(October 24, 2016 at 11:13 pm)Soldat Du Christ Wrote:(October 24, 2016 at 5:18 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: You were the one who proposed that there are better explanations than brute fact, it's up to you to provide one. Again you're operating from a principle which states that they have an explanation and that explanation is God. So far the only evidence you've put forward for this proposition was an argument from ignorance which failed. If you think God is a good explanation for objectivity, then show it. Don't whine about what I haven't provided.
Morality is not objective. Add this to the pile of things for which you need some evidence.
You have a lot of assumptions about how I should behave. I accept logic provisionally. You'd do well to spend more time proving your claims than opining about what I do.
You've lumped many things together not all of which belong together. I'll accept that logic is objective for the sake of argument. I don't agree that morality is objective, but let's say for the sake of argument that it is. How does that get us to God? What role does God play in this?
After all other options have been rendered impossible, what remains is the answer. The natural world cannot justify its own existence. Absolutes, moral duties, immaterial laws, work much the same way, demanding a trancedent cause. Something above and beyond the natural order
Did you ever answer my question about what justifies God? If so, point to page please. If not, answer it!
