budaatum:

So, you hold that "cultural relativism determines societies morals", is incorrect and opposed to reality, right?

I don't think cultural moral relativism describes reality.

rekinomtla:


I don't think cultural moral relativism describes reality.

What, or who, determines morality then?

budaatum:

What, or who, determines morality then?

The creator of the universe.

rekinomtla:


The creator of the universe.

The creator of the universe determines everyones morals?

rekinomtla:


The creator of the universe.

Even this answer is funny to u...

Who then determines immorality

budaatum:

The creator of the universe determines everyones morals?

The creator determines what is right and wrong. Humans are free to do what ever they want.

frank317:


Even this answer is funny to u...

How is saying the creator determines morality funny? Is saying society determines morality also funny?

Who then determines immorality

The creator.

rekinomtla:


The creator determines what is right and wrong. Humans are free to do what ever they want.

So when tells them not kill but then commands them to kill, he's both right and wrong by his own standard?

LordReed:

So when tells them not kill but then commands them to kill, he's both right and wrong by his own standard?

No, but according to atheists here that would make sense. They believe a society determines morality but at the same time the society can be wrong about the very things which it determines is right. Similar to saying a society can be wrong about the very things it determines to be legal or illegal.

rekinomtla:


The creator determines what is right and wrong. Humans are free to do what ever they want.

Do you know that some things that "creators" had determined were right have now been deemed wrong?

rekinomtla:


No, but according to atheists here that would make sense. They believe a society determines morality but at the same time the society can be wrong about the very things which it determines is right. Similar to saying a society can be wrong about the very things it determines to be legal or illegal.

But I am asking you about the creator. How is he able to say, don't kill and go kill to the same people at the same time?

budaatum:

Do you know that some things that "creators" had determined were right have now been deemed wrong?

Like what and "who" deemed them wrong?

LordReed:

But I am asking you about the creator.

I know, just showing the double standards of atheists.

How is he able to say, don't kill and go kill to the same people at the same time?

He never said don't kill.

rekinomtla:


Like what and "who" deemed them wrong?

Like the right to own slaves, as deemed wrong by just about the entire human race today?

rekinomtla:

He never said don't kill.

Not sure what creator you're talking about, but one of them definitely said, Thou shalt not kill.

rekinomtla:


I know, just showing the double standards of atheists.

Huh? I already accept that morality of killing is subjective so what are you on about

He never said don't kill.

Really?

Exodus 20 King James Version (KJV)
20 And God spake all these words, saying,

2 I am the Lord thy God, ....

13 Thou shalt not kill.

budaatum:

Like the right to own slaves, as deemed wrong by just about the entire human race today?

Slavery of the OT differs from modern slavery.

But you say slavery is wrong because most people believe it is. What if most people believed it was right, would that make it moral?

LordReed:

Huh? I already accept that morality of killing is subjective so what are you on about

Not speaking about you. I'm referring specifically to atheists who say society determines morality aka cultural moral relativism.

Really?

Exodus 20 King James Version (KJV)
20 And God spake all these words, saying,

2 I am the Lord thy God, ....

13 Thou shalt not kill.

budaatum:

Not sure what creator you're talking about, but one of them definitely said, Thou shalt not kill.

That commandment refers to murder, the unlawful killing of another human being.

rekinomtla:


[s]Slavery of the OT differs from modern slavery. [/s]

But you say slavery is wrong because most people believe it is. What if most people believed it was right, would that make it moral?

I do not say "slavery is wrong because most people believe it is"! Please give me some credit for having a brain and being able to use it! I live in a period whereby I am privileged to have the history of past behaviour laid before me, or have you not read Kunta Kinte or visited the museum at Badagry?

Most people doing a thing is obviously not a reason for doing so myself, as you would know if you but thought a little. Most people believe in the existence of creators for instance, but I happen to know they talking through their asses. I sure as hell don't just, because everyone believes things, believe too now, do I.

Slavery is seen as immoral and ethical by me and most people, and we will fight those who don't even if I were in the minority.

budaatum:

I do not say "slavery is wrong because most people believe it is"! Please give me some credit for having a brain and being able to use it! I live in a period whereby I am privileged to have the history of past behaviour laid before me, or have you not read Kunta Kinte or visited the museum at Badagry?

Most people doing a thing is obviously not a reason for doing so myself, as you would know if you but thought a little. Most people believe in the existence of creators for instance, but I happen to know they talking through their asses. I sure as hell don't just, because everyone believes things, believe too now, do I.

Slavery is seen as immoral and ethical by me and most people, and we will fight those who don't even if I were in the minority.

