iouae
Well-known member
I challenge anyone on this forum to define right and wrong without it eventually turning out that whatever God says is right IS right, and whatever God says is wrong IS wrong.
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
God's attitude towards science and progress
- Thread starter iouae
- Start date
I challenge anyone on this forum to define right and wrong without it eventually turning out that whatever God says is right IS right, and whatever God says is wrong IS wrong.
Here is your challenge, answered, and without right and wrong being arbitrarily decided upon by God.
https://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?t=47024
A Christian Answer to the Euthyphro Dilemma.
iouae
Well-known member
There never was a dilemma, and I already explained this supposed dilemma.
The pages and pages of confused reasoning you point to, I don't plan to wade through.
Put the link's arguments in your own words in one or two sentences and I would be happy to discuss it.
Just the first post. Not the entire thread.
I'm sure if you give it a read, you'll find it very informative, and maybe even learn something.
iouae
Well-known member
It's rubbish. I read the original Socrates dialogue, and have read almost all the dialogues of Socrates which Plato wrote. It was a dilemma with multiple gods, not so with One. Find my post above explaining that.
You explain what the link says if you think otherwise.
Well, I'm clearly just a glutton for punishment! Here goes nothing....
That has been done several times. Maybe not on this thread but I've started a whole thread on the exact topic.
On what basis do you make the claim that right and wrong are arbitrarily determined by God's fiat command/action?
iouae
Well-known member
Because without God to tell us what right and wrong is, there is no right and wrong in nature.
Paul says exactly the same agreeing with me.
Rom 7:7
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
And clearly, without God giving us the law, there is no sin, no right and wrong.
iouae
Well-known member
To speed this debate along, if I were Clete, I would argue that sin always existed because good and bad always exist. The law only points this out to us.
To which I would respond, read the next verse ...
Rom 7:8
But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
It does not say "without the law sin was hidden". It says, without the law sin was dead, meaning, does not exist.
Thus if sin did not exist, good and bad did not exist until God brought it into existence by writing the law.
Check mate.
If it were true, it would qualify as a reason why you might not know what right and wrong are, but your knowledge of a thing doesn't speak to its existence.
What about before anyone other than God existed; was God good then or did He have to wait to tell someone before He became good? Or is it that you do not believe that God is good?
You are completely removing that passage from its context. You don't get to pull random sentences from the bible and apply them in any way you want depending on what you happen to be discussing at the time, especially when Paul states the opposite of your point in the first chapter of the book you are quoting.
But I'm not even going to debate that with you. I'll even cede the point for the sake of argument. As I stated already, your (or Paul's) ignorance of right and wrong does not mean that right and wrong didn't exist prior to his knowledge of it. Further, Paul's statement says NOTHING at all about right and wrong being arbitrarily determined by God's fiat command/action.
So I ask you again...
On what basis do you make the claim that right and wrong are arbitrarily determined by God's fiat command/action?
Clete
iouae
Well-known member
Before anyone else existed, God went about being God.
When He wanted to bring other beings into existence, He wanted them to be like Him. Thus he made rules telling others how to be like Him. Like Him = good. Not like Him = bad.
Thus proving my point again, that God does not even have to think about or define good or evil, because God just went about being Himself. He then defined being like Him as good, and only formalised it as rules, when he created the angels and man.
Like what? If you cannot show it, then it does not exist.
But it does. Rom 7:8
For without the law sin was dead.
If sin was dead, it did not exist. Law brings good and bad into existence. God brings law into existence.
My point has been proved.
6days
New member
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Did Satan first sin in rebelling against His Creator?
Did Cain sin murdering his bro?
(Sin existed long before 'The Law')
iouae
Well-known member
Did you have a good holiday 6days?
Its not the head of the pin you need to worry about. You missed the point.
iouae
Well-known member
"Be yourself" is the worst advice one can give anyone.
The only one who can "be Himself" is God.
All the rest of us have to "Be like Him".
All the law and the prophets can be summarised by saying "Be like God".
Copy the Most High, but you are not a "most high". His will be done. And His will is that you become like Him, but subject to Him.
Lucifer wanted to "Be like Him" but not subject to Him.
God will not allow rival empires to form, because any competitor is not being like Him, they are being like their own selves, or being their own "Most High".
Folks think that Lucifer made war with God. I don't think so.
Lucifer persuaded other angels to flee to the North away from God.
God pursued them there with the heavenly host and cast them down to earth, because Lucifer wanted to be himself.
The only one who can "be Himself" is God.
All the rest of us have to "Be like Him".
All the law and the prophets can be summarised by saying "Be like God".
Copy the Most High, but you are not a "most high". His will be done. And His will is that you become like Him, but subject to Him.
