← Back to Feed
Author

I have a question. I posted a video of Ravi…

5 years ago • April 23, 2021 • by ourCOG

I have a question. I posted a video of Ravi Zacharias (which I can post in comments) and had a discussion with my atheist brother. His position is that objective moral values do not exist because they not only change but also because we can choose them, making them subjective. I appealed to moral duties and his response was that society can determine morality with Laws. My response is that if morality is only group ethics and then we must constantly change what believe is ‘right’ based on the societal norms. Likewise noble and heroic people who defied their governments for good causes were wrong because they ought to have complied and adopted the new wave of moral standards. Comrade Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot etc were just ahead of their time then according to that view.

How do you respond because I can’t get through.

Categories: #ourCOG

Discussion

15 comments

  1. Stephen Hannah says:
    April 15, 2020 at 9:20 pm

    Original post: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0218GkAGbnU

    Reply
  2. Tommy S. Hancock says:
    April 15, 2020 at 9:35 pm

    .
    All morality is based on the fact that every person is a image bearer of the Creator. This fact is in the account of Creation, and re-empasized in the Big10, specifically Big Number 7, <>
    (I think it’s number 7.)

    Reply
  3. Matthew Winning says:
    April 15, 2020 at 9:47 pm

    For me, there are only two options:

    (1) morality is either something constructed my humans; or

    (2) morality is something recognised by humans

    The atheist mostly says (1), I.e. morality is just a human construct, cultural or societal conventions etc. But the problem with this is that how can you judge one persons morals to be better or worse than others? If person / society 1 says murder is bad and person / society 2 says murder is morally good, then there’s no way at all to tell who is right… it’s just one set of created morality against another.

    If the atheist says (2), then they’re admitting that there is a perfect moral standard outside of humans which humans recognise to be real (in other words, we all recognise that there must be such a thing as a straight line in order to call something crooked). The question now is, what is this moral standard. Answer: God, by definition. He is the standard which everyone inherently knows exists; because when we say something is “immoral” we’re basically saying it falls short of perfection… but to say that, you have to presuppose that perfection exists. It’s not that God produces perfection, or that He meets the standard… it’s that He is perfection by nature.

    That’s how I see it anyway ?‍♂️

    Reply
  4. Harold Goldman says:
    April 15, 2020 at 10:04 pm

    Ask him does absolute truth exist if he says no ask isn’t that an absolute truth. You see there’s nothing subjective that’s just an imaginary door they use to not look at absolutes

    Reply
  5. David Funk says:
    April 15, 2020 at 10:16 pm

    I’d focus on what separates us from animals. We believe God breathed into us creating something different from animals, a conscience. I’d ask his idea of murder objectively based on the universal grounds of human flourishing because both atheist and Christians believe gdp is a measure of a successful society. If that doesn’t work he doesn’t understand civics and you try something more basic. Why do humans settle down? If I’m the male species then biologically tying myself to one mate would be illogical when I could have 3-5 creating offspring for me. Sometimes in nature the spouse kills the other spouse for the survival of the offspring. Is that an option on the table if staging an accident to receive life insurance is plausible or is genetics not a motive in determining course of action? Sorry if I’m dark. Its just what you have to do with these kind of people.

    Reply
  6. Julie Waschuk says:
    April 15, 2020 at 10:26 pm

    It’s one thing to philosophize this way, but when it is the individual who has been wronged, his soul will instinctively cry out for justice.

    Reply
  7. Harold Goldman says:
    April 15, 2020 at 10:37 pm

    And where and why does justice exist and come from? You can ask should all those who do bad receive justice? If yes did you do bad things also?

    Reply
  8. William Baugher says:
    April 16, 2020 at 1:56 am

    Dr. Frank turek does a good teaching on this..

    Reply
  9. Michael Clarkson says:
    April 16, 2020 at 3:13 am

    If God is the moral law giver then said morals are objective. However regardless of this statement , sinful man, who wants to be like God, treats said morals as subjective. It all comes down to whether you believe in the creator or not

    Reply
  10. Ralph T. A. Ranger says:
    April 16, 2020 at 3:26 am

    If a white American male in his 70s meets a black Africa female in her 30s and they fall in love. Scientifically we can measure EEG brain function and test for hormones levels. (Scientific ways of testing love). Both will have a similar response. So without universal morality and a moral code, how is it possible that two people from different countries, with different life experience and different culture, can have the same feelings? Haven’t people from different cultures been falling in love for 1000s of years. I am not sure I see the change your brother is talking about.

    We do have free will as humans and to an extent culture effects morals. The more killing is bad. One culture may be completely pacifist. Another culture may say it is ok to kill foreigners, but not members of that culture. Another culture may say you can only kill a person who has killed. Point is cultured are different in application, but the moral foundation is still there.

    Or like this. To quote Dr house “everybody lie”. Just because everybody lies, doesn’t mean there is a moral for lying. If you ever say “hey that’s not fair” (If someone lies to you for example) where did that fairness moral come from? It’s not fair they lies to you, but yet you still lie. Just because a morals exist from God doesn’t mean they can’t be broken.

    Reply
  11. Stephen Hannah says:
    April 16, 2020 at 8:48 am

    I think he’s getting hung up on the fact that we can choose to follow morality and somehow that makes morality subjective- because it’s determined by the individual. It just seems like circular reasoning.

    Reply
  12. Frank M Snyder Sr. says:
    April 16, 2020 at 9:17 am

    what can you say to a communist? Is there, or has there ever been a good communist leader? They believe in population control. Stalin was a brutal, murderer thug!

    Reply
  13. Kelly Johnson says:
    April 17, 2020 at 12:00 am

    Pray for God to give him eyes to see and ears to hear. I am in a similar discussion. I believe that truth is truth, period. So the objective and subjective truths isn’t a real debate if we are talking about truth in morals or anything else. If something is true, it is true period, and if it isn’t, it isn’t. I suggest you listen to: “Is truth, knowable?” Frank Turek he is very entertaining, and you will get something out of it.

    Reply
  14. David Holmes says:
    April 18, 2020 at 12:17 pm

    excellent Q.. are u a Chrisian?

    Reply
  15. I have a question. I posted a video of Ravi… #ourCOG – ourcog says:
    April 23, 2021 at 1:00 am

    […] I have a question. I posted a video of Ravi… […]

    Reply

Related Posts

Children’s Pastor, Frederick, MD

June 25, 2024

@dasjr 3rd tornado for the day #ourCOG

April 27, 2011