On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Nathan England <[email protected]> wrote: > Your argument is similar to the typical: > > Can God, who can do anything, create a mountain so big that he couldn't climb > it?
No, it's not. My question (not argument) is about the source of right and wrong. Your example is a logical paradox. > God, as the creator of right and wrong, will not willfully tell me to do > something that > he has said is wrong. Not the point. It's not about what God *would* do. It's about whether or not God commanding something is what causes that thing to be right. > Your entire argument is designed to frame a person into your argument so you > can > beat them. Did you learn this in philosophy class in college? Did your > anti-god teacher > teach you how to put a "christian" in his place? You are assuming that my teacher was "anti-god." My question (not argument) is designed to clarify an ethical question, not to frame people. > God is perfect justice. God is perfect punishment (punishment fits the crime > according > to God, not man). God is perfect compassion. God is perfect hatred. And > anything else > I'm forgetting. God is complete. We base our ideas and perceptions on only > knowing > half the story yet convince ourselves we are wise. Which doesn't really address the question. > Making yourself a final authority (deciding for yourself what is right and > wrong) is > contrary to having a God in the first place. Yet you believe that you know the mind of God, as demonstrated by your earlier statement that you know that God wouldn't command you to do something. Either you reserve the right to decide what is right and what is wrong (which you do earlier when you say that you know God wouldn't command you to do X or Y) or you are subject to God's commandments, even if they go against your better judgment. -Dan /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