Lucifer wanted to "Be like Him" but not subject to Him.
God will not allow rival empires to form, because any competitor is not being like Him, they are being like their own selves, or being their own "Most High".
Folks think that Lucifer made war with God. I don't think so.
Lucifer persuaded other angels to flee to the North away from God.
God pursued them there with the heavenly host and cast them down to earth, because Lucifer wanted to be himself.
iouae
Well-known member
When God was alone, God just did what He wanted. There was no question of good and evil.
The moment God created other beings, He wanted them to be like Him, and subject to Him.
Only when other beings entered the picture did the concept of "good" and "evil" arise.
You are good if you conform to God's will. You are evil if you go against God's will.
There is a difference between "sin" and "evil".
God wrote down laws telling his creation how to conform to His will. To break this law would be to "sin".
But no set of laws can ever truly cover every aspect of "good" or what God's will is. We need to know the Father and obey Him in the spirit as well as the letter of His law and will.
One can keep the law and still be against the will of the Father. The Scribes and Pharisees who put Christ to death are a case in point, because they did not recognise His Son.
The OC was more about the letter of the law.
The NC includes the spirit of the law.
But it needed Christ to DEMONSTRATE how to live in conformity with the Father's will.
And how Christ lived looked a lot different to how the Pharisees imagined a good OC law keeper to be.
For instance Christ had no problem interacting with sinners, touching them, forgiving them.
The Scribes and Pharisees tried to avoid sinners, not realising they were just as big sinners, and self righteous on top of that.
But still, "good" and "evil" only exist in relation to one Almighty God. Going against His will is "not good" or "bad". The Greeks and Romans and polytheists did not have this, because the gods warred among themselves. Thus siding with one god displeased another. There was no definition of "good" as being to conform to "god's" will. Which "god" would you choose?
The moment God created other beings, He wanted them to be like Him, and subject to Him.
Only when other beings entered the picture did the concept of "good" and "evil" arise.
You are good if you conform to God's will. You are evil if you go against God's will.
There is a difference between "sin" and "evil".
God wrote down laws telling his creation how to conform to His will. To break this law would be to "sin".
But no set of laws can ever truly cover every aspect of "good" or what God's will is. We need to know the Father and obey Him in the spirit as well as the letter of His law and will.
One can keep the law and still be against the will of the Father. The Scribes and Pharisees who put Christ to death are a case in point, because they did not recognise His Son.
The OC was more about the letter of the law.
The NC includes the spirit of the law.
But it needed Christ to DEMONSTRATE how to live in conformity with the Father's will.
And how Christ lived looked a lot different to how the Pharisees imagined a good OC law keeper to be.
For instance Christ had no problem interacting with sinners, touching them, forgiving them.
The Scribes and Pharisees tried to avoid sinners, not realising they were just as big sinners, and self righteous on top of that.
But still, "good" and "evil" only exist in relation to one Almighty God. Going against His will is "not good" or "bad". The Greeks and Romans and polytheists did not have this, because the gods warred among themselves. Thus siding with one god displeased another. There was no definition of "good" as being to conform to "god's" will. Which "god" would you choose?
glorydaz
Well-known member
God was never alone.
Exactly!
Wow !!! That's the Luciferian, New Age, Globalist and ancient mystery religions connections I've been posting about for the last ten days. That's exactly what all the secret societies teach, Illuminati, Freemasons etc. They claim satan only wanted to help mankind.
iouae
Well-known member
There is one last aspect to being good.
Christ had to come to earth to learn how hard it is being human. Jesus learned obedience to the will of the Father. Then He returned to sit at the right hand of the Father.
Now Jesus sends the Holy Spirit to be in us so that He can be in our minds, willing us on, and empowering us to conform to the will of the Father. Thus it seems to require a supernatural element for humans to be truly "good".
Christ had to come to earth to learn how hard it is being human. Jesus learned obedience to the will of the Father. Then He returned to sit at the right hand of the Father.
Now Jesus sends the Holy Spirit to be in us so that He can be in our minds, willing us on, and empowering us to conform to the will of the Father. Thus it seems to require a supernatural element for humans to be truly "good".
iouae
Well-known member
Point to one sentence where I said that Satan only wanted to help mankind.
Or, for that matter where these secret societies teach what I wrote above.
If you can't find it, it does not exist, and you become a false witness and a false accuser. And that is evil.
And don't post another video link and consider that "proof".
Give us a written quote that we can look at and examine.
iouae
Well-known member
I was simplifying it because it would have been harder to write "when YHWH Elohim alone existed". Anyhow, God is a collective noun.
So I can say "When God was alone..."