God and Morality: Separate Issues

[DeistPaladin]

Captain Scarlet has already dealt with the first part of Ryft's post so I'll proceed to the next.

Incidentally, I am still waiting for those academic sources you were to dig up showing that any Christian apologists have argued "God is morality"—although you are free to admit that you actually had no academic sources, that you were basing your critique on arguments made by vidiots on YouTube.

I'm happy to concede that Theologica37 is a vidiot as well as being an amateur apologist that I busted for lying. A "capable apologist" would be a lot more slick and mask his lies with more skill.

Incidentally, you're harping on a point already conceded and corrected. This is a sign of insecurity in your own position, a tactic used by someone looking for a diversion and trying to go on the offensive rather than defend his own position. This tactic is noted and called out.

(And the will of God is included in the definition, despite your persistent attempts to dismiss the second half of my statement, which was, "and revealed prescriptively in his commands," that is, the will of God.)

God has made no such commands. Understand, when I as a deist say "God", I mean the Creator, not the spoiled, tantrum-throwing, blood-thirsty, genocidal, emotionally-unstable, brutal, scientifically-ignorant, narcissist found in your ancient superstitious badly-written rabbinic scribblings that you call a god.

Can we keep it clear by calling the Judeo-Christian god by his name "YHWH" or "Yahweh"?

Ah, this is an important point to clarify. I was speaking of the concept of God in the abstract, not necessarily any particular version of anyone's religion. ... I'd like to keep this discussion on whether or not a god is required for morality to exist.

You are trying to escape your own words. The very first paragraph of your post (Msg. 1) identified the context in which you were using the terms, when you said it was Christians recycling these arguments. At any rate, if God is a necessary precondition for morality, then it follows that "a god is required." Ergo, keeping this discussion on God accomplishes your stated goal.

The fact that I often hear Christians posing this argument is only because I mostly hear from Christian apologists. Were I in a Muslim country, I would doubtless hear the same argument from Muslims. If I wanted to refer to either god specifically, I would say "YHWH" or "Allah".

Again, if you wish to speak of the Christian god specifically, you can explain how your source of morality can endorse rape, genocide and the keeping of slaves.

Although you did see me write those things, you do not seem to realize that they are not arguments.

Let's go to the tape again:

DeistPaladin Wrote:
... I'm curious as to what argument you would use. ... How do you relate the two topics of morality and God's existence? Do tell.

Ryft Responded:
One that is either the same or very similar to the one that Stempy alluded to, that moral order is grounded in the very nature of God and revealed prescriptively in his commands.

See, that's called "taking a position," not begging the question. ... don't bandy about frivolous accusations of logical fallacies.

It is both, sir. The position you took simply begged the question against your Christian opponent. You assumed the truth of your presuppositions and reasoned to the conclusion they entail, simply begging the question against the presuppositions of those you are arguing against.

No I stated my position and then stated why I saw it that way. If I'm wrong, I've repeatedly invited you to provide counter-arguments.

And you still haven't explained how I was begging the question.

If I'm wrong or missing something, feel free to present your own counter-arguments ...

Your view simply does not matter, sir. Period.

This is a discussion of points of views. If my views are wrong, I'm inviting you to correct them with reasoned, well-supported counter-arguments. Pompous, dismissive hand-waving is not a substitute.