13 Nov 11
Originally posted by bbarrSo the Jesus you talk about isn't the same one I'm refering to.
Yeah, I know more about morality than Jesus did. And in a thousand years, moral philosophers will know more than I do about morality. It's a form of human inquiry, and we get better and better over time, just like we do in other forms of inquiry like history, science, etc. And, no, Kelly, I don't "realize" that Jesus was the word of God made flesh. I'm an ...[text shortened]... ally chagrined if he found out that people nowadays think he's the only way to the divine.
Kelly
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by jaywillSo which premise of the argument do you deny?
I doubt many of the moderns "owe" their wisdom to Christianity.
If you didn't notice in the Western world history is divided [b] BC - Before Christ, AD - In the Year of Our Lord.
The words and life of Jesus Christ have minimal effect of the thinking of culture in the West ?
We're speaking of someone whose ...[text shortened]... wish - I full well know that already. No need to brag to me about it.[/b]
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by KellyJayThat's possible. If you take it as axiomatic that Jesus was morally perfect, and that Jesus was God, then everything else just follows. Nothing that he does could possibly be in error. But that's not what I mean by 'morality'. In my view, morality is not "whatever Jesus says". I think that's a childish view.
So the Jesus you talk about isn't the same one I'm refering to.
Kelly
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by RJHindsI still don't understand why you use the term patients for them.
I still don't understand why you use the term patients for them.
God to go back to my games now.
Oh well. I already spent a whole post (at your request, no less) explaining what I mean by the term 'moral patient' here and why I apply it here. Did you read it?
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by KellyJayIf you agree the creatore can do what they will with what the creator makes,
the potter will do what the potter will do to his pot.
[b]That the potter will do what the potter will do is just tautological. So this is vacuously true and says nothing.
If you agree the creatore can do what they will with what the creator makes,
than there is no argument against the creator doing whatever the creator
wants. S/he can ...[text shortened]... fit for the trash or display it is not the pot but
the creator that sets the standards.
Kelly[/b]
than there is no argument against the creator doing whatever the creator
wants. S/he can make a pot fit for the trash or display it is not the pot but
the creator that sets the standards.
I did not agree there that "the creator can do what they will with what the creator makes". All I said was that your claim (which basically was that the creator will do what the creator will do) is tautological and says nothing of substance. I agree with your tautology. How could I not? (Are you under the impression that there will be cases where the creator will not do what the creator will do?) Nothing of any substance follows from this tautology.
At any rate, in the case of God, who is supposed to be all-powerful, I will readily admit that He can do whatever wants to do with His creation. That is, He has the power to impose His will successfully basically whenever He wants, whatever it may be. That is not really relevant to this discussion. This discussion does not merely concern what it is that God may successfully carry out if He so wills; rather, it concerns what it is that He may justifiably carry out. Surely, you do understand this distinction. For example, I have the power to beat the next senior citizen I meet on the street; but, I think you would certainly agree that it is a further question whether I would be justified in doing so. So, surely you do understand this distinction. Now, if you want to hold that this distinction, which you understand applies to moral agents like LemonJello, somehow does not apply to the moral agent God, then that certainly seems non-obvious and I think you would need to present an argument to that effect.
Lastly, surely you have already read my objection against the potter/pot argument. It does not properly account for the issue of moral status. Are you or RJ going to address this objection?
13 Nov 11
3 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayWell what do you want from this, that in your opinion you dislike how God
You want to put a standard
upon the creator and I'm asking you, who are you to do such a thing?
This thread concerns the application of the term 'horrific' to the God described in the bible under some sufficiently literal interpretation. Who are we to apply this term to this God? We are persons who have read the biblical description in quest ill here. You think He was
been 'horrific' I think He has been very mercyful.
Kelly
acts so your going to call Him on some of the things, and lable Him 'horrific' ?
What I "want" from this inquiry is to know whether or not the term 'horrific' properly applies to the God in question.
13 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayI agree that God due to
You have nothing you can put on God to suggest that God owes you
anything
I have psychological capacities relevant to the subject of moral status. I am a moral agent and a moral patient, in virtue of which others in my normative community owe me proper standing. That surely includes God, too, supposing He exists. That He supposedly created u Him your
good standing is His mercy and grace not your good works or moral thoughts.
Kelly
His nature will treat you with a great deal of respect and honor, but it will not
be because you are something so special He owes you, but because of God's
nature.
