What does "We all agree X is wrong -> objective morality" actually mean

[Sabertooth]

What on earth is a static social model?

That if we make & enforce some complete set of written laws, then all of society's ills will be resolved. Our laws are provisional, at best.

 

[Bradskii]

That if we make & enforce some complete set of written laws, then all of society's ills will be resolved. Our laws are provisional, at best.

I specifically said that I wanted examples of how to solve a moral problem that was not codified. That is not, for example, found in scripture.

Are you actually reading my posts?

 

[Sabertooth]

I specifically said that I wanted examples of how to solve a moral problem that was not codified.

Absent code, such a solution would necessitate a viable, transcendent god (unless you would make humans into that god).

 

[Bradskii]

Absent code, such a solution would necessitate a viable, transcendant god (unless you would make humans into that god).

And...we've come full circle. God will know. He'll tell us. How do we know if He's given two different answers to two different people? Well, scripture will tell us. And if it doesn't? How do we know? Well, 'such a solution would necessitate a viable, transcendant god'.

 

[Clare73]

Again, I'm talking about moral problems that are not addressed in any way by scripture.

Such as?

 

[Sabertooth]

And...we've come full circle.

Full circle indeed.
“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot (even) see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3 NKJV

How do we know if He's given two different answers to two different people? Well, scripture will tell us. And if it doesn't? How do we know? Well, 'such a solution would necessitate a viable, transcendant god'.

You cannot attest to any given answer without you, yourself, first surrendering to Jesus. Prior to that, we are oblivious to His take on the matter.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Full circle indeed.
“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot (even) see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3 NKJV

You cannot attest to any given answer without you, yourself, first surrendering to Jesus. Prior to that, we are oblivious to His take on the matter.

So the whole thing is just a giant "If you don't think the way I do, you can't possibly be right because I have a single verse of ancient text that says so" argument.

Do you (and the others here) understand why that is NOT compelling or convincing in the slightest?

I wouldn't have found it convincing when I *did* believe, but then maybe that's because I was so defective I wasn't "born again" and didn't ever feel the presence of any "spirits".

 

[Bradskii]

Full circle indeed.
“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot (even) see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3 NKJV

You cannot attest to any given answer without you, yourself, first surrendering to Jesus. Prior to that, we are oblivious to His take on the matter.

Yet again, two people who have 'surrendered to Jesus' will give me two entirely different answers to a moral problem. So thanks for your input*.

* Code for 'the conversation has run its course.'

 

[Clare73]

So the whole thing is just a giant "If you don't think the way I do, you can't possibly be right because I have a single verse of ancient text that says so" argument.
Do you (and the others here) understand why that is NOT compelling or convincing in the slightest?
I wouldn't have found it convincing when I *did* believe, but then maybe that's because I was so defective I wasn't "born again" and didn't ever feel the presence of any "spirits".

I like you anyway.

.

 

[childeye 2]

So the whole thing is just a giant "If you don't think the way I do, you can't possibly be right because I have a single verse of ancient text that says so" argument.

Do you (and the others here) understand why that is NOT compelling or convincing in the slightest?

I wouldn't have found it convincing when I *did* believe, but then maybe that's because I was so defective I wasn't "born again" and didn't ever feel the presence of any "spirits".

I understand where you're coming from particularly since it's well articulated so as to be self-evident. But the problem as I see it, is about first coming to terms. For example, the term "spirits" and how you applied it sounds like superstition to me. But consider how I apply it: An only child might not experience the spirit of brotherly love, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist in reality and cannot be understood as to its meaning.

I would think that everyone has experienced the spirit of hope and that it's typically preceded by a spirit of despair/desperation/hopelessness. You also say, ..."I was so defective"... and that's a sentiment being expressed which is spiritual to anyone who hears it and can relate. Likewise, the Word of God is Spirit and not a book.

 

[Astrid]

I understand where you're coming from particularly since it's well articulated so as to be self-evident. But the problem as I see it, is about first coming to terms. For example, the term "spirits" and how you applied it sounds like superstition to me. But consider how I apply it: An only child might not experience the spirit of brotherly love, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist in reality and cannot be understood as to its meaning.

I would think that everyone has experienced the spirit of hope and that it's typically preceded by a spirit of despair/desperation/hopelessness. You also say, ..."I was so defective"... and that's a sentiment being expressed which is spiritual to anyone who hears it and can relate. Likewise, the Word of God is Spirit and not a book.

So you see that spirit is emotion

 

[Hans Blaster]

I didn't see this post on the weekend...

I understand where you're coming from particularly since it's well articulated so as to be self-evident. But the problem as I see it, is about first coming to terms. For example, the term "spirits" and how you applied it sounds like superstition to me. But consider how I apply it: An only child might not experience the spirit of brotherly love, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist in reality and cannot be understood as to its meaning.

I would think that everyone has experienced the spirit of hope and that it's typically preceded by a spirit of despair/desperation/hopelessness.

Up to this point I have to agree with Estrid's reply. These are just emotions and feelings.

