Go back
The Moral Argument for God's Existence

The Moral Argument for God's Existence

Spirituality

c

Joined
26 Dec 14
Moves
35596
Clock
07 Nov 18

@lemonjello said
How about you just go back and re-read those threads (plural) where we already had this exact discussion. It's not my problem that you seem simply ineducable when it comes to the topic of secular ethics.

And by the way, an objective standard of morality would be one not based on any opinion at all – including any opinions of your God, supposing He exists. Of course, y ...[text shortened]... e than not. I'm fairly confident you have none. That's why you continually resort to lame tactics.
I agree 100%, thumbs up.

This thread has turned into a mere ping pong match of who can say "objective" and "subjective" the most, with NO points being made.

And endless questions.

Ghost of a Duke

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
29599
Clock
07 Nov 18
Vote Up
Vote Down

@chaney3 said
I agree 100%, thumbs up.

This thread has turned into a mere ping pong match of who can say "objective" and "subjective" the most, with NO points being made.

And endless questions.
Agreed.

You have permission sir to remove your 'Bring it on' tagline and replace it with 'Sporadically insightful.'

c

Joined
26 Dec 14
Moves
35596
Clock
07 Nov 18

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Agreed.

You have permission sir to remove your 'Bring it on' tagline and replace it with 'Sporadically insightful.'
When you consume a delicious meatloaf sandwich, and save the cucumbers for a salad, we'll talk.

Until then, "bring it on"!!!

😀

Ghost of a Duke

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
29599
Clock
07 Nov 18

@chaney3 said
When you consume a delicious meatloaf sandwich, and save the cucumbers for a salad, we'll talk.

Until then, "bring it on"!!!

😀
Meatloaf is the moral argument for God's non-existence.

dj2becker

Joined
01 Oct 04
Moves
12095
Clock
07 Nov 18

@chaney3 said
I agree 100%, thumbs up.

This thread has turned into a mere ping pong match of who can say "objective" and "subjective" the most, with NO points being made.

And endless questions.
If there is nothing objectively wrong with alcohol abuse I wonder why everyone is encouraging you to sort out your drinking problem. If no objective morals exist surely you’re entitled to be a drunk or whatever else you want to be? The point is we all know that certain things such as alchol abuse are always wrong but the atheists won’t admit it because their belief system doesn’t cater for moral absolutes.

Ghost of a Duke

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
29599
Clock
07 Nov 18

Ignore the troll Chaney. People are encouraging you to cut out the alcohol for your health, not as a moral judgement, objective or otherwise.

dj2becker

Joined
01 Oct 04
Moves
12095
Clock
07 Nov 18

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Ignore the troll Chaney. People are encouraging you to cut out the alcohol for your health, not as a moral judgement, objective or otherwise.
Do you believe there is nothing morally wrong with someone destroying their own health? Where do you draw the line? Is suicide also morally acceptable to you?

Suzianne
Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
37387
Clock
07 Nov 18

@wolfgang59 said
Omitting a verse entirely!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_Testament_verses_not_included_in_modern_English_translations
That's nothing, entire books have been left out because they were 'inconvenient'.

dj2becker

Joined
01 Oct 04
Moves
12095
Clock
08 Nov 18
1 edit

@dj2becker said
‘By its nature, interpretation of the Bible is subjective.No objective interpretation of the Bible. No objective moral standard.’

Is the above statement subjective or objective? If it is subjective how do you know that it is true?
‘Objective’ means ‘not influenced by personal feelings or opinions’.

Not a single word in the Bible was written based on my personal feelings or opinions. In that sense it is an objective standard to me. If the Bible says something I have to accept it regardless of my personal feelings or opinions on the matter.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
Clock
08 Nov 18
1 edit

@divegeester

Me:

I don't think Genesis 1 and 2 is an exhaustive explanation or description of how God created everything.
You think!

You:
You think!

If your point is that that should be obvious, I agree.

I pay careful attention to how the two accounts of man's creation agree. And THIS I take away as probably the main concept the writer is conveying.

Whether man was made last after all the other animals. (Gen. 2) OR man was made first before all the other creatures (Gen. 1) BOTH chapters agree that human beings are topmost.

Human beings, though AMONG all the other creatures, has a special relationship with God and purpose from God which is at the pinnacle of meaning - a kind crown of creation.

All other things are made with man's special place before God in view. It seems to me deliberate that Moses put side by side two accounts which AGREE on this central point.

It is a "Don't Miss the Point" moment. I think then one of the main points of Genesis 1,2 is the centrality of humanity for a special purpose of God. We can afford that a hundred thousand other minor details are left ambiguous.

Don't miss that man was created in the image of God according to the likeness of God and transcends all the other creatures over which he was intended by God to have dominion for God.

Since you're interested in what I think.

You think!

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
09 Nov 18
Vote Up
Vote Down

@dj2becker said
If there is nothing objectively wrong with alcohol abuse I wonder why everyone is encouraging you to sort out your drinking problem. If no objective morals exist surely you’re entitled to be a drunk or whatever else you want to be? The point is we all know that certain things such as alchol abuse are always wrong but the atheists won’t admit it because their belief system doesn’t cater for moral absolutes.
This makes no sense at all.
Firstly you say EVERYONE is encouraging people to sort out their drinking problem,
then you say "alchol abuse are always wrong but the atheists won’t admit it".

What do you mean?

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
09 Nov 18
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

@Suzianne

As I previously stated. Whole Books have been omitted.

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
09 Nov 18

@dj2becker said
Not a single word in the Bible was written based on my personal feelings or opinions. In that sense it is an objective standard to me.
So if I write something not based on your personal feelings
or opinions it will be an objective standard to you?

If not - why do you give preference to the bible over my word?
Maybe it is your personal preference and subjective opinion.

KellyJay
Walk your Faith

USA

Joined
24 May 04
Moves
160324
Clock
09 Nov 18
Vote Up
Vote Down

@wolfgang59 said
So if I write something not based on your personal feelings
or opinions it will be an objective standard to you?

If not - why do you give preference to the bible over my word?
Maybe it is your personal preference and subjective opinion.
For me it would be no different than taking your word over how long an inch is versus a standard yardstick.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
09 Nov 18

@kellyjay said
For me it would be no different than taking your word over how long an inch is versus a standard yardstick.
Fair enough. And that's the point. You choosing "whose word to take" for it is a subjective thing. Our moral compasses are subjective tools that help guide us through the dilemmas of our everyday lives.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.