• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Some random questions

BH

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
1,149
Location
United States-Texas
Basic Beliefs
Muslim
Why do philosophers always take it for granted that any god that exists has to be good? Atheists are criticized for using supposed subjective morality when critiquing claims about acts of God in the past like killing Canaanite children. But is not God's idea of what is right and wrong just his opinion? And if it is argued God bases his ideas of what is right and wrong on his nature why does it matter? It's just his opinion his nature should dictate morality.

Also, another question. If God made us then so be it. But why do we owe him anything for doing so since we didn't ask him to do so. And really how can any argument why we should be anything other than a subjective opinion anyway? Same goes for him being some sort of authority. He claims he is an authority but if we don't want him to be and reject it he has nothing but his opinion to counter our refusal to go along. He may have the power to harm us or even cast into hell but having power and having authority are different things. He can slay with the sword and cast into hell or the bad side of town without a place to stop and pee if we need to but he can never prove he had any authority to do it.
 
Hello BH

You seen to be making serious blasphemy for a Muslim or Chistian for that matter.

I take all morality to be relative and fluid. We slowlyy went from majority opposed to gay rights to majority supporting gay rights.

Morality is the prevailing social consensus.

Greek and Roman gods had a spectrum. The bible god was not a nice guy, destroyed the world with a flood because it did not please him. Lot's wife was tuned into salt for not obeying a command

The Abrahamic god IMO is a reflection of the ancient nomadic tribal Hebrew patriarchal l culture that created it. The male patriarch of a family for all practical purposes was god.


Are you having a crissi of faith?
 
No. I don't think I'm being disrespectful of Allah at all. No crisis of faith really but thanks for asking.

I just tire of philosophical veneer trying to hide the obvious.

To me its obvious any standard of morality that a god that exists has is and can never be anything other than just his opinion. He may have more power than those his sentient self reflecting thinking created beings may have but his standards are still just his subjective morality. It may be argued he is wiser but the problem with that is that definition of wise is subjective as well. Is it wise to make the world where it is like it is now? Or would it have been wiser to make the world where it was problem free or not have been made at all? Its all just opinion. If a god made the world and us then its just a brute fact. And if he has rewards for us for doing what he wants and punishes us for not doing so then there is nothing we can do about it but whatever he does is still just based on his opinion.
 
Last edited:
Nicely stated views even though I am atheist.

That being said there are fundamental issues. Christians accuse atheists of moral relativism, without an absolute god given morality anything goes.

The problem is Christians and Muslims as far as I can see are the same moral relativists. We only have to look at the history of religion to see moral issues with both faiths. Atrocities committed in the name of a god's absolute morality.

I do not see religious morality as any better or different than the rest of humanity.
 
I think there will always be controversy over morality regardless of whether it depends on a faith or God given source or is entirely secular based with its source the consensus of the society it governs. Everyone wants security for themselves and will give lip service to the idea everyone should be treated properly, but there will always be differences of opinion on how to bring that about with balance to between ones individual desires and others.
 
In what court can a god be tried?
dogs-and-cat-at-court-hearing.jpg

(... sorry, it's an Egyptian joke.)
 
If God isn't good why are you worshiping him? Pretty much only evil people would worship an evil god. Thus, if you are good then God must be good.

A good person might try to placate an evil god but they wouldn't worship said god.
 
If God isn't good why are you worshiping him? Pretty much only evil people would worship an evil god. Thus, if you are good then God must be good.

A good person might try to placate an evil god but they wouldn't worship said god.
That may come down to what you think "worship" actually entails.
 
In what court can a god be tried?
In any really. But when it gets down to it it's just the opinion of whoever is trying him whether he did bad or good and it's just gods opinion whether the court is right or wrong. If God or any Gods gets offended by the trial it's really the God or God's fault really. They choose to get angry over it.
 
If God isn't good why are you worshiping him? Pretty much only evil people would worship an evil god. Thus, if you are good then God must be good.

A good person might try to placate an evil god but they wouldn't worship said god.
But what is good or evil is just opinion both for the supposed deity as well as worshiper.

About your second statement. I see it as a human realizing he lacks power and just wants to avoid being harmed by someone else much more powerful. The one more powerful is ultimately responsible for anything that happens to the weaker though because the stronger is responsible for his own feelings and choices regardless of whatever the weaker did or wants.
 
One of the problems which comes along with evolving a large brain is, one can never accept that something just "is". Once a sentient being's brain formulates the question, "Why?" some form of explanation is going to be created from the available information.

It doesn't require an extraordinary imagination to think all the forces of nature, everything from thunder storms to earthquakes, is due to the action of some other sentient being, who by definition must be big and strong enough to do these sort of things. When we need a model of a big powerful being who has control over stuff, the one at hand is the parent and child. This works really well because as anyone with the least bit of child rearing experience knows the child is not always going to be pleased with what you do, or understand why you do it.
 
Because people would never be seen worshiping an evil God in public, it's unthinkable. Anything or anyone we follow, and that is a successful movement, is usually going to be perceived as 'good' by the in-group following it, otherwise they end up looking like assholes.

So a philosopher discussing God starts from the assumption that the God should be benevolent.
 
Anything or anyone we follow, and that is a successful movement, is usually going to be perceived as 'good' by the in-group following it, otherwise they end up looking like assholes.
Only if their fear of looking like assholes is not outweighed by their fear of being punished by their tyrant god.
 
In what court can a god be tried?
In any really. But when it gets down to it it's just the opinion of whoever is trying him whether he did bad or good and it's just gods opinion whether the court is right or wrong. If God or any Gods gets offended by the trial it's really the God or God's fault really. They choose to get angry over it.
CS Lewis had a go at it God in the Dock.
I'll let the jury decide if he did a good job.
 
Because people would never be seen worshiping an evil God in public, it's unthinkable. Anything or anyone we follow, and that is a successful movement, is usually going to be perceived as 'good' by the in-group following it, otherwise they end up looking like assholes.

So a philosopher discussing God starts from the assumption that the God should be benevolent.
Key: "in public". Someone could worship an evil deity in private in the hope of gaining power.
 
Back
Top Bottom