Theists, some questions

[GodsRevolt]

There is a connection if you believe everything god says must necessarily be moral; if you're going to automatically assume everything god says is morally justified, then you have no morals but what god tells you, and if god tells you something immoral- baby killing!- then you're bound to consider it moral regardless.

God says, "Do not lie," or I introspectively assess a situation and decide on my now that I should not lie. Both are moral.

The fallacy still holds.

Sure, but if your view is that, because god says this, it is moral, then you've divorced yourself from having any kind of moral conversation. You said it yourself: to you, "almighty makes right." So my question to you was, would you kill someone if ordered to by god. If you would, then you are clearly immoral, and our conversation is over. If you wouldn't, then you're demonstrating my point: morality has no connection with what god says, and at most, he's a messenger.

Because I get the feeling you blanch at the idea of murdering someone, on god's orders or not. Is that just down to the sin in your heart, or do you actually have a moral system that transcends the dictates of someone else, powerful or not?

You are right. I do not agree with murder, and Neither does God. It comes down to rights. When it is lying, do you have the right to the truth? I can assess this on my own, for instance if someone is trying to kill the people that are hiding in my basement. That someone has no right to find them them just to kill them, so I withhold the truth.

I have the right to my privacy. If a group of people decide one day that they want to break into my house without my consent, they are acting immoral because they are infringing on my rights. However, if there is evidence that I am doing something that is going to potentially be dangerous to the general population then, after going through the proper authorities, a warrant may be obtained and the proper people may enter my house without my consent. Because of my behavior that was observable by my fellow human beings it was determined that I sacrificed certain rights (right to privacy) in order for others to retain theirs (right to life or safety or whatever I was threatening).

Authority is important when it comes to morals. Someone needs to take the objective stance and maintain consistency.

I'm saying I'm more moral for assessing situations and dealing with them in accordance with an independent set of morals and physical facts, than the person who considers something moral because "god sez." I'm saying it's not a matter of a set of rules at all, but what's moral in a given context, scenario, and set of physical laws. You're opting to be blind to that, because the voice in your head decided something else.

Bold added.

I'm curious what the independent set of morals you are talking about are. This is no longer "subjective" like you mentioned before.

I also think that if you took some time with the Catechism of the Catholic Church you would see a lot of your morals lining up with those of the Church. And I mean as independent from the actions of the members of the Church. This is how I am able to maintain that the morality of the Church stands, by saying that those within the Church, at times, act immoral. Catholics are not free from their own moral codes just because they do not like them. Catholics have been just as immoral as anyone else, but we know this because the moral standards have not changed.

---

This is not, "might makes right." This is "God created you, knows you for who you are and who you could be, and knows what is best for you even before you know it."

Just to be clear, this is why we cannot judge god's actions as immoral, even if the action in question is absolutely immoral for a human?

We cannot judge God's actions as immoral because He has understanding that we do not. He acts for the greatest good, the big picture, past-present-future from before you were ever born and long after you have died and faced Him.

He has a little more insight than us.