Is morality objective, even without God?

[Bradskii]

Either tell the truth or say nothing.
It is not OK under any circumstances to speak a falsehood

Now some will disagree. If someone prays for guidance and they say that God told them it was OK to lie to save the family in the attic, then who is right? I'd suggest that pleading the biblical version of the Fifth would mean a family is going to have a bad end.

 

[QvQ]

Now some will disagree. If someone prays for guidance and they say that God told them it was OK to lie to save the family in the attic, then who is right? I'd suggest that pleading the biblical version of the Fifth would mean a family is going to have a bad end.

If the Bad Guys are close enough to ask that question, or to have reason to suspect the family is in the attic, a lie will not save them
That is Hollywood Heroism, where the Gestapo is in the house asking about the attic. And the brave householder simply turns the bad guys away with a clever lie.
Real life, if the Gestapo are in the house, or suspects there are people hiding in the house, the Gestapo will find them.
There are many instances where refusing to speak, even being tortured for information is real life scenario
It is better to take the Biblical Fifth and trust in God as to the end.

 

[Bradskii]

It is better to take the Biblical Fifth and trust in God as to the end.

So if I'm in a quandry and I don't know what to do, one Christian will tell me it's OK to lie and another will tell me it's not. Why is God telling the first guy it's OK if He tells the second one that it's not?

He can't be. Obviously. Why should I trust you when you tell me that you've got it right?

 

[Neogaia777]

This is where God has me in my thought processes right now on this subject right now currently, etc.

Moral absolutes, or 100% objective morality, has to be a thing (a rule or a law, or a moral/ethical statement/code) that is either always, always right in 100% of all cases with absolutely not ever any exceptions, or else always, always 100% wrong in 100% of all cases with absolutely not ever any exceptions, etc. I don't really know what can truly fit into those categories with either the 100% always wrong part, or the 100% always right part, but maybe you guys have some ideas about that maybe?

And maybe also the question that if we say something like stealing is always, always wrong, but we have certain situations where we also think it could be deemed right, and it was 100% forgiven because of that, etc, then was it still wrong, or did a wrong all of the sudden get changed into a right, etc?

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

This is where God has me in my thought processes right now on this subject right now currently, etc.

Moral absolutes, or 100% objective morality, has to be a thing (a rule or a law, or a moral/ethical statement/code) that is either always, always right in 100% of all cases with absolutely not ever any exceptions, or else always, always 100% wrong in 100% of all cases with absolutely not ever any exceptions, etc. I don't really know what can truly fit into those categories with either the 100% always wrong part, or the 100% always right part, but maybe you guys have some ideas about that maybe?

And maybe also the question that if we say something like stealing is always, always wrong, but we have certain situations where we also think it could be deemed right, and it was 100% forgiven because of that, etc, then was it still wrong, or did a wrong all of the sudden get changed into a right, etc?

God Bless.

Well, objective morality might differ from moral absolutes, etc. But with objective morality, I don't know that we can talk about it other than in a case that involves a judgement of a person/people, or person place or thing? But let's take and individual person in this case, etc.

To make a truly 100% accurate moral judgment of a such a person, or a truly objective one, etc, then you'd have to have the kind of truly objective view of that person that we say only an all-knowing God can have right now in order to truly make a 100% truly objective moral or ethical judgment of such a person, or it's not 100% objective, etc, and that's the problem with a truly 100% objective and accurate moral judgment of another person right now currently, etc, because no human being has all-knowledge of that person right now currently, and so no human beings moral judgements can ever be 100% truly objective right now currently, etc, because you'd have to have all-knowledge of a thing before you can do that fully accurately, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Aaron112]

Do you honestly know anyone who says 'God doesn't entrust me with the truth'? I'm assuming that you'd consider yourself someone He would trust with it. The problem is that everyone I ask will give the same answer.

Honestly ? Or dishonestly ? Very few believe God has entrusted themselves or anyone else with the truth. If everyone you DO ASK gives the same (negative) answer, keep looking for those people that God has entrusted His Word to.

 

[Aaron112]

And how do you know that you're not one of the deluded ones? (Correct answer: you don't)

The answer is directly in Scripture. It is not likely you will find it until you believe God's Word is Truth all the way and TRUST HIM.

 

[Aaron112]

I'm sorry, but I'm nowhere any closer to know who to believe if someone tells me that God has guided him or her to know that a given act is wrong and someone else says He has guided them to know that it's right. ;

True Disciples​

31 Then Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
The true disciples are known by Jesus, and He Tells the Truth to His true disciples, with no error in what He says. He is Reliable , Honest, and different from men (who lie).

 

[Neogaia777]

Well, objective morality might differ from moral absolutes, etc. But with objective morality, I don't know that we can talk about it other than in a case that involves a judgement of a person/people, or person place or thing? But let's take and individual person in this case, etc.

To make a truly 100% accurate moral judgment of a such a person, or a truly objective one, etc, then you'd have to have the kind of truly objective view of that person that we say only an all-knowing God can have right now in order to truly make a 100% truly objective moral or ethical judgment of such a person, or it's not 100% objective, etc, and that's the problem with a truly 100% objective and accurate moral judgment of another person right now currently, etc, because no human being has all-knowledge of that person right now currently, and so no human beings moral judgements can ever be 100% truly objective right now currently, etc, because you'd have to have all-knowledge of a thing before you can do that fully accurately, etc.

