What would you do if you were God? (Page 3) ghostgeek: Lipton, the Ontological Argument is a mind-twister. It always seems wrong to me but saying why is the hard part. I have heard that Immanuel Kant made a pretty good attempt at criticising it though. As to the question of whether a god has to necessarily be perfect I would answer no. Plenty of the old gods had failings. It is just that God, the Christian god, seems to carry with him this assumption that he is perfect in every way. As this thread seems to relate to the Christian god I naturally took this assumption as the foundation on which to base my argument.  LiptonCambell: Lol it may be a question of the christian God since you are christian, but it doesn't really have anything to do with any one religion...  CoIin: According to what I understand, some modern Christian scholars try to keep the Ontological Argument alive in some form or another, but the consensus among philosophers for quite some time now has been that it is not possible to prove existence simply through an examination of concepts or attributes. (see J L Mackie for a nice treatment of the Ontological Argument) The argument is non-partisan - it doesn't claim to prove the existence of Yahweh or Allah or whoever - just a "perfect being". Whatever you take that perfect being to be is up to you. Topic: Religion By the way, @Ghost, your contention that a perfect being cannot create something imperfect (i.e. us) seems like a non sequitur to me. How do you figure that? A consummate violin maker could make a crappy violin (for the mother-in-law perhaps ) if he so desired, couldn't he?  ghostgeek: Colin, as you say, a perfect being could make an imperfect object. It would not be impossible, how could it. The thing is though, would a perfect being want to make something that was not a perfect fit for its intended purpose? I say no. In your example, that is not a crappy violin but one built exactly for its intended recipient, the mother-in-law. There would be no unintended mistake or error, just a statement of contempt. People seem to see humanity as a failure on the part of God but that is not possible. Given perfect knowledge, one of the attributes of God, he would know exactly what he was making at the creation and how it would turn out, before he even began. He would know how we would behave before making us but he went ahead anyway. We are as he intended, fit for purpose. It is just that nobody knows that purpose but God.
(Edited by ghostgeek) LiptonCambell: >>> would a perfect being want to make something that was not a perfect Perhaps it did. You know, the old "their ways are higher than ours- we cannot understand their reasons" argument? Or do you fully understand the thoughts and intentions of God? >>> he would know exactly what he was making at the creation and how it would turn out, before he even began. So then Judas killing Jesus was God's fault, not Juda's? Poor guy... Wait- does that mean every murderer, every rapist, every child molester, are simply doing God's will, since they couldn't defy it? And if so, doesn't that mean every murderer out there, when it comes time to pay for their sins, are actually innocent, since they could not defy the lords plan? An eternity of punishment and torture, because God needed someone to be killed as part of their grand plan, but couldn't do it themselves? Sounds like a bum deal to me.... Hell, how could sin possibly exist in a system with no freewill? >>>We are as he intended, fit for purpose. What purpose did Hitler or Stalin fit? (Edited by LiptonCambell) ghostgeek: Lipton, I think your beginning to get it. First though, lets clear up a couple of points. The first is that I do not necessarily believe in God. I have grave doubts about his existence but I may be wrong. The second point is that this thread specifically asks people what they would do if they were the Christian god. If you doubt this look at the wording of the thread heading. You use the proper name "God", with a capital letter. You are not referring to just any god of your or my choosing but to one in particular. Now this Christian god, I will use your term, God, in future, has ascribed to him a number of attributes which include him being omnisient, omnipotent, unknowable and infallible. This is not my doing, it comes courtesy of Christianity. So God is omnisient. He sees everything and knows everything through all of time and space. He knew what was going to happen through all of time before the act of creation. He saw the beginning and he knows the end of the universe. The "Fall of Man", so called, God knew that would happen before Man was first made. It means that nobody, but nobody, has free will other than God. I like to use a simple analogy to illustrate this point. Imagine a railway or railroad line runs from station A to station B. A train starts out from A and must necessarily travel to B. The driver of the train cannot decide half way through the journey that he wants to go to C. He has no power to change the