|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 9, 2018 16:28:50 GMT
I was trying to do that--help you understand, but you didn't bother with the question I asked. Are you familiar with the Euthyphro problem? Somewhat The basic idea of the Euthyphro problem is this: X has the property F (where x is something God-related) Does x have the property F because God created it that way, where He could create it as He wishes Or Does x have the property F because that's the way the world is whether God wants it to be that way or not? Or, a simpler way to put it is this: Could God make the world however He wants to make it, or are there some things where He'd have no choice? (And if there are some things where He'd have no choice, what determined that those things would be as they are?)
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 9, 2018 17:11:21 GMT
The basic idea of the Euthyphro problem is this: X has the property F (where x is something God-related) Does x have the property F because God created it that way, where He could create it as He wishes Or Does x have the property F because that's the way the world is whether God wants it to be that way or not? Or, a simpler way to put it is this: Could God make the world however He wants to make it, or are there some things where He'd have no choice? (And if there are some things where He'd have no choice, what determined that those things would be as they are?) The argument doesn't really apply to the dilemma of sin since it doesn't involve creation as much as it does standard, but I'll try to make the argument fit. God does have limitations. He cannot knowingly create a world that is contrary to his standards. This isn't discussing whether or not he could create a planet with chocolate waterfalls and floating mountains since that would only pertain to the level of interest he would have in maintaining something science can't explain. In regards to sin, God could make a world where sin doesn't exists simply by not relaying standards he has for perfection. Really, one could argue that world existed prior to the creation of man. however, once the standard was set, God would not be able to alter it nor would he likely want to considering the confusion it would cause.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 9, 2018 18:15:21 GMT
The basic idea of the Euthyphro problem is this: X has the property F (where x is something God-related) Does x have the property F because God created it that way, where He could create it as He wishes Or Does x have the property F because that's the way the world is whether God wants it to be that way or not? Or, a simpler way to put it is this: Could God make the world however He wants to make it, or are there some things where He'd have no choice? (And if there are some things where He'd have no choice, what determined that those things would be as they are?) The argument doesn't really apply to the dilemma of sin since it doesn't involve creation as much as it does standard, but I'll try to make the argument fit. God does have limitations. He cannot knowingly create a world that is contrary to his standards. This isn't discussing whether or not he could create a planet with chocolate waterfalls and floating mountains since that would only pertain to the level of interest he would have in maintaining something science can't explain. In regards to sin, God could make a world where sin doesn't exists simply by not relaying standards he has for perfection. Really, one could argue that world existed prior to the creation of man. however, once the standard was set, God would not be able to alter it nor would he likely want to considering the confusion it would cause. First, it's imporant to understand that it's not an argument. It's a dilemma or a "problem." And it's important to understand the dilemma. Re your comments, the dilemma rears its head here, for example: "God cannot knowingly create a world that is contrary to His standards." Re God's standards, are they what they are because God wanted them to be that way, or are they what they are because God had no choice? And if He had no choice, why not? What determined that God's standards must be what they are?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 9, 2018 18:18:55 GMT
The argument doesn't really apply to the dilemma of sin since it doesn't involve creation as much as it does standard, but I'll try to make the argument fit. God does have limitations. He cannot knowingly create a world that is contrary to his standards. This isn't discussing whether or not he could create a planet with chocolate waterfalls and floating mountains since that would only pertain to the level of interest he would have in maintaining something science can't explain. In regards to sin, God could make a world where sin doesn't exists simply by not relaying standards he has for perfection. Really, one could argue that world existed prior to the creation of man. however, once the standard was set, God would not be able to alter it nor would he likely want to considering the confusion it would cause. First, it's imporant to understand that it's not an argument. It's a dilemma or a "problem." And it's important to understand the dilemma. Re your comments, the dilemma rears its head here, for example: "God cannot knowingly create a world that is contrary to His standards." Re God's standards, are they what they are because God wanted them to be that way, or are they what they are because God had no choice? And if He had no choice, why not? What determined that God's standards must be what they are? I'm not understanding why you thinking creation involves an either...or scenario. Obviously if there are aspects of God that don;t change then there are aspects of his creation that are bound to that as well. That has no bearing on what he also would want to do. You are boxing in the dilemma without any actual reason provided for doing so.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 9, 2018 18:20:18 GMT
First, it's imporant to understand that it's not an argument. It's a dilemma or a "problem." And it's important to understand the dilemma. Re your comments, the dilemma rears its head here, for example: "God cannot knowingly create a world that is contrary to His standards." Re God's standards, are they what they are because God wanted them to be that way, or are they what they are because God had no choice? And if He had no choice, why not? What determined that God's standards must be what they are? I'm not understanding why you thinking creation involves an either...or scenario. Obviously if there are aspects of God that don;t change then there are aspects of his creation that are bound to that as well. That has no bearing on what he also would want to do. You are boxing in the dilemma without any actual reason provided for doing so. A simple question is this: can God's standards be whatever God wants them to be?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 9, 2018 18:23:34 GMT
I'm not understanding why you thinking creation involves an either...or scenario. Obviously if there are aspects of God that don;t change then there are aspects of his creation that are bound to that as well. That has no bearing on what he also would want to do. You are boxing in the dilemma without any actual reason provided for doing so. A simple question is this: can God's standards be whatever God wants them to be? I already answered that.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 9, 2018 18:24:45 GMT
A simple question is this: can God's standards be whatever God wants them to be? I already answered that. I didn't see where. Just type yes or no and make it easy on us.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 9, 2018 18:29:12 GMT
I didn't see where. Just type yes or no and make it easy on us. No Geez, I hope this is going somewhere. I can feel my hair turning gray...
