My views on objective morality

[ignoramus]

Every time you make a claim that -demands- elaboration, you "have a life"...and other assorted dodges.  May as well not even make the claims, we get enough of that as-is.  Maybe you're simply, sincerely, incapable of elaboration?

Spot on. That's when a theist's consciousness hits the boundary of their indoctrination.
When one is forced to reconcile fantasy with reality.

It can't happen. You didn't really expect her to get into the subatomic realm and begin proving her spiritual god via complex theoretical mathematics, did you?

You enjoy shooting fish in a barrel, don't you?   Hehe

[The Grand Nudger]

I enjoy informing people who don't realize it, that they're the fish in the barrel, that's for sure. I think they ought to know, lol.

I do expect people to have more than the claim, even if they can;t go down to the subatomic. I don't think that's an unfair expectation. People should understand what they believe in and why, I think, if they intend to share.

[Catholic_Lady]

We believe HIS Church comes before HIS book.

But who wrote HIS book? Not the Pope himself, no that was God, right? Or was it? If it was your god, then how can you believe it's best to put a mortal dude in a dress above God's own words? If it wasn't God, then why bother with that book at all - how do you know if any of it is any good?

It does seem that Catholics put a lot of blind faith in one man, as if he were an incarnation of God himself, and this observation is more than anything else what inspired the great schism which was known as the Protestant Reformation.

No, God did not write the bible. He inspired the bible, but it was still written by men, through the filter of men. Not by the hand of God.

[Catholic_Lady]

We believe HIS Church comes before HIS book.

But without the book, would there have ever been a church at all?

The Church existed before the bible did. Peter was the first pope, whom we believe was appointed by Jesus.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

But who wrote HIS book? Not the Pope himself, no that was God, right? Or was it? If it was your god, then how can you believe it's best to put a mortal dude in a dress above God's own words? If it wasn't God, then why bother with that book at all - how do you know if any of it is any good?

It does seem that Catholics put a lot of blind faith in one man, as if he were an incarnation of God himself, and this observation is more than anything else what inspired the great schism which was known as the Protestant Reformation.

No, God did not write the bible. He inspired the bible, but it was still written by men, through the filter of men. Not by the hand of God.

Then in that case on what grounds is anything that your popes say validified? I think you just told us that it's all on account of you, the followers, believing them!

Why does god need a filter for any messages which he may have for humanity? If he inspired the books, then how can they not really be his own words? We're talking about one who is supposed to be the most powerful superbeing in this universe and (possibly) beyond, therefore why would he need the middlemen who are (or were) apostles, writers of scriptures, priests, bishops, cardinals, or popes? What use does he really have for the Vatican? He may as well get a starship too, if one can be provided by his followers, and reasoning for this fails likewise.

[abaris]

No, God did not write the bible. He inspired the bible, but it was still written by men, through the filter of men. Not by the hand of God.

It hasn't been written at all, but compiled during the 4th century. As I said, by leaving certain parts out, editing others and taking other parts. The only inspiration were the bishops craving for power.

I guess, I already pointed it out in a different thread, but the high and mighties made a U turn to get into the good graces of the Roman emperor. Before they started to suck up to the empire, there were influencal church fathers excommunicating everyone doing military service. Many were opposed to capital punishment and opposed to deliver any criminal at all.

A soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath. If he is unwilling to comply, he must be rejected for baptism. A military commander or civic magistrate must resign or be rejected. If a believer seeks to become a soldier, he must be rejected, for he has despised God.
— Hippolytus of Rome[

   One soul cannot be due to two masters—God and Cæsar. And yet Moses carried a rod, and Aaron wore a buckle, and John (Baptist) is girt with leather and Joshua the son of Nun leads a line of march; and the People warred: if it pleases you to sport with the subject. But how will a Christian man war, nay, how will he serve even in peace, without a sword, which the Lord has taken away? For albeit soldiers had come unto John, and had received the formula of their rule; albeit, likewise, a centurion had believed; still the Lord afterward, in disarming Peter, unbelted every soldier. No dress is lawful among us, if assigned to any unlawful action.
   — Tertullian, On Idolatry Chapter 19: Concerning Military Service

Those soldiers were filled with wonder and admiration at the grandeur of the man’s piety and generosity and were struck with amazement. They felt the force of this example of pity. As a result, many of them were added to the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ and threw off the belt of military service.
— Disputation of Archelaus and Manes

And many more.

The Church existed before the bible did. Peter was the first pope, whom we believe was appointed by Jesus.

And how come, the Romans didn't record this? The Romman empire remained a politheist nation until the year 385. Undisputed until 325, when Constantine made the first move to legalize them.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

There you have it CL - as Abaris pointed out, the power of your church began with the betrayal of a peaceful group of believers by their own leaders in exchange for power. It was they who decided which so-called scriptures to keep, and who would be the first Emperor's puppet would be who would decide on what you should believe going forward. That has always been the relationship between rulers and popes, even while the balance of power between them sometimes shifted. The result has more than significantly changed what you believe today.

