Total Posts:182|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Objective morality

PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter
Hardtruthmerchant
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 7:01:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

You seem to know a lot about this topic, how about you set up the debate?
Fkkize
Posts: 2,223
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 7:45:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?
No.

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?
Sure.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 12:33:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Theological doctrine about morality can be subjective even if you believe in a god, since the only way of hoping to understand the deity is theology -- which is notoriously vague, ambiguous, inconsistent, and frequently full of ignorance, error and schismatically varied interpretations dealing with that.

However there's no reason to believe that morality without theology should be subjective in a modern world. We have excellent objective tools to ascertain our impacts, and there's not much doubt what welfare of the individual, of society and the species means, or that we can make common cause over this.

So our morality can be objective but emergent if we're willing to abandon the ignorant worship of poorly-conceived tradition that is theology.

In conclusion, the claim that nontheological morality is subjective, while popular among theologians, seems to me to be wrong --

-- twice.
JJ50
Posts: 2,145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 2:00:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

No human, however bad, is as evil as the Biblical deity!
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,680
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 2:12:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

Until some Uber-diety comes along, looks at God, His creation/play pen and politely asks:

"Whats this? No one gets to heaven except through You? Good deeds are not enough, it has to be about You? Why are you making covenants with creatures You can predict AND control? You were supposed to be discreet in Your sovereignty, not exacting worship. What good is that?!?!"
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
PureX
Posts: 1,975
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 2:48:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

"Objective morality" is a bit of a contradiction of terminology, as morality is inherently subjective. The "subjects" being we humans. So it doesn't really make much difference whether or not our subjective moral proclivities are based on God, pleasure, survival, ego, or whatever.

The closest thing I can think of to what could be labelled "objective morality" might be to presume natural processes, like evolution, to be expressions of some natural moral imperative. I don't believe they are, but I suppose one could believe it, and thus believe such a natural moral imperative to be an example of "objective morality". For example, one could interpret the natural evolutionary "rule" of survival of the fittest to be an objective moral imperative.
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 3:21:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 7:01:48 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

You seem to know a lot about this topic, how about you set up the debate?

It is one topic that the atheist chases his tail on. He has no fixed moral address, no best to determine and measure good from, outside of God that is, and he borrows from the Christian framework when he uses qualitative terms without realizing it. The atheist makes his own best based on what he likes, his preference. As G. K. Chesterton has pointed out, some like to love their enemies and some like to eat them, what is your preference? The atheist can espouse objective morals, as per Ruv, but that is just his subjective feelings on objective morality. In order to know objective morally, that something is actually objective true, it is necessary that an objective being reveals this to mankind. Without such a revelation mankind is stuck in their sea of relativism and lost in their might makes right, anything goes mentality, their smorgasbord of beliefs because their relative understanding is their measure and it is always changing. One year homosexual marriage is deemed "wrong" and the next year a law is passed favoring it. Everyone wants to justify their own belief as right and more reasonable than the next guy, or doesn't even care what the next guy believes because they are in a position to exert their beliefs over those beliefs of others. And you witness this kind of behavior in the news every day. I listed a couple of examples. Kim Jong-un and Putin have put themselves in the place of God; they have made themselves gods. That makes them particularly dangerous because of the iron grip of power they hold on their countrymen and because of the nuclear capabilities they control. Kim Jong-un just eliminates those in his country who get in his way. Such people are bullies who want to get their own way. As the leader(s) goes/go so goes the country.

Knowledge without wisdom is foolishness.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 3:26:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 2:00:37 PM, JJ50 wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

No human, however bad, is as evil as the Biblical deity!

In your relative opinion. Why is your opinion "right"? What is the fixed measure that you base your absolute statements upon? You mention evil and use the qualitative term "bad." What is "bad" measured against? Whose subjective standard do you use or can you reference an objective one?

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 3:36:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 2:12:29 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

Until some Uber-diety comes along, looks at God, His creation/play pen and politely asks:

"Whats this? No one gets to heaven except through You? Good deeds are not enough, it has to be about You? Why are you making covenants with creatures You can predict AND control? You were supposed to be discreet in Your sovereignty, not exacting worship. What good is that?!?!"

