Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8
Results 141 to 144 of 144
  1. #141
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    [1] I'm playing the agnostic. [2] And while you seem to be critical of that position, I think there is only one logical response to not knowing certain answers - admit you don't know them. What else can one do? [3] Make up an answer that has no evidence and use that as your answer?
    [1] Okay, fine, but why would a Christian defend agnosticism? You are not doing the truth justice if you believe God's word is true and yet set up arguments against it. I want others to know the truth that will set them free (John 8:32)!

    [2] I don't think agnosticism is a logical response. The logical answer is to find what can and does make sense, what is logical. If the universe is without ultimate meaning, then there is no point in looking for it. If the universe is without ultimate meaning, then there is no logic to it. Most worldviews seem to come at it as if there are sense and logic to be found. They look for sense and provide meaning that would not ultimately be there if their position were correct. If their position were true, there would be ultimate meaninglessness, no reason for logic.

    [3] Find the correct answer that has sufficient evidence! There is only one!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I can defend agnosticism by pointing out that no one has ever proven that God does or does not exist.
    Not true. People have come to faith in believing the evidence of the resurrection, the Word of God, the prophetic evidence, the testimony of Jesus throughout the Bible and a host of other evidence. These reasons are convincing proof of God.

    With proof, no matter how reasonable it is, some will not believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    But if you are going to argue that God does exist, you need to provide evidence that will convince those who aren't already convinced as you are. Until you do, you have no supported that the Christian God exists.
    I can provide evidence/proof that is logical, and consistent. No matter how consistent, or logical, or reasonable the proof/evidence does not bring someone to faith without the will to trust the evidence and believe God.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    [1] Accurate prophecy only establishes foresight. [2] Foresight, even supernatural foresight, does not prove that there's a God. If we allow for the supernatural (which we must if we hold that accurate prophecy exists), then there are a practically endless number of ways that one can have accurate foresight. [3] For example, if the supernatural can happen, then a sorcerer can cast a spell that allows him to see the future and he can present that without being God. [4] Or maybe aliens or a secret advanced civilizations develop the means to look into the future.

    [5] And that even assumes that the prophecies are all that accurate and specific. One can certainly read a lot into vague prophecies to make them seem accurate.

    [6] You seem to be explaining why you are convinced but you aren't presenting any reason for someone else to be convinced.
    [1] It establishes that what was said to happen happened, therefore it was true. It is a confirmation/proof that the claims are true. Since 1/3 (I think) of the Bible is prophetic, it is reasonable to believe what it says on other topics is also reasonable to believe.

    [2] Show me a human being in history that can predict the future with 100% accuracy, in hundreds of prophecies, in some cases over hundreds or thousands of years, and they come to pass, as said. It is reasonable proof it is of God.

    [3] The Bible gives us every reason to believe in God. You can make any excuse and give any unlikely explanation, but the Bible tells you it is the Word of God.

    [4] Again, aliens are not the answer the Bible gives. If they are aliens, there is no reason to trust anything they have to say. They falsely disclosed they were something other than what they were.

    [5] The evidence is there. What I continually hear from unbelievers is there is no evidence for God. I offer to show them there is and that it is reasonable and logical. They deny it without even hearing the evidence. They turn a blind eye, block their ears, close their hearts, and continue with their assumptions of no evidence.

    I challenge you to show me the prophecies are vague by taking either the Olivet Discourse or Revelation as our example. The reason I take the Olivet address by Jesus is that it is a hub of prophecy that radiates out into many biblical books. The reason for choosing Revelation is that it contains more OT prophecy (fulfillment) than any other NT book.

    I would also challenge you on another level. Show me it is reasonable to believe ANY NT book is written after A.D. 70.

    Are you willing, or are your allegations all hot air?

    [6] I have challenged those who doubt to refute 1) prophecy is true, 2) that it is not from God, 3) that it is not logical or reasonable to believe when looking at the evidence we have available.

    Peter

  2. #142
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,406
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Then even if an objective source is demonstrated, it would not negate the existence of the human sources of morality, or its use/implementation.
    No, but it would be superior to it in the same way that KNOWING that the Earth is round is superior to have an opinion on the shape of the earth.