[Catholic_Lady]

Sorry I did not respond to this post. The reason I didn't is because I feel like parts of the issues you bring up have already been addressed and I'll just be annoyingly repeating myself. Nonetheless, I appreciate your respectful tone, so here are my responses:

How do I know what I don't know? If someone asks me a question, like "why doesn't God do ______", and I don't know why, then I know that I don't know. 

As for how do I know that what I believe is true, again, this is basically a "why are you Catholic" question. Not something that can ever be summed up in a forum post. The short answer is, given everything I have experienced/seen/learned in my life, the faith makes sense to me.

But how do you know that what you do believe is true, given the fact that you don't have a metric for it?

How do you know that what you think is free will is free will? How do you know that what you regard as moral behavior stems from your god? The short answer is that you don't know. You believe, you have faith, that it is; but you can't say that things like genocide aren't you god's will -- after all, he's ordered such things, if we're to believe the Bible.

I feel very confident that it is. Of course, there is always the chance that I could be wrong. But let me put it this way, I feel as confident in my beliefs as I am confident that my husband loves me. Could I be wrong about my husband loving me? I mean, sure... anything is possible. but I feel confident enough that he loves me to the point where I am ok with saying "I know my husband loves me." Same thing applies to my religious beliefs. I feel confident enough to say "I know God is real, I know He gave us free will, I know He is love and goodness, and that anything outside of that is immoral." How do I know? How am I so confident? Again, it is not something that can ever be summed up in a forum post. The short answer is, given everything I have experienced/seen/learned in my life, has led me to believe what I do. 

If all you have to go on is faith, well then you're essentially saying that morality is subjective. Because at that point you've defined what you regard as moral, and then are saying "my god wouldn't do or order that". If your god is the author of morality, then the fact that he behaves in ways he tells us are immoral means that morality is subjective. If your god is not the author of morality, then it should be acknowledged that the acts attributed to him in your own scripture violate the moral code he is alleged to have passed down to us.

If you are referring to when God literally talks to people in the Old Testament, I don't believe that ever happened. I believe Jesus is God, and I believe in what He taught us about morality - doing good for others as we want them to do for us, loving others as ourselves, and forgiving our enemies, etc. I believe that is the basis for all of morality.     

Your faith makes sense to you -- great. But the fact is that it doesn't make sense to the majority of the people in the world, and while you're here expounding it, you cannot explain why anyone else should believe as you do. How is that not, in its very essence, subjective? Can you justify your own morality in an objective manner without appealing to your own personal reasons for believing (which are entirely subjective, as you've just admitted)?

How is that not subjective morality?

I'm not trying to explain why anyone else should believe as I do. Also, there is no way I know of to convince anyone. I think it's something that a person would need to conclude for him/herself based on their own understandings. I don't understand how that ties in to objective morality though. Perhaps you can clarify?   

Some things about God have been revealed to us, others have not. I believe the Church's teachings on faith and morals come from God, and those are the things we have a firm belief in. Those are the things about God that we believe have been revealed to us. The rest are unknown, and among those unknowns are some of the questions I always see here, such as "why doesn't God just personally tell us He's real" ...or something along those lines. With questions like that, all we can do is speculate and come up with theories. But at the end of the day, they are still unknown because they have not been revealed to us.

How do you know that what has been revealed is actually your god's mind, and not some human interpolation subject to the fancy, whim, and error that accompanies such an endeavor?

My answer for this is the same as up top (the why are you Catholic question, basically). I think the first part of my response works to answer this.

[Catholic_Lady]

But without the book, would there have ever been a church at all?

Yes, actually there might.  There really wasn't a Bible when Paul was writing, and not  for some time after that.  But there were Christians.  So Christianity predates the Bible.  Actually,  it predates the OT, which like the NT,  existed as a few of many scriptures before being chosen as the  official scriptures.   Some of both the not officially chosen of Jewish and Christian scripture remain, others are lost.

The church was the last authority until it choose the Bible as the last authority.  And in the case of some sects the church  remained the last authority.   Catholicism is one such sect.

Exactly, thank you. 

Yet another one of those things that I totally suck at explaining.

[abaris]

I believe Jesus is God, and I believe in what He taught us about morality - doing good for others as we want them to do for us, loving others as ourselves, and forgiving our enemies, etc. I believe that is the basis for all of morality.     

I didn't expect you to think any differently, but that's not reality. Never was, never is. Yet all of the above is very basic and serves to preserve the species.

As for forgiving your enemies, you folks never do any research concerning our nearest relatives.