Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I don't put much credence in that. I treat it as a bargain. Treat me well and I'll reciprocate. If they are created in God's image then they need to act as such. If they don't then all bets are off.
That's funny, because what He said was "the law and the prophets". So I presume He was talking about the law and the prophets(several of the books of the OT) and not just saying the idea was common. In other words, He seems to be saying "this is the summary of what God has said." as His reason. But maybe you're right, though I'm quite curious how you know what He really meant?
Then you don't follow it at all, do you? They call that the bronze rule, "Do unto others what they do unto you." I suppose at least you're not following the iron rule, "do unto others before they do unto you."
But common it is. It's pretty much universal. And certainly predates Christianity.
I know because of what He is reported to have said. Treat others as you would like to be treated. Treat them well because you want to be treated well. Don't treat them badly because you would not want to be treated badly. He's just emhasising empathy.
Oh? Certainly doesn't seem that way to me. Though its rather trifling to get into when and where it's been articulated.
Desire has nothing to do with it. At least not based on what He said, because the sole reason He gave for it was that it is what is written in the Law and the Prophets. And He isn't emphasizing empathy, because whether we have empathy for someone or not the golden rule applies. I need not feel any way about a person to do right by them, all that matters is how I treat them.
All reasons are not equal! And yeah, it's really handy if they are based on fact.
So no other reason than 'God said so'. You don't have your own reasons other than that. Again that's where we differ. You rely on someone else to tell you what's right or wrong. I don't. I make the decision myself. Glad we have that finally sorted out.
Your questions don't make any sense. Facts involved in what? The moral truth of a matter is what needs go be determined. By the arguments put forward. You then come to an opinion.
Ice cream is not a moral matter.
From the first hit on Google:
See above if you're confused about what constitutes a good argument.
Morality is subjective. Because we decide what is right and wrong. Based on the evidence. Which hopefully is factual. And facts are objective.
This is a silly question. Check out the list above for what constitutes a good argument. Investigate different arguments. Make a decision on why you think one is stronger. Don't ask God. You have to do this. Let me know how you get on.
You should investigate it. Google is your friend. I'm not of a mind to do it for you.
The golden rule isn't relevant unless you employ empathy. Put yourself in their shoes and work it out from there. It's not actually a rule. Itshould be called the Golden Guide.
Well, if loving my neighbour means I can give him some of his own treatment and give the guy a beating - just to discipline him of course, then fine. I'll go with that.
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
If its purely a matter of personal taste, then what distinguishes one reason from another? If it's an opinion, I don't need an argument because it's just my opinion. So is it just your opinion or is there more to it than that?
What more reason do I need? My opinion is the best reason possible is that God has said it. So if the only thing that separates us is opinions, then it doesn't really matter whether you decided for yourself or not. Because at the end of the day what you have decided is just your opinion. Which you seem to think is based on good arguments for...reasons?
"Moral truth"? I thought you said it was relative? Now there's moral truth? Pick a lane.
If I say it is, then why isn't it?
Great, now we have a definition of what a strong argument would include. So let's explore a couple. What are the non-arbitrary yet subjective moral premises?
I'm not confused about what constitutes a good argument, but why you demand an opinion have an argument. Unless you were lying when you said you think morals are just your opinion?
Evidence? According to you morality is subjective, so there are no objective facts to consider. So what possible facts or evidence can be involved?
Perhaps you could explain why an opinion would need an argument. Unless you don't thnk morals are matters of opinion.
Do I have to explain to you yet again that not all arguments are equal? Do I really have to give you examples? Surely not...And you don't need an argument anyway for moral matters. You have said, on more than one occasion, that you simply listen to God.
Yeah, that sums it up quite nicely. It was in my first post on the matter. I decide based on the arguments for and against. And you are told what the answer is.
Don't be facetious. If I hold to a moral position it's true as far as I am concerned. I have decided that it's true. You've been told.
Don't be silly.
Do you know what a premise is? It's a statement that will justify a conclusion. You can't nominate a premise without knowing what argument you are presenting. Make an argument and you'll have to present a premise.
How do you decide on what your opinion will be on whether an act is moral or not without being presented with an argument? Well, I should have said 'How does one decide...etc'. You've told me that someone else tells you. So you don't actually need an argument.
Yet again... morality is relative. Facts are objective. Don't make me repeat that.
You don't need an argument. God simply tells you. For everyone else, an argument is needed in order to form an opinion.
Opinions don't require arguments. So either way, no argument is necessary.
Do you understand the difference between something being factually true and an opinion? If morals are subjective, then those morals are not factually true but simply the subjective opinion of one person. So are morals factual statements, that require arguments and evidence or are they subjective opinions that are relative?
See, that's the whole thing. If morals are relative, then they can't be true or false. They're just opinions. You've decided that it's right, and so that makes it true. Since you've decided that its true, it must be true. But what are the facts and evidence its based on?
You don't seem to have a firm grasp on the is-ought problem.
A premise is something that a conclusion follows from, you say that your moral opinions aren't just arbitrary opinions and are based on arguments. So I presume you have premises for those arguments. So field a couple and let's see if they hold.
Well, if it's just my opinion then why do I need any argument at all? Its not factual, it's just a subjective opinion isn't it? Or do you not understand the difference between fact and opinion?
Right. So morality need not depend on any facts. Because if I believe its right, then its right. Because its relative, and I decide what is right and wrong. Or is there such a thing as relative truth to you?
What possible argument could be had, it's subjective not objective isn't it? So it doesn't make sense to talk about it in terms of truth or falsity, because subjective opinions aren't factual statements. So what are these mysterious facts and evidence you've based your moral opinions on?
