If "God" is all powerfull, then it stands to reason.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16463
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
If "God" is all powerfull, then it stands to reason.

If God can do anything then god by proxy of "all" is capable of being imoral.

If God is not capable of being imoral then he cannot be called God.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:If God can do

Brian37 wrote:

If God can do anything then god by proxy of "all" is capable of being imoral.

If God is not capable of being imoral then he cannot be called God.

He is also capable of totally deceiving us as to what his ultimate nature and motives are.

Even if people really were having direct experiences of God, there is no way of telling whether he is utterly playing games with them for his own amusement - he would be totally capable of convincing us of whatever he wanted for whatever purpose.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


treat2 (not verified)
Posts: 4294964976
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:Brian37

BobSpence1 wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

If God can do anything then god by proxy of "all" is capable of being imoral.

If God is not capable of being imoral then he cannot be called God.

He is also capable of totally deceiving us as to what his ultimate nature and motives are.

Even if people really were having direct experiences of God, there is no way of telling whether he is utterly playing games with them for his own amusement - he would be totally capable of convincing us of whatever he wanted for whatever purpose.

 

BobSpence1, just to clarify ...are you a Pantheist?


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16463
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
treat2 wrote:BobSpence1

treat2 wrote:
BobSpence1 wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

If God can do anything then god by proxy of "all" is capable of being imoral.

If God is not capable of being imoral then he cannot be called God.

He is also capable of totally deceiving us as to what his ultimate nature and motives are.

Even if people really were having direct experiences of God, there is no way of telling whether he is utterly playing games with them for his own amusement - he would be totally capable of convincing us of whatever he wanted for whatever purpose.

 

BobSpence1, just to clarify ...are you a Pantheist?

No he is not. "Pantheism" is just new age superstition and just as hokie and bunk as any ancient myth.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
treat2 wrote:BobSpence1

treat2 wrote:
BobSpence1 wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

If God can do anything then god by proxy of "all" is capable of being imoral.

If God is not capable of being imoral then he cannot be called God.

He is also capable of totally deceiving us as to what his ultimate nature and motives are.

Even if people really were having direct experiences of God, there is no way of telling whether he is utterly playing games with them for his own amusement - he would be totally capable of convincing us of whatever he wanted for whatever purpose.

 

BobSpence1, just to clarify ...are you a Pantheist?

No way - supernatural God beings of any sort are logical nonsense. 

I am just pointing out there that assuming the existence of an omnipotent super being, would actually imply that you could not be certain of anything, whether morality or the true nature of the universe, or anything else, contrary to claims that without God we would have no absolute reference for morality. The reverse is the case - only by assuming everything is based on natural, ie not God-given, laws, can we develop real knowledge and morality based on a consistent reality.

IOW God belief destroys any logical basis for certain knowledge, and is utterly incompatible with genuine morality.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:  

BobSpence1 wrote:

 

Brian37 wrote:

 

If God can do anything then god by proxy of "all" is capable of being imoral.

 

If God is not capable of being imoral then he cannot be called God.

 

He is also capable of totally deceiving us as to what his ultimate nature and motives are.

 

In the vein, he could have done stuff like, say not put the apple tree in the garden of Eden at all. Or at least put it up on the highest mountain so that we would have had to do more than have a tasty snack to disobey him.

 

Even better, he could have made the world exactly the same as he did except for the walking, talking snake from hell. I assume that it was a walking snake because I see no point in condemning a standard snake to spend the rest of time on it's belly.

 

Alternatively, he could have really made apples poisonous just like he said they were. Then after we chomped down, he would have had a chance to start over, this time with no snakes to mess stuff up.

 

Mind you, church doctrine is that the devil is the father of all lies yet the creator of the world clearly lied. So that must mean that the devil is the father of god or something?

 

Step 2: ????

 

Step 3: Profit.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13254
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
You'd think that an

You'd think that an omnipotent and omniscient being would know every language that ever did or will exist, and could put "bibles" properly translated for every language that ever was and will ever be in a vault that anyone could get access to but noone could damage.

Someone doesn't think so? Then I guess you don't have much confidence in your sky daddy after all.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.