    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Again, humans aren’t “the source of morality”, they’re the source of the morality of which they are the source, and there is no question about this in the scientific community. Whether there are or may be other sources of other kinds of morality is another question altogether. The support that humans are the source of human morality is that the morals coming from the human source have developed over time. Their development shows a direct correlation with the development of humans as we learn more. Other species' morality directly correlates to their societal development. From wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_morality):
    The evolution of morality refers to the emergence of human moral behavior over the course of human evolution. Morality can be defined as a system of ideas about right and wrong conduct. In everyday life, morality is typically associated with human behavior and not much thought is given to the social conducts of other creatures. The emerging fields of evolutionary biology and in particular sociobiology have argued that, though human social behaviors are complex, the precursors of human morality can be traced to the behaviors of many other social animals.
    I've looked through your links and as far I can tell, you are not forwarding proof that morality comes from evolution but just presenting certain people arguing that this is the case and none of the theories forwarded have been widely accepted. For example, with what you pasted from the wikipedia article, you omitted this:

    "Sociobiological explanations of human behavior are still controversial."

    And that seems to be the same for all of your support - no one has proven that this is the case but just that some people think that it is so.

    Also, I don't think a proving that there is a biological source of morality show that there is no objective morality. If one believes that God exists (typically defined as the creator of the universe and the primary source of morality) then all that is is what God wants it to be so even a biological explanation of morality can stem from this objective source. In other words, if objective morality exists in that fashion, the reason that biological morality exists is because God designed us, including every species of life, to be moral in that fashion. Or to put it another way, biological morality stems from objective morality.


    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    This is not supported. Please demonstrate why the existence of an objective source would mean that any morality it forwards would be anything more than moral pronouncements. Sure, it would be a fact that the source said something about morals, but you have not supported how you get from there to “the morals are facts”.
    I'm not getting there that way. I'm getting there from the very definition of the word "objective". If it's an objective fact that, say, murder is immoral, then it's a fact that it is.




    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    They don’t preclude each other, to which you agreed. So your statement of “if morality is subjective” makes no sense. Since they don’t preclude each other, it’s not “morality is subjective” or “morality is objective”, it’s “this morality (from a subjective source) is subjective” or “this morality (from an objective source) is objective”. You keep talking about morality itself as though it’s either subjective or objective, when you have not supported that this is the case.
    But this is really just semantics. One can subjectively believe that the Earth is flat and that would qualify as a "subjective" belief about the shape of the Earth coming from a person. That doesn't change the fact that it's objectively true that the Earth is round. So what the shape of the Earth is is both objective and subjective for there is nothing preventing someone from having a subjective opinion on something which is factually true or untrue.



    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Since they don’t preclude each other, this statement is irrational. So far we’ve established that human morality (from human sources) exists, and that it’s maybe possible that there exists an objective moral source which forwards its own morals.
    We are referring to human morality here. So if there is an objective source that has created our morality but we don't recognize it as such and instead make up our own answers, our answers are inferior to the correct answers. It's like making up our own answers about the shape of the Earth compared to the objective truth about the shape of the Earth. Yes, both the human-invented answer and the real answer exists, but obviously the real answer is the superior answer for it is objectively correct and there is no room for doubt, unlike the human-created answers.

  3. #143
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    58
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    [1] Okay, fine, but why would a Christian defend agnosticism? You are not doing the truth justice if you believe God's word is true and yet set up arguments against it. I want others to know the truth that will set them free (John 8:32)!

    [2] I don't think agnosticism is a logical response. The logical answer is to find what can and does make sense, what is logical. If the universe is without ultimate meaning, then there is no point in looking for it. If the universe is without ultimate meaning, then there is no logic to it. Most worldviews seem to come at it as if there are sense and logic to be found. They look for sense and provide meaning that would not ultimately be there if their position were correct. If their position were true, there would be ultimate meaninglessness, no reason for logic.

    [3] Find the correct answer that has sufficient evidence! There is only one!



    Not true. People have come to faith in believing the evidence of the resurrection, the Word of God, the prophetic evidence, the testimony of Jesus throughout the Bible and a host of other evidence. These reasons are convincing proof of God.

    With proof, no matter how reasonable it is, some will not believe.



    I can provide evidence/proof that is logical, and consistent. No matter how consistent, or logical, or reasonable the proof/evidence does not bring someone to faith without the will to trust the evidence and believe God.



    [1] It establishes that what was said to happen happened, therefore it was true. It is a confirmation/proof that the claims are true. Since 1/3 (I think) of the Bible is prophetic, it is reasonable to believe what it says on other topics is also reasonable to believe.