God is the standard, not man. God is the Creator, not man. God is omniscient, not man. God is worthy of worship, man is not.

The problem is that the creature wants to dictate to the Creator what is and what is not with insufficient knowledge to do so because his mind is limited and subject to change. Life is fleeting and man wastes it in his own fruitless pursuits by thinking he is the measure of all things - the problem is each to his own measure. Confusion is his epitaph.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 3:41:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 2:48:22 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

"Objective morality" is a bit of a contradiction of terminology, as morality is inherently subjective. The "subjects" being we humans. So it doesn't really make much difference whether or not our subjective moral proclivities are based on God, pleasure, survival, ego, or whatever.

The closest thing I can think of to what could be labelled "objective morality" might be to presume natural processes, like evolution, to be expressions of some natural moral imperative. I don't believe they are, but I suppose one could believe it, and thus believe such a natural moral imperative to be an example of "objective morality". For example, one could interpret the natural evolutionary "rule" of survival of the fittest to be an objective moral imperative.

Thanks for your subjective opinion! Better do some more thinking. What makes your subjective opinion true?

How is a process that is not mindful or personal moral? Evolutionists keep giving human or personal qualities to mindless matter that does not have intent or purpose.

Peter
Heterodox
Posts: 317
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 3:47:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

What is considered good/bad is always subjective.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,680
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 3:50:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 3:36:10 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 2:12:29 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

Until some Uber-diety comes along, looks at God, His creation/play pen and politely asks:

"Whats this? No one gets to heaven except through You? Good deeds are not enough, it has to be about You? Why are you making covenants with creatures You can predict AND control? You were supposed to be discreet in Your sovereignty, not exacting worship. What good is that?!?!"

God is the standard, not man. God is the Creator, not man. God is omniscient, not man. God is worthy of worship, man is not.

The problem is that the creature wants to dictate to the Creator what is and what is not with insufficient knowledge to do so because his mind is limited and subject to change. Life is fleeting and man wastes it in his own fruitless pursuits by thinking he is the measure of all things - the problem is each to his own measure. Confusion is his epitaph.

And yet man can still recognize authority and God in all man's insufficient knowledge and confusion.

How conviiiieeeeeeeeenient.

Now, back up the truck. "The Measure of all Things" is done by MAN? Seriously? Its religion that claims Man is a special snow flake in God's eyes, the entirety of creation was made FOR MAN, and God and the Devil are competing for man's attention, and then in the same breath says "Well, man is full of hubris". That some how, its man's souls that go to heaven, and other animals don't, because of... um... reasons. Where is your opinion coming from, exactly?


Peter
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 3:57:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 2:48:22 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

"Objective morality" is a bit of a contradiction of terminology, as morality is inherently subjective. The "subjects" being we humans. So it doesn't really make much difference whether or not our subjective moral proclivities are based on God, pleasure, survival, ego, or whatever.

The closest thing I can think of to what could be labelled "objective morality" might be to presume natural processes, like evolution, to be expressions of some natural moral imperative. I don't believe they are, but I suppose one could believe it, and thus believe such a natural moral imperative to be an example of "objective morality". For example, one could interpret the natural evolutionary "rule" of survival of the fittest to be an objective moral imperative.

I should explain myself a little more in my critique of you. You make these broad sweeping statements that depend on something being objective. You say:

""Objective morality" is a bit of a contradiction of terminology, as morality is inherently subjective."

Here is a statement claiming truth based on what unchanging bases or reference point; your own human feelings, your opinion, your preference, your likes?

