Objective morality, Evidence for God's existence

[KCfromNC]

I can prove you believe in objective moral values. You know how I can do that?

Look at his most recent posts in this thread. What is he implying in his appeals to scripture?

I'm "implying" that some people believe that those scriptures hold moral commands from the absolute infallible source of objective moral commands. That's why I brought it up. You asked if some people believed it was wrong to kill children, and I pointed to the objectively true moral command from the God some people believe in saying that yes, in some cases it is "blessed" to do so.

And it's strange that someone who claims to believe that objective morality comes from his god would be so hesitant to accept that God's objective moral command in this case. It is almost as if he knows, deep down, that his subjective judgement is superior to his allegedly objectively morally good god. It's a start, at least. Cognitive dissonance is uncomfortable, as we've seen from the multi-paragraph rant about all those bad atheists that are out to get him. But perhaps there's at least a glimmer of hope here.

 

[Sectio Aureo]

One line of evidence for the existence of God is presented in what is commonly called "The Moral Argument". The moral argument can be syllogistically represented as the following:

1. If God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist.

2. Objective moral values and duties do exist

3. Therefore God exists


In discussing this, please stay on topic, and refrain from using any logical fallacies. Thank you

SE

 

[Elioenai26]

I'm "implying" that some people believe that those scriptures hold moral commands from the absolute infallible source of objective moral commands. That's why I brought it up. You asked if some people believed it was wrong to kill children, and I pointed to the objectively true moral command from the God some people believe in saying that yes, in some cases it is "blessed" to do so.

And it's strange that someone who claims to believe that objective morality comes from his god would be so hesitant to accept that God's objective moral command in this case. It is almost as if he knows, deep down, that his subjective judgement is superior to his allegedly objectively morally good god. It's a start, at least. Cognitive dissonance is uncomfortable, as we've seen from the multi-paragraph rant about all those bad atheists that are out to get him. But perhaps there's at least a glimmer of hope here.

Well I am happy to tell you that you are simply mistaken on all counts. No where in the Holy Scriptures will you find God saying that men who kill children are blessed. Your whole argument is therefore based on a strawman.

 

[Gadarene]

Well I am happy to tell you that you are simply mistaken on all counts. No where in the Holy Scriptures will you find God saying that men who kill children are blessed. Your whole argument is therefore based on a strawman.

So what's your interpretation of the verses KC posted then? Be more specific, you are just asserting.

 

[JGG]

Well I am happy to tell you that you are simply mistaken on all counts. No where in the Holy Scriptures will you find God saying that men who kill children are blessed. Your whole argument is therefore based on a strawman.

I suspect he means that there are verses in which man is commanded to kill children under certain circumstances. Which I believe is what you asked for. Which begs the question, if there are circumstances in which it is moral to kill a child, how can one claim that killing children is objectively immoral?

 

[Ken-1122]

Well I am happy to tell you that you are simply mistaken on all counts. No where in the Holy Scriptures will you find God saying that men who kill children are blessed. Your whole argument is therefore based on a strawman.

How about Numbers 31:17-18 where they are commanded to kill everyone; little children included? (except the virgin women who are to be kept alive for rape) How does that fit into your objective morality?

Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

Double post

 

[Elioenai26]

How about Numbers 31:17-18 where they are commanded to kill everyone; little children included? (except the virgin women who are to be kept alive for rape) How does that fit into your objective morality?

Ken

Ask this in the apologetics sub forum please. Here it is a red herring. And as I have been chastised by several here for the need to follow the forum rules without the slightest deviation, please submit your post to the correct forum.

I asked in the OP for everyone to refrain from using informal fallacies as well, so please respect the request.

 

[Gadarene]

Ask this in the apologetics sub forum please. Here it is a red herring. And as I have been chastised by several here for the need to follow the forum rules without the slightest deviation, please submit your post to the correct forum.

I asked in the OP for everyone to refrain from using informal fallacies as well, so please respect the request.

You really will say anything to avoid answering a question about your beliefs, won't you?

 

[Elioenai26]

You really will say anything to avoid answering a question about your beliefs, won't you?

Just ask it in the appropriate forum. I am going to hold you to the same standard you hold me to. Let us respect the forum rules.

If you guys don't submit the question to the proper forum, it just tells me you aren't really concerned about receiving an answer.

 

[Skavau]

Ask this in the apologetics sub forum please. Here it is a red herring. And as I have been chastised by several here for the need to follow the forum rules without the slightest deviation, please submit your post to the correct forum.

This is good advice. I should keep this mind as I watch you attempt to derail my thread with red herrings. Your hypocrisy truly knows no bounds.

