I see the same thing in your writings, except you use the term "absolute morality" instead of wumphala. What is "absolute morality"? Is it a good thing to follow this "absolute morality"? You might as well be telling me to follow wumphala. If you can't define it, what good is it?
Well, exactly. Ed1wolf keeps asking how we can know what is moral and what is not. But when he is asked that question, his answer is pure circular logic.
No, Goodness is Gods character not what He tells us to do. Though what He tells us to do does reflect His character.
You have said that goodness is God's character. Therefore, whatever God does is good.
So, if we accept your logic, exactly what is to stop God from stealing, lying, cheating or telling others to do that?
You can
say "God would never do such a thing because it would not be good," but how can you tell? On what basis do you say that? You have already said that whatever God does is good. Therefore, if God
did steal, cheat or lie, those would be good actions.
You can say - as indeed you did - that God would never do such things because they would contradict His character. But why would God never contradict His own character? Because it would be a bad thing to do? But if God did contradict His own character, then it would
not - by your own definition - be a bad thing to do.
No, we also know they are good from our moral consciences, if it has not become too distorted we recognize it as good
And how do you know that your "moral conscience is correct? So far, all you've done is try to define it into existence, saying that your moral conscience knows what is right because it is the thing that recognises rightness.
There is an "external scale", His unchanging moral character which objectively exists thereby providing us with an objective moral standard upon which all morality is based.
We've already demonstrated that your definition of absolute morality has no foundation at all, since God could do absolutely anything and you would still label it good. Or, if you would not - if you would say, "No, God wouldn't do that because it's evil," then you are claiming to be able to judge God, which means you yourself claim to possess a standard by which to judge God, and absolute morality does not come from God after all.
Do you believe persons exist? Throughout all of human existence it has been empirically observed that only persons can produce the personal.
It's certainly correct to say that persons
produce the personal, but that's not what we're talking about, is it? Have you ever seen a person
create a person? I haven't.
Certainly I was
produced by my parents, but all that means is that they instigated and participated in a series of biological chain reactions that led to me being born. They didn't
create me, any more than a person pressing the button on a TV creates the film they watch.
So if you are saying that we have seen personal beings
create other personal beings - that is, design the process by which they come into existence and use it to make them come into existence - I have to say that you are incorrect. The fact of the matter is that every single person in existence was created by the impersonal forces of human biology, themselves produced by the impersonal forces of evolution.