There have been several threads about this on the server as late. I've been giving it some thought and the truth is that have no reason to believe that the subject actually is some god(s) moral standard at all. In fact until some god(s) moral standard is outlined (as opposed to some list of moral pronouncements) and that some god(s)actually hold said standard (an impossible task without first proving that some god(s) even exist) I have no reason to believe that any standard is being discussed other than the standard of the poster which he has projected onto his or her concept of some god(s). The truth is I think some theists have gotten the idea that I do not believe based on some moral concept or lack thereof when in fact the standard some theist claims their preferred god(s) is beside the point until there is some demonstration of their claims. I am happy to continue these discussions as hypotheticals but understand that even if your preferred moral standard is perfect and mine is deeply flawed that does not get yo uh an inch closer to proving any god exists. If morals mean nothing or cannot exist without any god(s) and that disturbs you I may have some bad news for you.
Some god(s) moral standard
Posts
Total:
17
-->
@secularmerlin
I have no reason to believe that any standard is being discussed other than the standard of the poster which he has projected onto his or her concept of some god(s).
(01) Me first.
(02) No artwork. [**]
(03) Don't say my name.
(04) Do no work on my special day.
(05) Obey your parents (unless they tell you to break a commandment).
(06) No murder (except for foreign children).
(07) No marital infidelity (no divorce).
(08) Don't steal (except from foreigners).
(09) Don't tell lies.
(10) Don't desire the belongings of others (except from foreigners).
These can be boiled down to "focus your mind respecting the unknowable" (eyes up here please), "do what you're told", and "be honest".
Taking a look at this list, it actually gives an enormous amount of power to your parents.
As long as your parents don't tell you to violate any of the 7 empirically verifiable laws, they can pretty much make you jump through any number of hoops they damn well please.
And if your parents are dead, just don't talk bad about them and follow the other 7, and you're welcomed to beat your neighbor half-to death and cut their ears off if they look at you the wrong way (just as long as you're perfectly honest about it and don't take their stuff).
I'm actually pretty surprised it doesn't say anything about "do what the priests (and or your king and or whatever-Moses-was) tell you to do".
I guess the voice of your "leader" is assumed to be the voice of your god($) even though it never actually says that explicitly.
-->
@3RU7AL
These are moral dictates not a basic moral standard. Nothing about the list you posted tells us why it is wrong to disobey your parents or desire the stuff if others (except for the stuff of foreigners. It just assumes a greater authority effectively abdicating personal moral intuition especially where the two are in conflict.
-->
@secularmerlin
These are moral dictates not a basic moral standard.
Excellent point.
It's basically "do what you're told" with zero "principles".
-->
@secularmerlin
Would you consider "love thy neighbor (but not the foreigner)" a "moral principle"?
-->
@3RU7AL
I might consider it an inadequate moral principle. I mean that can be used to determine other behaviors when used as a measuring stick.
-->
@secularmerlin
I might consider it an inadequate moral principle.
In what context might it be considered "adequate" and in what context might it be considered "inadequate"?
-->
@3RU7AL
By my own personal moral intuition (emotional response to what I subjectively believe to be right or wrong) which is the only one I have to rely on.
-->
@secularmerlin
By my own personal moral intuition (emotional response to what I subjectively believe to be right or wrong) which is the only one I have to rely on.
Do you consider "follow your own moral intuition" a "moral principle"?
-->
@3RU7AL
More of a biological imperative.
-->
@secularmerlin
More of a biological imperative.
I like the idea that each of us will be our own "judge" at the end of our lives.
-->
@secularmerlin
What's moral isn't that difficult to begin with. God's morality is based on love, not a set of random insignificant rules.
Whatever action you took in regards to another, was it done in love?
-->
@RoderickSpode
How have you determined that any god(s) actually exist or what if anything any god(s) love or what loving someone(thing) should do to inform our actions and moral judgements?
You have a lot of ground to cover before we get from your claim about "god's love" and a working moral theory even if I were to grant your preferred god's existence for the sake of argument.
-->
@secularmerlin
How have you determined that any god(s) actually exist or what if anything any god(s) love or what loving someone(thing) should do to inform our actions and moral judgements?
As far as your question how I determined that any god exists, I'm guessing you haven't seem my testimony (which is likely considering the numerous posts and threads). And the Bible actually informs us on how to make that determination.
You have a lot of ground to cover before we get from your claim about "god's love" and a working moral theory even if I were to grant your preferred god's existence for the sake of argument.
I think we're at least on the same page that love exists, right?
If you granted for the sake of argument that God exists, this would imply that the ability for us humans to love was given by God. This means that if you wanted to do someone you love good, big or small, then God would be the ultimate reason you're throwing a surprise birthday party for a loved one.
-->
@RoderickSpode
As far as your question how I determined that any god exists, I'm guessing you haven't seem my testimony (which is likely considering the numerous posts and threads). And the Bible actually informs us on how to make that determination.
The bible is the claim. Under no circumstances should a claim be considered proof of itself.
I think we're at least on the same page that love exists, right?
We are on the same page that social organisms appear to be capable of love and that humans can even communicate the concept to one another.
If you granted for the sake of argument that God exists, this would imply that the ability for us humans to love was given by God.
No that is a non sequitur. That some gid created something does not imply that said god also gave that something any particular capacity. In fact just granting some god(s) is different entirely from granting some creator god(s). If I were to grant your god you would still have some work to do to prove that your preferred god created anything.
This means that if you wanted to do someone you love good, big or small, then God would be the ultimate reason you're throwing a surprise birthday party for a loved one.
Incorrect especially if I don't even believe in that god. In fact the reason I throw people birthday parties is that their parents had sex on that date less nine months.
-->
@RoderickSpode
Whatever action you took in regards to another, was it done in love?
I love my family and that's why I murder everyone who tries to cheat them.
-->
@secularmerlin
The bible is the claim. Under no circumstances should a claim be considered proof of itself.
I stated that the bible informs us on how to make a specific determination. Your comment is like saying the BMW manual is the claim, and under no circumstances should be considered proof of how to connect a fuel line.
No that is a non sequitur. That some gid created something does not imply that said god also gave that something any particular capacity. In fact just granting some god(s) is different entirely from granting some creator god(s). If I were to grant your god you would still have some work to do to prove that your preferred god created anything.
Keep in mind, I'm focusing on the God of the Bible in a hypothetical situation.
The God of the bible suggests creator. Even though created beings might find themselves with butterflies in their stomachs independent of the creator, wouldn't it be at the very least just as logical for love to be an attribute provided by the creator?
This means that if you wanted to do someone you love good, big or small, then God would be the ultimate reason you're throwing a surprise birthday party for a loved one.Incorrect especially if I don't even believe in that god. In fact the reason I throw people birthday parties is that their parents had sex on that date less nine months.
I have a hard time believing you're that callous!
But again I was painting a hypothetical scenario.