Why Secular Morality is Superior

[genkaus]

Plato started off wrong when he wrote about socrates and euthyphro. He didn't know his creator and therefore grouped all "gods" under the same category. There is no dilemma for those who know the biblical God.

Yes, there is, since your biblical god puts himself in the same category as well.

Does anyone know the difference between Christianity and all other religions, including humanism and naturalism?

That humanism and naturalism are not religions.

The LORD does not command morality because it exists outside of him.
Cain murdered his brother Able in Gen 4 before God gave the command not to murder (Gen 9). Cain already knew he did wrong without God telling him after the fact. The reason is Cain and all human beings are made in the image of God and have a conscience (con - with/science - knowledge) given by him to know good. (Gen 1)

The biblical God does not randomly command morality either just because he likes or loves it.

Going back to Gen 4 the first murder by Cain. No command was ever given to not murder, yet Cain and Abel are both made in the image of God and therefore Cain is responsible to his maker for his actions. With the biblical God no commands need to be given by him in order for us to know not to murder. that's why there is no "euthyphro dilemma".

Sounds to me like you are getting squarely skewered on the first horn - godwillsit because it is good. And it can be known to be good without god's command.

How do I know that God is good?
Without the biblical God you can't have morality make sense. Nor any type of human experience. Sin wouldn't exist nor make any sense.
There is no vicious circular argument. It's a virtuous one and it comes from the bible as my ultimate standard for truth.

Its ironic you believe that because all your problems, dilemmas and contradictions exist because of your god. It is when one assumes that your god exists that we find all these problems popping all over the place. It is in your worldview that these things don't make sense, even though you desperately want them to and would like to pretend they do.

The "might equals right" is an evolutionary dilemma. The weak die out and the strong survive even if it means murder. But murder shouldn't even be considered evil according to evolution. This would cause a descriptive process to be prescriptive and make it impossible for morality to exist and a need for justice to be served.
In an evolution worldview acting like animals should be expected yet there is a behavioral inconsistency between humans and animals.
Do we put the lion in jail for killing the antelope? Why do we kill the cannibal in Florida for eating the homeless man?

Is that how you understand evolution? You poor deluded fool.

Who thinks they can tell me why murder is wrong apart from the biblical God?

I can tell you, but you seem incapable of understanding.

---

Perhaps some of them weren't meant to be laws of morality? They're more like guidelines for living for God.

Remember what Christians today believe. They don't care about sticking to old rituals too strictly, rather accepting Jesus.

There is a verse in the Bible(I'll look it up later) where Jesus says something about there is no "greater sin". Every sin is the same. A murder is the same as calling someone a fool. It's more based on conscious of what is right and wrong. If you conscious tells you it's wrong, it's wrong.

Its telling me that you are wrong. So very wrong if you think that calling someone a fool is as bad as killing them. If you really think like that then you really must be a moron, a fool and an idiot - wait, did I just kill you three times?

Do you know what the word "repent" means? That is what you're supposed to do when you commit a sin in Christianity. You ask for forgiveness and promise to never do it again.

Sounds like an easy out to me. There is no reprisals or reparations required. Imagine if the criminal justice system worked by the same standards.

I'm pretty sure it said no adultery. As for slavery, it says "obey your master". I know that sounds harsh but get this, slavery back then more like being a servant. It was nothing like the trianglular trade African slavery we think of. Genocide? Do not murder?

Really? Did the slaves of that time had the option of quitting their jobs, refusing some work they found outside their job description, calling the cops on their employers if they got abusive or suing their asses? If not, then it wasn't like being a servant.

And it's ironic that you'd mention genocide when your god personally ordered so many of them.

People who call themselves Christians aren't neccassarily Christians. Just cause they celebrate Christmas doesn't mean they follow the teachings. My school is full of Christians, and they're the nicest people I have ever met, no joke.

No true Scotsman much.

---

So you're saying a guy that celebrates Christmas yet does not in anyways try to accept God into his life is a Christian? Really?

How do you know that celebrating Christmas isn't his way of "accepting god"?