This is actually an ancient dilemma, that seems to be glossed over, sometimes bloodily, throughout history.
If the modern god, named God (as contrasted against Osiris and other deities), is the source of morality, then how can morality be other than an inappropriate opinion for wee humans, who are not omnipotent or omniscient, etc.?
If morals are not this god’s opinion, then where does this absolute morality come from?
If you claim God has the monopoly on morality because it created life, then you fail in several ways.
Men create things without dictating their morality. With no capacity to dictate morality.
Men create children with different opinions then their parents.
Further, parents should be able to, under the same constraints of this God perform morally. Such things as drown their children should they be ruled “wicked in the eyes of God.”
Finally, the ultimate absolute of: if God created morality, how is there morality, and not status quo? Is God incompetent?
God’s derivation of morals
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Savant
- Posts: 8202
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
- Has thanked: 960 times
- Been thanked: 3553 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #11But Dude (or dudess, perhaps), why don't you want to be murdered? That would get you to heaven (assuming you believe that's where you'll go) before you commit too many sins, lose your Faith or somehow risk losing Grace. Why this instinctive clinging to Life, as though you know (instinctively) that it mattered more than an afterlife?1213 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 27, 2022 8:58 amI think that would be in any case just a subjective opinion. I agree with God, because I think His will is righteous and good. For example the idea to love others and treat others as I want to be treated. I think it is just the most reasonable and logical moral principle. If I don't want to be murdered, I don't murder others, because if I would murder, I would give the same right to others, I could not say that others can't do what I myself do without being hypocrite. I believe it is the only perfect and objective and reasonable moral principle and that is why I believe it is also promoted by God. If you think some other principle is better, I would like to hear what it is.
Treating others as they want to be treated is not (in itself) Biblical - the Golden Rule is something found in many philosophies. It's the humanist basis of Human well -being, and that it is used to urge Christians to do good does not make it a Good devised by God.
The point is whether Good and evil has a validity of its' own no matter what God saysabout it, or whether it only is moral and Good if God says so. Thus Morality existed without (and perhaps before) God, and He just adopted it as His morality. If it is 'His Nature' it's because he opted to use morality.
When it suited Him.
- 1213
- Savant
- Posts: 11476
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
- Location: Finland
- Has thanked: 327 times
- Been thanked: 374 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #12I don't want to be murdered, because I am in no hurry to die. Also, I don't know will I go to heaven. Bible promises eternal life for righteous and it is possible that I am not righteous enough for it.TRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Wed Apr 27, 2022 10:44 am ... why don't you want to be murdered? That would get you to heaven (assuming you believe that's where you'll go) before you commit too many sins, lose your Faith or somehow risk losing Grace. ...
If it is so common teaching, why do you think so few live by it, or teach it?TRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Wed Apr 27, 2022 10:44 am...Treating others as they want to be treated is not (in itself) Biblical - the Golden Rule is something found in many philosophies. It's the humanist basis of Human well -being, and that it is used to urge Christians to do good does not make it a Good devised by God.
Maybe good and evil are always only opinions. And I don't think opinions exist without a person who can understand such things.TRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Wed Apr 27, 2022 10:44 amThe point is whether Good and evil has a validity of its' own no matter what God saysabout it, or whether it only is moral and Good if God says so....
- 1213
- Savant
- Posts: 11476
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
- Location: Finland
- Has thanked: 327 times
- Been thanked: 374 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #13Simply by telling what is wrong with it.Willum wrote: ↑Wed Apr 27, 2022 9:09 am [Replying to 1213 in post #9]
Well as long as you think your opinion is identical to the lord of the universe, how can I argue with you?
If you manage to say something very reasonable and intelligent, I may change my mind.
- Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #14Well as a matter of history, you have never been shown to change your mind no matter how well reasoned the conversant or the topic.1213 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 28, 2022 8:42 amSimply by telling what is wrong with it.Willum wrote: ↑Wed Apr 27, 2022 9:09 am [Replying to 1213 in post #9]
Well as long as you think your opinion is identical to the lord of the universe, how can I argue with you?
If you manage to say something very reasonable and intelligent, I may change my mind.