You also say, ..."I was so defective"... and that's a sentiment being expressed which is spiritual to anyone who hears it and can relate. Likewise, the Word of God is Spirit and not a book.

I think we are now getting in to this "Holy Spirit" notion. I never quite got what it is and I no longer care. I certainly don't think it's real. My sarcastic comment about being "defective" (I am not) was a reference to my failure to detect said spirit. There are those who say it can be felt or enter you. Never did feel that thing what ever it was. And, yes, I do consider it to be superstition.

This final line of yours is just nonsensical to me about words being spirit. Utterly devoid of meaning.

 

[Astrid]

I didn't see this post on the weekend...



Up to this point I have to agree with Estrid's reply. These are just emotions and feelings.



I think we are now getting in to this "Holy Spirit" notion. I never quite got what it is and I no longer care. I certainly don't think it's real. My sarcastic comment about being "defective" (I am not) was a reference to my failure to detect said spirit. There are those who say it can be felt or enter you. Never did feel that thing what ever it was. And, yes, I do consider it to be superstition.

This final line of yours is just nonsensical to me about words being spirit. Utterly devoid of meaning.

Failing to agree with everything I say
Is the same as agreeing to fail.

Just fyi

 

[childeye 2]

1. So you see that spirit is emotion

   I wanted to mention to you that despite my initial dismissive attitude of it being taken to be insincere, I took your advice to not use the term "respectfully" so much and I think it has helped in my discourse. So I wanted to say thank you for that.
   
   
2. spir·it
   [ˈspirit]
   NOUN
   1. the nonphysical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul:
      "we seek a harmony between body and spirit"
      synonyms:
      soul · psyche · inner self · inner being · essential being · pneuma · anima · ego · id · ka · atman

 

[childeye 2]

Up to this point I have to agree with Estrid's reply. These are just emotions and feelings.

I'm not sure whether Estrid means to affirm or deny my recognition that spirit is emotion, or that which animates us, moves us. I've known that most all of my life. But since it is my claim, then essentially you're agreeing with me.

spir·it
[ˈspirit]
NOUN

1. the nonphysical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul:
   "we seek a harmony between body and spirit"
   synonyms:
   soul · psyche · inner self · inner being · essential being · pneuma · anima · ego · id · ka · atman
2. those qualities regarded as forming the definitive or typical elements in the character of a person, nation, or group or in the thought and attitudes of a particular period:
   "the university is a symbol of the nation's egalitarian spirit"
   synonyms:
   ethos · prevailing tendency · motivating force · animating principle ·
   [more]

I think we are now getting in to this "Holy Spirit" notion. I never quite got what it is and I no longer care.

Well, I cared enough about you to respond to what you cared enough about us to say here:
"So the whole thing is just a giant "If you don't think the way I do, you can't possibly be right because I have a single verse of ancient text that says so" argument. Do you (and the others here) understand why that is NOT compelling or convincing in the slightest?"

I certainly don't think it's real. My sarcastic comment about being "defective" (I am not) was a reference to my failure to detect said spirit.

It's a fact that what we believe to be true will produce a spirit/emotion within us, (that's basic brain chemistry). Subsequently I was able to deduce your belief that spirits are superstition by the sentiments you expressed. If you don't think the spirit of brotherly love is real, then I can tell you with complete certainty that it is.

There are those who say it can be felt or enter you. Never did feel that thing what ever it was. And, yes, I do consider it to be superstition.

This is why I said the problem is first that we need to come to terms so as to understand one another. This is how the feeling/spirit of the term "spirits" being superstition entered into you, through misunderstanding the term "spirit".

This final line of yours is just nonsensical to me about words being spirit. Utterly devoid of meaning.

Sentiments/meanings are spirit. In other words, the words we communicate with to express our sentiments/beliefs/feelings have meaning, or in other words carry a spirit. That is what I was meaning when I said words are spirit.

sen·ti·ment
[ˈsen(t)əmənt]
NOUN

1. a view of or attitude toward a situation or event; an opinion:
   "I agree with your sentiments regarding the road bridge"
   synonyms:
   view · point of view · way of thinking · feeling · attitude · thought · opinion · belief · idea
   • general feeling or opinion:
     "public sentiment was on the side of reform"
   • a feeling or emotion:
     "an intense sentiment of horror"
     synonyms:
     feeling · emotion

 

[Astrid]

1. I wanted to mention to you that despite my initial dismissive attitude of it being taken to be insincere, I took your advice to not use the term "respectfully" so much and I think it has helped in my discourse. So I wanted to say thank you for that.
   
   
2. spir·it
   [ˈspirit]
   NOUN
   1. the nonphysical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul:
      "we seek a harmony between body and spirit"
      synonyms:
      soul · psyche · inner self · inner being · essential being · pneuma · anima · ego · id · ka · atman

As an ESL student I am very familiar with the dictionary.

As used by you, the word "spirit" was just about feelings.

The dictionary does try to keep it simple.
But
To state what the "spirit" IS is the " non physical..."?
Instead of " assumed by some to be..."

