Atheism Cannot Rationally Explain Morals.

And my point has been that what YOU call morality is exactly the same. Exactly. In different circumstances a completely different morality might be appropriate. Morality doesn't have to be either sense or nonsense. It just has to work. We can certainly discuss it. You can start by citing wherever the Bible says that, "God is infinite and thus his morality is absolute as a result of that." That's just it. You "know" it instinctively, not rationally. We can certainly discuss your so-called "evidence" in an appropriate thread.

Huh? Of course the word subjective is relative. Subjective MEANS different for each person - i.e. relative to the subject. That doesn't follow at all. We non-Nazis agree collectively that some of the things they did were wrong. Collective agreement is as close to objectivity as we can get. Remember the social contract? Child molesting is a breach of the social contract. One person can not have a contract with himself so one person does not have his own private morality. It worked until the rest of us intervened. It was a clash of different moralities.Take slavery as another example. It worked just fine for centuries. It was supported by Christians, based on an "absolute morality" that came from the same source as your "absolute morality". You're right back to the same problem that you haven't addressed: If there exists a being outside the universe that is all knowing and absolute in its morality, then YOU still don't know what that absolute morality is. YOU are not omniscient. And the fact that there are thousands of different sects with thousands of different ideas of "absolute morality" means that you don't even have a collective approximation of objectivity. None of that says anything about morality.Also, Romans 11 says that God's judgements are unsearchable and unfathomable - i.e. YOU have no way of knowing absolutely what they are. No, it means impossible to understand or interpret. The Bible is shooting you in the foot.

Why would one make that claim? That believer would be contradicting his own Bible. Look at Dawn Bertot's own quotes. God is beyond our understanding. That's common behaviour of people who are proven wrong.

That's right. Morality is not a thing like a banana. It's made up in human minds. It's an agreement between humans to make living together in society easier. Like any contract, the specific provisions vary to suit the situation. Your morality is the same. You've made it up. The only difference is that you've fooled yourself into thinking that God whispered it in your ear. You didn't need to demonstrate that. It's what I've been saying all along. Social animals have their own social contracts just like ours. Subjectivity exists because perceptions and imaginations are not real things. Everybody has different perceptions and imaginations. That's what subjectivity means. What did you think it meant? There is no "actual" meaning. There's only the meaning that we assign. The same applies to you. The only "meaning" in the Bible is what you imagine. The Bible says you can't understand God. You quoted it yourself. Those verses don't say anything about God's character either. They say that He is infinite and that you can't understand Him. And if you don't understand Him completely, you can't understand His morality absolutely. You have to make it up just like the rest of us.

The only way "good" or "bad" has to exist in reality is by way of the person's behaviour. He imagines that his behaviour is "good" or "bad". There is no need for an absolute standard of "good" or "bad" to exist. Once again your own citation disagrees with you:

quote:

---

Romans 2:14-16 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

---

The Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the law. The imaginations and perceptions of what IS real are all we have, all of us, including you. Your imagination and perception of God is as close to real as God can get. Your imagination and perception of morality is as close to real as morality can get.Your imagination and perception of a two-by-four is "more real" in the sense that you can compare your own imagination and perception with those of other people to form an approximation of an objective view of the object. You can also understand the concept of flight without being able to fly. You can understand the concept of unicorns whether unicorns exist in reality or not. The concept is nothing but imagination and perception. It doesn't have to have any basis in reality.

Exactly. According to the Bible, it's written on everybody's heart at birth. So it isn't something we figure out rationally, not for atheists and not for theists either. Indeed. The Bible authors knew something about reality and they don't agree with you. James 1:13-16 refers to every man, not just believers.

The verses that you quoted, including James, don't set theists apart from atheists. You claim that you have special insight into God's "absolute morality" but nothing you have quoted from the Bible supports that claim.As I have said all along, your morality is no more "accurate" than an atheist's. It's made up just like the atheist's. Yours may have religious influences where the atheist's has only social influences but the fact remains that both are equally made up.

I've asked you more than once to tell us the absolute meaning of, "Thou shalt not kill." If there are exceptions, how is it absolute?You're free to answer that one.

That's what Dawn Bertot said, more or less, but he says it IS absolute.

The question isn't whether absolute morality can or does exist. The question is whether theistic morality an be differentiated from atheistic morality. Since you admit that you don't know everything, it doesn't matter whether or not God has absolute standards because you don't know exactly what those standards are.You can know that brain surgery exists without knowing how to do brain surgery. Similarly, you can "know" that absolute morality exists without knowing how to do absolute morality.So the question remains, how is your theistic morality different from anybody else's morality? You have to guess at what God wants while the atheist at least gets to rationally decide what is best for society. Your morality is less rational, not more.

It's only fairly recently that rape has become a crime against women. It used to be a crime against the husband, much like using his lawnmower without permission. It was about keeping track of whose offspring belonged to whom.

There's individual morality and there's collective morality. Our society can agree that slavery is a bad thing while individuals like Faith can argue that homosexuality is worse than slavery because that's what the Bible sez. At best, an individual can live up to his own standards approximately. And sometimes individual standards conflict with community standards. That's a nice bowl of cherries. While you're at it, you can conveniently ignore any examples of Jesus' immorality that you don't like.

I didn't say that. I said that it doesn't matter whether or not absolute morality exists - because neither you nor anybody else has any way of knowing what that absolute morality would be. The Bible verses that YOU quoted confirm that NONE of us can understand the mind of God fully. That's exactly what I've been saying. There is no such thing as morality except in imaginations. The same applies to your own morality. You really don't seem to understand what "subjective" means. Can you explain it in one sentence?

It isn't rocket science. You may know that brain surgery exists but you don't know how to do it. You may know that rocket science exists but you don't know how to do it. You may know that absolute morality exists but you don't know how to do it.What we're talking about here is not knowing that something exists. We're talking about knowing how to do it. We're talking about rationally figuring out what is moral and what is not.If you DID know all the facets of absolute morality, you wouldn't be figuring anything out rationally. You'd only be following orders, which requires no rational thought at all. Not at all. To say that God is wrong from our perspective is no different from saying that the Nazis were wrong from our perspective. God and the Nazis are right from their own perspective but not necessarily from ours. Unless you know EXACTLY what God's perspective is, you can't rationally conclude that it is "right". You're only taking his word for it, which is not rational. You continue to demonstrate that you don't know what "subjective" means. Kindly explain in simple terms what YOU think it means and then I can point out why you don't understand what I'm saying.

Of course not. Why would it? Aerodynamics doesn't impose any morality on us either. No. Morality is whatever society wants it to be, whatever works to help us live together in relative harmony.