How Would You Show That God Is Moral?

[elguanteloko]

Because He gave his Only Begotten Son to the world, that we might live eternally in His presence. Would you give your son's life so that I might have eternal life?

If I am God and I know my son is powerful enough to resurrect at will and he himself will be crowned with glory and power unlimited forever and ever.... No. That should be his choice but if he wants to (and I will be disappointed if he doesn't want to) then, have at it! Sounds to me like an extremely good deal. I would give my life for my family, brother, and I wouldn't hesitate to give it for the WHOLE of humanity. The atonement makes no sense as a sacrifice.

but we digress. You aren't answering the question. You seem to be thinking that because God has made some good actions, that, therefore, his future actions will be moral... but that definitely doesn't follow (and i say why this is wrong in the OP). My point is that you have to think through God's actions as you would (and should!) anyone's actions. Probably even with more rigor than anyone else's actions... after all, God is an extremely powerful guy, you don't want to have such a powerful being over you and knowing so much that isn't good, do you? Checks and balances and all.

Edited November 30, 2011 by elguanteloko

[mfbukowski]

Not at all. I'm asking epistemological questions here (how we evaluate God's actions as either moral or immoral), not whether God is moral or not.

I'm sorry but, were you attempting to answer the question? Thanks for the information and all but...

I think he was summarizing the positions, and I think he did it well.

[Cobalt-70]

Not at all. I'm asking epistemological questions here (how we evaluate God's actions as either moral or immoral), not whether God is moral or not.

True, but despite how I mis-framed your question, I was focusing on the context of your epistemological questions.

I'm sorry but, were you attempting to answer the question? Thanks for the information and all but...

I wasn't trying to answer the question. I guess I was just observing that your question only has relevance in a classical Mormon universe (or a Pagan or Gnostic universe). In Will's universe, and in the traditional Christian universe, the questions are meaningless.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Cobalt-70

[elguanteloko]

I wasn't trying to answer the question. I guess I was just observing that your question only has relevance in a classical Mormon universe (or a Pagan or Gnostic universe). In Will's universe, and in the traditional Christian universe, the questions are meaningless.

I guess that in an incoherent position would make anything would sound incoherent. Sure.

It isn't hard to see why Will's position makes morality meaningless. If God can say that burning innocent children for fun is wrong and, one second later, turn around and say it is moral, then you are open to completely arbitrary morality and the only thing binding would be God's threats. Will isn't saying there is knowledge behind God's choices or that God is driven by good will or anything like that... he is, literally, saying that whoever has the power decides what is right and wrong. God could, in principle, say that everything that was previously declared by him to be good is not evil and everything evil is now good... for no reason.

I also don't see how he would manage to argue for that position. God said it? I really don't see it.

Edited November 30, 2011 by elguanteloko

[CV75]

Simple question. How would you know that God is moral or that his actions are moral in a different way that you would analyze whether my actions are moral or immoral?

***

So, how would you show that God's action are good in any way different than trying to determine that my actions are good?

Showing that actions are good is not the same as trying to determine that actions are good.

Showing that another’s actions are good means that their goodness is has already been established in the mind of the observer or evaluator. Trying to determine that another’s actions are good indicates that their goodness has not yet been established in the mind of the observer or evaluator.

[bluebell]

God is moral because He's God and He defines morality. If He says it's moral, it is. Therefore, if He says He's moral, He is.

At least, that was one of Socrates answers when he asked this question.

[CV75]

P.S. Where God is the standard for what is good (Moroni 7:16-18; Matthew 19:17), the only occasion I have to “try to determine” is when faith is lacking. God commands me to see Him with the eyes of faith, where everything He does is good. In so doing I cannot judge His children for He has commanded me not to. So I show that God is good through faith, and I try to judge others without it.

[elguanteloko]

Showing that actions are good is not the same as trying to determine that actions are good.

For present purposes it amounts to the same thing. If you understand that God is doing something moral then I don't see why you wouldn't be able to explain it. People, believe it or not, do NOT even understand that God is moral (they just think he is) and, therefore, can't explain it anyways. Again, for all practical purposes here they amount to the same thing.

Trying to determine that another’s actions are good indicates that their goodness has not yet been established in the mind of the observer or evaluator.

