Moral command theory is false.

[Link]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

[Alan V]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

Do you understand that the atheists you are addressing do not refer to "holy books" to understand what is good?  Do you also realize that what such books say is good is terribly outdated and culture-bound?

[Link]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

Do you understand that the atheists you are addressing do not refer to "holy books" to understand what is good?  Do you also realize that what such books say is good is terribly outdated and culture-bound?

I know, it's because, some Theists (I included) misunderstood the Command theory and said it was a reason to believe in God. This is false. So I'm correcting a mistake in the past.

[Deesse23]

God commands what he sees is good.

How do you know?

He creates what he knows is good.

How do you know?

He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

How do you know?

[jerryg]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

You are describing good as a separate entity to God.  But God created good. So it's still His will, no?  What is the creation of good, but a command even if indirect.

It's like we're playing a game I made up, and I say "You can't do that.  Not because I say, but because it's in the rules (which I wrote)."  Isn't that the same thing?

[Link]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

You are describing good as a separate entity to God.  But God created good. So it's still His will, no?  What is the creation of good, but a command even if indirect.

It's like we're playing a game I made up, and I say "You can't do that.  Not because I say, but because it's in the rules (which I wrote)."  Isn't that the same thing?

It's like saying he created the rules of logic, that doesn't make sense.  God knew the rules of logic but he didn't create them. God is himself a good being, he didn't create himself.

[Dānu]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

[Link]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

Thanks for the hot animation.

[jerryg]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

You are describing good as a separate entity to God.  But God created good. So it's still His will, no?  What is the creation of good, but a command even if indirect.

It's like we're playing a game I made up, and I say "You can't do that.  Not because I say, but because it's in the rules (which I wrote)."  Isn't that the same thing?

It's like saying he created the rules of logic, that doesn't make sense.  God knew the rules of logic but he didn't create them. God is himself a good being, he didn't create himself.

If nothing existed, do you think the rules of logic would?  Or do you think the rules of logic are just a way to describe part of what does exist?

[Link]

You are describing good as a separate entity to God.  But God created good. So it's still His will, no?  What is the creation of good, but a command even if indirect.

It's like we're playing a game I made up, and I say "You can't do that.  Not because I say, but because it's in the rules (which I wrote)."  Isn't that the same thing?

It's like saying he created the rules of logic, that doesn't make sense.  God knew the rules of logic but he didn't create them. God is himself a good being, he didn't create himself.

If nothing existed, do you think the rules of logic would?  Or do you think the rules of logic are just a way to describe part of what does exist?

If nothing existed, the rules of logic would not exist. I think the rules of logic and reality go hand to hand, but logic is not a physical thing.

[Chimp3]

All morality is of the human imagination and also intrinsic to social creatures. All gods are human contrived. We can leave gods out of the argument. Since we know far more than the authors of ancient scripture then we can leave them out of any moral arguments too. Morality is a contemporary, evolving debate.

[Mark]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

Like he needs pointers?

[jerryg]

It's like saying he created the rules of logic, that doesn't make sense.  God knew the rules of logic but he didn't create them. God is himself a good being, he didn't create himself.

If nothing existed, do you think the rules of logic would?  Or do you think the rules of logic are just a way to describe part of what does exist?

If nothing existed, the rules of logic would not exist. I think the rules of logic and reality go hand to hand, but logic is not a physical thing.

Do you believe God is bound by the rules of logic? In that the rules of reality are more powerful than God?

[Bucky Ball]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

Does he create the 6 month old with terminal cancer ?

[brewerb]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

This sounds like the rationalization of a terrorist.

[Cheerful Charlie]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

How many times in the gospels did Jesus command Christians to sell all they have and give to the poor?  How many Christians do that?  And see Acts 4:29-42.  God commands communism be practiced among Christians?  Why don't Christians actually do that?

Part of the art of being a modern day American Christian is choosing the parts of the Bible they are not going to follow as commanded.

[airportkid]

... This sounds like the rationalization of a terrorist ...

The apex of moral aspiration of the worshiper is "do god's will".