So it just your opinion which many agree with now.

rekinomtla:


Not speaking about you. I'm referring specifically to atheists who say society determines morality aka cultural moral relativism.





That commandment refers to murder, the unlawful killing of another human being.

So then killing is relative is it not?

rekinomtla:


Not speaking about you. I'm referring specifically to atheists who say society determines morality aka cultural moral relativism.

By the way, cultural moral relativism is a very different concept from moral relativism.

LordReed:

So then killing is relative is it not?

No it is not. Relative means it only a matter of opinion.

LordReed:


By the way, cultural moral relativism is a very different concept from moral relativism.

It is a form of morality relativism.

rekinomtla:


No it is not. Relative means it only a matter of opinion.

Thou shalt not kill but kill the Canaanites is not relative? Help me understand how you arrive at this position.

rekinomtla:


It is a form of morality relativism.

Well I am not using it in any way. I firmly believe all morality is relative.

LordReed:

Thou shalt not kill but kill the Canaanites is not relative?

The commandment is referring to the unlawful killing of another human being. God ordering the execution of the canaanites for their sins is not the unlawful killing of another human being. God has the right to take people lives away as punishment for their sins.

Help me understand how you arrive at this position.

Help me understand what you mean when you say killing is relative. Do you mean that out moral beliefs are just differences in opinion or...?

rekinomtla:


The commandment is referring to the unlawful killing of another human being. God ordering the execution of the canaanites for their sins is not the unlawful killing of another human being. God has the right to take people lives away as punishment for their sins.

I am still struggling to understand how this is not relative in your estimation. He says do not kill, then he gives them a justification to kill. This is the very definition of relative ie there is a time to kill and there is a time to not kill. God didn't carry out the action himself, he gave a command to the same people who he had just told not to kill.

Help me understand what you mean when you say killing is relative. Do you mean that out moral beliefs are just differences in opinion or...?

It's not just a difference of opinion, it is that properly evaluated there is a justification for an action in one situation while there isn't for the same action in another situation. God evaluates that these Canaanites have sinned so they should be killed while he already told the Israelites not to kill.

rekinomtla:


The creator determines what is right and wrong. Humans are free to do what ever they want.

Where, when and how did the creator of the universe determine what is right and what is wrong? Is eating pork immoral? According to some people the creator of the universe said it's very immoral. Are they stating the truth?

rekinomtla:


The commandment is referring to the unlawful killing of another human being. God ordering the execution of the canaanites for their sins is not the unlawful killing of another human being. God has the right to take people lives away as punishment for their sins.

Why then do you complain when Muslims go about killing people in the name of Allah? After all Allah has the right to kill unbelievers like you as punishment for your sins ofunbelief.

I hope this shows you that you are completely unreasonable and talking complete nonsense.

LordReed:


I am still struggling to understand how this is not relative in your estimation. He says do not kill, then he gives them a justification to kill. This is the very definition of relative ie there is a time to kill and there is a time to not kill. God didn't carry out the action himself, he gave a command to the same people who he had just told not to kill.




It's not just a difference of opinion, it is that properly evaluated there is a justification for an action in one situation while there isn't for the same action in another situation. God evaluates that these Canaanites have sinned so they should be killed while he already told the Israelites not to kill.

Sucker Punch

LordReed:

I am still struggling to understand how this is not relative in your estimation. He says do not kill, then he gives them a justification to kill.

That's perfectly consistent with objective morality. I can believe something is objectively wrong in one situation but right in another depending on the circumstances.

this is the very definition of relative ie there is a time to kill and there is a time to not kill.

Moral relativists certainly believed that but the difference is they believe truth is a matter of opinion. If I said it is wrong to kill someone for personal pleasure and someone else said it is right, a natural question that would follow is who is correct, is it right or wrong to kill for personal pleasure.

According to moral objectivism there is a answer to that question and one of us is incorrect. According to moral relativism no one is incorrect, because there's no objective truth in the matter. My opinion is true for me and his for him. No one is right or wrong, it's just a difference of opinion.

God didn't carry out the action himself, he gave a command to the same people who he had just told not to kill.

Thou shalt not kill refers specifically to the unlawful killing of another human being. Most modern translations today use the word "murder" in place of "kill".

It's not just a difference of opinion, it is that properly evaluated there is a justification for an action in one situation while there isn't for the same action in another situation.

According to moral relativism it is a matter of opinion. If you don't believe that then you not a moral relativist. If for instance you believe that some action is always wrong in certain circumstances.

God evaluates that these Canaanites have sinned so they should be killed while he already told the Israelites not to kill.

Not to unlawfully kill.