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 9, 2018 18:31:28 GMT
I didn't see where. Just type yes or no and make it easy on us. No Geez, I hope this is going somewhere. I can feel my hair turning gray... Thanks. Okay, so then if God's standards couldn't simply be however he wants them to be, what determines that fact? What forced His standards to be as they are?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 9, 2018 18:33:23 GMT
No Geez, I hope this is going somewhere. I can feel my hair turning gray... Thanks. Okay, so then if God's standards couldn't simply be however he wants them to be, what determines that fact? What forced His standards to be as they are? Why does an origin story for God matter?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 9, 2018 18:35:59 GMT
Thanks. Okay, so then if God's standards couldn't simply be however he wants them to be, what determines that fact? What forced His standards to be as they are? Why does an origin story for God matter? A lot of people wonder why things are the way they are. We can wonder that about God, too. You don't think it's interesting to wonder about what made God's standards what they are if God didn't choose them? For one, it implies that there's something God has no control over--He couldn't intentionally/consciously make His standards different. Something basically forced His standards to be what they are. You're not curious why that would be and what it would be? This is the whole gist of the Euthyphro problem by the way.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 9, 2018 18:39:29 GMT
Why does an origin story for God matter? A lot of people wonder why things are the way they are. We can wonder that about God, too. You don't think it's interesting to wonder about what made God's standards what they are if God didn't choose them? For one, it implies that there's something God has no control over--He couldn't intentionally/consciously make His standards different. Something basically forced His standards to be what they are. You're not curious why that would be and what it would be? This is the whole gist of the Euthyphro problem by the way. No, I'm not interested since it doesn't matter. This doesn't have much to do with the initial question either.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 9, 2018 18:44:41 GMT
A lot of people wonder why things are the way they are. We can wonder that about God, too. You don't think it's interesting to wonder about what made God's standards what they are if God didn't choose them? For one, it implies that there's something God has no control over--He couldn't intentionally/consciously make His standards different. Something basically forced His standards to be what they are. You're not curious why that would be and what it would be? This is the whole gist of the Euthyphro problem by the way. No, I'm not interested since it doesn't matter. This doesn't have much to do with the initial question either. What it has to do with is the answer that was presented in the initial post. In that answer, it was suggested that the world is a particular way as if it HAS to be that way. It's worth asking, in light of the question that was asked, if the world is that way because God chose for it to be that way, or if God had no choice and had to follow along with it just as we do. And for some of us, it's interesting to wonder this: if God had no choice in the world being that way, either, then just what determined that it has to be that way?
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Mar 9, 2018 18:51:30 GMT
If more than 30% of the people surveyed had the same answer....
Survey says....!!
