Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Moral command theory is false.
#76

Moral command theory is false.
(03-22-2020, 09:10 PM)Link Wrote: And it's means God if is going to be a moral authority, has to provide insights and proofs to his commands. He is authority to be relied on in manifesting what is good, but it's not that he just commands arbitrarily and it's good because it his commands.

Hey shit for brains...

What's with posting three fucking comments within 8 minutes?

Quote:It's a rehash of 2.

Quote:It's a rehash, and it's saying God's commands based on good, but the goodness is himself. That's all that is different.

All your comments and their tsunami of absolute bullshit is unwanted here.  Are you so fucking dense
that you haven't figured it out yet?  And you also haven't noticed that everybody else here thinks you're
a total dickhead, with the brainpower of a garden slug?

Do us all a favour, and just piss off.     You won't be missed.      Angry
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
Reply
#77

Moral command theory is false.
(03-22-2020, 12:43 PM)Link Wrote: I wasn't rejecting 3. I agree with 3, but command theory is based on 1.

There is nothing that says you can't have a moral command theory with a #3 understanding of what makes God good. It seems you want to reject moral command theory so it serves you to choose #1. Isn't that what you are doing?
Reply
#78

Moral command theory is false.
1) Morality, is what I say is right.
2) Immorality, is what I say is wrong.
3) Any questions, see #1. Also, take a long walk off of a short pier. Preferably wear cement loafers.
D) Thank you very much. Have a nice day.
The following 1 user Likes no one's post:
  • Deesse23
Reply
#79

Moral command theory is false.
(03-25-2020, 08:31 PM)no one Wrote: 1) Morality, is what I say is right.
2) Immorality, is what I say is wrong.
3) Any questions, see #1. Also, take a long walk off of a short pier. Preferably wear cement loafers.
D) Thank you very much. Have a nice day.

Except no man is an island.

We live in society and it is that society that determines morality.
It is always changing as there is never 100% agreement and it is constantly under pressure.
Philosophy is about asking questions.
Science is about answering questions.
Theology is about avoiding questions.
Reply
#80

Moral command theory is false.
(03-01-2020, 04:44 PM)Link Wrote: It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

To the best of your ability, can you please tell me what is it that compels you accept the existence of a supernatural entity you refer to as God?
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply
#81

Moral command theory is false.
(03-25-2020, 08:24 PM)SteveII Wrote:
(03-22-2020, 12:43 PM)Link Wrote: I wasn't rejecting 3. I agree with 3, but command theory is based on 1.

There is nothing that says you can't have a moral command theory with a #3 understanding of what makes God good. It seems you want to reject moral command theory so it serves you to choose #1.  Isn't that what you are doing?

3 is a version of 2.
Reply
#82

Moral command theory is false.
(03-26-2020, 02:30 AM)Link Wrote: 3 is a version of 2.

Twice 2 less 1 is 3, so is half of a half dozen.  9/3 is a bit showy, 18/6 is downright ostentatious.  But 3 standing in as a version of 2 - that can't happen.  It's been theorized that small values of 3 could approach large values of 2, but only when humongous values of 0 approach infinitesimal values of 1, which has only been observed in the wild accompanied by high intake of hallucinogenic substances.
The following 3 users Like airportkid's post:
  • skyking, Chas, Finite Monkeys
Reply
#83

Moral command theory is false.
Quote:And the Lord spake, saying, 'First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then, shalt thou count to three. No more. No less. Three shalt be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, nor either count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then, lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.'
[Image: signature%20The-Ascension-of-Iweko.jpg]
The following 5 users Like Dānu's post:
  • skyking, Mark, Deesse23, brewerb, Gwaithmir
Reply
#84

Moral command theory is false.
(03-05-2020, 02:19 PM)SteveII Wrote: The third option (that has no unwanted conclusion): it is not God's will that defines the good but his unchanging nature that governs his will and his commands to us.

Please document this, without making things up.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
The following 1 user Likes brewerb's post:
  • Deesse23
Reply
#85

Moral command theory is false.
"And they shall stand in despair before the white cliffs of the world, and shall chant from their empty tomes in vain, for their words are nothing! And Erú shall prevail against His enemies and they shall be cast into the Void, for their enchantments are naught and their gods are helpless before Him." (The Silmarillion, 17:82)
Gandalf
Reply
#86

Moral command theory is false.
The ancient dogma of the simplicity of God claims God's essences and substance are one. God does not have metaphysical parts.
So then, God's intelligence, goodness and logic are all one and the same thing. Goodness does not depend on logic and logic does not depend on goodness. Does this make any sense at all? And then thus the moral failings of God make sense? Predestination, lack of free will and hell? Commands of massacres and genocides? Failure of God to appear to mankind in an utterly unmistakable manner and to guide us unerringly?

If then we cut this Gordian knot by dropping simplicity of God, how did God come to be as God is, what undelying metaphysical reality is foundational to the existence and possibility of God's existence?
Plunk your magic twanger Froggy!   Boinnnnnng!  Hiya Kids!  Hiya! Hiya!



The following 1 user Likes Cheerful Charlie's post:
  • Dānu
Reply
#87

Moral command theory is false.
(03-26-2020, 03:07 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: .... how did God come to be as God is, .......

[Image: giphy.gif]
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
Reply
#88

Moral command theory is false.
(03-26-2020, 03:07 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: The ancient dogma of the simplicity of God claims God's essences and substance are one.  God does not have metaphysical parts.
So then, God's intelligence, goodness and logic are all one and the same thing.  Goodness does not depend on logic and logic does not depend on goodness.  Does this make any sense at all?  And then thus the moral failings of God make sense? Predestination, lack of free will and hell?  Commands of massacres and genocides?  Failure of God to appear to mankind in an utterly unmistakable manner and to guide us unerringly?

If then we cut this Gordian knot by dropping simplicity of God, how did God come to be as God is, what undelying metaphysical reality is foundational to the existence and possibility of God's existence?

You are confused with his titles and aspects when descended (they differ) and what they are in their ultimate form (one).
Reply
#89

Moral command theory is false.
(03-29-2020, 01:53 PM)Link Wrote:
(03-26-2020, 03:07 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: The ancient dogma of the simplicity of God claims God's essences and substance are one.  God does not have metaphysical parts.
So then, God's intelligence, goodness and logic are all one and the same thing.  Goodness does not depend on logic and logic does not depend on goodness.  Does this make any sense at all?  And then thus the moral failings of God make sense? Predestination, lack of free will and hell?  Commands of massacres and genocides?  Failure of God to appear to mankind in an utterly unmistakable manner and to guide us unerringly?

If then we cut this Gordian knot by dropping simplicity of God, how did God come to be as God is, what undelying metaphysical reality is foundational to the existence and possibility of God's existence?

You are confused with his titles and aspects when descended (they differ) and what they are in their ultimate form (one).

No confusion here.  Simplicity of God as a dogma has deep roots in Greek philosophy and Christian theology.  The Greek concept of arche, the underlying reality of everything was divided into two positions.  Naturalists and those who claimed God was the underlying arche, the foundations of all.  Xenophanes and Plato et al.  The earliest theologians, Clement of Alexander, Iraeneus and other all explicitly wrote that God was simple.  And Jewish thinkers, Philo and Plotinus. This belief has deep and long roots and has been well discussed for centuries.

The problem is, if God is the root of logic and creator of all metaphysical necessities, which are all contingent, and is perfectly good, moral evil should not exist.  If God can change the very logic of the universe to whatever God pleased, as Descartes claimed God in fact could do, then God had no obstacles to achieving mankind's perfect moral goodness, and no secret reasons for not doing so.