For this qualitative statement to be true it would have to be objective, yet you have already admitted that morality is subjective, so the statement is subjective and is no better than any other subjective statement because it lacks an objective reference point. It is a self refuting statement. It refutes itself because it is contradictory and not sufficient to know truth because it lacks the basis for truth, something that is unchanging. For relativists "good/right" can mean anything morally, but in order to use qualitative terms you have borrow from the Christian's standard that claims the necessary criteria for objectivity, omniscient Being.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:09:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 3:50:31 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 8/22/2015 3:36:10 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 2:12:29 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:56:55 AM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

Until some Uber-diety comes along, looks at God, His creation/play pen and politely asks:

"Whats this? No one gets to heaven except through You? Good deeds are not enough, it has to be about You? Why are you making covenants with creatures You can predict AND control? You were supposed to be discreet in Your sovereignty, not exacting worship. What good is that?!?!"

God is the standard, not man. God is the Creator, not man. God is omniscient, not man. God is worthy of worship, man is not.

The problem is that the creature wants to dictate to the Creator what is and what is not with insufficient knowledge to do so because his mind is limited and subject to change. Life is fleeting and man wastes it in his own fruitless pursuits by thinking he is the measure of all things - the problem is each to his own measure. Confusion is his epitaph.

And yet man can still recognize authority and God in all man's insufficient knowledge and confusion.

With the Fall of man Adam basically decided to do things his way rather than God's way and God gave him the choice after warning him of the consequences. History is God's demonstration that man cannot know right outside of God.

How conviiiieeeeeeeeenient.


Now, back up the truck. "The Measure of all Things" is done by MAN? Seriously? Its religion that claims Man is a special snow flake in God's eyes, the entirety of creation was made FOR MAN, and God and the Devil are competing for man's attention, and then in the same breath says "Well, man is full of hubris". That some how, its man's souls that go to heaven, and other animals don't, because of... um... reasons. Where is your opinion coming from, exactly?

Without God man is the measure. You are judging God, you a mere man. Who made you God?

God does not compete with the devil. I believe the devil has been judged. Only his influence still remains.

My opinion is based on what is necessary for objective morality. Without an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, unchanging Being who gives a carp what you or I think. In the big picture it means nothing what you or I think, unless there is a God who created us. The universe does not care, nor can it.

Here you are making all these moral distinctions based on what fixed measure? They are meaningless without God because why is your subjective opinion any "Better" than anyone else? It is not without God. You can force it on others but what makes that better? Hitler forced his on others, so does Putin and the leader of North Korea, based on subjective personal preference. Why is what they like better than what you like because without God you base morality on likes, on feelings, on preference.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:11:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 3:47:47 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

What is considered good/bad is always subjective.

Thanks for your meaningless subjective opinion! A dim a dozen.

Peter
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 24,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:12:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another.

We are subject to morality, not morality to us.
Mark Twain had the right idea when he said:

"There is something fascinating about science; you get such a wholesale amount of speculation from such a trifling amount of fact".

Galatians 5:18 "Furthermore, if you are being led by spirit, you are not under law."
annanicole
Posts: 20,546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:14:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:12:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another.

Huh? That makes no sense.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 24,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:14:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:11:23 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 3:47:47 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

What is considered good/bad is always subjective.

Thanks for your meaningless subjective opinion! A dim a dozen.

Peter

Your "talk to the hand" Avatar, is very appropriate, lol.
Mark Twain had the right idea when he said:

"There is something fascinating about science; you get such a wholesale amount of speculation from such a trifling amount of fact".

Galatians 5:18 "Furthermore, if you are being led by spirit, you are not under law."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 24,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:17:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:14:05 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:12:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another.

Huh? That makes no sense.

To you maybe not, but it does to those who have any understanding of people's feelings.
Mark Twain had the right idea when he said:

"There is something fascinating about science; you get such a wholesale amount of speculation from such a trifling amount of fact".

Galatians 5:18 "Furthermore, if you are being led by spirit, you are not under law."
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:22:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:17:22 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:14:05 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:12:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another.

Huh? That makes no sense.

To you maybe not, but it does to those who have any understanding of people's feelings.

I use sarcasm to emphasis a point. It brings the point home quickly. These people are applying a standard that cannot be justified because God is necessary to justify it, and not any old god but the God who is real.

Peter
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,680
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:23:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Yes, without God as that reference point how do you arrive at good? It can mean anything. We see the effects of subjective morality with dictators such as in North Korea, a country in the news. We see it with Putin in Russia, Obama in the USA. Where do these people get their moral rightness from? They ignore what the Bible teaches. They have their own agenda. Most people have their own agenda to a great extent. Why it is right? Who says?

Peter

Until some Uber-diety comes along, looks at God, His creation/play pen and politely asks:

"Whats this? No one gets to heaven except through You? Good deeds are not enough, it has to be about You? Why are you making covenants with creatures You can predict AND control? You were supposed to be discreet in Your sovereignty, not exacting worship. What good is that?!?!"

God is the standard, not man. God is the Creator, not man. God is omniscient, not man. God is worthy of worship, man is not.

The problem is that the creature wants to dictate to the Creator what is and what is not with insufficient knowledge to do so because his mind is limited and subject to change. Life is fleeting and man wastes it in his own fruitless pursuits by thinking he is the measure of all things - the problem is each to his own measure. Confusion is his epitaph.

And yet man can still recognize authority and God in all man's insufficient knowledge and confusion.

With the Fall of man Adam basically decided to do things his way rather than God's way and God gave him the choice after warning him of the consequences. History is God's demonstration that man cannot know right outside of God.

Apparently he couldn't know it "with" God, either.

How conviiiieeeeeeeeenient.


Now, back up the truck. "The Measure of all Things" is done by MAN? Seriously? Its religion that claims Man is a special snow flake in God's eyes, the entirety of creation was made FOR MAN, and God and the Devil are competing for man's attention, and then in the same breath says "Well, man is full of hubris". That some how, its man's souls that go to heaven, and other animals don't, because of... um... reasons. Where is your opinion coming from, exactly?

Without God man is the measure. You are judging God, you a mere man. Who made you God?

Assuming God exists as you describe, why do I need to be anything other than what I am to judge Him?

God does not compete with the devil. I believe the devil has been judged. Only his influence still remains.

Semantics. Both parties "influence" to their own designs.


My opinion is based on what is necessary for objective morality. Without an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, unchanging Being who gives a carp what you or I think. In the big picture it means nothing what you or I think, unless there is a God who created us. The universe does not care, nor can it.

And you derived the 3 "omines" from the Bible? .... I see. Why would an entity necessarialy be "omnipresent"? Isn't that a redundant function to "omniscient"? Why would an omniscient being have need of a new AND old covenant? Do you feel omnipotence can create paradoxes?

Here you are making all these moral distinctions based on what fixed measure? They are meaningless without God because why is your subjective opinion any "Better" than anyone else?

And the worst part: it doesn't need to be "better". It just needs to give a reason why rules should apply equally as opposed to the few with regards to behavior. From there, humans, a reasonable creature, can determine if it should be adhered to.

You can force it on others but what makes that better? Hitler forced his on others, so does Putin and the leader of North Korea, based on subjective personal preference.

Which is demonstrably hypocritical as "rules".

Why is what they like better than what you like because without God you base morality on likes, on feelings, on preference.

Because its NOT hypocritical. Its not a "do as I say, not as I do", or worse, "Do as I say, not as a do, but when I do engage in it, it MUST be right and holy because I am always right and holy, so sayeth the book I gave you, written by me".


Peter
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:23:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:14:07 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:11:23 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 3:47:47 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

What is considered good/bad is always subjective.

Thanks for your meaningless subjective opinion! A dim a dozen.

Peter

Your "talk to the hand" Avatar, is very appropriate, lol.

Ditto!
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 24,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:30:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:23:51 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:14:07 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:11:23 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 3:47:47 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

What is considered good/bad is always subjective.

Thanks for your meaningless subjective opinion! A dim a dozen.

Peter

Your "talk to the hand" Avatar, is very appropriate, lol.

Ditto!

I know mine is, that's why I chose it. Not sure you realise the true significance of yours, lol.
Mark Twain had the right idea when he said:

"There is something fascinating about science; you get such a wholesale amount of speculation from such a trifling amount of fact".

