Scientists Create Alien DNA After 15 Years Of Work

[TheComebackKid]

I didn't use morality to reject the notion of god, I used your description of his morality to reject following that god.

So because we have limited understanding, I couldn't possibly understand god, sure (given he exists). This also means you can't either, and any view you have on god's morality is just as incorrect as mine.

Not unless he tells me the correct view. I may not understand the view completely but I can understand that it is the correct view based on his saying so. Why? Because he sets the standard.

 

[Jake Jarmell]

Not unless he tells me the correct view. I may not understand the view completely but I can understand that it is the correct view based on his saying so. Why? Because he sets the standard.

So in this case, YOU have the correct view because he tells YOU. Has he told everyone his view, or was this just revealed to you?

 

[TheComebackKid]

So in this case, YOU have the correct view because he tells YOU. Has he told everyone his view, or was this just revealed to you?

Change "me" to "us" then. "Unless he tells us the correct view".

 

[TheBox]

Not unless he tells me the correct view. I may not understand the view completely but I can understand that it is the correct view based on his saying so. Why? Because he sets the standard.

Doesn't this make the standard entirely arbitrary and subject to whim? If god decides that rape is the most righteous action, then it is?

 

[Zankou]

Remember we are considering a hypothetical God here. So if that hypothetical God existed then all you are describing is man's different and ever changing interpretation of that standard. But if that God and that standard do not exist then there is no real moral standard at which to apply anything to. The standard is what that person or group currently believes according to their current level of insight and understanding of a situation.

Why? In what world is God required to say, for all time, that one thing is good and one thing is evil? Does God lack the power to define that issue? If his will is constrained ... if he can't come in front of us and declare that chocolate is Evil because that would be stupid and meaningless ... then God's commandments are superfluous, there is an absolute nature to good/evil that doesn't depend on him. By contrast, if evil simply means that God has ordered it, and God can order anything at any time, then it's a purely semantic argument to use the terms good/evil. All we would want to know is what God wanted at any particular time, and that could be absolutely anything, and could be different things for different people.

As to morality being changeable, almost everything about humanity is changeable. That doesn't make it arbitrary. You and I both speak English. It's a language that changes over time. In no way does that make the nature of the English language meaningless, nor does it permit you or I as individuals to start blithering gibberish syllables under the assumption that "everything is permitted." You can blither gibberish, but it won't communicate anything in English. It has a reality, defined in complex ways, that goes far beyond anything the individual can decide.

In other words, relativism and contingency in human affairs do not make everything meaningless and up for grabs. The entire history of human religion is largely an attempt to declare that a very particular argument for morality and human order "isn't really a political/moral claim" because it was ordered by God, not by humans. And, not surprisingly, while some constraints can be imposed via that mechanism, they are remarkably limited.

 

[Jake Jarmell]

Change "me" to "us" then. "Unless he tells us the correct view".

Ok, has he told "us" the correct view? I know you believe the Christian view, but how can we discern that as being truth from some random guy who says "oh I just talked to god and he said x"?

 

[TheComebackKid]

Doesn't this make the standard entirely arbitrary and subject to whim? If god decides that rape is the most righteous action, then it is?

I wouldn't call the Creator of morality arbitrary. I would call his Will the standard. What other standard would you go by? Your personal emotions and conclusions based on your level of understanding and insight?

 

[Pupi]

TCK is killing it in here, imo. Preach the good word, my brutha.

 

[Zankou]

I wouldn't call the Creator of morality arbitrary. I would call his Will the standard. What other standard would you go by? Your personal emotions and conclusions based on your level of understanding and insight?

As discussed above, morality isn't something an individual just gets to decide with zero constraints, any more than the English language is.

But as to your second question, I'd trust that guy's conclusions over a "God" who pulls stuff like this.

"Also I swore to them in the wilderness that I would scatter them among the nations and disperse them among the lands, because they had not observed My ordinances, but had rejected My statutes and had profaned My sabbaths, and their eyes were on the idols of their fathers. I also gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not live; and I pronounced them unclean because of their gifts, in that they caused all their firstborn to pass through the fire so that I might make them desolate, in order that they might know that I am the LORD."'

Ezekiel 20:23-25.