[X] [X] [X]
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 9, 2018 19:47:19 GMT
No, I'm not interested since it doesn't matter. This doesn't have much to do with the initial question either. What it has to do with is the answer that was presented in the initial post. In that answer, it was suggested that the world is a particular way as if it HAS to be that way. It's worth asking, in light of the question that was asked, if the world is that way because God chose for it to be that way, or if God had no choice and had to follow along with it just as we do. And for some of us, it's interesting to wonder this: if God had no choice in the world being that way, either, then just what determined that it has to be that way? This is why discussions with you ultimately become pointless. You insist on a rule and can't even contemplate deviating from it as if the flawed question is back by ultimate truth. You are maintaining that the question mandates only one of two responses when there is nothing in the subject material that indicates the choice is so simple. Rather than address that head on, you pretend that i don't understand the question that I understood from the very beginning to advance a question that isn't tied to a real answer but rather only to answers you have already developed in your head but don;t feel like sharing.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 9, 2018 20:12:12 GMT
What it has to do with is the answer that was presented in the initial post. In that answer, it was suggested that the world is a particular way as if it HAS to be that way. It's worth asking, in light of the question that was asked, if the world is that way because God chose for it to be that way, or if God had no choice and had to follow along with it just as we do. And for some of us, it's interesting to wonder this: if God had no choice in the world being that way, either, then just what determined that it has to be that way? This is why discussions with you ultimately become pointless. You insist on a rule and can't even contemplate deviating from it as if the flawed question is back by ultimate truth. You are maintaining that the question mandates only one of two responses when there is nothing in the subject material that indicates the choice is so simple. Rather than address that head on, you pretend that i don't understand the question that I understood from the very beginning to advance a question that isn't tied to a real answer but rather only to answers you have already developed in your head but don;t feel like sharing. Are you you saying that you believe there's a third option re, for example, either God can choose his own standards or He cannot? Or either the world has to be x way or it does not?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Mar 10, 2018 1:47:00 GMT
You said no. What it has to do with is the answer that was presented in the initial post. In that answer, it was suggested that the world is a particular way as if it HAS to be that way. It's worth asking, in light of the question that was asked, if the world is that way because God chose for it to be that way, or if God had no choice and had to follow along with it just as we do. And for some of us, it's interesting to wonder this: if God had no choice in the world being that way, either, then just what determined that it has to be that way? This is why discussions with you ultimately become pointless. You insist on a rule and can't even contemplate deviating from it as if the flawed question is back by ultimate truth. You are maintaining that the question mandates only one of two responses when there is nothing in the subject material that indicates the choice is so simple. Rather than address that head on, you pretend that i don't understand the question that I understood from the very beginning to advance a question that isn't tied to a real answer but rather only to answers you have already developed in your head but don;t feel like sharing. Don't be so defensive and then dismissive. IMHO Terrapin Station has done a creditable job of asking you, in effect, about God's omnipotence. You also, in effect, answered no, God is not omnipotent because ie when asked A simple question is this: can God's standards be whatever God wants them to be?You answered. No. Further this is akin to asking 'If God made everything, even if they were not to his own preferred standards... WHO made God and those alternate standards. This is just a standard theological question, to which neither you nor anyone else seems to have an adequate reply and you have nicely fallen into Terrapin Station and others' trap. If God's standards are not what God ALWAYS wants, then whose standards are they? You also talk about ' a flawed question as if it has an ultimate truth'. If there is an ultimate truth and it is the omniscience of God, why are you denying it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2018 9:58:45 GMT
You are maintaining that the question mandates only one of two responses If the options are "god can change his standards" or "god cannot change his standards" then those would seem to be the only possible options. What other possibility could there be?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 10, 2018 15:09:38 GMT
You are maintaining that the question mandates only one of two responses If the options are "god can change his standards" or "god cannot change his standards" then those would seem to be the only possible options. What other possibility could there be? That was already answered twice. Let's assume that God cannot change his standards. terrapin is implying by the question if not by his opinion that because his standards don't/can't change his options can't change which is incorrect. Then the cherry on top is wondering why God's standards don't change which is irrelevant to the original question. These... ...are not contradictory. There are some things he is obligated to keep his standards on. However, he can do a million different things it have no connection to his standards which could allow for them.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Mar 10, 2018 15:32:03 GMT
tpfkar The argument doesn't really apply to the dilemma of sin since it doesn't involve creation as much as it does standard, but I'll try to make the argument fit. God does have limitations. He cannot knowingly create a world that is contrary to his standards. This isn't discussing whether or not he could create a planet with chocolate waterfalls and floating mountains since that would only pertain to the level of interest he would have in maintaining something science can't explain. In regards to sin, God could make a world where sin doesn't exists simply by not relaying standards he has for perfection. Really, one could argue that world existed prior to the creation of man. however, once the standard was set, God would not be able to alter it nor would he likely want to considering the confusion it would cause. Of course, it's just that his "standards" are obscene. And he obviously creates some with the traits needed to get into heaven. Why wouldn't he create all that way? The Lord is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.
|
|