When monotheists hurt God's credibility

[Trurl]

Sex outside of marriage which is not aimed at procreation is immoral.

According to you sex INSIDE marraige, which protects against procreation is immoral, too. According to your definition of “morality”… but I do not agree with your definiton.

There is a reason for that. It does not go with natural law.

There is no natural law.

Says you. It’s used in a coherent manner.

It could be coherent, but still nonsensical.

We’re wasting time because you want to argue against a straw man. The Catholic God also the God of the Jews and Muslims is Being Itself. (It’s the concept in the 3 Abrahamaic Religions).

Is that an argument? Which fallacy did you commit here?

He is the ground of all existence. He is Goodness itself not He is Good. He is Truth, not He speaks truth. He is uncreated. This is all well argued out from empirical premises. If you want to know more, I suggest you purchase a good book: The Last Superstition, by Prof E Feser. There are of course other books.

I read quite a few books along those lines. None of them was worth the price of the paper it was printed upon. A whole lot of unsubstantiated and irrational mumbo-jumbo.

 

[Trurl]

The idea that God should weed out child molesters and rapists is silly.

To keep child-molesters and rapists in jail is silly, too? You have some strange sense of “silly”.

Why should God then not weed out people who commit just as deadly but more subtle injustices, such as unfair bosses who fire people or abuse them, bullies who lead people to depression, fraudsters who defraud people of their life savings, elder abusers who hit and punch the elderly they are looking after, alcoholics who beat their wives and destroy their families, etc. God would have to interfere everywhere.

Actually, no. First, you put a whole lot of incongruent categories there. Second, the truly psychopathic and sociopathic people are at most one or two percent of the population. God (using his alleged omniscience) could simply prevent those people fro being born. And NO one would miss them. Or maybe you would???

And if He did that, they why not just go all the way and interfere with anyone who has a bad though.

Bad thoughts are a thoughtcrime in 1984 and in the bible… strange bedfellows.

Obviously not, God can’t just micromanage us this way. We’d have absolutely NO FREE WILL. Even if He just zaps people who rape and kill, we would not be free then.

Wrong. You guys have absolutely no power of imagination. There is no need for God to come and slap down the really bad people… He could intervene in a subtle manner which would never reveal that an interference took place. Weeding out the child molesters and rapists would be a step in the right direction. I cannot comprehend that christians and catholics would argue for the perpetuated existence of child molesters and rapists. What kind of value-system do you have?

 

[Tenofovir]

To keep child-molesters and rapists in jail is silly, too? You have some strange sense of “silly”.

Which is exactly what I did not say.
Saying God should micromanage people is silly is not equivalent to saying, protecting the public from rapists is silly. You either have a comprehension problem, in which case please work on that, or you’re being purposefully disingenuous.

Actually, no. First, you put a whole lot of incongruent categories there. Second, the truly psychopathic and sociopathic people are at most one or two percent of the population. God (using his alleged omniscience) could simply prevent those people fro being born. And NO one would miss them. Or maybe you would???

Most child abuse is carried out by non-psychopaths. The stats say that something like 20-30% of little girls have been abused at one time. Secondly most crime, and I mean violent crime, is not committed by psychopaths or sociopaths. Thirdly, it’s a value judgement that only rape and child abuse are evil crimes worthy of God’s intervention. Even the slightest bit of suffering is worthy of God’s interference after all, God is omnipotent and so could easily do it. Your ideas are incoherent.

Sociopaths and Psychpaths are sick people. When you say no-one would miss them you are lacking compassion. That’s a modern day sin, BTW. Some would say that lacking compassion is a bad trait and yes, maybe God should zap you too? I certainly think that these people should be helped and locked away for protection of society until they can be cured, if that is possible.

Bad thoughts are a thoughtcrime in 1984 and in the bible… strange bedfellows.

You want God to police thought crimes after all crime starts in the mind.

Wrong. You guys have absolutely no power of imagination.

Not using that. Using logic here. Either we are FREE or we are not. Also you don’t get to decide how far to take that. That’s special pleading to say - God should zap only rapists but leave defrauders alone, especially those who drive people to ruin, depression and suicide.

There is no need for God to come and slap down the really bad people… He could intervene in a subtle manner which would never reveal that an interference took place. Weeding out the child molesters and rapists would be a step in the right direction. I cannot comprehend that christians and catholics would argue for the perpetuated existence of child molesters and rapists. What kind of value-system do you have?

No-one is arguing that. See my point in the first paragraph. Please try to be charitable.
You’re parsing these arguments wrong. Try to think more carefully about this.

 

[Tenofovir]

According to you sex INSIDE marraige, which protects against procreation is immoral, too. According to your definition of “morality”… but I do not agree with your definiton.

If you want to argue against the Catholic concept of God, you have to agree to this morality. Otherwise you are arguing against a different God-concept, one which we Catholics do not hold. Please visit a different forum to argue that.

There is no natural law.

In your worldview, YES there is none, although people do smuggle this in when they say we can use science to decide what is moral. Yes even atheists believe in some OUGHTS and consider them universal. Your “evil = making sentient creatures suffer” is a type of moral natural law. But strictly speaking in a naturalistic universe there is no OUGHT from IS. You cannot say God should do anything because you should not consider anything evil or bad. Stuff may be undesirable but that’s only because you are deluded to think that. If you think strongly about morals, theism is the way to go. Then learn about the Catholic concept of God - from Aristotle and St Thomas. If you are here to just ramble on (what you’ve been doing so far) and argue against straw men, please stop wasting our time and internet bandwidth.

It could be coherent, but still nonsensical.

You keep repeating that but you haven’t shown that.

Is that an argument? Which fallacy did you commit here?

It’s not an argument. St Thomas Aquinas Summa has hundreds of pages. It’s available online for free. You’ll find the argument there.

I read quite a few books along those lines. None of them was worth the price of the paper it was printed upon. A whole lot of unsubstantiated and irrational mumbo-jumbo.

Not sure what you read but judging by what you say here it wasn’t very good. I’d advise not reading the God Delusion as it doesn’t understand St Thomas Aquinas.

 

[Tenofovir]

To say monotheists hurt God’s credibility is like saying the general public who believes that Relativity is true is hurting its credibility because 99% of the public can’t show why E=mc^2, or even understands what it means.