(March 13, 2016 at 4:13 am)bennyboy Wrote:(March 12, 2016 at 11:22 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I feel like I have already addressed this though.
I don't have some sort of alternate definition for the word "Morality". By its dictionary term, it is defined as "principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior." I'm on board with this and wouldn't define it any differently. The objective part is my belief that God has established between what is "right and wrong, and good and bad", and it is a real distinction. Not a matter of opinion.
(Off topic here for a second, I don't like the condescending/rude way you talk to me. I'll probably stop responding because I don't enjoy talking to someone who is consistently rude to me. Sorry, just not in the mood.)
If you feel I'm being rude, please consider this. We are over 100 pages into this thread made by you about objective morality, and you still haven't explained why you think morality is objective. I don't think I was rude while you avoided supporting your beliefs with reasons or supporting evidence for like the first 60 pages, but at this point I feel I'm justified in pressing a little.
Yes, I do think the way you said it on the first post was rude and condescending. And I think you know that. This new post of yours on the other hand, is neither of those things.
Again, I'm not here to support my beliefs with evidence. I have said that multiple times. I have also said I don't have evidence that I can demonstrate to anyone. I can say why objective morality makes sense to me, and the video I posted on the OP explains it pretty well, but I can't give you evidence because I don't have any.
Quote:You say God made objective morals. Why do you think God is real, and why do you think He has made objective morals? Do you even HAVE a reason for believing these things? See, my "condescending" post was designed to show how ideas, reasons, and supporting evidence can clarify one's position.
I feel like I have already addressed these questions.
1. Why do I think God is real?
That's a question I've answered multiple times already in this thread. It's a mix of things. There's no way I can sum it all up in an online forum, especially since I'm so bad with words. The video explains part of it. I'd say the biggest part of it is due to a supernatural experience I had. I have explained this in more detail earlier on in the thread. If you care to find it, go for it.
2. Why do I think He "made" objective morals?
Perhaps that wasn't the best way to put it. As I said in my last post to you, morals are sets of principles concerning the distinction between good and evil. Everything God created is good. Evil is the absence of good. When we do something good, that's moral. When we do something bad, that's immoral. He didn't "create" morality directly. He created good. Evil is the absence of good. Free will gives us the choice between the 2, and the principles concerning the distinction between them is morality. So while morality is directly tied to Him and dependent on Him in that way, perhaps having said He "created it" wasn't the best choice of words.
3. Do I have reasons for believing these things?
See answer to question one.
Quote: Here's what I think. I think the reason you don't answer my question is that you don't have an answer-- you don't HAVE any logical reason to believe in God, or any evidence that He exists, much less that He has made an objective moral code. I think you are blaming me for condescension because it allows you to dodge the responsibility of the OP of a thread to support his/her ideas, and still come up smelling like roses.
What question did I not answer? I have answered all your questions. You just don't like my answers, and keep saying I don't have evidence to support them. Yes, that is correct. I don't. I have said as much, repeatedly.
No, I'm blaming you for being condescending because that's what you've been in many of your posts to me. Not this one though. Except for maybe that last part about smelling like roses, but still a major improvement from your last post before this one.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
