Why Must Morals Come From God And Not Anywhere Else?

[Hassan]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1642103' date='Aug 29 2008, 10:28 PM']God tests Abraham.[/quote]

that is a very nice way of putting it. He lies to Abraham (I don't think that can be disputed, he tells him he must sacrafice his son when he apparently has no intention of makeing him go through with it).

[HisChildForever]

God is the absolute good. Morals (as we can all agree upon) are generally defined as principles of right conduct. Since "right" is generally "good" then we can say "morals" are "good" and since goodness comes from God alone, it makes sense that He created them. I also like to say that the "conscience" helps us identify what is "right" and what is "wrong". (And, when we do chose "wrong", it is the "conscience" that hits us with guilt.) It is possible that the Holy Spirit [i]is[/i] our "conscience" or the Holy Spirit [i]guides[/i] our "conscience".

So, say that God does not exist, or that He is the great clock-maker. Does this mean that it is up to humankind to determine right and wrong? Certainly, some humans will not agree on a set moral code.

This moral code has been instituted by God.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1642103' date='Aug 29 2008, 10:28 PM']God tests Abraham.[/quote]

Hey Cmom,

Don't you like how he completely ignores my [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s=&showtopic=84254&view=findpost&p=1642084"]post[/url], where my argument is, if man would accept God created things in a certain way, therefore if someone changes it, even to help another man, it has wide reaching consequences, like cancer, that would be avoided if we said, if God created cows to produce a certain amount of milk, why should we change it?

Don't you love it.

He won't deal with the real issue. Morality is simply, letting God be God.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1642105' date='Aug 30 2008, 12:31 AM']that is a very nice way of putting it. He lies to Abraham (I don't think that can be disputed, he tells him he must sacrafice his son when he apparently has no intention of makeing him go through with it).[/quote]
Were you there to hear the conversation?

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1642111' date='Aug 29 2008, 11:36 PM']Were you there to hear the conversation?[/quote]

He was hiding behind the altar taking pictures.

[Hassan]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1642111' date='Aug 29 2008, 10:36 PM']Were you there to hear the conversation?[/quote]

I'm just going by what the Bible says.

[Hassan]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1642120' date='Aug 29 2008, 11:44 PM']He was hiding behind the altar taking pictures. [/quote]


The alter was not constructed untill after God commanded Abraham to muder his own son

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1642129' date='Aug 30 2008, 12:00 AM']I'm just going by what the Bible says.[/quote]

In Gen 17:15-16, we see this.
[quote]God further said to Abraham: "As for your wife Sarai, do not call her Sarai; her name shall be Sarah. I will bless her, and I will give you a son by her. Him also will I bless; he shall give rise to nations, and rulers of peoples shall issue from him."[/quote]

While Abraham was "going through the motions" - that is, just about to strike Isaac - he was acting on faith and trust. God had already told him that Isaac will grow up, rule nations, and have children ("rulers of people [i]shall issue[/i] from him").

In Gen 22:2 we see this.
[quote]Then God said: "Take your son Isaac, your only one, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah. [b]There you shall offer him up as a holocaust on a height that I will point out to you[/b]."[/quote]

The part I emphasized is of tremendous importance. By bringing Isaac to Moriah, by taking out his knife to slay his only son (re: Gen 22:10), Abraham [i]did[/i] offer his son. The act may not have been carried out, but Abraham obeyed God faithfully. He [i]mentally[/i] offered Isaac up as a holocaust when he decided to sacrifice him for God.

Furthermore, Abraham suffered great anguish the entire time he and Isaac travelled to Moriah. What father wouldn't? He knew that he would have to live the rest of his life with the sorrow of murdering his son. He knew he would have to tell Sarah what he did. He would have to explain it to her. How hard would it be to explain that this was God's will, how convincing would he be with tears streaming down his face, with anger (yes, even anger) and confusion drowning his words?

[Justin86]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1642100' date='Aug 30 2008, 12:27 PM']I would simply contend that the feelings about murder being undesirable are just more widespread and applicable than someone loving a particular person. It affects more people and thus, people have a more similar opinion.[/quote]
The problem is precisely what you have stated here: Atheists can be moral, but it becomes nothing more than an opinion, with no ultimate consequence for either being good, or being bad. If there is no God, no Heaven, no Hell, what does it matter if we live moral lives or not? What reward do we get?

[Hassan]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1642144' date='Aug 29 2008, 11:13 PM']In Gen 17:15-16, we see this.


While Abraham was "going through the motions" - that is, just about to strike Isaac - he was acting on faith and trust. God had already told him that Isaac will grow up, rule nations, and have children ("rulers of people [i]shall issue[/i] from him").[/quote]

Yes, Kierkegaard wrote a beautifull novel on this. He had to jumop through hoops to find any justification




[quote]The part I emphasized is of tremendous importance. By bringing Isaac to Moriah, by taking out his knife to slay his only son (re: Gen 22:10), Abraham [i]did[/i] offer his son.[/quote]

No he did not offer up a Holocaust as the Torah prescribes, you can transpose your Christian assumptions on it if you wish, however that does not change the text.

