Man's morality

[Drich]

And the reason for those actions?
Acts in of themselves are meaningless, it is why we do what we do that determines the 'moral value' of an action.
Which is why i keep point to the perservation of a life style as the primary reason for abortion.

So intent can make an action moral or immoral?

Yes

That would make him god, once removed.

what are you talking about here?

You are comparing god (who kills people directly or through agents acting on his specific orders) with someone who expresses approval of the killing done by others. Thus, those people aren't directly comparable to god, they are comparable to the people who approve of god's actions.
[/quote]
:thumbsup:

---

This isn't really a response... just a veiled insult.

there was no veil. Just an observation that points to a negitive attribute in the way you seem to think.

How did you come to this conclusion?

Because there is no evidence. Please...

God provides evendicence to all of those who A/S/K as we have been instructed.

present it if you have such.

I can show you where to look if you wish, but your receiving evidence is based on your ablity and willingness to follow instructions.

We've all been waiting for thousands of years.

You and people like you have been waiting. Me and people Like me have found what God offers.

This is exactly why i was looking for the defination of God's Righteousness/Morality from you.

I cannot define something that doesn't exist. I cannot tell you what the easter bunny is thinking either. Or what unicorns taste like.

Then how, oh how is it possiable for you to tell me what it isn't? How can you say anything for or against it? Yet isn't that what your efforts here are based on?

You still don't seem to understand the basic division between Man's morality and God's righteousness otherwise you would not have lead with this arguement.

Actually I do. Man's morality depends widely on the specific culture. There are very few universal morals. I think murder in cold blood is probably frowned upon in all cultures. Going back as far as Mesopotamian culture we find evidence that man has had laws about murder. However, what makes it murder, just, or unjust varies. If someone raped my daughter and then gave me 30 pieces of silver in attempt to buy her... I'd kill them. And in our culture there would be a strong case for my defense as a father emotionally disturbed by his child's assault. In Archaic Jew land I would have been in the wrong as the rapist did what was right to make up for the rape. And I'd probably be stoned to death for going against God's law.

So morality varies by culture. GOD... at this point... is an invention of man. No such being has ever been proven to exist. So any attributes of this character are simply a work of fiction and have no bearing on real world moral considerations.

Then why engage in this discussion if you understand that man's morality is an ever changing standard based on soceity and the times we live in?

It isn't based on anything. It's fiction.

Even if it were it is still based on the absolutes defined or provided by said fiction. If we were having a conversation about Thor verses the Hulk both are works of marvel fiction and as such if we were to remain true to the discussion we would have to observe the rules set fourth by the cannon in said fiction.

The discussion I am having here is not to discern the legitmacy of one 'morality' over another. I have said over and over again that man's morality is not a standard quipt to be used to judge God's morality. Take it how you like (Meaning this is your chance to dismiss what you do not know how to argue.) Because our moral standards are based on the idea that acts themselves have a right and wrong value. this is not the case with God's righteousness. God's righteousness is based on attonement leaving why you do what you do the deciding factor on what is and is not judged righteous.

Not so. Is it ok to have sex with a child if the child goes willingly? Our culture says no.

Our culture defines a child as anyone under the age of 18. If two 13 to17 years olds get married and have sex willingly there is nothing wrong with that despite what your culture says.

Talk to some American Jews. They honor the tradition but no Jewish mother is sending her 13 year old boy out in the wilderness.

I guess you are just not jewie enough, and just missed out. however that does not mean all jewish boys/men must follow your path.

http://www.wildernesstorah.org/programs/...f-passage/