Yeah, nice "unchanging standard" from the "creator of morality." Way to go, YHWH. Sometimes he tells you to throw your children into the fire -- why not -- and sometimes he doesn't. Sometimes he gives you evil laws, and sometimes he gives you good laws. You just gotta roll with the flow.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

From a christianity perspective natural disasters are only occuring because man has let sin into the world through our free will. Man originally had dominion over the earth and everything in it. Man gave up that dominion, voluntarily, and now are at the mercy of the elements.

Just so I understand you correctly, because Adam and Eve dropped the ball (so to speak) the rest of humanity shall pay the price? Essentially, humanity is inheriting something brought about due to the actions of Adam and Eve? (serious question, not trolling)

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Heres a hypothetical, philosophical question. Lets just say there is a God(creator of heaven/earth, creater of life, creator of morality) who produces, allows, or authorizes natural disasters that lead to massive human suffering...how could any of us call him evil? He is the one who defines and determines what is or isn't evil.

I really don't think you can have something like an "evil God". The closest you can get is a "God that seems evil to our limited understanding of good and evil".

Just a thought. But carry on...

"A rose by any other name, is still a rose."

And it would be difficult to follow someone (person, entity,)
if they didn't follow the same ethics, morals and codes they themselves espoused.

Thou Shall Not kill....(except when I do it.)

it oozes of "do as I say, not what I do."

Can you not see how this is self contradictory and or hypocritical?

 

[Zankou]

Thou shalt not kill.

Except when I command thou to kill Canaanites.

Then thou must kill. And kill. Until nothing is left but blood and slaves.

Ancient Semitic Gods did not mess around.

 

[TheComebackKid]

You are all blasphemous heathens!

 

[Phelly2]

Heres a hypothetical, philosophical question. Lets just say there is a God(creator of heaven/earth, creater of life, creator of morality) who produces, allows, or authorizes natural disasters that lead to massive human suffering...how could any of us call him evil? He is the one who defines and determines what is or isn't evil.

I really don't think you can have something like an "evil God". The closest you can get is a "God that seems evil to our limited understanding of good and evil".

Just a thought. But carry on...

I'm no biblical scholar, but didn't God severely punish (with death, and then some) Adam and Eve for eating fruit from the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil?"

In your hypothetical scenario, if there's no way to know if God is good or evil, then what's the point in worshipping God? For all you know, you could be worshipping Satan in disguise. If you don't know if God is good or evil, then you do not know if the things in the bible are orchestrated to end in our demise, therefore it makes no sense to follow them.

 

[sickc0d3r]

Heres a hypothetical, philosophical question. Lets just say there is a God(creator of heaven/earth, creater of life, creator of morality) who produces, allows, or authorizes natural disasters that lead to massive human suffering...how could any of us call him evil? He is the one who defines and determines what is or isn't evil.

I really don't think you can have something like an "evil God". The closest you can get is a "God that seems evil to our limited understanding of good and evil".

Just a thought. But carry on...

Fine, but, unless it makes itself known to us, its morality is irrelevant. There is no reason to believe or care that it exists.

 

[Kevin Rudd]

I've never heard the theory that people came from dirt, can you link it?

it is called the bible. God made Adam from some dirt didn't he?

 

[OldGoat]

How did a thread about science devolve into theology?

 

[ocfightfan]

I can't wait until it escapes and exterminates all life on earth.

I for one welcome our new e.coli overlords.

 

[S Class]

I'm no biblical scholar, but didn't God severely punish (with death, and then some) Adam and Eve for eating fruit from the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil?"

In your hypothetical scenario, if there's no way to know if God is good or evil, then what's the point in worshipping God? For all you know, you could be worshipping Satan in disguise. If you don't know if God is good or evil, then you do not know if the things in the bible are orchestrated to end in our demise, therefore it makes no sense to follow them.

Good point. Also, why is it just the Christian god that keeps getting mentioned? There's more than 1 religion on this planet and I know that each religion may contain their own gods and goddesses as well. Or what about gods/goddesses that don't even have a religion to begin with (it's possible)? Dat Christian god bias.

 

[TheBox]

I wouldn't call the Creator of morality arbitrary. I would call his Will the standard.

It can change on a whim, can it not?

What other standard would you go by? Your personal emotions and conclusions based on your level of understanding and insight?

How about rules which enhance the stability and health of society and the happiness and well-being of people? Is that not the main purpose of moral systems anyway?