What will happen if, science runs across definitive proof of God?

FireDragon76 · Jan 7, 2015

Paradoxum said:
I've read many of them.

Can you quote one you think completely and fully explains Gods reasoning behind his morality. Ie: Explains it in as much detail as you'd expect from a philosophy essay.

I do not think a complete accounting of God's reasoning is possible. Jesus was asked about spiritual and religious matters and he gave answers in parables to specific situations. Nontheless, generalities can be drawn across the parables.

I merely suggested studying the parables because the accusation was that God has given no explanation at all in regards to his ethic, and I pointed out that this is simply not true, from the Christian perspective.

agua · Jan 8, 2015

Paradoxum said:
I've read many of them.

Can you quote one you think completely and fully explains Gods reasoning behind his morality. Ie: Explains it in as much detail as you'd expect from a philosophy essay.

FireDragon76 said:
I do not think a complete accounting of God's reasoning is possible. Jesus was asked about spiritual and religious matters and he gave answers in parables to specific situations. Nontheless, generalities can be drawn across the parables.

I merely suggested studying the parables because the accusation was that God has given no explanation at all in regards to his ethic, and I pointed out that this is simply not true, from the Christian perspective.

Maybe most of Yahweh's moral standards are derived from the 2 main commands. 1. Love God 2. Love neighbour. From these we can assume that anything breaking these commands is immoral.

It is an interesting question and one every parent sorta has to deal with ( not why God says so but why daddy and mummy do) when a child asks "why" ( and boy do they ).

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

God leaves no one in doubt that whatever is of God is good. Wickedness is not of God even though God achieves his good purposes despite the wickedness in some creatures. Saint Augustine explained evil with this analogy, which I hope will be helpful to some, evil is not a created thing because it cannot exist apart from good evil is the corruption of what is good and can exist only so long as there is good to corrupt.

Now will we return to the thread's topic, namely "What will happen if, science runs across definitive proof of God?"

agua · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
God leaves no one in doubt that whatever is of God is good. Wickedness is not of God even though God achieves his good purposes despite the wickedness in some creatures. Saint Augustine explained evil with this analogy, which I hope will be helpful to some, evil is not a created thing because it cannot exist apart from good evil is the corruption of what is good and can exist only so long as there is good to corrupt.

Now will we return to the thread's topic, namely "What will happen if, science runs across definitive proof of God?"

The question Paradoxum is asking isn't what Yahweh's moral standards are ( or even if they're right/wrong )but why He chose them. ie. the reasoning behind them.

Archaeopteryx · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
God leaves no one in doubt that whatever is of God is good.

How do you know that?

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

agua said:
The question Paradoxum is asking isn't what Yahweh's moral standards are ( or even if they're right/wrong )but why He chose them. ie. the reasoning behind them.

I understand that, but there is an error in the premise that God "chose" what is good as if goodness exists apart from God. Hence my comment that what is of God is good.

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

Archaeopteryx said:
How do you know that?

The one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church told me and I believe their testimony on this matter.

agua · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
I understand that, but there is an error in the premise that God "chose" what is good as if goodness exists apart from God. Hence my comment that what is of God is good.

Oky how about this. Why is it wrong to steal ?

Archaeopteryx · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
I understand that, but there is an error in the premise that God "chose" what is good as if goodness exists apart from God. Hence my comment that what is of God is good.

Enter Euthyphro.

Archaeopteryx · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
The one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church told me and I believe their testimony on this matter.

Why?

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

Archaeopteryx said:
Enter Euthyphro.

That'd be "The Euthyphro", quite clever argument against the Greek gods. Not entirely valid, but clever.

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

Archaeopteryx said:
Why?

Because God speaks in and through the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.

Archaeopteryx · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
Because God speaks in and through the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.

How do you know that to be true?

Archaeopteryx · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
That'd be "The Euthyphro", quite clever argument against the Greek gods. Not entirely valid, but clever.

Quite a dilemma for the Christian one too.

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

Archaeopteryx said:
How do you know that to be true?

Foundational truth.

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

Archaeopteryx said:
Quite a dilemma for the Christian one too.

God is a category outside of The Euthyphro.

Archaeopteryx · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
Foundational truth.

Which you have gleaned, how?

MoreCoffee said:
God is a category outside of The Euthyphro.

If you are referring a deistic God, then yes, the Euthyphro need not apply. It does, however, apply to the Christian God because the Christian God is putatively moral and concerned by the morality of human affairs.

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

Archaeopteryx said:
Which you have gleaned, how? ...

It's a foundation, foundational truths are not derived.

Archaeopteryx · Jan 8, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
It's a foundation, foundational truths are not derived.

This renders it a bare assertion. If there is no reason to believe it to be true, then we can dismiss it. Adding the word "foundational" does not make it true.

MoreCoffee · Jan 8, 2015

Archaeopteryx said:
This renders it a bare assertion. If there is no reason to believe it to be true, then we can dismiss it. Adding the word "foundational" does not make it true.

Google foundationism

What will happen if, science runs across definitive proof of God?

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Repentance works.

Newbie

Wanderer

Repentance works.

Repentance works.

Newbie

Wanderer

Wanderer

Repentance works.

Repentance works.

Wanderer

Wanderer

Repentance works.

Repentance works.

Wanderer

Repentance works.

Wanderer

Repentance works.

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency