hey athiests! i'm chatting with a person from liberty university on yahoo

[David Floyd]

How does a religious person define good? It's Plato all over again. Is something morally right because God says so or do morals (goodness) exist independent of God? If it's the first, then the religious definition of good is baseless and down to the whim of God, which removes moral authority. If it's the second, then God isn't the source of morals and athiests are just as free to call upon that independent moral (good) guide as believers are.

There is a third option, one that I tend to support. God created morality, along with everything else. However, the morality that he created was the result of the universe he set up, as a result of both the laws of nature and the concept of free will. These "morals" - which you can call whatever you want, but the concept of morals applies - are inherently good, because they are a part of God's creation.

God is good. Therefore God must also be moral. If God is moral, then God cannot violate the moral law, due to his nature. I suppose that one can make the omnipotence argument - and one would be correct. God has the power to behave immorally, however, the exercise of this action is not within the realm of possibility because of the nature of God. If God were to behave immorally, he would cease to be God, and beliefs predicated on a good God would be immediately invalidated.

So, essentially, my belief is that God is effectively constrained by the moral law that was indirectly established by God as a result of creation (whether God-driven evolution, literal creation, or any other sort).

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I'd agree since BJs are a notable exception of where it is better to recieve.

Did you try the other way ?

[Japher]

Eewwww!!! Homo!

[Lincoln]

Yea, what DF said. God's moral law is in his being. Trying to violate the law of God is like trying to defy gravity. You can try it but the law will win the argument.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Anyway, I thought you liked *******s?

Anyway, my God is Starchild's void. Unlike Lincoln's God though, my God doesn't really give a damn about what the Hell we do. Not really, anyway. In essense I believe in 'Clockwork world' of the Enlightenment: God set the clock and then walked away (got bored with us).

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Did you try the other way ?

Absolutely not! I'm just going by the gagging and gurgling noises my ex-girlfriend made as well as her personal testimony.

[David Floyd]

Lincoln,

You sure you want to agree with me? There are major Libertarian implications in that belief I stated...ie, if God isn't allowed to behave immorally, or change the definition of morality, then who exactly is?

[Lincoln]

Well David, I think we are free to change God's imposed morality but he is free to not accept our changes.

I guess I don't understand your question.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Basing one's morality on the laws of nature reminds me of something I saw yesterday. A hornet was sucking the life blood out of the neck of another bug without mercy. That is the law of nature without all of the fancy justifications.

Ya eat meat, Lincoln?

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov




Ya eat meat, Lincoln?

Yea, I'm an an animal too you know!

[Boris Godunov]

I don't. So I guess I'm morally superior, huh? All these leftist vegetarians and vegans are like hornets who choose not to suck blood from the neck of the other bugs, whereas the rightist carnivores are just merciless bloodsuckers.

[GePap]

Does anyone here have any valid arguements that show that the Monotheistic God everyone here is talking about is more valid than the pantheon of Hindu gods, more valid than animist beliefs, or the spiritual belief system of any native American tribe you decide to focus on, or Buddhism?

[Boris Godunov]

Kill the heretic! Gaaaaaaah!

[Lincoln]

Most leftist vegans I know prefer to kill their own unborn children than eat meat. I would prefer that they just had a good a hamburger...

[GePap]

NOT Heretic, Infidel.

That is what gets me about this particular debate: people alwasy paint it as science v. Monotheistic God, but the fact is that monotheism is only ONE religious school of thought..fine, the most popular but not the only one. The monotheistic ideology may very well be wrong, but that does not invalidate religions per say.