    [2] Show me a human being in history that can predict the future with 100% accuracy, in hundreds of prophecies, in some cases over hundreds or thousands of years, and they come to pass, as said. It is reasonable proof it is of God.

    [3] The Bible gives us every reason to believe in God. You can make any excuse and give any unlikely explanation, but the Bible tells you it is the Word of God.

    [4] Again, aliens are not the answer the Bible gives. If they are aliens, there is no reason to trust anything they have to say. They falsely disclosed they were something other than what they were.

    [5] The evidence is there. What I continually hear from unbelievers is there is no evidence for God. I offer to show them there is and that it is reasonable and logical. They deny it without even hearing the evidence. They turn a blind eye, block their ears, close their hearts, and continue with their assumptions of no evidence.

    I challenge you to show me the prophecies are vague by taking either the Olivet Discourse or Revelation as our example. The reason I take the Olivet address by Jesus is that it is a hub of prophecy that radiates out into many biblical books. The reason for choosing Revelation is that it contains more OT prophecy (fulfillment) than any other NT book.

    I would also challenge you on another level. Show me it is reasonable to believe ANY NT book is written after A.D. 70.

    Are you willing, or are your allegations all hot air?

    [6] I have challenged those who doubt to refute 1) prophecy is true, 2) that it is not from God, 3) that it is not logical or reasonable to believe when looking at the evidence we have available.

    Peter

    It appears that Jews and Muslims (for instance) have a little different take on the same history. They don't believe in the miracles of Jesus (though they do reference him as a man). They make remarkably similar claims of truth to the ones you have just made with regards to evidence. What makes your "evidence" superior to "their evidence"?

    Did you research Muslim, Jewish or other beliefs before you became Christian?


    What is the value of faith? Why is it basically a requirement?
    From what I have read in the Bible about God, the faith requirement seems pretty iffy. If the Christian God's desires match what is said in the Bible, it seems logical (to me at least) that there would be a way to know for sure you were fallowing the right path, given the gravity of that decision.
    I have heard free will argued as the reason for a faith requirement, but if you believe in the Bible and resurrection etc, God has many, many times shown himself and/powers.
    Indeed, how can it be said you have free will to make a decision at all if you don't know for sure what the choices are? Especially a decision that involves eternity.
    Perhaps my definition of faith doesn't apply in this case for some reason?

  4. #144
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    It appears that Jews and Muslims (for instance) have a little different take on the same history. They don't believe in the miracles of Jesus (though they do reference him as a man). They make remarkably similar claims of truth to the ones you have just made with regards to evidence. What makes your "evidence" superior to "their evidence"?
    Yes, they do have a different take on history, but all three religious beliefs utilize the OT. The OT Jews rejected their Messiah. The Jews of today, I believe I can show, can no longer meet the requirements of the Mosaic Covenant because God abolished it. They are NOT the same Jews the Bible speaks of who were under covenant with God.

    Islam, it seems, is a religion influenced by at least four different faiths - Judaism, aberrant Christianity, Zoroastrianism, and regional pagan tribes (some of whom worshiped the goddess of the half moon).

    Judaism does not recognize that the Torah (Law), Psalms and Prophets have been fulfilled.

    Christianity is the fulfillment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Did you research Muslim, Jewish or other beliefs before you became Christian?
    No, after.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    What is the value of faith?
    I will be frank.

    I believe it is what pleases God; our trust in Him and belief in His Word (because it is best). He made humanity for a relationship with Him. Adam had free will to choose. He chose his own way. History is the witness.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Why is it basically a requirement?
    Because before you come to God you have to believe He exists and rewards those who diligently seek Him (Hebrews 11:6). You can't trust someone or have faith in someone who you do not believe exists. God resists the proud (James 4:6). They put their wisdom above His (1 Corinthians 1:19-21). He scoffs at those who think they know better, leaves them to their own darkened ways. They replace God as the highest authority and put themselves in His place. He makes their wisdom foolish.

