And then God dissapeared in a puff of logic.

[yungerkid]

in that hypothetical situation, i would carry out that purpose (if i had a proof that my purpose was to be a rapist). although i would first try to ascertain where that purpose came from - who gave me it, and what its accomplshment will do in the greater scheme of things. erm, first cause? i think we first need to address the existence of a first cause.

[a happy song]

in that hypothetical situation, i would carry out that purpose (if i had a proof that my purpose was to be a rapist). although i would first try to ascertain where that purpose came from - who gave me it, and what its accomplshment will do in the greater scheme of things. erm, first cause? i think we first need to address the existence of a first cause.

So you're telling me that if God directly told you to rape women because it was part of his plan, you'd go along with it without question?

You might be one LSD tab away from life in prison...

[yungerkid]

let me further clarify it. if i had a proof that God is the first cause (umm....) and i also had proof that He told me to be a rapist, then yes, i would be a rapist. however, it would be essential to determine the highest purpose first, if there is one. and if there isn't, i'm thinking that there is no such thing s a purpose in the first place.

clocking out; i'll be back in the afternoon. nice debating with you!

[iangb]

To start with, God (or the supernatural in general) is not disprovable. Science is logical - all you need to do is state that the supernatural does not obey logical laws and you quickly run into the obvious snag.

Talking about if it was, however, I am reminded of An atheists defence of religion - TalkOrigins.org, purely for the following quote:

In making the case for religion from a less philosophical perspective, it seems clear to me that one thing none of us, atheist or theist, wants is for a massive population of flawed and fallible humans (as are we all) that believes it cannot act ethically without religion, to try to do so. The last thing we need is a bunch of people who believe they have no internal moral compass running around without their external one.

Chaos might well occur. You'd probably get the Five Stages - denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance - and only once people got to that fifth stage would things calm down. How many generations this would take, and how many casualties you get along the way, would be another matter.

[a happy song]

Who'd have guessed the lurker would chose this thread to make his enterance proper?

[Brainwasher]

If we've all a purpose laid out for us, and if morality should be ignored if it interferes with that purpose, if somehow you discovered -through some divine means or whatever - that your absolute purpose to be here was to become a rapist, would you carry on following that instruction or would you question it?

Hmm. Maybe if my raping someone would produce the next Einstine or the person who would kill the next Stalin, but other than in extreme circumstances, I would act the same as I do now. I don't really know why I do things that are "good" or "bad"; I just do.

[otters~1]

God this thread got weird.

atob: let's hope that yungerkid doesn't take LSD for a variety of reasons, that being only one of them.

[a happy song]

We can only :p

[MattKestrel]

"Upon discovering that Homer Simpson has completely disproved all religion, we would like to remind you that this station does not encourage vigilante justice"

GET HOMER



An amalgam of obscure simpsons references.

[Deathconciousness]

in that hypothetical situation, i would carry out that purpose (if i had a proof that my purpose was to be a rapist). although i would first try to ascertain where that purpose came from - who gave me it, and what its accomplshment will do in the greater scheme of things. erm, first cause? i think we first need to address the existence of a first cause.

So you're telling me that if God directly told you to rape women because it was part of his plan, you'd go along with it without question?

You might be one LSD tab away from life in prison...

assuming God was real, then yes i would think that any human being that got a direct order from this God should obey it. I mean, as you stated, if it was part of this God's plan then it probably adhere to a much higher level of telos rather than the simple moral judgement you make on raping women.

i.e., you kill one man, so that thousands may live.

[capt_weasle]

Can we please divert from the issue of whether or not you would become a rapist if God told you to? First of all, I highly doubt that God (being from the Christian Bible) would ask anyone to be a rapist. Second, the only way anyone should ever even think about that is if God Himself came down from heaven and told you to do so, and by that point, it couldn't be argued that that would be part of His plan because He had to come down and tell you. If that were so, He might as well just "poof" everything well for the world because He would have revealed Himself as being real, thus negating our proposed point for living at this time (ie to bring people to God). So stoppit.

[blue_tetris]

God asked Samson to murder a bunch of people with the jawbone of an ass and he asked David (not me...) to bring back the foreskins of a few thousand Philistines. If God asks you to do something morally objectionable, it's probably got a good purpose. Who are we to question God's plan?

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.
If God asks you to do something and it's against your morals, then your sense of morality is broken and needs to be fixed and you shouldn't consider yourself sane until you get it all sorted out; God is in no way responsible, and the problem is entirely on your end.

[Condog]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.

What if God is actually testing the moral fibre of his worshipers? Or is using reverse psychology? Or just enjoys messing with peoples heads for his own amusement?

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.

What if God is actually testing the moral fibre of his worshipers? Or is using reverse psychology? Or just enjoys messing with peoples heads for his own amusement?