Again, have you read the biblical accounts lately? He does not characteristically treat other sentient beings with respect or honor. And He does not honor those responsibilities that fall to Him as being a member of a greater normative community. This does not have to do with thinking I am somehow "special". It just has to do with basic issues related to moral status.
God can do with His own as He will
See my post above that concerns this point. This point on face value is not really relevant to the discussion. And if you mean here that God may justifiably do whatever He wants with His creation, whatever it may in principle be, then that requires an argument.
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by KellyJayYea, read it daily at least two chapters a day. I do call God's actions fair and
you will
acknoweldge that God's dealing with all of us has been fair and just, not due to
being force to, but because it will be true.
[b]Have you read the bible lately? It's hard to imagine a literal reading of it under which all the actions of God are fair and just.
Yea, read it daily at least two chapters a day. I do call God's actions fair and
just.
Kelly[/b]
just.
Like, for example, where He sanctions genocide? Would you please explain how He was justified in doing so?
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by whodeyThe Hutterites have a near total community of goods. They have no rich, no poor, no hunger, and no murder. They have no state apparatus to enforce their equality either. They are each their own "moral police." The problem with you is that you love your private property more than you love your fellow man. This avarice prevents you from having any trust in anyone. The kingdom is all around you Whodey, but you do not see it.
So who is going to be the moral police Rwingett? Is it going to be politicians like Charles Rangel and Anthony Weiner or even Barney Frank? In fact, I wonder how much private property they all have combined. So spare me these moral midgets from preaching to Whodey.
Private propert is not the problem Rwingett, it is the condition of our hearts which uses ...[text shortened]... evil heart will continue to be little bastards and society would not be noticably better for it.
13 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettSo do you live in this community? My guess is that you own private property. In addition, property is not just relegated to land. It has to do with everything you own, right?
The Hutterites have a near total community of goods. They have no rich, no poor, no hunger, and no murder. They have no state apparatus to enforce their equality either. They are each their own "moral police." The problem with you is that you love your private property more than you love your fellow man. This avarice prevents you from having any trust in anyone. The kingdom is all around you Whodey, but you do not see it.
Nevertheless, it is not the fact that I own private property, or a care, or a coat to wear, rather, it is what I do with what I have that counts. For example, I may choose to let others live on my private property, right? I could choose to give my coat to my neighbor, right?
I have no issue with people living in such communities just like I have no issue with people worshiping in a religion of their choice, however, who am I to impose that on anyone?
14 Nov 11
2 edits
If God ends your existence in this dimension (or does so by proxy, not intervening in your "death" and allowing it to occur), and then you pass on to another dimension that is infinitely better; has God done something horrific?
The non-Christians continually (and many willfully) ignore the Christian precept that life on Earth isn't life as the World knows it. It's just a temporary visit to another dimension. If you're going to entertain the existence of the Christian God as described in the bible then you must also accept that the "death" of this life is nothing but a passing to another place.
14 Nov 11
Originally posted by whodeyI am not the one who professes to be a Christian, Whodey. You are. But I think the Hutterites have it absolutely right. They are the "true" Christians, in my opinion. They are the ones who are living most closely to what Jesus had in mind.
So do you live in this community? My guess is that you own private property. In addition, property is not just relegated to land. It has to do with everything you own, right?
Nevertheless, it is not the fact that I own private property, or a care, or a coat to wear, rather, it is what I do with what I have that counts. For example, I may choose to let ...[text shortened]... ith people worshiping in a religion of their choice, however, who am I to impose that on anyone?
Why do you so doggedly defend a capitalist system that both fosters and rewards greed? Indeed, a system that holds greed to be its highest value. Why wouldn't you try to emulate the Hutterites and try to live as they do, without greed, poverty and violence. You know, just like Jesus preached. It's hard to argue with their success.
14 Nov 11
Originally posted by sumydidUh huh. And when you see that semi is hurtling toward you on an icy freeway, are you going to be thinking happy thoughts about going to another place? I don't think so.
If God ends your existence in this dimension (or does so by proxy, not intervening in your "death" and allowing it to occur), and then you pass on to another dimension that is infinitely better; has God done something horrific?
The non-Christians continually (and many willfully) ignore the Christian precept that life on Earth isn't life as the World knows ...[text shortened]... must also accept that the "death" of this life is nothing but a passing to another place.