Sure... and?

Showing that another’s actions are good means that their goodness is has already been established in the mind of the observer or evaluator.

Not necessarily (example, I explain some things here that I don't believe) but, again, for the moment they amount to the same thing. Brother, I'm not asking whether or not you think a particular action of God is good but how you determine that it is and if that method is any different in principle than how you determine than my actions are good.

[elguanteloko]

P.S. Where God is the standard for what is good (Moroni 7:16-18; Matthew 19:17), the only occasion I have to “try to determine” is when faith is lacking. God commands me to see Him with the eyes of faith, where everything He does is good. In so doing I cannot judge His children for He has commanded me not to. So I show that God is good through faith, and I try to judge others without it.

OK, so faith is your answer. In other words, you don't know but you trust that what he's doing is good. Why do you have faith that God's actions are good, though? You just want to believe?

[elguanteloko]

God is moral because He's God and He defines morality. If He says it's moral, it is. Therefore, if He says He's moral, He is.

At least, that was one of Socrates answers when he asked this question.

You've heard of the Euthyphro dilemma, haven't you?

[zerinus]

How Would You Show That God Is Moral?

By His own declaration. God, who is unchanging (Malachi 3:6), and "cannot lie" (Titus 1:2), has declared Himself to be a moral and just God:

Exodus 34:

6 And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, the Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,

[altersteve]

By His own declaration. God, who is unchanging (Malachi 3:6), and "cannot lie" (Titus 1:2), has declared Himself to be a moral and just God:

Exodus 34:

6 And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, the Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,

This is what elguanteloko doesn't understand. It doesn't do anything to talk to him about this. All we can say is that we have our own proof that God is good, and that's all we need to say, even if he doesn't like it. And the only reason he doesn't like it is because he doesn't understand it, so he wants us to prove it to him. But honestly, the fact that he doesn't get it is not our problem, so we have no reason to justify or prove anything to him, because the only proof that is sufficient is the type of proof that God Himself can give.

You want a reason why I believe God is good, elguanteloko? Because He has declared that He is, as zerinus said above, and I trust Him. I have no reason not to trust Him.

There. There's your reason.

Edited November 30, 2011 by altersteve

[Log]

But it differs from classical Christianity in that Will's view is inherently relativist. Because Mormons can't quite believe in a truly omnipotent God, or one that creates the universe ex nihilo, Will is saying that because God is the most powerful being in (at least our part of) the universe, his will is defined as morality for us, and therefore it makes no sense to ask whether God is moral. God, in other words, is the dictator of our part of the universe. Though not in an ex nihilo sense of traditional Christianity, he is the law, even if theoretically, another god might act differently. There is no absolute standard of morality to which God is bound. Morality is simply what God, in his might, defines it to be: morality by fiat.

That may well be Will's view; I cannot concede, however, that it is a Mormon view, even if it be held by Mormons.

[TAO]

Simple question. How would you know that God is moral or that his actions are moral in a different way that you would analyze whether my actions are moral or immoral?

Morality is a socially constructed definition, meaning each person has their own definition of it.

So is God moral according to his own moral law? Yes.

Do I submit myself to God's moral law, and make my moral law the same as his my moral law? Yes.

Therefore, in my opinion, he is moral, according to the moral law I adopted from him.

In other words which law are you talking about? And who is the authority behind that law?

So, how would you show that God's action are good in any way different than trying to determine that my actions are good?

Good is a matter of opinion as well. Talking about how a person's actions are good needs a reference point; that is, which person are you talking about? Something that is good to me is not necessarily good in your opinion and vise versa.

Why is this important? Because if you can't answer the question besides admitting that there is no difference, then this would mean bringing God's opinions as somehow confirmatory that your position is moral can't possibly work and you have to do the work of thinking through the issues yourself.

Not particularly. My position is the one I am most comfortable with. Therefore, it is most practical for me to support it over your position. Similarly, you may hold your position because it is more practical to you. This says nothing about the morality and goodness of God.

