Why can't the argument be
If Gods don't exist then objective morality doesn't exist.
Objective morality does exist
Therefore Gods exist.
Why does it have to be one singular God?
I know people like WLC are defending one God so of course it'd be one God to him, but what stops the argument from being polytheistic and just as rational if a believer of polytheism is trying to make the claim?
Also, I don't understand how one can be deistic and at the same time think there are objective morals.
Didn't Plato say once that if there are objective morals then God HAS to be personal.
Why can't the argument go this way?
-
spartanII
- Established Member
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 9:38 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
Why can't the argument go this way?
Atheist: "Science says it, I believe it, That settles it."
-
Furstentum Liechtenstein
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:55 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: It's Complicated
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
- Location: Lower Canuckistan
Re: Why can't the argument go this way?
Perhaps because God has singleness of mind (Dt 6:4).* Several gods would have differing opinions on morality.spartanII wrote:Objective morality does exist
Therefore Gods exist.
Why does it have to be one singular God?
FL
*...and Dt 6:4 is itself a good indication that God is One because He says so!
Hold everything lightly. If you don't, it will hurt when God pries your fingers loose as He takes it from you. -Corrie Ten Boom
+ + +
If they had a social gospel in the days of the prodigal son, somebody would have given him a bed and a sandwich and he never would have gone home.
+ + +
+ + +
If they had a social gospel in the days of the prodigal son, somebody would have given him a bed and a sandwich and he never would have gone home.
+ + +
-
jlay
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 3613
- Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:47 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Re: Why can't the argument go this way?
OM only makes sense in a monotheistic sense.
If you study polytheistic religions you quickly learn that the gods are arbitrary, emotional, limited, and replete with faults including moral failures. Basically amplified humans.
If you study polytheistic religions you quickly learn that the gods are arbitrary, emotional, limited, and replete with faults including moral failures. Basically amplified humans.
-“The Bible treated allegorically becomes putty in the hands of the exegete.” John Walvoord
"I'm not saying scientists don't overstate their results. They do. And it's understandable, too...If you spend years working toward a certain goal and make no progress, of course you are going to spin your results in a positive light." Ivellious
"I'm not saying scientists don't overstate their results. They do. And it's understandable, too...If you spend years working toward a certain goal and make no progress, of course you are going to spin your results in a positive light." Ivellious
-
spartanII
- Established Member
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 9:38 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
Re: Why can't the argument go this way?
That was what i was thinking. That, and objective morality only comes from a single source. Not multiple sources, right? But how do i make that axiomatic? That, and my friend told me that within a Buddhist religion, or Hindu religion, the individual is still the ultimate authority. So he/she chooses what is right/wrong. So morals, within that system, are still subjective.jlay wrote:OM only makes sense in a monotheistic sense.
If you study polytheistic religions you quickly learn that the gods are arbitrary, emotional, limited, and replete with faults including moral failures. Basically amplified humans.
Atheist: "Science says it, I believe it, That settles it."
-
narnia4
- Senior Member
- Posts: 560
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 12:44 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Undecided
Re: Why can't the argument go this way?
I think you could definitely argue that OM only makes sense under monotheism and not polytheism, but even if you couldn't its not too big of a deal imo. Establish that theism is correct, and there are other arguments out there that can show that there is not (or cannot be) multiple "capital G" Gods.
Young, Restless, Reformed