God Bless.

In order to have a moral (or anything) that is 100% truly objective, then it will have to have been decided/reached 100% truly objectively, etc. And I don't think human beings are capable of that, no matter how hard some of them might try, etc. Humans have a limited viewpoint, don't possess all-knowledge, and therefore cannot be truly objective about pretty much anything, but are always going to have only subjective viewpoints, etc. And even if one human being did manage, they'd have a heck of a time trying to convince any others that they were objectively right, etc, due to all of the others still having only subjective viewpoints, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

In Philosophy and in Life we are sometimes presented with certain situations or circumstances in which there is really not any right or wrong answer or decision you can make either way, etc, and in these situations each individual is a law unto themselves and must go/decide according to their individual conscience, etc, and only God is going to know if you violated the/that/those law(s) that were unto your own selves in those situations or circumstances or not, etc, and everyone in general might not ever get to know about everybody in general in this regard until we are all standing in the judgement together after we die on judgement day, etc. But and/or again, both in Philosophy and in Life, etc, we are sometimes presented with certain moral situations or circumstances in which we need to make a decision (and/or decisions) for which there is really no right or wrong answers either way other than people just being a law unto themselves, etc. And only God, and maybe perhaps you maybe, this side of life anyways, etc, is ever going to know whether or not you violated that or not, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Bradskii]

​

The true disciples are known by Jesus, and He Tells the Truth to His true disciples, with no error in what He says.

I don't care that Jesus knows who are the true disciples. I want to know who they are. And you've given me nothing by which I can determine that.

 

[QvQ]

I don't care that Jesus knows who are the true disciples. I want to know who they are. And you've given me nothing by which I can determine that.

Sola Scriptura
John 8:31 If ye continue in my WORD, then are ye my disciples indeed;

 

[Bradskii]

Sola Scriptura

And should I discuss this with a Catholic? They'll tell me something completely different. I'm back to square one.

 

[Jerry N.]

If the Bad Guys are close enough to ask that question, or to have reason to suspect the family is in the attic, a lie will not save them
That is Hollywood Heroism, where the Gestapo is in the house asking about the attic. And the brave householder simply turns the bad guys away with a clever lie.
Real life, if the Gestapo are in the house, or suspects there are people hiding in the house, the Gestapo will find them.
There are many instances where refusing to speak, even being tortured for information is real life scenario
It is better to take the Biblical Fifth and trust in God as to the end.

I'm from Poland, and the lie about Jews hiding actually worked sometimes.

 

[o_mlly]

Bad Fred.

Bad Brewski.

Now do you have any divine guidance for the moral problem

Take your own advice.

... if we have the details then we can decide ... If I give you no facts then you cannot make a decision.

True. Now give me the details needed to help you out: moral object, intent, circumstances.

 

[Jo555]

I don't care that Jesus knows who are the true disciples. I want to know who they are. And you've given me nothing by which I can determine that.

Another day, some extra time. I answered that for you 3 times i counted this morning, but you continue to ask the same question, sometimes in different form, but same question over and over, and over again

To me it appears that you are trying to prove some point you have, but it isn't working out as you had hoped, and you continue to try to make that happen

Reading more this morning, others have also given you good replies, but you continue with the same thing.

I personally am choosing to no longer answer your question because i did that already, three times, and it appears to me that you don't like my response so are digging for whatever it is you'd like to hear, and / or trying to make us look like fools,, which you failed to do. The only thing I'm seeing is someone with a hidden agenda, but it is not working out for them so they are desperately working at twisting things, etc, to try and succeed with their agenda.

So. It appears to me that you are not really seeking, you are plotting and you won't get to the truth until you are truly seeking the truth for the right reasons.

So now I'm truly done, and won't be surprised if your reply again will be that I haven't answered your question when i did 3 times.

I did enjoy the exchange, but now don't want to encourage you and what i see as a devious plot.

If I'm wrong do accept my apologies, but I don't think i am.

Again, keep asking, seeking, knocking of GOD, the source of all truth.

 

[Stephen3141]

I'll skip all the video based presentations.

If the poster wants to summarize the arguments, then I will try to interact.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Well...yeah. That's the way that good partnerships work.

Congratulations, Bradskii! You likely have a marital relationship that is better than, and more in accordance with God's will, what the Ephesians of Paul's time could muster up on an everyday basis.

 

[Bradskii]

True. Now give me the details needed to help you out: moral object, intent, circumstances.

The object is the relationship with my partner. The intent is to have her be subject to me. Or not. Depending on the advice. The circumstances are that of a married couple. I gave you this before. Now what is tbe moral position to take take?

 

[Bradskii]

So now I'm truly done, and won't be surprised if your reply again will be that I haven't answered your question when i did 3 times.

I'm afraid that your answers have been no help at all. They amount to 'God gives the answers to those who seek them'. Which explains nothing about contradictory views within Christianity.