The way you know God is moral and good by understanding his Point of View, and having it 'click'. This isn't the case for you, I believe, correct? Because of that, our moral views will differ, and so I cannot show you how he is moral or good; it is something I may simply state that I believe instead. =)

Part of the problem, I think, is that you are looking for some 'substantial' 'concrete' form of morality to base your OP on, but that doesn't actually exist. We obey the laws because we love God; we submit ourselves to those laws. That is what makes them 'moral laws' for us. In other words, they aren't 'inherently' moral, but instead are instead 'constructively' moral. We got our laws from our God, and he got them... and he got them from his Father maybe... etc. But the point is, you are trying to look at it with logical postivism, and that doesn't quite work very well for morality, imho. =P

Best of Wishes,

-TAO

Edited November 30, 2011 by TAO

[Storm Rider]

Will's view borrows from this classical Christian view (within the context of a plural god theology). But it differs from classical Christianity in that Will's view is inherently relativist. Because Mormons can't quite believe in a truly omnipotent God, or one that creates the universe ex nihilo, Will is saying that because God is the most powerful being in (at least our part of) the universe, his will is defined as morality for us, and therefore it makes no sense to ask whether God is moral. God, in other words, is the dictator of our part of the universe. Though not in an ex nihilo sense of traditional Christianity, he is the law, even if theoretically, another god might act differently. There is no absolute standard of morality to which God is bound. Morality is simply what God, in his might, defines it to be: morality by fiat.

You never seem to amaze me; it is as if you have your head firmly planted in the sand and it does not matter what anyone says, you spout the same, tired, errant claptrap. It has no basis in Mormonism except in your own mind. When did Mormonism say God was not omnipotent? What does nx nihilo have to do with omnipotence?

It is a constant flow of inanity from you. What is worse is that you make statements like you know what you are talking about; readers need to understand that you don't know what Mormonism is, what it believes, or what it teaches at any point in its history. You have opinions with no basis in reality.

[TAO]

You never seem to amaze me; it is as if you have your head firmly planted in the sand and it does not matter what anyone says, you spout the same, tired, errant claptrap. It has no basis in Mormonism except in your own mind. When did Mormonism say God was not omnipotent? What does nx nihilo have to do with omnipotence?

It is a constant flow of inanity from you. What is worse is that you make statements like you know what you are talking about; readers need to understand that you don't know what Mormonism is, what it believes, or what it teaches at any point in its history. You have opinions with no basis in reality.

StormRider, we don't believe in a God who can disobey laws, whereas other religions do. That is why their ideas of God are more 'omnipotent' than ours. That, of course, doesn't make it any more correct. God has to obey some laws to be moral in the first place =). His own laws, in the least case... or maybe more than that =D.

[Stargazer]

You never seem to amaze me;

He doesn't? You sure seem amazed to me...

oh, wait... you meant he never CEASES to amaze you. Got it!

Edited November 30, 2011 by Stargazer

[mfbukowski]

All:

I think you are missing the point. Read this carefully:

How would you know that God is moral or that his actions are moral in a different way that you would analyze whether my actions are moral or immoral?

Let me re-phrase it.

How do you know that is what is "good" for God IS DIFFERENT than how we know what is good for us?

The answer is that how we know what is moral is NOT DIFFERENT for God than for us.

We know what is moral, God knows what is moral and the standards are the same for him as they are for us. If God would "sin" he would no longer be God, right? So the standards are the same, and we know he is moral in the same way we know we are moral.

So what's the big discussion?

[Stargazer]

elg I tried to give some sort of answer in the other thread but ran out of time to respond properly and so my answer was all very generic and so on. Sorry about that.

I don't think the question can be answered in the context of the Universe, actually. It is a very subjective equation, and asking for an objective solution to it is like trying to measure the size of the Universe itself. Given the speed of light, and the estimate that the Big Bang occurred in a discrete location an unknown distance from where we now sit, and the fact that radio observations don't seem to be able to see anywhere that the density of galaxy clusters is significantly less (suggesting the edge of the Universe might be in such a direction), we can't answer the question "How big is the Universe?"

God's morality is of like indefinability from the point of view of His creation. He is all we know, we don't know much, except for what we believe His prophets have told us, and so we are either going to accept that He is moral, by definition, or throw up our hands in complete befuddlement.

