Believing it is not proving it

What I meant was, there is no way to ground a moral rule logically. One just ends up begging the question. To ground it, you need an Absolute. If you're saying I don't know if there's an Absolute or not, that's true; I don't for sure.ABE: But what I do know is that, without an objective morality, the concept of "sin" is meaningless.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 04-05-2006 06:10 PM

quote:

---

Oh, please. My use of the word "heart" is quite common in conversation and literature.

---

I realize that, but your statement smacks of the Old Testament. But you say you aren't relying on the Bible. We are looking at a God, not a religion. I need to know that you are looking at reality and not mixing in bits and pieces of a religion or religions.How does the existence of a God make the rules not to kill or not to steal objective? A God is still a being subject to feelings.By looking around you can see that those rules don't apply to all living creatures. If to kill was objectively wrong then it would always be wrong no matter what the circumstances. Theoretically no living creature would kill.2+2=7 is wrong. We can write it wrong as I just did, but I don't believe we can make it wrong in reality. If you have two apples and I give you two more, I can say seven, but you still only have four apples.

quote:

---

Well, I don't think God exists, so no. But if God existed, at least the type of God I'm thinking of, we would know what's right and wrong just as we know arithmetic. There would be no doubt about it.

---

I realize you don't feel that God exists, but we are looking at this from the viewpoint that he does. We want to see the God that is, not the one you are thinking of. I hate to say this, but be more objective. Let go of your preconceived idea of the God you don't believe exists. Look at what is. I feel you are basing your opinion on what you know of religion and probably have an unrealistic expectation.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Why?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

See message #254.

---

"It is very unhappy, but too late to be helped, the discovery we have made, that we exist. That discovery is called the Fall of Man."--Emerson

I was nit picking Robin. Sorry. Well there kind of is. I know God exists therefore I can ground objective morality logically. Whilst many might decry this it will be from a position of lack of knowledge as to Gods existance. In limiting the rules of logic to those that exclude God they merely say that the playing field is as they define it to be. Without being able to ground why it is that said playing field must be the one on which the game is played.You'll see it all the time. God pre-ordaining and yet wanting that none should perish for example leaves us with a paradox. Paradoxes are logical dead ends ergo God doesn't exist (or some such 300 post thread summary). This excludes that fact that God has dimensions open to him and closed to us in which to square circles in his realm. I agree.Gut feeling as opposed to head knowledge time. Do you sin?

I've read Message 254 and it's just another assertion without support.The question is why does sin have to be based on some objective standard? Right and wrong are the same for a Christian, Buddhist, Atheist, Taoist.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Because if it's not objective, it's a mere personal preference (or group preference, if you like). That's what "subjective" means. There's no logical basis for it. We just "decided" on some rule.

Exactly, decided on some rule. Mutually agreed upon.That is the beauty of the two Great Commandments.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Two beautiful commandments given by God. And if not God then just another person. So we're back to subjective againAbE: an aside: is Jesus God, Jar?AbE: changed was to isThis message has been edited by iano, 06-Apr-2006 12:55 AMThis message has been edited by iano, 06-Apr-2006 12:55 AM

Yes, subjective. Depends on when you are talking about IMHO. During his lifetime here on earth I think that he was wholely man, just human.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hi, Iano.I agree that when we encounter a paradox, we have encountered a limitation in our language or understanding, not something contradictory about the world: the world seems to me always coherent and consistent (well, maybe not in Cavediver's world, but that's another country entirely). Once one has posited an omniscient, omnipotent being, it seems silly to play word games in order to catch God out in contradictions.But I don't see why God's (yours or any others') morality should be considered logical or objective, or even why morality need be logical.I suppose it should be sensible, in the plain, intuitive sense of the word, but logic is cool, and love and kindness are warm; cold logic has led to as many horrors as heavens.QED. Glad you're still coming 'round, mate.

Hi Omni It would seem so, but in the cold light of EvC you'd be amazed at how often the attempt is made. I agree that the world can seem coherent and consistant without God. But that is only if one is prepared to accept best guess notions for aspects of life - such as a nigh on universal sense of objective morality in practice. Away from the cut and thrust of focused debate on the subject I mean.Cowardice in battle is reviled. Stealing too. We have an inate aversion to the queue skipper. Yet all the proponants of such acts could be said to be expressing the much toted and overarching maxim of life: survival of the fittest.The man who stepped on that land mine and pushed you away hath no greater love than that he laid his life down for a brother.According to evolution he was unfit.Seek and you shall truly cohere...EvC ain't out of my blood yet. But life is sure looking brighter - I get to see a bit more of it...This message has been edited by iano, 06-Apr-2006 01:56 AM

Morality is a guide for behavior and ideally it would be a sensible guide, but that's not the situation in life. All we can do is go by our feelings. There's nothing to base the feelings on.And we all know how misleading feelings can be.

quote:

---

What I meant was, there is no way to ground a moral rule logically. One just ends up begging the question. To ground it, you need an Absolute. If you're saying I don't know if there's an Absolute or not, that's true; I don't for sure.

​

ABE: But what I do know is that, without an objective morality, the concept of "sin" is meaningless.

---

Why? And no Message 254 doesn't answer that question.You are making your own rule. How is it more logical to say don't kill each other or steal from each other because God said it is wrong, as opposed to, don't kill each other or steal from each other because the tribal elders said it is wrong or your parents said it is wrong. The elders have learned from experience that it is better not to kill each other or steal from each other. What is illogical about that?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

It's not just feelings. It's also experience, empathy, and direction.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion