Moral absolutes
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-03-2016, 02:11 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
(22-03-2016 02:10 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 01:56 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Just out of curiosity, could you show me your source for baby sacrifice by hebrews?

Ezekiel 20:25-26 directly indicates that YHWH actually commanded such sacrifices: “I [YHWH] also gave them statutes that were not good, and ordinances by which they could not live. I caused them to sin by their (own) gifts, by causing (them) to pass through (the fire) all who open the womb [i.e., the firstborn], in order that I might horrify them, in order that they might know that I am YHWH
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromot...nt-israel/

John Day, Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice in the Old Testament. University of Cambridge oriental publications, no. 41 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989); George C. Heider, The Cult of Molek: A Reassessment. Journal for the study of the Old Testament supplement series, 43 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1985); Paul G. Mosca, Child Sacrifice in Canaanite and Israelite Religion: A Study in Mulk and Mlk (Unpublished Dissertation) (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1975); and Jon Douglas Levenson, The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily...onite-god/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/valerie-ta...77340.html

http://christ.org.tw/bible_and_theology/...ildren.htm

http://www.usbible.com/Sacrifice/sacrifice_israel.htm
Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 02:19 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
You're kind of helping to make the case for the existance of a God. If we view morality as merely a point of view or something that is man made, how do we determine who has the correct answer? You can definitely argue that rule of law is based on the 10 commandments. I believe we know in our hearts what is wrong, because God (i'm asking for it now) made us that way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 02:20 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
(22-03-2016 02:19 PM)ScottD Wrote:  You're kind of helping to make the case for the existance of a God. If we view morality as merely a point of view or something that is man made, how do we determine who has the correct answer? You can definitely argue that rule of law is based on the 10 commandments. I believe we know in our hearts what is wrong, because God (i'm asking for it now) made us that way.
Yeah...you stepped in it now.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like jason_delisle's post
22-03-2016, 02:32 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
(22-03-2016 02:19 PM)ScottD Wrote:  If we view morality as merely a point of view or something that is man made, how do we determine who has the correct answer?

How we are determining that something called "objective morality" is a good thing to follow? And how exactly this morality look - is stoning woman moral? What about eating shellfish?

(22-03-2016 02:19 PM)ScottD Wrote:  You can definitely argue that rule of law is based on the 10 commandments.


You also could argue that moon is made of cheese.

(22-03-2016 02:19 PM)ScottD Wrote:  I believe we know in our hearts what is wrong, because God (i'm asking for it now) made us that way.

[emphasis mine]

Believe is a key word here. But your belief mean nothing to me if it is not backed with evidence.

Also before you claim how god made us it would be nice to present some proof of something called god actually existing.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 02:44 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
(22-03-2016 02:19 PM)ScottD Wrote:  If we view morality as merely a point of view or something that is man made, how do we determine who has the correct answer?

That depends entirely on how you define "correct".

(22-03-2016 02:19 PM)ScottD Wrote:  You can definitely argue that rule of law is based on the 10 commandments.

You could also argue that the commandments in question function no differently than any other man-made moral code, which raises the question of how an objective moral system would even operate, how it might be identified, and what "objective morality" even means.

(22-03-2016 02:19 PM)ScottD Wrote:  I believe we know in our hearts what is wrong, because God (i'm asking for it now) made us that way.

We actually welcome theists here. jason_delisle would appear to be one as well, though I am not certain on that front yet because I have only been skimming this thread. Aliza, one of our most well-respected members, is Jewish.

We have no issues with differing opinions here (for the most part, anyway; atheists can be as immature as anyone else), though we will tend towards bluntness in our answers to your arguments. Just remember that an attack on the argument is not the same as an attack on the arguer.

It's actually nice to have theists around that we can discuss things with, because it keeps the conversation interesting rather than turning it into a pointless echo chamber. It just happens that most of our more prominent theist members (The Q Continuum, Call_of_the_Wild, etc.) tend to be condescending assholes, so they get a bit of rougher treatment in return.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Unbeliever's post
22-03-2016, 02:55 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
(22-03-2016 01:50 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(28-01-2016 09:12 AM)claywise Wrote:  After listening recently to Matt Dillahunty on this subject, I got to wondering precisely what "moral absolutes" believers (or non-believers) might propose. In other words, what moral position might be so clear-cut that everyone agrees on it.