That is assuming it's existence, like saying " a flying saucer is...".

You are welcome to assume both things and that there are
dinosaursurking in the Congo.

They are not statements of fact.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I'm not sure whether Estrid means to affirm or deny my recognition that spirit is emotion, or that which animates us, moves us. I've known that most all of my life. But since it is my claim, then essentially you're agreeing with me.

I thought my earlier post (#87) was pretty obviously using "spirits" to talk of supernatural spirits (holy spirits, souls, ghosts) and not emotions. I certainly wasn't claiming I didn't feel or believe in emotions. (I certainly think that when people say they felt the "Holy Spirit" they are just experiencing an emotional response to something and not having a supernatural experience.)

I Well, I cared enough about you to respond to what you cared enough about us to say here:
"So the whole thing is just a giant "If you don't think the way I do, you can't possibly be right because I have a single verse of ancient text that says so" argument. Do you (and the others here) understand why that is NOT compelling or convincing in the slightest?"

It's a fact that what we believe to be true will produce a spirit/emotion within us, (that's basic brain chemistry). Subsequently I was able to deduce your belief that spirits are superstition by the sentiments you expressed. If you don't think the spirit of brotherly love is real, then I can tell you with complete certainty that it is.

Again, you think I have confused emotion for the supernatural. I have not.

I
This is why I said the problem is first that we need to come to terms so as to understand one another. This is how the feeling/spirit of the term "spirits" being superstition entered into you, through misunderstanding the term "spirit".

Sentiments/meanings are spirit. In other words, the words we communicate with to express our sentiments/beliefs/feelings have meaning, or in other words carry a spirit. That is what I was meaning when I said words are spirit.

Sentiments are emotions and not relevant to my post dismissing the supernatural that started this sub-conversation. Please stop conflating them or confusing my meaning.

 

[childeye 2]

I thought my earlier post (#87) was pretty obviously using "spirits" to talk of supernatural spirits (holy spirits, souls, ghosts) and not emotions.

I agree, that is definitely what came across. But I read your posts, and please forgive me, but I don't like the notion in my thoughts of you thinking I'm a nut. It matters to me as a Christian to not be counted as entertaining a superstition.

I certainly wasn't claiming I didn't feel or believe in emotions.

Again, I agree, you come across as a sensible person. I'm no different. I don't believe in the occult or magic either.

(I certainly think that when people say they felt the "Holy Spirit" they are just experiencing an emotional response to something and not having a supernatural experience.)

I appreciate you saying that. Yes, there's an emotion that is felt in the recognition of a self-sacrificing Love, which as a Christian is what I hold to be sacred, which is why it is called The Holy Spirit or the Spirit of The Christ. Having said that, I also want to be sure you know that I have never ever thought you would begrudge such a Love as a reality or that anyone would.

Again, you think I have confused emotion for the supernatural. I have not.

Okay, but I was just making a point that brotherly love is real, and I trust you know I was not meaning to suggest that you don't know that.

Sentiments are emotions and not relevant to my post dismissing the supernatural that started this sub-conversation. Please stop conflating them or confusing my meaning.

I was just trying to get our terms qualified to eliminate any misunderstandings in good faith. But you're absolutely right. Others don't get to say what you mean, and you or I don't get to say what others mean. Let's agree that hypocrisy is unreasonable, and therefore I will try not to conflate or confuse your meaning of superstition with emotion, and you will try not to conflate or confuse superstition with the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of Christ. Does that sound equitable?

 

[Hans Blaster]

I appreciate you saying that. Yes, there's an emotion that is felt in the recognition of a self-sacrificing Love which as a Christian I hold to be sacred, which is why it is called The Holy Spirit or the Spirit of The Christ. Having said that, I also want you to know that I have never ever thought you would begrudge such a Love as a reality or that anyone would.

I was under the impression that the "Holy Spirit" was some how part of God itself. Though I must confess that the trinity was not a concept I could only claim to hold understanding of for more than a few seconds. (Sort of like crossing my eyes.) As soon as I stopped trying I went back to my "Jesus was created by god as his son" view of things.

 

[childeye 2]

I was under the impression that the "Holy Spirit" was some how part of God itself. Though I must confess that the trinity was not a concept I could only claim to hold understanding of for more than a few seconds. (Sort of like crossing my eyes.) As soon as I stopped trying I went back to my "Jesus was created by god as his son" view of things.

Well, the trinity should not be so confusing. I don't currently feel compelled to go too deep into it. I will say that the Gospel is presenting a compassion/Love, that being Eternal, suffered the ultimate humiliation in a temporal wicked world and was never compromised.

The term God in scripture is axiomatic meant to represent the source of the energy that created all things. There is no other imagery other than what we imagine in our own vanity. Subsequently, the Christ means the True Image of God that was sent by God to believe in and receive Eternal Life through faith/trust in this Image that He sent. That is the Father and the son. And the Holy Spirit testifies to both of them because it is the same love we all know as the goodness at the core of our being, the seat of our Character, which gets compromised in this world through unbelief/distrust/cynicism.