Then he'd either ask Satan (see Book of Job), or He wouldn't be the God of (the common flavor of epistemological hedonism mistakenly called) Christianity.

[otters]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.

I don't know how something went wrong so that you spoke truth about Christianity, but you did...

What if God is actually testing the moral fibre of his worshipers? Or is using reverse psychology? Or just enjoys messing with peoples heads for his own amusement?

I think the first is probably the most likely...after all, God said he was going to destroy the nation of Israel because they were sinful, but Moses begged him not to, and he changed his mind. I mean, he tested Abraham by telling the guy to sacrifice his son, and Abraham did it, so everything worked out.

[yungerkid]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.

...and i also had proof that He told me to be a rapist, then yes, i would be a rapist.

erm...excuse me? i was the one who originally said that i didn't give a hoot about morality. i would certainly not object on moral grounds to *anything*, let alone from a God whom i know to be perfectly moral. God's morality is one of the basic tenets of our faith; do you really think i'd forget it that quickly? and anyway, as i said earlier, i wouldn't even consider the morality of the request. morality does not truly concern me.

God asked Samson to murder a bunch of people with the jawbone of an ass and he asked David (not me...) to bring back the foreskins of a few thousand Philistines. If God asks you to do something morally objectionable, it's probably got a good purpose. Who are we to question God's plan?

dang right. we are humans to question God's plan. it does not matter if we question God, so long as we follow Him. and if God asks me to do *anything*, it has the best *possible* purpose that it can have. and by the way, humans (especially humans from other tribes) back then were treated very differently from how they are today. (objective) morality itself was different, because Jesus' sacrifice on the cross had not taken place yet.

@condog: i think it is feasible for God to do whatever He wants. after all, He's going to bring on flipping armageddon and torture and kill millions or more in the end times. also, God does not need to test the moral fibre of his followers. He already knows it. the reason He had Abraham almost kill his son, was for Abraham's purposes. God did not need to know how strong Abraham was in faith. i don't think we know exactly what was going on there, but almost killing your son can give you quite a scare. i would suggest that it maybe motivated Abraham to be more confident with his faith, or to know his own bounds more. i don't think speculation will go anywhere; this matter in itself is irrelevant. the point is that God knows all, and would not test us for His sake, or mess with us for His sake. He loves us. have you ever been in a loving relationship with someone? when you are, you just don't think about yourself half as much as you do normally. God is not selfish in His actions; He works for our benefit. and that's what He always does.

[rambo5252]

well theres a fine line between science and religion.....it should NEVER be crossed

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.

I don't know how something went wrong so that you spoke truth about Christianity, but you did...

The heathen knows his Bible best.
(That'd sorta be why we're heathens, cuz we've actually read the thing.)

[otters]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.

I don't know how something went wrong so that you spoke truth about Christianity, but you did...

The heathen knows his Bible best.
(That'd sorta be why we're heathens, cuz we've actually read the thing.)

E.g. implying I haven't read my Bible. (Nice sleuthing there, huh?)

So was it an accident, or what? Why have your arguments broken from the norm of overstating and caricaturing controversial topics in the doctrine?

[capt_weasle]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.
If God asks you to do something and it's against your morals, then your sense of morality is broken and needs to be fixed and you shouldn't consider yourself sane until you get it all sorted out; God is in no way responsible, and the problem is entirely on your end.

I figured if He did ask me to rape someone, it would be the whole "sacrifice your son to prove that you would do it, but at the last moment, say 'Just kidding! You proved your faith, so it's all good kthx.'" So I don't think He would ask of that in the first place, but, how would I ever know?

[blue_tetris]

That's messed up. I don't let anyone that I worship--whether a deity or just a dame--toy with my emotions on that level any more.

[Condog]

So you don't let the subject of your worship do things to you? I thought the whole idea of worship was that you do what they say.

[otters]

I don't understand you Christians (lookin' at you, yungerkid and capt_wealse) who would object on moral grounds to a direct order from God. He's God, dude. He invented morality, and He will only ever do good whether you know it or not.
If God asks you to do something and it's against your morals, then your sense of morality is broken and needs to be fixed and you shouldn't consider yourself sane until you get it all sorted out; God is in no way responsible, and the problem is entirely on your end.

I figured if He did ask me to rape someone, it would be the whole "sacrifice your son to prove that you would do it, but at the last moment, say 'Just kidding! You proved your faith, so it's all good kthx.'" So I don't think He would ask of that in the first place, but, how would I ever know?

That analogy is ridiculous in the first place. Why would God ask someone to be a rapist? And no, Suki, it's not like him asking David to bring back Philistine foreskins...that was a task, for a reason.

[blue_tetris]

So you don't let the subject of your worship do things to you? I thought the whole idea of worship was that you do what they say.

I must have a different definition of worship. For me, it's adoration, not subjectivity to command.