Tim?

Demand more from your God, shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just? (Skeptic)

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

Sylogism for Objective Morality:

1. Action presupposes reasons -> To act intentionally is to take oneself to have reasons for acting.

2. Reasons must be universalizable -> A reason counts as rational only if it could justify action for any relevantly similar agent, not merely because it is "my" preference.

3. Agency is the capacity to recognize and act on reasons ->
Agents are beings capable of understanding and acting for reasons. This capacity exists in varying degrees, including developing or partial forms.

4. Agency requires objective conditions -> To act for reasons, agents require certain generic goods: Life, bodily integrity, minimal freedom, and cognitive functioning. Without these conditions, agency is impossible.

5. Therefore every agent must value these conditions because these goods are necessary for any action at all, every agent must regard them as necessary for their own agency.

6. Denying them to others is arbitrary -> If an agent claims these goods are necessary for themselves but not for others, the justification becomes identity-based ("because it’s me"), which is not a rationally generalizable reason.

7. Therefore rational agents must recognize the agency of others -> Consistency requires recognizing that the same conditions that justify protecting one's own agency apply to other agents and developing agents as well.

8. Violating those conditions without justification frustrates agency -> Actions like killing, coercion, or torture unjustifiably destroy the preconditions that make agency possible.

9. A norm is objective if denying it requires a performative contradiction -> If one must rely on the agency the norm protects in order to reject it, the norm holds independently of personal preference.

Conclusion:
Unjustified destruction or frustration of agency is objectively wrong, because any rational agent must recognize and preserve the conditions that make agency possible.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@BlueTimeFairy @Ausbloke93 @darwintojesus Idk if you know this, but the definition of slavery involves a lack of freedom...

A "Free slave" is an oxymoron... Moron.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@BlueTimeFairy @Ausbloke93 @darwintojesus So you lied when you said a master can always affirm everything a slave ever wanted...

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@BlueTimeFairy @Ausbloke93 @darwintojesus And what if the slave wants... Freedom?

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@anchoredso37497 Does God know the moral law? Because the moral law written on my heart says that harming the innocent as a means to punish the guilty isn't justice... But God doesn't seem to think so 🤷‍♂️

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@Ranfel5 @anchoredso37497 @TheWanderingAzn Yup. And only 50% of women bleed their first time...

Funny how the moral law written on my heart tells me that this law from God who supposedly wrote all moral laws is immoral... 🤔

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

For the sake of argument let's say sure, the fact that I think something is truly wrong is evidence of objective morality. The question becomes: Why then do I think the actions of Yahweh as described in the Bible are truly wrong? Maybe there is objective Morality, but it doesn't come from the deity who harms the innocent as a means to punish the guilty.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@Arinzeoreva @SocietyMovies If there were no children... God could've just let them go extinct. 🤦‍♂️

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@darwintojesus You've gotten a Snapchat from big G?

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@AltChristianMan @BasicHeresy You don't have to adopt a worldview in order to critique it. It's an internal critique.

You won't answer my question and are a waste of time. See ya. 👋

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@Tsar_Martyr Can a Christian not believe in God and still be a Christian?

If you say no, then you're committing the No True Scotsman Fallacy.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@ChavtownAtheist Had to take a break after the guy kicked his concubine out of the house so she could be raped in his place and then She died so he chopped her up mailed her body parts to the other tribes of Israel, starting a war with the benjamites. 👍

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

It depends on what you believe about the afterlife. If hell is ETC then I'd agree that literally nothing else matters in life besides doing whatever it takes to avoid it. So maybe the millions of children who died in the bubonic plague were actually blessed with a free ticket to the good place if you believe that dead children don't go to hell.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

They "cared the most" 😂 good luck demonstrating that historically 🤦‍♂️

You're just blinded by your bias and ignoring all the other people groups who contributed to science. China, Japan, the ancient Greeks, india, and Islamic countries have all made massive contributions to science. I'm not saying that Christians didn't make massive contributions too... because that would stupid, but your claims are way too broad.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@jsrrayburn @GoblinsHole @darwintojesus If you think Christians were the only people group trying to understand how things worked and doing science then you're either being disingenuous or your woefully misinformed.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

I think if God explained to us that fleas can carry diseases that would've been very much in our benefit... Took us hundreds of year to figure out the cause and hundreds of millions of people died because of us not knowing... 🤷‍♂️

I ask my Dad questions all the time and he doesn't feel like he's being treated like a genie. He's just being a good dad who cares about me.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@jsrrayburn @GoblinsHole @darwintojesus Why did Christians have to study God's creation to understand it? Couldn't they just... Ask the creator to explain?

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@darwintojesus Idk what a soul is, so I'll keep my arm thanks.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@Fabled_is_me @HalfTangible "his opinion is immoral"? I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.

"Objective reason" is nonsense. There's no such thing as a mind independent reason. Reasons are mind dependent.

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

Well from the POV of the Dad protecting his family from an intruder, he's fully justified no matter what reason the attacker has for attacking just based on his "true love" for his family. I'm not really sure what system of ethics you're trying to apply in this scenario. What is the Dad supposed to stop the intruder and politely ask what his reasons are for attacking his family?

[Tim? @Tim0riginal]

@darwintojesus This seems like major projection. It sounds like deep down you believe in determinism, materialism and moral anti-realism since you've determined those are the "correct answers".