In the end, simplicity of God is incoherent and self defeating.  And the dogma has long, deep roots that are not mysterious or complex.  The problem is, if theology abandons that, and some theologians do, for example, Alvin Plantinga, because of the points i am making, it allows naturalism to take precedence over any theoretical God.  What principles allow god to exist as god does exist, if God exists?  Simplicity of God claims God's essences and substances are one and the same so as to avoid having to explain how God came to be God.

And down goes TAG and presuppositionalism that rely on the claim God created logic and all other metaphysical necessities.

Thus we can see that the greater the claims made for God, maximalist God, perfect being theology, Simple God, the weaker the whole argument for existence of God gets.  Theology fails.
In other words, no matter how we argue this, simplicity of God or no simplicity of God, it is a problem for theology.
Plunk your magic twanger Froggy!   Boinnnnnng!  Hiya Kids!  Hiya! Hiya!



Reply
#90

Moral command theory is false.
Simplicity of God's Essence is due definition of greatness and perfection. If he had an attribute that lacked what another attribute lacked or an aspect that lacked what another aspect lacked, he would be formed of non-ultimate aspects. If he had parts, they would exist with him, and so each would a god in themselves, yet not ultimately complete.

God's essence is one if ultimate being exists, it has to be one complete essence. That said, aside from that, the nature of all things as far they are beautiful or great, is descent from God.

God also by being necessary, cannot be imagined to exist or not exist, only seen to exist. God exists necessarily and only the eternal one can exist necessarily, and so greatness if ultimate is also proven to be eternal.

All morals themselves are necessary truths, they are true regardless of any possible world. It's not the case that in some world x is evil but in this world x is good. This shows they are rooted in God, the eternal and basis of all greatness and beauty in this world.
Reply
#91

Moral command theory is false.
Also God is absolutely vertically (highest in attributes x and y and z) and horizontally (has infinite attributes and perfections).

Creation are not absolute neither vertically (highest) nor horizontally (have all perfections and treasures of God).

All talents we have are from God but God can create absolutely infinitely more talents that differ from one another and creations and hues we don't know, because he is absolute horizontally as well.

Yet, despite this, his essence is one. If he wasn't, he would be consisting if non-ultimate attributes, which is paradoxical.
Reply
#92

Moral command theory is false.
The problem is, a God that is all powerful, that is the source of logic and morality, and is perfectly good, has a problem with reconciling with the great amount of moral evil in this world. Many supposedly sophisticated theologians try to deal with this issue, have been for centuries and it cannot be done and has not been done.

One attempt to deal with this is sophisticate theologians telling us that God, perfectly good, all powerful God does not owe us any moral obligations and that God is not a moral agent. Not a new idea by any means.

In the end it is all they've got. Sorry as it is. Special pleading of the most rank variety.
Plunk your magic twanger Froggy!   Boinnnnnng!  Hiya Kids!  Hiya! Hiya!



Reply
#93

Moral command theory is false.
You are refer to the problem of evil. Change of subject though that is.
Reply
#94

Moral command theory is false.
A God that creates every thing has a lot of problems. Problem of Evil is a big part of it It cannot be ignored or set aside. A God that supposedly is outside of time and creates time as an illusion for us, soon has problems with time. God then creates all at once, and thus all evil. Or God does not, but then time so powerful God must obey time is a problem for a god that supposedly creates all. Time, logic, morality, and more soon become intellectual quagmires for the proposition of God supposedly sophisticated theologians want us to believe in.

To save god means stripping away these supposed attributes of God who soon grows so small, nobody cares any more about that shrunken God. or playing special pleading games, rationalization, and sophistry games. It no longer matters to us atheists. No more than unicorns or fairies and arguments about them.

God in the end explains nothing and collapses under careful scrutiny.
Plunk your magic twanger Froggy!   Boinnnnnng!  Hiya Kids!  Hiya! Hiya!



The following 2 users Like Cheerful Charlie's post:
  • Dānu, skyking
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)