@ajhieb

1 month ago

God's nature is the standard of goodness.
Fred's nature is the standard of goodness.
Both can be true. God's nature can be your standard, and Fred's nature can be my standard. But of course this only goes to show that even the Christian "supposedly objective" moral framework is still very much subjective.

You claim that the Standard is "God's nature" but you don't seem to have any direct experience with God's nature, so instead you rely on what the Bible tells you about God's nature as your standard. Of course the Bible just gives you a set of commandments, and leaves you to figure out the rest. (Seems like a grossly incomplete framework) So for the rest you simply rely on your moral intuition which, correct me if I'm mistaken, you believe is guided by God. I'm just curious how you differentiate your own moral preferences from those coming from God?

And can you tell me what about a particular morally applicable action makes it moral or immoral? Is it the action itself? Some actions are good and others are bad? Is it the intent? So the action doesn't matter so much as whether or not you intended on doing good? Or is it the outcome? As in your intent and the action itself don't really matter so long as the outcome was good? Do tell how do you make sense of it all?

2 |