    Those who humble themselves before God, by His grace He lifts up (in His time). Sometimes He allows a person to come to a low point in their life so that they reach out to Him because they have nothing left. When you have everything you need you tend to put God aside and pursue things that do not last.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    From what I have read in the Bible about God, the faith requirement seems pretty iffy. If the Christian God's desires match what is said in the Bible, it seems logical (to me at least) that there would be a way to know for sure you were fallowing the right path, given the gravity of that decision.
    Jesus is that path (John 14:6). Faith/belief in Him is what the Father calls for (Romans 3:28; Luke 18:14). The whole of the OT is a revelation of Him (Jesus) in types and shadows (Luke 24:44; Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 8:5). The physical reality of the OT points to a greater spiritual reality revealed more fully in the NT - Jesus Christ, the expectant Messiah. What is applied strictly to God in the OT is also applied to the Lord Jesus Christ in the NT. What is shown man cannot do in the OT is done by Jesus Christ in the NT.

    So, what makes Christianity different from other religions? Other religions are all religions of works (works based), what we do to earn God's mercy/favor by our "righteousness."(Galatians 2:16) Christianity is what God has lovingly done for us (John 3:16-18). Man is required to live justly before God by meeting requirements of goodness. The problem is, how can man live a perfectly righteous life before a holy and pure God? The witness of the OT, history, and every religious belief is that he can't.

    The Son of God became a man to fulfill for us the righteous requirements of God. He meets that perfect standard of righteousness by the life He lives as a man. He also takes the punishment for sin that we deserve and pays it for us. Thus, He satisfies God's righteousness in reconciling us (Romans 4:5; Romans 5:18; Romans 10:4), restoring the close relationship that was lost by Adam (Colossians 1:22). He also pays our penalty to satisfy God's justice - a good God does what is just!

    Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ transforms us and translates us into God's kingdom, through adoption (Ephesians 1:5). God opens our hearts and minds to His grace and mercy (2 Corinthians 4:6). He gives us a new nature, a nature that is no longer hostile or indifferent to Him (Romans 8:5-10). He continually confirms to us that His Word is true in what it says (1 Corinthians 2:12; Colossians 2:2-3).

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I have heard free will argued as the reason for a faith requirement, but if you believe in the Bible and resurrection etc, God has many, many times shown himself and/powers.
    Indeed, how can it be said you have free will to make a decision at all if you don't know for sure what the choices are? Especially a decision that involves eternity.
    Perhaps my definition of faith doesn't apply in this case for some reason?
    The witness of God is there for everyone (Romans 1:18-21). He shows His providence in sustaining the universe (Colossians 1:16-17) by what is made. He shows His grace and mercy by revealing Himself and what He is like by His Word and through His Spirit.

    I personally do not believe our wills are free but in bondage to all kinds of influences. We are governed by our sinful natures. We like to do what we like to do (that opposes God's good nature). We need God's grace to set us free from our bondages. We still have a volition (we choose), but we don't choose for God without hearing of His mercy, usually through His Word and Spirit in Christ, or by the witness of a Christian. It requires an act of God (John 3:3-5). The way, again, is Jesus Christ. We see our hopelessness in and of ourselves and see our need for a Savior. Are we willing to change? It requires repentance and the mercy of God. Bring it to God. He has done everything needed for our salvation/redemption! If you treat the Bible as the God of the universe speaking to you through Jesus and the two testaments, I think you open yourself to His message. The first time I ever read the Bible I knew I was on holy ground. God was speaking to me through the witness of Scripture! He was showing me who He is and what He requires, faith in Jesus.

    When you read the Bible pay attention to the audience of address and the time frame. Most people try to relate everything prophesied to themselves and their generation. That is not who the audience is addressing. It revolves around two covenants and God's judgment of the one (because of the faithlessness of most of OT Israel people to living in obedience to that covenant) to bring the other (better) covenant into existence.

    Why do some people believe, yet no matter how convincing the argument is, others will not? They just entrench themselves all the more against God. Hoping you hear His grace through the message!

    Peter

 

 
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8

Similar Threads

  1. Objective Morality and atheism
    By CliveStaples in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: September 16th, 2012, 02:36 PM
  2. Is God Necessary for Objective Morality?
    By estill in forum Religion
    Replies: 190
    Last Post: June 14th, 2012, 09:26 PM
  3. Objective morality is effectively useless
    By mican333 in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: September 11th, 2011, 06:59 AM
  4. Subjective Morality Is Pointless
    By MyXenocide in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 163
    Last Post: September 7th, 2011, 07:00 PM
  5. Subjective Morality
    By mican333 in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: July 19th, 2011, 07:44 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •