by using our God given moral consciences. No contradiction or irrationality there or having the cake and eating it too.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Ed1wolf said: ↑
No, I am not declaring something a priori good, we know Gods law is good because of all the good things it has brought to the world and also we know it is good because of our own experience with Him has been confirmed good by our consciences.

qua: So, in the end it´s you and your human valuations that determine that God is good. Which is the very opposite of God being the standard for determining what´s good.
You can´t have the cake and eat it, too.

ed: No, we determine that God is the standard for determining good by using our God given moral consciences. No contradiction or irrationality there or having the cake and eating it too.

How do you respond to someone with a differing belief in a god who says their god-given moral conscious tells them that the Christian god isn't good?

 

[Ed1wolf]

How do you respond to someone with a differing belief in a god who says their god-given moral conscious tells them that the Christian god isn't good?

I explain how the Christian God thru His people and Christianity have produced almost everything good about Western Civilization. I would then ask them how their god has improved the world. Of course, if they hate Western Civilization then another method may be needed. Such as explaining how they can know God personally and thereby learn how good He is thru an actual relationship with Him.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I explain how the Christian God thru His people and Christianity have produced almost everything good about Western Civilization.

That only shows that Christians can do good things. It doesn't reflect on the deeds of the god depicted in the Bible. Even the most evil god depiction can have followers that do good things.

I would then ask them how their god has improved the world.

You can believe in a Diest god that neither hurt or helped the Earth. To them, that god would be more moral than one that hurt people.

Of course, if they hate Western Civilization then another method may be needed. Such as explaining how they can know God personally and thereby learn how good He is thru an actual relationship with Him.

And that tactic can be turned back on you. It's not helpful in identifying truth.

 

[Ed1wolf]

That only shows that Christians can do good things. It doesn't reflect on the deeds of the god depicted in the Bible. Even the most evil god depiction can have followers that do good things.



You can believe in a Diest god that neither hurt or helped the Earth. To them, that god would be more moral than one that hurt people.



And that tactic can be turned back on you. It's not helpful in identifying truth.

Well then I would try to demonstrate that their god is not God and creator of the universe. By doing that I can show that their god probably does not exist, and the Christian God does exist.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Well then I would try to demonstrate that their god is not God and creator of the universe. By doing that I can show that their god probably does not exist, and the Christian God does exist.

And they would do the same. So, it seems like a permanent stalemate unless either of you have good evidence.

As a third party to the exchange, I'm left with no choice but to be unconvinced by either side.

 

[quatona]

Ed1wolf said: ↑
No, I am not declaring something a priori good, we know Gods law is good because of all the good things it has brought to the world and also we know it is good because of our own experience with Him has been confirmed good by our consciences.

qua: So, in the end it´s you and your human valuations that determine that God is good. Which is the very opposite of God being the standard for determining what´s good.
You can´t have the cake and eat it, too.

ed: No, we determine that God is the standard for determining good by using our God given moral consciences. No contradiction or irrationality there or having the cake and eating it too.

It´s pretty telling that you isolated these two posts from the context in which you had compared the process of valuating God to valuating your wife.

Whatever. The way you explained it now you are comparing God to (what you think are) God´s own standards. You are basically saying that you valuate God good because you have a priori defined God to be good. The circularity of your argument makes me all dizzy.

 

[Ed1wolf]

And they would do the same. So, it seems like a permanent stalemate unless either of you have good evidence.

As a third party to the exchange, I'm left with no choice but to be unconvinced by either side.

There is more evidence for the Christian God than any other god. And Christianity is more rational than atheism.

 

[bhsmte]

There is more evidence for the Christian God than any other god. And Christianity is more rational than atheism.

Fraid not.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

There is more evidence for the Christian God than any other god. And Christianity is more rational than atheism.

I'd have to say no and no to that.

But feel free to try and show I'm wrong.

Hopefully without having to resort to semantic gymnastics to try and define something into existence. Because we all know how silly that is...

 

[HitchSlap]

By doing that I can show that their god probably does not exist, and the Christian God does exist.

I hear this a lot.

 

[Ed1wolf]

It´s pretty telling that you isolated these two posts from the context in which you had compared the process of valuating God to valuating your wife.

Whatever. The way you explained it now you are comparing God to (what you think are) God´s own standards. You are basically saying that you valuate God good because you have a priori defined God to be good. The circularity of your argument makes me all dizzy.

No, before I became a Christian, I didn't know if He was good or not. How is that circular?

 

[Ed1wolf]

Fraid not.

Just saying that proves nothing.

 

[quatona]

No, before I became a Christian, I didn't know if He was good or not. How is that circular?

What/whose standards did you apply in order to find out if God is good or not?

 

[Ed1wolf]

I hear this a lot.

So what? You are hanging out at a Christian Apologetics website. What did you expect?

 

[KCfromNC]

Just saying that proves nothing.

Which makes it equal to post 8 as far as demonstrating things about reality.

 

[quatona]

So what? You are hanging out at a Christian Apologetics website. What did you expect?

Good call - everywhere else I would expect a person who claims "I can show it" to actually be able and willing to show it.

 

[HitchSlap]

So what? You are hanging out at a Christian Apologetics website. What did you expect?

So, I've yet to see you do what you claim. Which is what I'd expect from you, on an apologetics sub-forum.

 

[Hawkins]

The big picture is that God is considered "sin-incompatible". Law is a set of standard reflecting, in a sense, about what are disliked by God. We need to obey Law to do what God likes because humans are designed to live with Him in a forever realm. So basis is that Law is about how He declares what He doesn't like, and doesn't like us to do if we want to live with Him.

We inherited the same concept of "good" from God, as our conscience can be considered as a result of how God wrote His Law in our hearts. We can also objective observe that the Law of God is good in the least sense that there are a lot of them are about how we should live in a way of loving each other instead of hurting each other, such as the commandments of don't kill, don't steal and so forth. Practically, our own conscience will also tell us not to do something causing harm to others. It means that God's Law is good. Even our humans are based off most our own conscience to stand. That's why we don't need to study laws in order to abide by laws (I never read laws in details myself in order not to break them).

So all left is actually whether you believe that our concept of law and our conscience are ultimately delivered from God.

 

[Ed1wolf]

What/whose standards did you apply in order to find out if God is good or not?

My conscience.