Does God like things that are morally right; or are they morally right because God likes them?

I just want you to answer which one of these you think is right, I don't give two shits what you think God is doing up there in heaven or anything like that.

[This message has been edited by jb_mcbean (edited 12-20-2006).]

Can lunatics respond?

quote:Originally posted by Hexadecimal:

Can lunatics respond?

Yes.

Can heretics respond?

Related question. When there was just god, by himself, how was he "good"? How could he be good by himself? Or is "good" what "god likes"? So then whatever god says is good. Is that what we're going with here?

I mean like when they say "god is good", what the fuck do they mean by that? Being THE decider of what is good, sort of makes you automatically good, so the adjective "good" becomes meaningless in that context. Anybody get what I'm saying here?

Do you think that God is just by himself with His creations? Must be awful lonely being the only omnipotent being. Or do you think that maybe other Gods exist, each with their own worlds/universes they created? God may have omnipotence in the universe He created, but that doesn't mean He doesn't have laws that He has to follow.

Oooo.. a "chicken or the egg" question.

I think the flaw is in your wording. It isnt about what god 'likes,' because when you are dealing with an omni-being, things simply 'are'. That is, actions are categorically moral and immoral permanently. To say that something is categorically right because of a 'like' lends to the idea that said deity's emotions can change. The theory of the christian god is that he is permanent in all of his commandments (except for.. ya know.. when he wrote the sequel 'the new testament'). So, since god is eternal, morals are eternal, because actions are categorically right and wrong since he 'began'.

Anyways, morals evolved like everything else. Read Dr. Dawkin's 'The God Delusion' (chapter 7 if i remember correctly)

God is.

God the construct, a pathetic lie that attempts to imitate the truth, is where morality comes into play.

No man can know the God that is - the God(s) we know is nothing but imaginary. Any morals that are declared as wholesome by this 'being' are reflections of the tortured and suffering self. Say, for example, you felt the pain of someone being lost to death - this is an unchangeable event. Up until one knows death, murder might be thought of as bad because they are told so, but when they suffer the loss of live, they will almost always conclude that purposefully ending a life is 'wrong'. This very same mental construct will be plastered into the directive of a higher mental construct called 'morality'.

From here, rather than recognizing morality as nothing but illusion created to rebel from the truth that is suffering, the mind will create another construct which will justify morality, more often than not, this construct is a 'god'. Once again, one might have been raised with a vague construct called 'god', but it is not until one suffers and runs from their pain that they will justify themselves with a solidified construct of 'god', which still does not yet penetrate the surface of the reality it imitates.

To quote Lao Tzu: The tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao.

quote:Originally posted by chubbyman25:

Do you think that God is just by himself with His creations? Must be awful lonely being the only omnipotent being. Or do you think that maybe other Gods exist, each with their own worlds/universes they created? God may have omnipotence in the universe He created, but that doesn't mean He doesn't have laws that He has to follow.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

Hmmm, no mention of God's pet or best mate there. But basically, what you are saying is that God didn't create morality, yet you belieave he created our universe? Morality exists in our universe, is in fact a part of our universe. God didn't create morality, therefore he didn't create the universe, therefore he doesn't exist. I thank you, and goodnight.



[This message has been edited by jb_mcbean (edited 12-20-2006).]

Morality as a whole is not derived from any religion or religious text, sure we get things like the golden rule and such but those are a given really.

God is the most un-moral being you could possibly think up.

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

Morality as a whole is not derived from any religion or religious text, sure we get things like the golden rule and such but those are a given really.

God is the most un-moral being you could possibly think up.

Amoral or unmoral? I'd go with the prior, only because if some supreme entity willed anything to happen, then its will would be moral by its actual supremacy over human will - even if it were the cause of death, suffering, rape, plagues, ect.

quote:Originally posted by among_the_living:

Morality as a whole is not derived from any religion or religious text, sure we get things like the golden rule and such but those are a given really.

God is the most un-moral being you could possibly think up.

You know just because the question posed was for Christians doesn't mean the guy who posed it was a Christian.

I'm not here to argue about whether God does or does not exist (I happen to believe he doesn't), or about whether morals can be divorced from religion; I'm here to pose a philosophical question and listen to answers that Christians specifically give.

Well jb, you don't always get what you want. o_O