• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Moral argument my version - proof for God.

Link

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
(1) If a hypothetical creator can create morality from nothing, he can make it whatever he wants.
(2) If he can make whatever he wants, it can be arbitrary.
(3) If it can be arbitrary, it can be deemed moral to forever torture babies for no crime they done in severe torture/pain with no end to it.
(4) It cannot be in any possible world that it's moral to forever torture babies for no crime they done in severe torture/pain with no end to it.
(5) Therefore morality can't be arbitrary. (combination (3)(4))
(6)Therefore a hypothetical creator can't make it whatever he wants.(combination (5)(2))
(7)Therefore a hypothetical creator can't create morality from nothing.(combination (6)(1))

(8) If a hypothetical creator can't bring in morality so can't evolution since a hypothetical creator can create everything evolution can (structure wise).
(9)Therefore morality exists eternally.(combination (8)(7))

(10)If morality exists eternally, it includes all levels of moral greatness and possible goodness.
(11) The only being that can see ultimate morality is God
Therefore God exists eternally. (combination 9, 10, 11)
 
Last edited:
Link

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I numbered the premises so people can just talk about them easier and tell me where they see it's invalid or which premise they dispute.
 
Link

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
A shorter version:

If morality is objective, it's eternal.
Eternal morality in all it's possible levels and pieces can only be seen/exist by God.
Morality is objective.
Therefore God exists.

The longer argument shows more why this is the case, but that's the short version.
 
Link

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
JoshuaTree said:
So God exists because people are moral?
Click to expand...

Morality is a way to know God exists since it's his light, and he is the light of it and negative non-existence is it's darkness, it's eternality mixed with time, morality is. That's why Imam Jaffar (a) says following an example is nothing but what soul has been given at it's origin, when the light of time was mixed with that of eternality.
 
Link

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And goodness and believing it - is one of the quickest way to realize God exists.
 
viole

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Link said:
(1) If a hypothetical creator can create morality from nothing, he can make it whatever he wants.
(2) If he can make whatever he wants, it can be arbitrary.
(3) If it can be arbitrary, it can be deemed moral to forever torture babies for no crime they done in severe torture/pain with no end to it.
(4) It cannot be in any possible world that it's moral to forever torture babies for no crime they done in severe torture/pain with no end to it.
(5) Therefore morality can't be arbitrary. (combination (3)(4))
(6)Therefore a hypothetical creator can't make it whatever he wants.(combination (5)(2))
(7)Therefore a hypothetical creator can't create morality from nothing.(combination (6)(1))

(8) If a hypothetical creator can't bring in morality so can't evolution since a hypothetical creator can create everything evolution can (structure wise).
(9)Therefore morality exists eternally.(combination (8)(7))

(10)If morality exists eternally, it includes all levels of moral greatness and possible goodness.
(11) The only being that can see ultimate morality is God
Therefore God exists eternally. (combination 9, 10, 11)
Click to expand...
Useless: premises from 1 to 10 are valid also for analytical propositions like 2+2=4.

11) does not follow, since every idiot, without any divine attributes, can see the eternal truth that 2+2=4.

Ergo, your argument fails totally. And it took about 5 seconds to see how.

May I ask if you use such arguments to give you confidence that what you believe in is not just some hokus pokus?

Ciao

- viole
 
Link

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
viole said:
Useless: premises from 1 to 10 are valid also for analytical propositions like 2+2=4.

- viole
Click to expand...

That's true, but I didn't bring math and logic, both which need God too, nor beauty which needs God, I'm bringing something more obvious and more firm, which is morality.

And math can be argued, that no God can make it what it wants....and material eternal universe would contain math in it eternally, but eternal billions of big bangs leading to humans, can't contain morality.
 
viole

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Link said:
That's true, but I didn't bring math and logic, both which need God too, nor beauty which needs God, I'm bringing something more obvious and more firm, which is morality.
Click to expand...
Let me see.

You are bringing an argument, whose value, and inferences are usually based in logic. But logic, as you said, needs God. Ergo, you are making arguments for God whose validity already assume God from the start.

So, why do you do it? Looks like a waste of time to me.

Ciao

- viole
 
Link

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
viole said:
Let me see.

You are bringing an argument, whose value, and inferences are usually based in logic. But logic, as you said, needs God. Ergo, you are making arguments for God whose validity already assume God from the start.

So, why do you do it? Looks like a waste of time to me.

Ciao

- viole
Click to expand...

You doing sophistry and not addressing the actual argument.
 
viole

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Link said:
You doing sophistry and not addressing the actual argument.
Click to expand...
Yawn. Winning against such arguments, is like stealing lollypops from kids. It is so easy, that it is almost embarassing.

What sophistry? Do you, or do you not agree that logical inferences can be made without assuming a God? If yes, why did you say logic needs God?

Ciao

- viole
 
U

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Link said:
A shorter version:

If morality is objective, it's eternal.
Eternal morality in all it's possible levels and pieces can only be seen/exist by God.
Morality is objective.
Therefore God exists.

The longer argument shows more why this is the case, but that's the short version.
Click to expand...

I think what kills this is the "If-factor."

Is mortality objective?... objectivity isn't depended on who believes, what, and why. It exists on its own accord (like physics). Without humans, what is morality?

"Can only".... how is this conclusion based on objective reasoning and not personal opinion?

Can-only is also a logical fallacy. I think it's deductive reasoning or something similar if I'm not mistaken

"Therefore" and "can only" doesn't lead to objectivity. When drawing god-conclusions, it needs to be based on objective criteria that can be tested without need for someone to "believe in it" in order for it to be objective/a fact.

Which leads to my conclusion that god, like mortality, is in the eye of the bolder 'and' the experiencer. Which means god is subjective....nothing wrong with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top