Is god allowed to ask us anything?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Interesting. It says:
"In psychology, bicameralism is a hypothesis which argues that the human brain once assumed a state known as a bicameral mind in which cognitive functions are divided between one part of the brain which appears to be "speaking", and a second part which listens and obeys."

Note that "speaking" is surrounded with quations marks. Do ...[text shortened]... s are not needed in cognitive activities.

Using words is only one way to communicate.

Well, the "speaking" is between quotations marks because it's simply structuring your thoughts using words. In that sense, a consciousness arising like that (and more importantly a moral consciousness) could provide the illusion of divine revelation.

It's an interesting theory. Even if you don't agree with it fully, it's an interesting way to think about how the social advent of oral language affected self-consciousness.

Originally posted by twhitehead
The vast majority of my thoughts never get put into words. I don't need to talk to blind or deaf people to know that. Even when my thoughts are put into words, that happens after most of the thinking has happened and the words are a kind of summary of the results. In addition to that I am also capable of forming words without directly involving my conscio ...[text shortened]... sness. For example I can read a book out loud while thinking of something completely different.

That's not the point. The point is what happens when you add the extra dimension of being able to think in words.

Originally posted by twhitehead
For example I can read a book out loud while thinking of something completely different.

A skill honed reading for the kids?

Originally posted by Palynka
That's not the point. The point is what happens when you add the extra dimension of being able to think in words.

Why? Most people I know who claim to have received messages from God, did not hear words.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Why? Most people I know who claim to have received messages from God, did not hear words.

I see. 😵

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"Sensus divinitatis."
how do you tell this from indigestion, a bump to the head, schizophrenia, sun stroke, someone putting magic shrooms in your hamburger?

"Of course. Not that I'm implying that the Abraham story would reliably lead us to that conclusion."
why would a omniscient being break his own rules? and i am not talking about setting a rule in o ...[text shortened]... e, so i know it is you, don't ask me to murder someone in a brutal fashion."

"Sensus divinitatis."
how do you tell this from indigestion, a bump to the head, schizophrenia, sun stroke, someone putting magic shrooms in your hamburger?
I don't think you can.

why would a omniscient being break his own rules?
Not being omniscient myself I don't feel qualified to say. But clearly if breaking the rules is part of god's mysterious purpose then I'm not in a position to disallow it.

and why isn't the abraham story a violation of rules set forth by god himself?
All rules need interpreting. If you look into the Old Testament you will see god ordering genocide. So clearly "thou shalt not kill" has implicit caveats, like 'unless god tells you to'.

have you ever thought that he is testing you to see if you will commit murder?
How would you decide that this was the nature of the test in preference to a test of trust via obedience? It seems Abe got it right, at least according to the story.

moses hasn't said "thou shalt not kill except when..... " with number 3 on the list being "god tells you to" and number 15 being "the person being murdered is a Damien"
Yeah right....tell that to the Midianites.....

shouldn't there be a convention, soemthing like a password as in "God, when you speak to me, so i know it is you, don't ask me to murder someone in a brutal fashion."
It wouldn't work, since:
a) god might require you to brutally murder someone
b) the devil might be a very good hacker

Originally posted by Lord Shark
"Sensus divinitatis."
[b]how do you tell this from indigestion, a bump to the head, schizophrenia, sun stroke, someone putting magic shrooms in your hamburger?
I don't think you can.

why would a omniscient being break his own rules?
Not being omniscient myself I don't feel qualified to say. But clearly if breaking the rules is part of go ...[text shortened]... you to brutally murder someone
b) the devil might be a very good hacker[/b]

how do you tell[...]?
"I don't think you can."
so all the psychos claiming they have a vision from god asking them to kill their family should go ahead and obey said vision just in case god is really the one asking?

god's mysterious purpose
so god orders someone not to murder. then he goes around telling someone else to murder. then again orders murder. seems pretty mysterious indeed.

All rules need interpreting
yes, they do. but only god is allowed to do the interpreting, right? or only the chosen ones? like the televangelists asking for money on tv? also you mentioned god ordering genocide in the old testament. what if it wasn't god ordering that genocide? what if it was simply a way for the jewish leaders to justify an easy conquest: kill everyone so they don't rebel later on?

How would you decide that this was the nature of the test in preference to a test of trust via obedience?
who is the weak in this story? god? or isaac? who needs defending? who does abe have a duty to? does he have a duty to a voice claiming to be god? or does he have a duty to his defenseless son? again i ask you, would you obey a god asking you to sacrifice humans in his name?

in my opinion abe took the easy way out. instead of standing up to what was right even if that meant suffering at the hands of a potentially vengeful god, he choose to obey the powerful being. let me ask you one thing: if someone would hold a gun to your son's head and told you he will kill both him and yourself, however if you killed your son yourself he will let you go, what would you do?

