Christian morality delusions

[The Grand Nudger]

---

Fun q for the theists in the thread.  Notice how many questions I've responded to without a single reference to a god?  Ask yourselves this...what would the addition of a god do for any of my answers?  What would the subtraction of a god cause to be lost?

---

I like the way you play devil's advocate... see there I go again referencing imaginary beings in casual conversation...
On the serious tip though, the subtraction of God from any equation, if He doesn't exist, would simplify communication. It would do the same even if He does exist, but would miss the point. You're completely entitled to live out an entire lifespan without God and can live a perfectly moral and societally productive life positively impacting all those around you without once needing God. My point was 200 years down the road will that impact mean the same thing to people in their rearview? Maybe you support the death penalty but in 200 years society sees it as atrocious and sees you as amoral. I posit a more objective morality than personal and societal morality. It can be a flying spaghetti monster, Satan, Rosanne or Zeus or the AI running the matrix. You probably don't see a need for that, but do you think an objective morality would improve societal and personal morality?

You don't posit an objective morality, at all, by positing a god. You're simply registering your displeasure with what you view to be the mistakes of "societal morality"...but since that morality was largely informed by the very same god you are invoking (as is your displeasure at the notion of societal morality).......you should probably take that up with him?

Meanwhile.......objective moral values do not require a god and a god adds nor subtracts anything to them.

As far as objective moral values being an improvement. In some ways I'd expect them to be, sure..in other ways, maybe not. Certainly would have put the kibosh on all this god says this and that business which lead to your dissatisfaction and subsequent misconceptions. One of the more amusing things about conceptualizing morality as objective..is that is produces a similar paradox in the case of tolerance or hedonism (and even refer -to- tolerance). It may be that conceptualizing them as "other-than" produces tolerance..which is (purportedly) good. So..insomuch as an objective morality reduces tolerance it might be objectively bad to advance an objective moral schema.

Might explain some of that nastiness, god nastiness included, eh?