Posted on 04/05/2016 7:51:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
One of those gods has a Son.
One of those gods does NOT have a son.
Different beings.
Morality has to come from somewhere. You can't trust it to "majority rule." Those who pride themselves on being moral exist within a culture that has already determined what is moral and what is not. The fact that Islamic morality differs by 180 degrees from JudeoChristian morality on many vital points indicates that morality is not relative. It is learned, and is taught and modeled. It came from somewhere; and one of these systems logically has to be closer to accurate alignment with Nature than the other.
In the Western canon, morality came not from the point of a sword, as in Islam, but rather from the supernatural actions of a loving and communicative God. Those who witnessed the early miracles also were instructed to bring up their children and maintain their families and communities within the moral law of the God of Abraham. Many who still recognize this God still recognize new miracles in contemporary life.
At some point, a person wishing to have deep moral integrity must recognize the coherent Source Code for his/her morality and drive corruption out of his or her self-righteous, intellect-based morality, just as he or she would clean up his/her laptop so it can operate effectively, or at all. After all, most people did not design, build and develop his laptop — those who came before have brought forward a rich and complex stream of knowledge, based on principles of conductance and communication present in nature.
And Who designed Nature?
Rational people who recognize the exquisite detail of computers that automatically reject a data transmission if even one dot is out of place can also accept the probability that there is a master programmer for the orderly operation of the planetary universe, a SysOp who is massively capable of having built an organic intelligence technology into our DNA that records and operates everything; and that He can examine, augment, delete or change areas of this detailed code for His reasons, or at His pleasure.
City Journal is still pretty good.
Are you suggesting that God is a hacker? ;)
Begs the question; who designed the designer?
Tell me about nations founded on the principle of objectivism.
It’s like the joke.
Man goes to God and says, “We don’t need you anymore. We can create man from dirt just like you.”
God says, “Ok, go ahead, show me.”
The man picks up some dirt.
God says, “No....go make your own dirt.”
“I beg to differ. Islam is based on the same “God of Abraham” as Judaism and Christianity.”
Beg to differ all you want, you don’t know what you’re talking about. As I said the Koran borrows names from the Bible, Abraham being one. It also includes Jesus.
The morality and theology of Islam does not have anything in common with that of Christianity or Judaism.
Muslims believe that Mohammed was God's true prophet.
How is relevant to the efficacy of a philosophical system?
” Begs the question; who designed the designer?”
Aseity is part of the definition of God in Christian theology. This is basic stuff.
Don't be silly. You can walk around doing what you determine to be "good" and "moral" all you want.
You and your fellows can even draw up social contracts and do your best to abide by them, rather like a Homeowners Association.
But without a divine authority, without God, there is no morality.
God instructs the faithful as to what is good and what is evil.
Who instructs you? I mean it not as a challenge or a rebuke, but a genuine question: Who or what instructs you?
So objectivism actually has nothing to do with reality?
Aseity is a device to avoid the infinite regression of creators/designers.
Again, this assumes the conclusion.
Who instructs you? I mean it not as a challenge or a rebuke, but a genuine question: Who or what instructs you?
A system of ethics based on two simple, self-evident truths. That the universe exists and that I exist within it.
Just because no country has been created in the name of Objectivism doesn't mean it has nothing to do with reality.
How did you come to that conclusion?
You are waving around cliches as if that means something. It’s painfully obvious that you know next to nothing about how dramatically these religions differ.
It’s not uncommon for many people to have no interest in religion. But those who have little interest and even less knowledge probably shouldn’t pontificate on the subject.
What is the philosophic pedigree of objectivism?
There is no infinite regression involved when the subject by definition is self-existing. That’s not even theology, it’s basic logic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.