- Purple Knight
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3519
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
- Has thanked: 1140 times
- Been thanked: 733 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #15You could always say that morality is written into the fabric of the universe as absolutes, and is no more under anyone's control than math. You can make different systems of math and call the numbers different words (for example you can call 1 blun or call 2 frou) but the relationships will always behave according to laws. 1 and 1 will always be 2. And murder - when one kills another one - will always be immoral.Willum wrote: ↑Sun Apr 24, 2022 11:53 am This is actually an ancient dilemma, that seems to be glossed over, sometimes bloodily, throughout history.
If the modern god, named God (as contrasted against Osiris and other deities), is the source of morality, then how can morality be other than an inappropriate opinion for wee humans, who are not omnipotent or omniscient, etc.?
If morals are not this god’s opinion, then where does this absolute morality come from?
I don't know if this is the case, but it's at least logically consistent.
This is also logically consistent, since subcreations would not belong to their direct creators, but to the owner of their creator.Willum wrote: ↑Sun Apr 24, 2022 11:53 amIf you claim God has the monopoly on morality because it created life, then you fail in several ways.
Men create things without dictating their morality. With no capacity to dictate morality.
Men create children with different opinions then their parents.
Further, parents should be able to, under the same constraints of this God perform morally. Such things as drown their children should they be ruled “wicked in the eyes of God.”
We would indeed have to accept morality as a made-up word to describe our actions as either good (agreeable with what our master wants) or evil (opposed to what our master wants). We would have to accept that morality itself has no special significance and that if the Devil was in power, it would simply be good to do what the Devil wanted.
- Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #16[Replying to Purple Knight in post #15]
I can provide a consistent theorem of math where 2 + 2 = 3, or with triangles with greater than 180 degrees.
So that concept is flawed.
As to there being a original creator, that means Ford owns all Ford-made cars.
So that concept is flawed.
On your third point, you are consistent with the other two, in that you completely ignored the topic, maybe hoping no one would notice.
Is god the source of morality? In which case, why should we care about his opinion?
Or
Did god get morality elsewhere, and if so, where?
I can provide a consistent theorem of math where 2 + 2 = 3, or with triangles with greater than 180 degrees.
So that concept is flawed.
As to there being a original creator, that means Ford owns all Ford-made cars.
So that concept is flawed.
On your third point, you are consistent with the other two, in that you completely ignored the topic, maybe hoping no one would notice.
Is god the source of morality? In which case, why should we care about his opinion?
Or
Did god get morality elsewhere, and if so, where?
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #17You are making the assumption there is 'absolute morality'. That does not seem to be a valid assumption to being with. Can you show there is absolute morality?Willum wrote: ↑Sun Apr 24, 2022 11:53 am This is actually an ancient dilemma, that seems to be glossed over, sometimes bloodily, throughout history.
If the modern god, named God (as contrasted against Osiris and other deities), is the source of morality, then how can morality be other than an inappropriate opinion for wee humans, who are not omnipotent or omniscient, etc.?
If morals are not this god’s opinion, then where does this absolute morality come from?
If you claim God has the monopoly on morality because it created life, then you fail in several ways.
Men create things without dictating their morality. With no capacity to dictate morality.
Men create children with different opinions then their parents.
Further, parents should be able to, under the same constraints of this God perform morally. Such things as drown their children should they be ruled “wicked in the eyes of God.”
Finally, the ultimate absolute of: if God created morality, how is there morality, and not status quo? Is God incompetent?
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
- Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #18[Replying to Goat in post #17]
And you are catching on!
Excellent.
In a few more days you might be able to address the post!
Fingers crossed!
And you are catching on!
Excellent.
In a few more days you might be able to address the post!
Fingers crossed!
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: God’s derivation of morals
Post #19Well, before I continue, start with your basic assumptions.Willum wrote: ↑Thu Apr 28, 2022 7:58 pm [Replying to Goat in post #17]
And you are catching on!
Excellent.
In a few more days you might be able to address the post!
Fingers crossed!
Why do you think there is absolute morality? If you can not show there is absolute morality, then your entire question breaks down, because the princples that are behind evolution can also be applied to this. Societies that have standards of behavior that promote the suvivical of the society as a whole will continue to exist, while societies that promote disruption of societies will be filtered out because of failure of that society.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella