Why did not the moral law please the unbelievers?

[questfortruth]

1. If there is the moral law (like "not to do abortion", "not to murder a baby in a baby carriage"), then there is the Law Maker.

2. The moral law is. It is immoral to tell a lie. And if there is nothing but lies, then there is no Truth. And latter is not true, therefore they are wrong and maliciously lie, that there is no moral law.

3. Therefore, there is the Law Maker - God.

What did the atheists say in this video made by atheists?

They simply say:
"Prove that there is a moral law, prove that you can not murder a baby in baby carriage." By that they are unveiling that without God there is no morality in them.

What are the atheists trying to do, referring to the fact that God executed people with the World Flood? If they proved that morality does not exist, then they are immoral. And the lie is immoral, so they slander God, they rub Saint God into their own mud. Or have they proved that killing babies in abortions or in baby carriages is the norm? Then they violated the law of their country, because there is no state fascism in the country. So, they are immoral and slander the Holy God.

Look their day dream about to murder a baby:
(there is the picture) Ответы@Mail.Ru: Почему моральный закон не понравился неверующим?

FROM DISCUSSION:

one YouTube person does not speak for all atheists.
THE CHRISTIANITY TEACHES NOT TO MURDER. IT IS THE DOGMA, IT IS THE COMMANDMENT. NO SINGLE CHRISTIAN, IF HE CAN BE CALLED "CHRISTIAN", CAN THINK OF MURDER. BUT MANY ATHEISTS HAVE NO MORAL LAW. FROM THERE THEY HAVE IT? FROM GOD?! SO, THE SINGLE YOUTUBE VIDEO SPEAKS FOR EVERY SINGLE ATHEIST.

Each one can speak for oneself, including what each one considers to be logical and evidence.
OUR HOLY GOD IS THE GOD OF ABSOLUTE TRUTH, SO THE ATHEISTS PERFECTLY KNOW THE TRUE GOD. THE GOD TELLS THEM THROUGH CONSCIENCE, THAT 2+2 IS 4, THAT MURDER IS NOT MORAL. THE PROBLEM: THEY ARE LIARS.

And ones might have different reasons for having moral systems.
IF THERE ARE TWO MORALS, WHICH HAVE RIGHT TO EXIST, THEN THE PERSON HAS THE DOUBLE STANDARDS. THAT IS SIN AND LIE.

 

[Earthling]

Wait a minute, now . . . don't you think that that video makes perfect sense? I certainly do.

 

[Woberts]

Whatever, buddy.

 

[PureX]

The problem with religious morality is that it assumes itself to be the authority on what is and isn't moral. So, of course, anyone that rejects the religion will be likely to reject the moral imperatives that the religion is epousing. And to add fuel to that 'insult', the religion will then condemn anyone that doesn't agree with it's self-centered moral imperatives as being "immoral". Thus proving it's own selfish intention to impose, by force, it's own self-assumed moral authority over others.

This is the main reason why I reject all forms of organized religion, and whatever dogmas and doctrines they espouse, on principal. The principal being that they insist on placing themselves in authority over me, and on my subjugating my own sense of moral imperative to theirs. They want to deny me my right as a human being to make my own moral choices. And I refuse to give it to them, because I believe that as a human being, I am responsible for making my own determinations about what is and is not a moral imperative, and why I think so.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The problem with religious morality is that it assumes itself to be the authority on what is and isn't moral. So, of course, anyone that rejects the religion will be likely to reject the moral imperatives that the religion is epousing. And to add fuel to that 'insult', the religion will then condemn anyone that doesn't agree with it's self-centered moral imperatives as being "immoral". Thus proving it's own selfish intention to impose, by force, it's own self-assumed moral authority over others.

Moral law (as appropriated by any religion) is an immorality, plagiarism. It has been espoused by many before them.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Why did not the moral law please the unbelievers?

I suspect it might have been unnecessarily written in all-caps text. That might have been a good reason to reject it, for sure.

 

[ChristineM]

1. If there is the moral law (like "not to do abortion", "not to murder a baby in a baby carriage"), then there is the Law Maker.

2. The moral law is. It is immoral to tell a lie. And if there is nothing but lies, then there is no Truth. And latter is not true, therefore they are wrong and maliciously lie, that there is no moral law.

3. Therefore, there is the Law Maker - God.

What did the atheists say in this video made by atheists?

They simply say:
"Prove that there is a moral law, prove that you can not murder a baby in baby carriage." By that they are unveiling that without God there is no morality in them.

What are the atheists trying to do, referring to the fact that God executed people with the World Flood? If they proved that morality does not exist, then they are immoral. And the lie is immoral, so they slander God, they rub Saint God into their own mud. Or have they proved that killing babies in abortions or in baby carriages is the norm? Then they violated the law of their country, because there is no state fascism in the country. So, they are immoral and slander the Holy God.

Look their day dream about to murder a baby:
(there is the picture) Ответы@Mail.Ru: Почему моральный закон не понравился неверующим?

FROM DISCUSSION:

one YouTube person does not speak for all atheists.
THE CHRISTIANITY TEACHES NOT TO MURDER. IT IS THE DOGMA, IT IS THE COMMANDMENT. NO SINGLE CHRISTIAN, IF HE CAN BE CALLED "CHRISTIAN", CAN THINK OF MURDER. BUT MANY ATHEISTS HAVE NO MORAL LAW. FROM THERE THEY HAVE IT? FROM GOD?! SO, THE SINGLE YOUTUBE VIDEO SPEAKS FOR EVERY SINGLE ATHEIST.

Each one can speak for oneself, including what each one considers to be logical and evidence.
OUR HOLY GOD IS THE GOD OF ABSOLUTE TRUTH, SO THE ATHEISTS PERFECTLY KNOW THE TRUE GOD. THE GOD TELLS THEM THROUGH CONSCIENCE, THAT 2+2 IS 4, THAT MURDER IS NOT MORAL. THE PROBLEM: THEY ARE LIARS.

And ones might have different reasons for having moral systems.
IF THERE ARE TWO MORALS, WHICH HAVE RIGHT TO EXIST, THEN THE PERSON HAS THE DOUBLE STANDARDS. THAT IS SIN AND LIE.

There is no moral law, however some laws are based on morality.

Morality is a human trait far older than religion. Without morality humanity could never have attained civilization which enabled the rise of religion.

Religion cherry picked human morality and used it to sell hatred of whoever is not of their religion while making themselves feel superior.

I find such abuse of morality to be highly immoral.

 

[LuisDantas]

This talk about a divine law makes does not really make any sense, and only serves to confuse what turns out to be a significant matter.

 

[PureX]

This talk about a divine law makes does not really make any sense, and only serves to confuse what turns out to be a significant matter.

Unfortunately, the term "divine law" is far too often used as an excuse for not providing any other reasoning than; "I (as God's spokesman) say so".

I could accept the idea of a "divine law" if someone would explain to me, logically and reasonably, what they are labeling as "divine", and how it relates to our considering it a "law". I actually think an argument can be made in this area of reasoning, but I never see one being made by the people who tend to use this terminology.

 

[Twilight Hue]

People do realize (hopefully) that religion does not corner the market on morality.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Most religions do not assume that morality is handed down from on high: that's a monotheists' idea.

Good behaviour is behaviour that enables us to flourish in the life in which we are placed. That is why most societies share the basic values: there is no society which accepts murdering some-one for their money. Obviously the difference comes in the detail. Everyone accepts that morder is wrong, but they may differ in what constitutes murder. For some (a few) it would include killing in self-defence, for others (also a few) it would include abortion.

The belief in divine law rather than natural law has its obvious dangers, as when Christians want to criminalise abortion and Muslims to execute blasphemers.