Objective morality as a proper basic belief

[Astonished]

If you would spend more time on reading comprehension and articulating your point instead of congratulating yourself on how smart you and your pals are, this would be a lot shorter.

1. Still confusing. The existence of God creates a set of objective moral standards. It does not require morals to be objective. There are many other moral systems . I'm sure the cannibals in Africa had some sort of moral code. Khemikal thinks harm is a good system. However, anything short of what I described is not objective. 

2. Omnipotent? Yes. However, that word does not mean can do anything: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence#Meanings
Omniscient? Yes. God knows everything that can logically be known (including counterfactuals). 

3. You misunderstood. 

5. That is a better word. I will use 'eternal' in the future.

---

1. Yes.
2. That does not logically follow. God has rights, authority, responsibility, knowledge, and perfect moral clarity that we do not have.

---

I'm going with an omniscient God understands his nature. Then the rest of your post does not apply.

I'm tired of you being an insulting dickhead. Fuck off with your self-righteous pseudointellectual bullshit


Cheers
TheBeardedDude

*Applauds* Finally, someone realizes it's fruitless to argue with that dipfuck. When a person clearly does not understand their own intellectual failings, trying to educate them is hopeless.

Not going to specifically respond to any of what was going on the last handful of pages, but here's some shit I just feel like ranting about:

Free will does not exist. Free will requires the consent of those being granted free will and none were consulted about whether they wanted to exist to participate in this experiment or not. Informed consent also factors in, namely that we would have to all have perfect, unquestionable understanding of every facet of existence, including our creator and afterlife, and we have none of that, ergo if there are eternal consequences of a positive or negative nature, our ignorance of that inhibits our ability to make an informed choice about anything. Not to mention knowing that there IS a carrot-and-stick coercion is a direct violation of free will. Leaving us to figure out 'right' and 'wrong' on our own without regard to any external consequences would be the only true test of free will. So anyone using free will as an excuse for anything can shove it so far up their ass it could be used as a baby Xenomorph.

The only way in which an agent could be objective is if their actions never differed regardless of circumstance, and the identity of the agent committing one action or another was irrelevant. Because god says one thing and does another, that is clearly not objective (and flatly hypocritical). Fairness is also an issue that I personally find damning about the whole thing, as no god of any loving capacity would play favorites or even be capable of doing such, and yet that's practically all we see in that ham-handed stone-age tabloid. Also making love entirely conditional, what the fuck does that say about the nature of this insecure demon? Make the right capitulations or you don't get love or mercy...this is proof fucking positive that the heavily religious have no idea what the fuck love is, let alone morals. Fuck right off with that shit.

I would think that settles the damn matter but I'd bet dollars to donuts some asshole is going to ignore it or play some mental gymnastic game to make it sound like something they can actually argue.