Galatians 5:18 "Furthermore, if you are being led by spirit, you are not under law."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 24,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:37:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:22:24 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:17:22 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:14:05 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:12:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another.

Huh? That makes no sense.

To you maybe not, but it does to those who have any understanding of people's feelings.

I use sarcasm to emphasis a point. It brings the point home quickly. These people are applying a standard that cannot be justified because God is necessary to justify it, and not any old god but the God who is real.

Peter

God is not necessary to justify it.

Concern for your fellow man should be motivation enough.

Jehovah just makes it easier by pointing out problems we humans are too dumb to recognise on our own.

However, as Jesus pointed out to the Pharisee who asked him what the most important command was, you cannot truly show proper love for Jehovah without showing sufficient love for your fellow man.

That is why Jesus quoted the two when only asked for one.

Side question.

Why did Jesus say it fulfilled the prophets? I wonder if you can work that out, though knowing your beliefs as I do, I doubt it.

Jehovah has infinitely more foresight than we do, and so can see the wider effects of our decisions, and further into the future also.
Mark Twain had the right idea when he said:

"There is something fascinating about science; you get such a wholesale amount of speculation from such a trifling amount of fact".

Galatians 5:18 "Furthermore, if you are being led by spirit, you are not under law."
annanicole
Posts: 20,546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 4:49:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:17:22 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:14:05 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:12:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another.

Huh? That makes no sense.

To you maybe not, but it does to those who have any understanding of people's feelings.

Whether or not someone has "any understanding of people's feelings" makes no difference.

The fact that my behavior ... or your behavior ... or anyone else's behavior affects those around me, or you, or them has nothing to do with whether morality is objective. Yet you say, "Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 24,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 5:00:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:49:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:17:22 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:14:05 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:12:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another.

Huh? That makes no sense.

To you maybe not, but it does to those who have any understanding of people's feelings.

Whether or not someone has "any understanding of people's feelings" makes no difference.

The fact that my behavior ... or your behavior ... or anyone else's behavior affects those around me, or you, or them has nothing to do with whether morality is objective. Yet you say, "Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another."

In fact it is what makes morality objective. Didn't think you would understand that.
Mark Twain had the right idea when he said:

"There is something fascinating about science; you get such a wholesale amount of speculation from such a trifling amount of fact".

Galatians 5:18 "Furthermore, if you are being led by spirit, you are not under law."
annanicole
Posts: 20,546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 5:05:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 5:00:48 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:49:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:17:22 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:14:05 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:12:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another.

Huh? That makes no sense.

To you maybe not, but it does to those who have any understanding of people's feelings.

Whether or not someone has "any understanding of people's feelings" makes no difference.

The fact that my behavior ... or your behavior ... or anyone else's behavior affects those around me, or you, or them has nothing to do with whether morality is objective. Yet you say, "Morality is always objective, since the way you behave affects everyone around you in one way or another."

In fact it is what makes morality objective. Didn't think you would understand that.

It's not that you present some esoteric fact that I just can't comprehend. It's the fact that what you wrote isn't true in the first place. You are saying this:

"What I do affects others. Conclusion: morality must be objective"

That's sheer nonsense of the unadulterated variety.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
PGA
Posts: 4,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2015 5:27:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/22/2015 4:30:15 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:23:51 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:14:07 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 8/22/2015 4:11:23 PM, PGA wrote:
At 8/22/2015 3:47:47 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/22/2015 5:03:46 AM, Hardtruthmerchant wrote:
Does morality become subjective without a transcendent anchor (a God)?

Anyone up 4 a debate on this topic?

What is considered good/bad is always subjective.

Thanks for your meaningless subjective opinion! A dim a dozen.

Peter

Your "talk to the hand" Avatar, is very appropriate, lol.

Ditto!

I know mine is, that's why I chose it. Not sure you realise the true significance of yours, lol.

The symbol can mean various things depending on how you wish to interpret it. It can signify "STOP" or "Halt" or "Talk to the hand" or a wave or many other things, I'm sure.

Peter