Thus, resort to divine moral sanction turns out to be a useless non-resolution of the underlying problem.
Oh, I don't know. There are hundreds of millions of buddhists who might disagree.
Each individual rational human being is driven by his own values. Inasmuch as each man may know only the specific workings of his own mind, each individual is uniquely qualified to determine his values, and his alone. No man may claim to accurately represent the mind or the values of another. Hence each man’s values may only be advanced by evaluating the world, forming rational conclusions, and acting for himself.
The free-will choice to act in accordance with one’s own values is recognized by other more traditional names, the most recognizable of which is “the pursuit of happiness”. Whether actions are seemingly motivated by traditional religious pursuits, or by the advancement of family, or friends, or charitable concerns, the pursuit of individual happiness (advancement of one’s own values) is the true motivator. Men seek to please their Gods, or to protect their children, or to help others, because it pleases them to do so.
In order to pursue the rational advancement of their values, individuals must be free to act in accordance with the dictates of their own will. In recognition of the fact that the will of individuals may conflict in advancement of their values, a rational restrictive boundary is created at the intersection of competing wills. This boundary reconciles the potential for conflict, by defining as a right, any action in accordance with the dictates of the will of the individual actor, which does not infringe upon the ability of other individuals to do likewise.
The only means which men have at their disposal to infringe upon the rights of others are initiated force, threat of initiated force, and fraud. Recognition of this truth, provides the foundation of a moral code. Initiated force, threat of initiated force, and fraud, are immoral inasmuch as they act to infringe man’s pursuit of his happiness as he defines it. All initiated force, threat of initiated force, or fraud, are immoral, whether perpetrated by an individual or by a collection of individuals sometimes known as government.
The good rabbi has the tail wagging the dog, as strange as that sounds. God is not required for there to be an absolute standard of right and wrong. All that requires is absolute and inexorable consequences -- or, to put it another way, natural laws that can't be finessed.
Many would argue that this alone conclusively implies the existence of God. I believe in God, but I also recognize the availability of other explanations for the invariability of Natural Law. Indeed, I think that's the way God wants it -- for faith is meaningless if it's provable and incontrovertible.
I call this the Divine Non-Coercion Package. It allows men's minds to be free on the Ultimate Subject, for, without freedom, the election of belief is as morally empty as submission to gravity.
C. S. Lewis does some delightful turns on this in The Screwtape Letters.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason:
http://palaceofreason.com
America certainly doesn't need God! Look how well everything has been going the last decade without Him.
We're in hock for trillions, our industrial base is in China, there are no real jobs left, the Chinese and North Koreans are in position to fire missiles up our collective ass!
Hell, we don't need God.
The understanding that God could be Evil but chooses not to be makes God much more Good, in my eyes, than simply making it a tautology that anything God does is Good. By that thinking, if God were purposely torturing little children or sending Good people to Hell just for the heck of it, that would be "Good". And if you argue that God wouldn't do that because God is Good, that just proves my point. God's options and actions are limited in order to for God to be good, then the definition of Good must be something external to God. Put another way, if God werelike Satan, would you find Him worthy of worship and your love?
How about the murder of innocents?
Is that permitted?
Absolute nonesense............!!
New Gods have come and gone over the past 10,000 years as any historical study for the period will affirm....a mere drop in the time bucket of time since man began walking upright.
On the contrary to this statement, for the past 6,000 years, the argument over which God is the one true God has usually ended civility and been the cause of much inhumanity where any horror has been permitted and encouraged.
Have a nice day.
Absolute nonesense............!!
New Gods have come and gone over the past 10,000 years as any historical study for the period will affirm....a mere drop in the time bucket of time since man began walking upright.
On the contrary to this statement, for the past 6,000 years, the argument over which God is the one true God has usually ended civility and been the cause of much inhumanity where any horror has been permitted and encouraged.
Have a nice day.