The Moral Argument

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

But then how is He a reference point? If it is just what He says we should do, then it is just an opinion. Maybe it's the best opinion, but how is it more than that? How is He morality, yet we cannot act in the same way?

Because there are some things He can do that no other person has authority to do.

 

[Davian]

It's indistinguishable from fiction to you.

You then concede my point, that you have no objective evidence that points directly to your "God"?

God is not a deistic god, he does show his power

Then define how this happens, and how we can test it, if it has some effect on this world.

and the name of Jesus is a powerful name.

For some.

You're accountable because you are a sinner and the only thing you'll be able to call to in the day of judgment to save you is Jesus and what he did for you.

Why would I call on someone that, even if they ever existed, has been dead for 2000 years?

As Christians, we are trying to show you that.

And I am just commenting on what you are telling me. You started a thread to present a moral argument for a theology that says that serial killers can get a pass while disbelievers burn for eternity for reasons beyond their control.

Personally, I have no problem if you can hold such a concept as a belief, as long as you don't promote it as fact to my kids. I am here as I find such things fascinating to discuss.

 

[anonymous person]

You will not ever get there without first overcoming your numerous and basic epistemological hurdles.

I am already there actually. Are you talking about yourself?

 

[Davian]

What if God revealed himself and these revelations were written down in a book?

Granting that hypothetical for the moment, it would seem that this would be a poor form of communication, seeing that it has resulted in thousands of religions and millions of interpretations, from Christian atheism to pantheism/panentheism.

"Christian atheism is a theological position in which the belief in the God of Christianity is rejected or absent but the moral teachings of Jesus are followed."

Christian atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The apostle Paul quotes a pantheist poem about Zeus in Acts 17:28, turning it into a panentheist statement about their "unknown God" when he quotes, "'In him we live and move and have our being' as some of your poets have said."

Panentheism is also a feature of some later Christian thought, particularly in mystical Orthodox Christianity, Catholic philosophy, and process theology. In order to avoid confusion with pantheism some panentheists now use the doublet "unitheism.""

Panentheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It would also beg the question, should not those revelations comport with reality?

 

[Davian]

Well then.... perhaps you should enlighten me which direction is up while floating aimlessly in the vacuum of space. Smarty pants. [emoji1]

There would be no up and down, other than that reached by internal or external consensus.

 

[Sapiens]

I love how you first state that serial killers don't get a free pass and then in the next breath literally mention the procedure by which they get a free pass.

Yes, I'm sure you're enjoying yourself quite a lot right now.

I meant that without Jesus, they would go to hell. Yeah, then they get a "free-pass". In fact, it's the only pass.

 

[Sapiens]

The fact that it simply doesn't matter whether one behaves morally or not; all that matters is that one believes.

Both matter.

 

[Sapiens]

Then your religion isn't about moral accountability at all.

It's quite the contrary.

 

[Davian]

You said you are ignostic right?

Hand over this judgment or get back on topic.

If you recall, my theological position does not interfere with the discussion hypotheticals, or theologies.

Are you only able to discuss your beliefs with those that allow your presuppositions to go unchallenged?

 

[Davian]

You didn't answer the question he asked.

The bible is either divinely inspired or not. If it is then we have God communicating to us, which would render your view false.

So really the issue is whether or not there is evidence of the bible being divinely inspired.

Sure, and in other threads we have discussed how, in the context of a testable, falsifiable hypothesis, no evidence has been presented.

However, we could stay on topic, and provide the Bible with some validity on a hypothetical basis, and explore how the theology of the OP is morally bankrupt, in spite of the intent of the thread.

 

[Moral Orel]

Because there are some things He can do that no other person has authority to do.

So God both is morality and at the same time above morality? There is no act that God cannot do for the sake of His plan, or purpose, or what-have-you that we could ever call immoral simply because He created us. Yet He is supposed to be the yardstick that we measure our morality on. What He says morality to be is then morality, and not Him. He is not morality itself as morality that applies to us in any way has absolutely nothing to do with him. He can, at best, have knowledge of what the best things that we can do are, and what the worst things that we can do are, based on a definition of morality.

Now if we can agree on a definition of morality that doesn't demand design behind it (i.e. purpose = morality) then we can reason our way to the best possible morality without God, at least eventually. But if the definition of morality itself demands a designer, such as that definition does, then this whole argument fails because most people don't define morality as "obey God" and nothing else.

I posed the question to Sapiens as well, but I'll ask you too. If you built and programmed a robot full of emotions, and physical feelings, and aspirations, and dreams, and desires, you really feel that you have the moral authority to cause that robot pain and suffering simply because you created it?

 

[Davian]

It's quite the contrary.

Explain it then. How is the core tenet of your theology more than "believe, or else..."

 

[Davian]

I am already there actually. Are you talking about yourself?

Sounds like "I know you are, but what am I?".

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

I am already there actually. Are you talking about yourself?

I'm sorry, I must have completely missed the part where you laid out an epistemology of 'revelation'. Point it out, please.

 

[anonymous person]

I'm sorry, I must have completely missed the part where you laid out an epistemology of 'revelation'. Point it out, please.

God said it, that settles it.

How's that?

 

[anonymous person]

"I know you are, but what am I?"

What are you?

Well, if you're asking, I would say you are more of an apatheist than anything.

 

[anonymous person]

Incidentally, a point has been made to me by Extraneous and I think it bears mentioning here.

What happens to the rapist when he dies if Christianity is false?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

God said it, that settles it.

How's that?

That's certainly a sentence. Written in English, by all appearances.

Are you getting to that epistemology anytime soon?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Both matter.

If I could live exact opposite lives, in regard to moral behavior - one in which I am a serial raping child murderer, the other in which I am a lifelong philanthropist - and the one and only determining factor for where I end up when I die is whether I believed at the moment of death, it is blatantly false to say 'both matter'.

 

[Davian]

God said it, that settles it.

How's that?

Rather poor, I would say. It has been my experience here that there is no position, however contrary to another, that someone cannot find support for in the Bible.