Derf
Well-known member
You just cited a verse that says how morality applies to the perfect Creator God. He is "without iniquity". How can anyone be judged "without iniquity" unless a moral standard is applied to him?
What Is Morality, and is it Absolute?
- Thread starter JudgeRightly
- Start date
Right Divider
Body part
God IS the standard.
Derf
Well-known member
But He gives His standard verbally, and if there's some way that He can be said not to be iniquitous, then He would have to be consistent with the standard He has given in words, or He would be a divided kingdom that cannot stand. This is the argument against higher Calvinism that says God WANTS people to sin.
Right Divider
Body part
Duh... how else would He do it?
Double-negatives are a bad way to communicate.
Yes, God IS the standard that He uses to describe the standard.
Blah...
That's from left field.
God is not judged against Himself.
Last edited:
Derf
Well-known member
Yes, He is:
Hebrews 6:13. “For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself,”
Morality applies to God in precisely the same fundamental way that it applies to us, although with one critically important distinction.
Morality is grounded in life itself. Life is the standard of morality, and reason is the means by which a rational being identifies what is good and what is evil. That which promotes and sustains life is good. That which destroys or undermines life is evil.
Now, God is a NECESSARY being. He is the self-existent, rational and living Creator upon whom all contingent existence depends. That means God's goodness is not something He acquires by conforming to some moral standard external to Himself. Nor is something good merely because God happens to do it. Rather, God's moral perfection follows necessarily from His own living and rational nature.
God is necessarily living, necessarily rational and therefore necessarily just (i.e. righteous). His nature is the ultimate foundation of the very principles by which morality is understood. Put another way, God does not arbitrarily decide what is good. Goodness is grounded in what/who God IS. This is why Scripture can declare that God is righteous and that all His ways are just. His righteousness is neither an arbitrary decree nor obedience to some authority higher than Himself. It is the necessary expression of His own nature.
The distinction between God and us is that our existence is contingent, while His is necessary. We must discover what is good through reason and choose whether to act accordingly. God's perfect rationality and necessarily righteous nature mean that He will never act contrary to Himself, which is to say that He will never act contrary to Life, which is to say that He will never act contrary to the good.
Thus, morality applies to God because He is a rational, living being, and His moral perfection is an inherent and necessary attribute of His existence. Indeed, if God were capable of acting contrary to reason, justice or righteousness, He would not be the necessary being that reason identifies as God.
P. S. I happen to writing a book that deals with this exact subject!
You don't get to believe anything you want and still meaningfully call yourself a Christian. SQ!
And what biblical evidence to have that God created EITHER the physical or spiritual laws in advance? Did it ever occur to you that such laws are not required to be independently created? What we call physical laws are merely descriptions of how the physical world works. God make things the way they are and the laws are what they are as a result of that creation. There is precisely no evidence anywhere, including the bible, that it was the other way around.
That's just one mostly innocuous example of what appears to me to be a nearly total incapacitation of your ability to think critically, particularly when it comes to an analysis of your own doctrine. You seem totally blind, for example, to how you undermine your own position. You pretend to believe that Right Divider's position is no more or less valid than yours is and then deride him when he says your position is wrong. The fact that your wrong is a major part of his position, which you just said was as valid as your position is! So which is it? Is your position correct or is Right Divider's position that your wrong correct?
That last paragraph went over your head. You can get it though! Read it over and over until it clicks!