Thou shall not kill is obviously problematic, even if we allow for the common Christian assertion that it refers only to murder. According to Merriam-Webster, murder is the crime of deliberately, or unlawfully, killing a person or people, sometimes with the added frisson of malice aforethought.

It's pretty easy to come up with situations in which knowingly killing even an innocent person might be "moral" — say, for example, that a terrorist is holding a dirty bomb and hostages inside a building, and taking her out will result in the death of innocents, though far fewer than if the bomb is allowed to go off.

Thou shall not steal is easy to debunk, so I won't bother here. Ditto with false witness, adultery, and so on. Some might say hitting a child is always, absolutely morally wrong, but again one can see exceptions.

I thought "Rape is always wrong" might be an absolute, and for me, personally, I think it is. But what about a situation in which survival of the species was at stake - say, there is one fertile female left alive after an apocalypse, and she does not wish to propagate any more creatures who would one day bring down more destruction, or bring new individuals into a world of suffering (which strikes me as a perfectly moral position)? I still think that person's autonomy is more worthy of regard than the goals of the "community," certainly when it requires violence against her.

Even Dillahunty, who uses "wellbeing" as a yardstick for what should be considered "moral," falls short, in my opinion: Is it "moral" to raise tens of millions of highly intelligent animals - pigs, which have the cognitive abilities of a three-year-old human and obviously can suffer - because it promotes the "wellbeing" of humans who like to eat bacon?

I guess my point is, despite Christians' frequent yammering and teeth-gnashing about moral relativism, I don't think I see any "moral" position that's absolute. Curious to hear any proposals for a true absolute moral.

How about this: "Though shall not torture babies just for fun."

it's still circumstantial which has been said to you in the other dozen+ times you through out this idea but never stick to responding about it in threads, because something else always seems to focus your attention in the thread elsewhere.

Even if torturing babies for fun is something a particular person can only seem to get a settling level of dopamine and calmnessness from that prevents them from unleashing a mass murderous chemical weaponry cache he has control over, it's the objective or absolute(whichever way one may think it would be going) thing to not do. So the torturing of babies is still an action one would clear cut no way to contextualize it. So torturing babies for fun is absolutely wrong regardless of any possible contextualizing that could be in aid to save hundreds of millions of lives of children, adults, fetus's, aged people, and so forth dying?

I suppose those who think a sin is a sin regardless of the action would still think it's wrong, but that's a portion of the ways of understanding the topic.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
22-03-2016, 03:03 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
This is just a suggestion and a request. Could we instead try to find something objectively good that everyone can agree with rather that come up with the most horrific? I rather not think about baby torture.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 03:05 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
(22-03-2016 03:03 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  This is just a suggestion and a request. Could we instead try to find something objectively good that everyone can agree with rather that come up with the most horrific? I rather not think about baby torture.

It is your argument. You are free to take it in whatever direction you wish.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
22-03-2016, 03:23 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2016 03:33 PM by jason_delisle.)
RE: Moral absolutes
(22-03-2016 03:05 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 03:03 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  This is just a suggestion and a request. Could we instead try to find something objectively good that everyone can agree with rather that come up with the most horrific? I rather not think about baby torture.

It is your argument. You are free to take it in whatever direction you wish.
Ok. If I was to try to provide evidence for the existence of objective morality, I would say that acts of love are objectively good. I define an act of love as any action where you sacrifice your needs, wants, or desires in order to fulfill another’s needs, wants, or desires. Or putting another person's needs, wants, or desires above your own.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2016, 04:01 PM
RE: Moral absolutes
(22-03-2016 02:19 PM)ScottD Wrote:  You're kind of helping to make the case for the existance of a God. If we view morality as merely a point of view or something that is man made, how do we determine who has the correct answer?

Easy-peasy. There is no correct answer.

Quote:You can definitely argue that rule of law is based on the 10 commandments.

In Hindu countries? Buddhist countries? Shinto countries? Consider

Quote:I believe we know in our hearts what is wrong, because God (i'm asking for it now) made us that way.

'Round these parts we require evidence, pardner. Got any?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: