Page 1 of 1
Why can't the argument go this way?
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:55 am
by spartanII
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.
Re: Why can't the argument go this way?
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:16 am
by Furstentum Liechtenstein
spartanII wrote:Objective morality does exist
Therefore Gods exist.
Why does it have to be one singular God?
Perhaps because God has singleness of mind (Dt 6:4).* Several gods would have differing opinions on morality.
FL
*...
and Dt 6:4 is itself a good indication that God is One because He says so!
Re: Why can't the argument go this way?
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:21 am
by jlay
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.
Re: Why can't the argument go this way?
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:03 am
by spartanII
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.
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.
Re: Why can't the argument go this way?
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:23 am
by narnia4
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.