Objective morality as a proper basic belief

[SteveII]

Certainly some commands are specific to a people, time, nation or objective. 

In what way are such commands objective?  As in, why would it be "moral" for one band of raiders to go off a-viking in the Levant.....but not some other?  [1]

Double standard implies that you both have the same standing. You don't.

An objective standard necessitates that there is no consideration of a subjects "standing".  That's the -entire- premise of an objective morality.  This comment, alone, represents a categorical failure to understand the subject matter.  Relative "standing" is the territory of subjective moralities, wherein something is variously right or wrong or both at once based not upon the object of discussion, the moral fact of a matter, but something about the subject in question - the purported moral agent. [2]

Objectivity requires that the standards not be influences by things that change (opinion, circumstance, etc.), The eternal nature of God is such a thing and so is clearly objective. Since our moral values and duties stem from the nature of God (via God's commands--because otherwise we would not be aware of them or how to apply them), they are objectively moral. 

Just stop talking about objective standards of morality, you clearly have no idea what that term means, not fundamentally, and not in the specifics.  Again, -our- moral values and duties do not stem from the nature of -your- objectively evil god, whom..you insist, applies a double standard righteously due to his "standing" - a simpletons way of saying that gods might, makes god right.  It would be, frankly, impossible...to form an objective moral schema from any of the nonsense you've been peddling these many posts. [3]

Your leap from there being a set of objective values to you having the right to enforce them or deliver the consequences of breaking them is unwarranted. Our moral values and duties stem from the commands of God. An example is needed if you want to discuss this issue further--you must have one in mind.

Are you here to discuss the articles of your faith in divine command, or objective morality?  Do you want to discuss any of the number of specific examples given..or just keep asking till judgement day as though the last 40 pages never were? [4]

Sit down Steve, you're tired.  "God" moved on objective morality like a bitch....but couldn't get there....  

It's shit like this that leads people to conclude that there is no objective morality, because..to hear Some People™ describe it..it is not only -not- an objective morality, but based upon a work of petty fiction.  Useless, and less-than-wrong. [5]

1. Who said the commands were objective? The objectivity is found in the nature of God. We cannot fully understand that nature (it would be impossible). 

2. You are confusing objective morality with application. We are rarely in a position to apply anything objectively. 

3. You keep missing the point. The objective part comes from the nature of God. We can know of this through God's commands. We are not in a position to apply HIS standards for him in the absence of a command. This is not hard.

4. I would respond to an example if done in context and not framed in derision. 

5. You don't want to understand any of this. You think you do already and just throw out statements that are equivalent to talking over the top of someone in a discussion. You suck at discussion with someone of a different opinion and I wouldn't bother with you except there are others reading that might think you have a point.