(June 29, 2018 at 6:39 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(June 29, 2018 at 6:38 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: It doesn't really follow in my opinion, because if God is the source of morality and he must be morally good then how can you place moral obligations on that god in premise #2, aren't all of his moral decisions objectively good as you established in premise #1. Also if that god is the source of morality what morality are you using to form your moral judgments?

If I knew of a terrorist attack that was about to occur, it would be immoral for me not to reveal such to the authorities.

Yes but that doesn't really have anything to do do with the scenario you set up. You said god is the source of morality and he must be good, if that was a true statement how could you possibly question his morality?

(June 29, 2018 at 6:38 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: It doesn't really follow in my opinion, because if God is the source of morality and he must be morally good then how can you place moral obligations on that god in premise #2, aren't all of his moral decisions objectively good as you established in premise #1. Also if that god is the source of morality what morality are you using to form your moral judgments?

So you're completely ignoring the conclusion that ties it all together?

(June 29, 2018 at 6:45 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(June 29, 2018 at 6:39 pm)Jehanne Wrote: If I knew of a terrorist attack that was about to occur, it would be immoral for me not to reveal such to the authorities.

Yes but that doesn't really have anything to do do with the scenario you set up. You said god is the source of morality and he must be good, if that was a true statement how could you possibly question his morality?

In my major premise, I said "If..." and not "Since..."

(June 29, 2018 at 6:47 pm)Kit Wrote:

(June 29, 2018 at 6:38 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: It doesn't really follow in my opinion, because if God is the source of morality and he must be morally good then how can you place moral obligations on that god in premise #2, aren't all of his moral decisions objectively good as you established in premise #1. Also if that god is the source of morality what morality are you using to form your moral judgments?

So you're completely ignoring the conclusion that ties it all together?

  

 Premise 2 is in conflict with premise 1, therefore the conclusion couldn't possibly tie it together.

---

(June 29, 2018 at 6:48 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(June 29, 2018 at 6:45 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: Yes but that doesn't really have anything to do do with the scenario you set up. You said god is the source of morality and he must be good, if that was a true statement how could you possibly question his morality?

In my major premise, I said "If..." and not "Since..."

Makes no difference

(June 29, 2018 at 6:52 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:   

 Premise 2 is in conflict with premise 1, therefore the conclusion couldn't possibly tie it together.

Explain to me how a moral super being has no obligation to reveal morality in such a way to his creations that leaves no room for denial?

I get my morals from Superman.

(June 29, 2018 at 6:54 pm)Kit Wrote:

(June 29, 2018 at 6:52 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:   

 Premise 2 is in conflict with premise 1, therefore the conclusion couldn't possibly tie it together.

Explain to me how a moral super being has no obligation to reveal morality in such a way to his creations that leaves no room for denial?

If that god is the source of objective morality and they must be good, then what ever moral decision they chose must be good. That is the way the argument is set up.

(June 29, 2018 at 6:54 pm)Kit Wrote:

(June 29, 2018 at 6:52 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:   

 Premise 2 is in conflict with premise 1, therefore the conclusion couldn't possibly tie it together.

Explain to me how a moral super being has no obligation to reveal morality in such a way to his creations that leaves no room for denial?

"God" would not be a (morally) perfect being, if, in my goodness, I feel obligated to do certain things, whereas, God would have no such moral obligations?

(June 29, 2018 at 6:58 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: If that god is the source of objective morality and they must be good, then what ever moral decision they chose must be good. That is the way the argument is set up.

Incorrect. Your reading comprehension skills are for shit.

(June 29, 2018 at 6:58 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(June 29, 2018 at 6:54 pm)Kit Wrote: Explain to me how a moral super being has no obligation to reveal morality in such a way to his creations that leaves no room for denial?

If that god is the source of objective morality and they must be good, then what ever moral decision they chose must be good. That is the way the argument is set up.

I consider it to be a proof by contradiction.