I asked in the OP for everyone to refrain from using informal fallacies as well, so please respect the request.

The combined arrogance and naivety oozes from this request. I'm sure people very deliberately with malicious intent use informal fallacies.

 

[Ken-1122]

Ask this in the apologetics sub forum please. Here it is a red herring. And as I have been chastised by several here for the need to follow the forum rules without the slightest deviation, please submit your post to the correct forum.

I asked in the OP for everyone to refrain from using informal fallacies as well, so please respect the request.

I believe the question is on topic. In post #321 KcfromNC asked about the possibility of a person claiming under certain conditions God claims it is moral to kill children
You replied in post #323 that nowhere in scriptures does God say it is moral to kill children thus calling his question a strawman. I pointed out an example of Moses claiming to speak for God, instructing the children of Israel to kill little children of a surrendering army after a war and you say my question is off topic? I disagree! How is it off topic?

Ken

 

[Elioenai26]

I believe the question is on topic. In post #321 KcfromNC asked about the possibility of a person claiming under certain conditions God claims it is moral to kill children
You replied in post #323 that nowhere in scriptures does God say it is moral to kill children thus calling his question a strawman. I pointed out an example of Moses claiming to speak for God, instructing the children of Israel to kill little children of a surrendering army after a war and you say my question is off topic? I disagree! How is it off topic?

Ken

It is off topic because it fails to address either of the two premises of the moral argument.

It is also an informal fallacy of the red herring stripe.

It is also a violation of the OP's request that informal fallacies not be used in this discussion.

It is also inappropriately posted in this forum. There is a specific sub-forum for questions regarding biblical interpretation.

As I have already stated, several times, I would be more than thrilled to answer this question. I just will not be addressing it in this forum.

The above are the main reasons why I have literally begged for anyone here to engage in a formal debate with me. A formal debate will eliminate all unnecessary arguments, red herring tangents and strawmen constructs.

Would you like to engage in a formal debate with me regarding the topic of your choice in an agreed upon format?

 

[Skavau]

No, when you say you want a "formal debate" what you actually mean is you want to control the flow of the conversation. As soon as any "formal debate" goes in a way which you don't like you'll simply end the discussion.

 

[Elioenai26]

No, when you say you want a "formal debate" what you actually mean is you want to control the flow of the conversation. As soon as any "formal debate" goes in a way which you don't like you'll simply end the discussion.

A formal debate is conducted according to a predetermined and mutually agreed upon format. Any deviation from the format by either party means that the deviating party forfeits the debate.

 

[Gadarene]

Oh look, Eliarnai is still evading and expects to be taken seriously. Bless.

 

[Gadarene]

Just ask it in the appropriate forum. I am going to hold you to the same standard you hold me to. Let us respect the forum rules.

If you guys don't submit the question to the proper forum, it just tells me you aren't really concerned about receiving an answer.

This is just hypocrisy. This whole topic is apologetics, and you were quite happy to start a thread about an apologetics topic. You're only playing the rulesheet now when it suits you to avoid answering a question, and it's transparently dishonest. For that matter, show me where any of us have used the forum rules to avoid answering a question the way you repeatedly have.

You are aware that Jesus repeatedly condemned hypocrisy, right? Wouldn't be the first time a Christian displayed an ignorance of their own text that I had to correct.

 

[Elioenai26]

This is just hypocrisy. This whole topic is apologetics, and you were quite happy to start a thread about an apologetics topic. You're only playing the rulesheet now when it suits you to avoid answering a question, and it's transparently dishonest. For that matter, show me where any of us have used the forum rules to avoid answering a question the way you repeatedly have.

You are aware that Jesus repeatedly condemned hypocrisy, right? Wouldn't be the first time a Christian displayed an ignorance of their own text that I had to correct.

Thank you for your insight and concern for my correctness. I shall endeavor to be in accordance with the forum rules at all times.

 

[Gadarene]

Thank you for your insight and concern for my correctness. I shall endeavor to be in accordance with the forum rules at all times.

Whatever you do, just be consistent about it, and ditch the blatantly obvious evasion tactics when other people ask you questions. Disagree with our arguments all you want, but we've answered plenty of questions from you rather than hiding behind the rules, off topic or not.

 

[Elioenai26]

Whatever you do, just be consistent about it, and ditch the blatantly obvious evasion tactics when other people ask you questions. Disagree with our arguments all you want, but we've answered plenty of questions from you rather than hiding behind the rules, off topic or not.

I will abide by the forum rules, and expect everyone else to as well.