destination. The only person who can choose the destination of the train is the one who builds the railway. That person could have chosen to have the line run from C to D or E to F or any other two points but once the decision is made and the line built the route is fixed. The same applies to God and the act of creation. He would have had the freedom to choose between the multitude of different paths creation could have taken but once God had made his decision everything would unfold as intended. We, as agents in this drama, might feel we have the power to determine our actions but we would be wrong. All we can do is accept that this is the best possible outcome that could possibly exist, because God is infallible, remember. He cannot make a mistake so this has to be the best of all possible worlds that can fulfill his purpose. As to that purpose, I know nothing at all. Another aspect of God, you remember, is that he is unknowable so his purpose will always be shrouded in mystery. If these conclusions do not suit you, all I can suggest is that you find another religion. There are plenty to choose from. LiptonCambell: >>>The second point is that this thread specifically asks people what they would do if they were the Christian god. If you doubt this look at the wording of the thread heading. You use the proper name "God", with a capital letter. You are not referring to just any god of your or my choosing but to one in particular. Are....are you seriously suggesting that I am talking about the christian God because of punctuation? Allow me to resolve this issue for you- I am not talking about the Christian interpretation of God, or the Muslim, or Islamic, or the ancient Greek, or the ancient Egyptians- I am talking about the generic thought on God without acknowledging any one attribute from any one religion. I like the Wikipedia explanation, so that'll be the official definition for this thread; "God is often conceived as the supreme being and principal object of faith.[1] In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe. In deism, God is the creator (but not the sustainer) of the universe. In pantheism, God is the universe itself. Theologians have ascribed a variety of attributes to the many different conceptions of God. Common among these are omniscience (infinite knowledge), omnipotence (unlimited power), omnipresence (present everywhere), omnibenevolence (perfect goodness), divine simplicity, and eternal and necessary existence." ~en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God There is no reason that God HAS to be perfect. If you religious beliefs hold that he is....whatever....but it seems from your comments that you are not religious....which confuses me further.... >>>because God is infallible, remember. I simply don't get that. I understand that God knows his actions and the repercussions of his actions in advance- but I don't see how that makes all possible circumstances the best possible circumstance. Maybe God just didn't give a fuck, and was okay with the crusades, or with the Holocaust- but that doesn't mean that the Holocaust happening is a reflection of God's perfection, or that nearly a billion people dying from starvation a year is perfection >>>If these conclusions do not suit you, all I can suggest is that you find another religion. Again, I never at any point said "Btw, everyone has to argue for a Christian God"- wanna be Marduk, Odin, or Allah, go nuts- I don't care- I care about what YOU would do differently, not which God is the true God. (Edited by LiptonCambell) CoIin: The soundness of Ghost's argument above I will leave as an exercise to the reader, as they say It does, however, alert us to the problem of over-commitment to a theory, a problem not unique to the religious. We often see the case where fanatical adherence to a pet theory leads to the adherent being forced to embrace apparently absurd consequences, while those on the outside simply shrug and acknowledge the vastly more plausible explanation that the theory is simply wrong. In the case of the traditional monotheist, for example, implacable faith in the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity theory may put her in the awkward position of being forced to admit that any absurdity, say, that this is the best of all possible worlds is "true", or that any atrocity, say, the wholesale burning of children in Nazi ovens, is "good". And why is it good? It HAS to be good otherwise the theory would be in trouble, and for the zealot, this is never an option. The less dogmatic among us draw the obvious conclusion that the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God theory is just wrong. Now, I'm not trying to ruffle feathers here, or perhaps I am but not in a gratuitous manner, however I do have worries that science followers can be beguiled just as easily. Say, for example, we see sociobiologists expending a great deal of effort demonstrating that all genuine altruism, human altruism included, is an illusion. Now, clearly, this is contrary to