"god might require you to brutally murder someone "
the omnipotent god that could end all existence with a thought might require me the murder something? is that right?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
[b]how do you tell[...]?
"I don't think you can."
so all the psychos claiming they have a vision from god asking them to kill their family should go ahead and obey said vision just in case god is really the one asking?

god's mysterious purpose
so god orders someone not to murder. then he goes around telling someone else to murder. then agai ...[text shortened]... end all existence with a thought might require me the murder something? is that right?[/b]

so all the psychos claiming they have a vision from god asking them to kill their family should go ahead and obey said vision just in case god is really the one asking?
No I don't think they should.

so god orders someone not to murder. then he goes around telling someone else to murder. then again orders murder. seems pretty mysterious indeed.
Yes it does.

what if it wasn't god ordering that genocide? what if it was simply a way for the jewish leaders to justify an easy conquest: kill everyone so they don't rebel later on?
D'you know, you could be onto something...🙂

who is the weak in this story? god? or isaac? who needs defending? who does abe have a duty to? does he have a duty to a voice claiming to be god? or does he have a duty to his defenseless son?
According to the story as I understand it, Abe's primary duty was to god. Abe got that right and so no children were harmed in the making of this fable.

let me ask you one thing: if someone would hold a gun to your son's head and told you he will kill both him and yourself, however if you killed your son yourself he will let you go, what would you do?
Clearly I'd offer to shoot my son with the gun and when I got my hands on it I'd point it at the person who issued the threat while my son escaped. Sadly, that wouldn't work with god.

But I wonder whether you are having trouble engaging consistently with the terms of your own analogy. Remember that in your scenario god is real, so there are some possibilities:

1) God is good and is telling the truth about what you are required to do
2) God is good and is telling lies about what you are required to do in order to test you
3) God is capricious or evil

But I think the problem with the scenario is as you identified above, we can't know which of the possibilities (1, 2 or 3) is correct and nor can we know that we are not schizophrenic or deluded in some way. Although real lottery money might skew our judgement somewhat.

Originally posted by Lord Shark
[b]so all the psychos claiming they have a vision from god asking them to kill their family should go ahead and obey said vision just in case god is really the one asking?
No I don't think they should.

so god orders someone not to murder. then he goes around telling someone else to murder. then again orders murder. seems pretty mysterious indee ...[text shortened]... or deluded in some way. Although real lottery money might skew our judgement somewhat.

"Clearly I'd offer to shoot my son with the gun and when I got my hands on it I'd point it at the person who issued the threat while my son escaped. Sadly, that wouldn't work with god."
should have been clear on the twisted example i came up with. i said that person is holding the gun. i didn't say he will give you the loaded gun to shoot your son with it.
let's be clear, you have no alternatives: kill your son and live or refuse to kill him and both die.

1) God is good and is telling the truth about what you are required to do
2) God is good and is telling lies about what you are required to do in order to test you
3) God is capricious or evil
4) the one who wrote that particular story was a psycho(excusable for those times) and lying or not telling the whole truth

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"Clearly I'd offer to shoot my son with the gun and when I got my hands on it I'd point it at the person who issued the threat while my son escaped. Sadly, that wouldn't work with god."
should have been clear on the twisted example i came up with. i said that person is holding the gun. i didn't say he will give you the loaded gun to shoot your son with it. ...[text shortened]... ar story was a psycho(excusable for those times) and lying or not telling the whole truth

should have been clear on the twisted example i came up with. i said that person is holding the gun. i didn't say he will give you the loaded gun to shoot your son with it.
Curses, just when I thought it was going to be easy....

let's be clear, you have no alternatives: kill your son and live or refuse to kill him and both die.
Ah but you missed out the alternative of shouting 'oh look behind you, a giant humming bird!' and us both taking the opportunity to make a dash for the conveniently large cross-sectioned ventillation ducts.

1) God is good and is telling the truth about what you are required to do
2) God is good and is telling lies about what you are required to do in order to test you
3) God is capricious or evil
4) the one who wrote that particular story was a psycho(excusable for those times) and lying or not telling the whole truth
I didn't claim that the list was exhaustive. But listen, if you are trying to make the highly contentious point that we shouldn't listen to any voices in our heads that try to persuade us to murder people, well duh! Is it credible that the best explanation for the voices is god? No.

If on the other hand, you say that for the purposes of argument god really exists and really does ask you to kill somebody then the question just reduces to
a) would you do it?
b) would it be moral?

a) depends on character, circumstance and beliefs and so on, the answer to b) depends on your solution to the Euthyphro dilemma.

Originally posted by Lord Shark
the answer to b) depends on your solution to the Euthyphro dilemma.

OK, goodness being intrinsic to God's nature, his goodness is expressed in his moral command to you to kill -- I've lost track of what we're killing here, but anyhow, it's good to do it.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
OK, goodness being intrinsic to God's nature, his goodness is expressed in his moral command to you to kill -- I've lost track of what we're killing here, but anyhow, it's good to do it.

Yes that's about it. I'm not clear whether it is babies or my son either, but the principle's the same 🙂