[quote]The act may not have been carried out, but Abraham obeyed God faithfully. He [i]mentally[/i] offered Isaac up as a holocaust when he decided to sacrifice him for God.[/quote]

When God told Abraham:
[i]Then God said: "Take your son Isaac, your only one, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah. There you shall offer him up as a holocaust on a height that I will point out to you."[/i]

Do you think that Abraham thought he would be offering up a "mental" sacrafice? And if not, thn what would be the term we could apply to God leading Abraham to believe something (that he would be killing Isaac) that was not actually the case?

[quote]Furthermore, Abraham suffered great anguish the entire time he and Isaac travelled to Moriah.[/quote]

Yes, because God had led him to believe hw would be killing his own son

[quote]What father wouldn't? He knew that he would have to live the rest of his life with the sorrow of murdering his son. He knew he would have to tell Sarah what he did. He would have to explain it to her. How hard would it be to explain that this was God's will, how convincing would he be with tears streaming down his face, with anger (yes, even anger) and confusion drowning his words?[/quote]

You should read "Fear and Trembling", that's not a shot, I just think you may like it. Unless you alreay have read it

[Hassan]

[quote name='Justin86' post='1642196' date='Aug 29 2008, 11:44 PM']The problem is precisely what you have stated here: Atheists can be moral, but it becomes nothing more than an opinion, with no ultimate consequence for either being good, or being bad. If there is no God, no Heaven, no Hell, what does it matter if we live moral lives or not? What reward do we get?[/quote]

no reward, you just do things you think will make the world a better place.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1642257' date='Aug 30 2008, 12:34 AM']no reward, you just do things you think will make the world a better place.[/quote]

People who created Modified Bovine Growth Hormone thought they were making the world a better place, because cow farmers could produce more milk for sale, and more milk means healthier people, and people having more money from sales of milk.

Unfortunately, the extra hormones that get created by a Cow treated by rBGH, have been know to cause Cancer in people. . .

Well, with that being said. Maybe the scientists should have thought this moral question. If God created a cow to make this much milk, what right do I have to make cows make more?

Wow, Sounds like they should have been humble before God, and not said, hey we can make it better!

Edited August 30, 2008 by MakeYouThink

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Justin86' post='1642196' date='Aug 29 2008, 10:44 PM']The problem is precisely what you have stated here: Atheists can be moral, but it becomes nothing more than an opinion, with no ultimate consequence for either being good, or being bad. If there is no God, no Heaven, no Hell, what does it matter if we live moral lives or not? What reward do we get?[/quote]
Why do you need a reward or punishment? That kind of proves that those who are Christian arent really good people for any other reason than fearing hell.

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1642262' date='Aug 29 2008, 11:48 PM']People who created Modified Bovine Growth Hormone thought they were making the world a better place, because cow farmers could produce more milk for sale, and more milk means healthier people, and people having more money from sales of milk.

Unfortunately, the extra hormones that get created by a Cow treated by rBGH, have been know to cause Cancer in people. . .

Well, with that being said. Maybe the scientists should have thought this moral question. If God created a cow to make this much milk, what right do I have to make cows make more?

Wow, Sounds like they should have been humble before God, and not said, hey we can make it better![/quote]
I'm not sure how pointing out a mistake that scientists made somehow equates with morals needing to be absolute.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1642262' date='Aug 29 2008, 11:48 PM']People who created Modified Bovine Growth Hormone thought they were making the world a better place, because cow farmers could produce more milk for sale, and more milk means healthier people, and people having more money from sales of milk.

Unfortunately, the extra hormones that get created by a Cow treated by rBGH, have been know to cause Cancer in people. . .

Well, with that being said. Maybe the scientists should have thought this moral question. If God created a cow to make this much milk, what right do I have to make cows make more?

Wow, Sounds like they should have been humble before God, and not said, hey we can make it better![/quote]
To add to what I said, maybe scientists should stop looking for the cure to cancer then, seeing as if God wanted us to live longer, he wouldn't have created cancer.

You're point is kind of silly.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1642265' date='Aug 30 2008, 02:02 AM']Why do you need a reward or punishment? That kind of proves that those who are Christian arent really good people for any other reason than fearing hell.


I'm not sure how pointing out a mistake that scientists made somehow equates with morals needing to be absolute.[/quote]

That's the thing. Why did scientists make a mistake. . .

Because they presumed to think they could make something better than God (Can we say pride), and with good intentions, they paved the way to lots of people's death from cancer from the milk that people drank from treated cows!

So, they did sin, and there has to be a moral absolute that people humble themselves to God for the way he has made things, or more things like that will occur! We can't play God and not expect it to bite us in the !

And whenever we sin, we say the same thing, we know better than God (again that is pride), and we will be accountable for that I know better than you attitude, when we come before God!