RE: Objective morality as a proper basic belief
July 12, 2017 at 5:07 pm
(This post was last modified: July 12, 2017 at 5:14 pm by SteveII.)
(July 12, 2017 at 4:20 pm)TheBeardedDude Wrote:(July 12, 2017 at 4:11 pm)SteveII Wrote: 1. I don't know what your point is.
2. God's abilities are not unlimited. Never claimed they were. It seems you are.
3. I never ever made that claim. Read my posts.
4. Got it.
5. The only time I used the word infinite was clearly in the context of always existing . If you want to say omnipotent or omniscient, use those words. It is you who are trying to cobble together a definition based on a misunderstanding of the word infinite.
1. I don't know what your point is.
Thought it was pretty clear. You've not demonstrated that the existence of a god requires morals to be objective.
2. God's abilities are not unlimited. Never claimed they were.
So your god is not all-powerful or all-knowing? Those are claims made of your god, whether or not you specifically said them here or not is irrelevant.
It seems you are.
Insults all you have?
3. I never ever made that claim. Read my posts.
I did and cited what you said and when. You should read your own posts it seems. In separate sentences and points, you've contradicted yourself. I suspect it is because you don't know how to properly use terms like "infinite." In fact...
5. The only time I used the word infinite was clearly in the context of always existing . If you want to say omnipotent or omniscient, use those words. It is you who are trying to cobble together a definition based on a misunderstanding of the word infinite.
This cements the fact that you don't know what the word "infinite" means. If you mean to say your god has always existed, the word you're looking for is "eternal."
If you would spend more time on reading comprehension and articulating your point instead of congratulating yourself on how smart you and your pals are, this would be a lot shorter.
1. Still confusing. The existence of God creates a set of objective moral standards. It does not require morals to be objective. There are many other moral systems . I'm sure the cannibals in Africa had some sort of moral code. Khemikal thinks harm is a good system. However, anything short of what I described is not objective.
2. Omnipotent? Yes. However, that word does not mean can do anything: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence#Meanings
Omniscient? Yes. God knows everything that can logically be known (including counterfactuals).
3. You misunderstood.
5. That is a better word. I will use 'eternal' in the future.
(July 12, 2017 at 4:40 pm)Inkfeather132 Wrote:(July 12, 2017 at 4:32 pm)SteveII Wrote: For ease of reference, I will number my points:
1. God's moral nature (characteristics) is an objective moral standard because it always existed, is unchanging, and each attribute is perfect. In other words, there could be no loving nature greater than God's, no merciful nature greater than God's, no greater justice than God's, etc.
2. God cannot make decisions or command anything contrary to his nature, so all of God's decisions and commands are moral.
3. God's commands are the source of our moral values and duties (two different things).
Notice the moral hierarchy: God's Nature --> God's Commands --> Our values and duties. This is an important distinction that most people are just skipping over.
Ok. What I'm understanding here is that his commands to us are constrained by his nature. So god won't tell us to do anything he wouldn't do himself? [1] And he would not forbid us from doing something that he does? [2]
1. Yes.
2. That does not logically follow. God has rights, authority, responsibility, knowledge, and perfect moral clarity that we do not have.
(July 12, 2017 at 4:45 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: If morals proceed god and can't create them then he does not understand them completely. By what means does he judge them moral . For all he's knows there not moral at all and he's not understanding them. Who still have not escaped the dilemma you just keep trying to wiggle around it.
None of the 3 things listed escape the dilemma. There just more of the same assertions . Arbitrary definitions . Arbitrary attributes . It's at least been 10 pages and nothing but the same .
I'm going with an omniscient God understands his nature. Then the rest of your post does not apply.