what we all see around us day in day out. Why, then, must these guys convince us that all altruism is only "apparent" altruism and actually serves an evolutionary function? Because if this were not the case, Darwin's theory of evolution through natural selection would be in jeopardy. And we simply can't have that now, can we? (Edited by CoIin)  lori100: From "The Watchers II" by Raymond Fowler----"Without those who are detrimental to society, those who are advanced cannot be tested. Hussein (Sadaam ) serves a necessary purpose. Evil serves a necessary purpose. There must be suffering, because without these things, there is no advancement and nothing to overcome. Evil on the earthly plane is the negative aspect. Evil on the larger plane is part of the overall plan that gives us all a chance to advance and rise above it. Everything in nature....has a plus and a minus, a light and dark, a negative and positive, a good an bad. It must be, for without some content of evil, there can be no good. There can be no growth. There will come a time when evil will be wiped away. That time is not close at hand. When that time comes, our growth will not cease. Rather, we will advance into further planes of existence. Right now, the...type of society that you speak of is not possible. Man needs spiritual growth badly. The whole idea of advancing is to get closer and closer to the Creator. That is the ultimate goal. The spirit can neither be harmed nor improved. The only thing it can do is advance and grow. It's a very beautiful thing." (Edited by lori100) CoIin: Once again, Lori, a claim like "It must be, for without some content of evil, there can be no good. There can be no growth." is simply incompatible with an omnipotent, omnibenevolent god. Why can there be no growth without evil? This is a causal relationship. Let's say that trees can't grow without sunlight and water on our planet. Are you saying that God couldn't make them grow any other way? Likewise with "spiritual growth", if God is truly omnipotent then he can bring about growth ANY WAY HE LIKES. This is so obvious that I fail to understand why it keeps needing to be pointed out. Or are you suggesting that God is subject to causal laws like all the rest of us? CoIin: @ Lori  Read pages 6 and 7 of this thread. If you disagree with anything I said about good vs evil, I'll be all beers, I mean ears   Topic: Philosophy lori100: Hi Colin, I don't really understand it completely myself. It is the system set up. God wants us to CHOOSE to be kind, helpful beings. That's why there must be a choice. We must choose to reject evil. From what I have read---many other teachings ----it is repeated many times again....God allows us to make the decision ....otherwise we would be robots with no minds of our own.......You will have to ask God to explain it...good luck... (Edited by lori100) CoIin: Ok, I'm willing to grant that for the sake of argument, but it still doesn't help. Your position - God has made us in such a way that we FREELY make good decisions sometimes and bad decisions other times. My question is, why could he not have created us in such a way that we FREELY make the right choices EVERY time (or even most of the time). There is no contradiction here. (And bear in mind, bad choices do not just entail an ugly hairstyle or burnt toast. Bad choices entail people losing legs and children getting massacred wholesale) I'm sure you've gone for an hour before without screwing up, right? Maybe even a whole day? Or a week? Did that make you any less free? Some people seem to have the inexplicable notion that we must screw up once in a while to be free. lori100: Ahhh, you are psychic!  I was just going to repost this one from your other thread----My question is, why could he not have created us in such a way that we FREELY make the right choices EVERY time . ------- If we make the right choice EVERY time, there would be no true choice, and no growth, no advancement. Why do we need growth..? I don't know ....if we were perfect it would be a pretty boring cosmos. --------- Whitley Strieber wrote of seeing the earth being destroyed by a comet. The people were highly advanced and knew the second it would hit. They all gathered their families to watch it happen. He stated they were too advanced, they knew too much. There was little chance to advance to higher knowledge.....same theme again....In India they honor a god called the Destroyer.....Rudolf Steiner states a physical organ must be destroyed in one life so it will be stronger in a future life when that soul has a great purpose to fulfill-----illnesses also seem to have purposes.....destroy, rebuild it better, correct flaws, advance to a higher level.....same themes again.... (Edited by lori100) CoIin: Growth is only good because it raises one to a higher state. Right? So it's better to be in a higher state than a lower state. Right? So it would be better to be in that higher state TO BEGIN WITH. Right?  | Philosophy Chat Room 14 People Chatting Similar Conversations |
