Sin, I don't believe in Sin.

[genkaus]

I realize what you are talking about, I'm simply pointing out that your position is baseless. You haven't given any arguments as to why we should believe that "there is such a thing as objective morality". You haven't justified you position. Further, morality is a mental phenomenon, not a physical one, thereby making it more likely to be subjective. As for your metaphor, its an invalid demonstration for the existence of objective morality. The question presumes the existence of such a thing as "sound", the same way your argument assumes such a thing as "objective morality".

I am assuming you don't believe in objective morality, correct?

I do. But my position is irrelevant to the discussion of the failings in yours.

---

Relativism, cultural relativism, emotivism, utilitarianism, etc. These philosophical theories don't provide any authority of what a person should or shouldn't do morally. One person or a group of people do not have authority over each other to say what is right or wrong. There has to be a transcending authority above humanity to give a moral law. If there is such a thing as evil, then there is such a thing as good. If there is good and evil then there has to be a moral law to differentiate the difference between the two. If there is a moral law then there has to be a moral law giver. Personal opinion can't have authority for a moral code, but the transcendent moral law giver does. Our Lord who has revealed himself through the Bible has made us in his image and written that moral code on our hearts.

A fine example for argument from consequence. Let me counter this by reductio ad absurdum.

If there is such a thing as distasteful food, then there is such a thing as delicious food. If delicious and distasteful food exist, then there has to be a taste law to differentiate between the two. If there is a taste law, then there is a taste law giver. Personal opinion does not have the authority to determine what is tasty and what is not, but a transcendent taster does.

Your argument fails for the very same reason this one does. Good and evil, like beauty and ugliness, taste or distaste, aromatic or odorous are may very well be matters of personal/collective preferences and subjective judgment and not require any transcendent authority to determine.

---

So lets start there. I like that. How do you know that what you perceive is reality???
I know because God has made me in his image and given me a brain that can reason logically like he does and senses that can be trusted.

And how exactly do you "know" that? How do you know that your senses can be trusted, that there is a god who looks like you?

I won't ask you about thinking logically because.. well, you don't.