Nephi once suggested that God could cease to be God under some circumstances. I alluded to this in the other thread, I think. God's cesasing to be God would in fact be the result of his ceasing to be moral in the context of laws which are higher than the ones he has set forth for us. In short, we are fish, and are not really all that aware of water. This makes us poor judges of life on land. I'm really mixing my metaphors, here, sorry about that.

I really don't think you're going to hear an answer that does anything for you. I don't think that you expected one, though, so that's OK, I guess.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Stargazer

[elguanteloko]

elg I tried to give some sort of answer in the other thread but ran out of time to respond properly and so my answer was all very generic and so on. Sorry about that.

I don't think the question can be answered in the context of the Universe, actually. It is a very subjective equation, and asking for an objective solution to it is like trying to measure the size of the Universe itself. Given the speed of light, and the estimate that the Big Bang occurred in a discrete location an unknown distance from where we now sit, and the fact that radio observations don't seem to be able to see anywhere that the density of galaxy clusters is significantly less (suggesting the edge of the Universe might be in such a direction), we can't answer the question "How big is the Universe?"

God's morality is of like indefinability from the point of view of His creation. He is all we know, we don't know much, except for what we believe His prophets have told us, and so we are either going to accept that He is moral, by definition, or throw up our hands in complete befuddlement.

Well, we clearly can think through the issues ourselves, you know? God didn't taught us about mathematics but we can figure stuff out. Same with logic, science, philosophy, etc. Plus, why in the world would you choose God the moral locus besides you wanting to? Are there good reasons for doing so? If there are, please state them. (which means, btw, what is obvious and should be clear: that you need to think for yourself why God is moral... which is my point)

Nephi once suggested that God could cease to be God under some circumstances. I alluded to this in the other thread, I think. God's cesasing to be God would in fact be the result of his ceasing to be moral in the context of laws which are higher than the ones he has set forth for us. In short, we are fish, and are not really all that aware of water. This makes us poor judges of life on land. I'm really mixing my metaphors, here, sorry about that.

Yeah, great technique: "I am a fallible human being who might be wrong about moral judgments. What should I do? I know! Let's let another entity think stuff for me and I can just accept anything he tells me. Yay!

I really don't think you're going to hear an answer that does anything for you. I don't think that you expected one, though, so that's OK, I guess.

Oh, brothers, always going for the ad hominem illusions! Do you guys really want to avoid reason so much that you have to be cynical of everyone who asks seriously?

[elguanteloko]

Let me re-phrase it.

How do you know that is what is "good" for God IS DIFFERENT than how we know what is good for us?

....No, that is not the question, mf. Read the OP again. It is very clear if you read it carefully.

Just imagine the following:

You watch a person who you've never seen before those some things that look rather immoral (or moral). Will you just assume any action he does is moral because he tells you he is? Will you think his actions are moral because he has all the guns and can fulfill any threat he makes? Will you think an action he does is moral because he has done other moral things in the past? Etc. Rather easy, brothers.

[Log]

What is moral, then? If you answer that, then maybe others will know how to answer you. Define your terms.

[elguanteloko]

By His own declaration. God, who is unchanging (Malachi 3:6), and "cannot lie" (Titus 1:2), has declared Himself to be a moral and just God:

Exodus 34:

6 And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, the Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,

So, because he told you he was good? Do you seriously think this is a good reason, zerinus? Please think about it.

[elguanteloko]

All we can say is that we have our own proof that God is good, and that's all we need to say, even if he doesn't like it.

I'm just asking you what that 'evidence' is and try to see if it is good. What is your evidence? how did you get to that conclusion?

You want a reason why I believe God is good, elguanteloko? Because He has declared that He is, as zerinus said above, and I trust Him. I have no reason not to trust Him.

Will you agree with me that "God is good because he told me so" isn't a good reason, correct? I hope you do for your own safety, brother. If you wouldn't accept that from anyone (I hope), why do you think this is a good reason? It isn't.

[elguanteloko]

What is moral, then? If you answer that, then maybe others will know how to answer you. Define your terms.

If we don't have disagreements over what is moral (and I haven't seen any here yet), then there's no need to define it. I would much rather prefer we don't fight over definitions and instead clear the field of our common ground (of which there is a lot, btw). Discussing what definition of 'morality' is better will GREATLY derail the thread and I don't want that.

Edited November 30, 2011 by elguanteloko