God's will could be anything:  infant genocide, child rape, rape, murder, buying Wal-Mart brand cosmetics, government overthrow - anything.  God's will has no boundary, no restraint, no definition.  God's will is whatever some jackass human says it is.

The secularist's apex of moral aspiration runs closer to "don't f*%k up my neighbor".  One of these two aspirations constitutes far less menace than the other.  One of these two aspirations is far less likely to inspire terrorism; the other is always just a hair's breadth away from doing exactly that.

Every terrorist believes utterly he's carrying out the highest possible moral act: doing god's will, not his own.
 
No one is safe until this vicious piece of mental chicanery is eradicated to the last neuron in the last zealot.  Which will probably be awhile.

[Dānu]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

How many times in the gospels did Jesus command Christians to sell all they have and give to the poor?  How many Christians do that?  And see Acts 4:29-42.  God commands communism be practiced among Christians?  Why don't Christians actually do that?

Part of the art of being a modern day American Christian is choosing the parts of the Bible they are not going to follow as commanded.

FYI, Link is Muslim. Not that it changes much.

[Phaedrus]

Objectively, the god character is not and never was good. Hitler thought he was doing good, and so did the Germans. Even Darth Vader thought he was doing good. When you reasonably take a step back from the claim, and logically analyze it, you realize that there is no good in the situation proposed by any god any more than disillusioned humans thinking they are doing good for their subjective ideal toward the betterment of humanity.

And the morality in any ancient text does not and cannot properly transition past the time it was written to align with the evolution and progress of a society.

[Link]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

This sounds like the rationalization of a terrorist.

Yes, this is part of their wrong thinking.

[Fireball]

How many threads does a pig fucker get to start per day before the SPAM rule kicks in? 

[Chas]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

There are no gods. Grow up.

[Chas]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

You are describing good as a separate entity to God.  But God created good. So it's still His will, no?  What is the creation of good, but a command even if indirect.

It's like we're playing a game I made up, and I say "You can't do that.  Not because I say, but because it's in the rules (which I wrote)."  Isn't that the same thing?

It's like saying he created the rules of logic, that doesn't make sense.  God knew the rules of logic but he didn't create them. God is himself a good being, he didn't create himself.

Of course not - he was created by a meta-god who was created by a meta-meta-god who was created by a meta-meta-meta-god who was created by a meta-meta-meta-meta-god who was created by a meta-meta-meta-meta-meta-god who was created by a meta-meta-meta-meta-meta-meta-god ...

It's metas all the way down.

[SYZ]

It took me a while to realize that. But God commands things that are good. Although him commanding something, would make it good to obey, if this was the criteria of him commanding, that is he commands anything and it's "good", then all morals would be arbitrary.

God commands what he sees is good. He creates what he knows is good. He forms what is good. And himself is what is good.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

How many of these fucking threads are you gonna start mate?    It's all bullshit.      

There are no such things as supernatural entities or paranormal phenomena, and
you're an ignoramus if you believe there are.  You need to read up on 21st century
science and research, rather than living in the dark ages believing everything your
your paedophile prophet says.  What are you gonna say next?  That fucking 9-year-old
girls is okay?  Your entire religious values disgust me, as do your personal distorted,
perverse views on the world and its people.  

I'm sick and tired of ignorant cunts like you flooding theist forums with your obnoxious
viewpoints, with no intent of engaging in any meaningful dialogue.  You're nothing
more than a missionary of hate and deceit, trying to spread your cretinous beliefs like
an insidious virus.    Do us all a favour, and piss off.     Thank you.

[Reltzik]

So, I'm with you on moral command theory being false (though I know it by the name Divine Command Theory, instead).

But then there's this.

This important, because, it means holy books should be seen as moral guides, not books to define what is good, but make you see what is good.

So, when we read in a certain holy book that a rape victim should be married to her rapist, is that a good moral guide?

Most scriptures have a mix of good and bad in them, and it's important to be able to filter out the bad and keep the good.  Which means we need to turn to something other than scripture for moral guidance, because we can't use scripture to filter itself.