User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Objective Moral Values, God's Law, and the New Covenant.

  1. #1
    TOL Legend Jacob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakewood, Washington
    Posts
    17,482
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 813 Times in 749 Posts

    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    121114

    Objective Moral Values, God's Law, and the New Covenant.

    What are objective moral values? Do they allow for the Law of Moses or New Covenant Law?

    For something to be considered moral must it be a part of God's Law?
    Bereishit - Genesis - Chapter 1

    1 In the beginning of God's creation of the heavens and the earth.
    :א בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ

    In beginning He created God the heavens and the earth

  2. #2
    TOL Legend Jacob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakewood, Washington
    Posts
    17,482
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 813 Times in 749 Posts

    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    121114
    People say that objective moral values and duties do exist, etc....

  3. #3
    TOL Legend Jacob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakewood, Washington
    Posts
    17,482
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 813 Times in 749 Posts

    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    121114
    What is an objective moral value?

    Or

    What are objective moral values?
    Bereishit - Genesis - Chapter 1

    1 In the beginning of God's creation of the heavens and the earth.
    :א בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ

    In beginning He created God the heavens and the earth

  4. #4
    TOL Legend Jacob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakewood, Washington
    Posts
    17,482
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 813 Times in 749 Posts

    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    121114
    objective moral value

    A proposition is objective if its truth value is independent of the person uttering it. A fact is objective in the same way. For morality to be objective, moral propositions such as "Killing is bad","Stealing is bad", etc... need to be true independently of the person who is stating them.

    Google Search
    Bereishit - Genesis - Chapter 1

    1 In the beginning of God's creation of the heavens and the earth.
    :א בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ

    In beginning He created God the heavens and the earth

  5. #5
    Over 1500 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,582
    Thanks
    194
    Thanked 259 Times in 216 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    27179
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacob View Post
    What are objective moral values?
    When I think of objective morality, what I think of is what is objectively determinable. For example, say killing is wrong, we can objectively perceive whether someone is objectively guilty of killing. But then there are circumstances that do not negate an objective moral offense, but can diminish, attenuate, or nullify altogether any imputable guilt or culpability to the objective moral offender, for example if you kill in self defense or in defense of an innocent person, then your guilt for the objective moral offense of killing is not imputed to you. It doesn't mean that killing is now moral, it means that sometimes, an objective moral offense is not entirely or at all due to your free will, and so you are not fully or even at all guilty of the objective moral offense, in certain circumstances that render you less than completely free in your decision to commit an objective moral offense.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacob View Post
    Do they allow for the Law of Moses or New Covenant Law?
    Yes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacob View Post
    For something to be considered moral must it be a part of God's Law?
    No. Most people are moral or believe in some morality, no matter whether they believe in God, or in some other deity, or in no gods at all (atheist). None of them think that morality comes from God, even though the authentic Christian faith believes that authentic morality does come from God.
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  6. #6
    TOL Legend Jacob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakewood, Washington
    Posts
    17,482
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 813 Times in 749 Posts

    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    121114
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    When I think of objective morality, what I think of is what is objectively determinable. For example, say killing is wrong, we can objectively perceive whether someone is objectively guilty of killing. But then there are circumstances that do not negate an objective moral offense, but can diminish, attenuate, or nullify altogether any imputable guilt or culpability to the objective moral offender, for example if you kill in self defense or in defense of an innocent person, then your guilt for the objective moral offense of killing is not imputed to you. It doesn't mean that killing is now moral, it means that sometimes, an objective moral offense is not entirely or at all due to your free will, and so you are not fully or even at all guilty of the objective moral offense, in certain circumstances that render you less than completely free in your decision to commit an objective moral offense.
    Yes.
    No. Most people are moral or believe in some morality, no matter whether they believe in God, or in some other deity, or in no gods at all (atheist). None of them think that morality comes from God, even though the authentic Christian faith believes that authentic morality does come from God.
    There is a difference between an objective moral value and if someone has done something that is objectively wrong.

  7. #7
    Over 1500 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,582
    Thanks
    194
    Thanked 259 Times in 216 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    27179
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacob View Post
    There is a difference between an objective moral value and if someone has done something that is objectively wrong.
    I see that the way you're using "objective," that this is the case.

    I offered up another meaning for "objective moral" for thought.

    'Idea being, that whatever morality we're discussing, there is the moral offense itself, which is objectively determinable (whether someone did it or not), and then there is what's 'behind the scenes' within the mind of the objective moral offender, such as for example, were they coerced in any way, was there a credible threat on an innocent person's life /limb, anything that might render what they did, not fully attributable to their own free will choice.

    In such a case, while the determination of whether a moral offense has been committed (objectively) is untouched, the guilt imputed to the offender might be less than complete, even completely nullified, again due to certain circumstances that render the offender's choice something less than completely due to their free will.

    Just food for thought.
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  8. #8
    TOL Legend Jacob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakewood, Washington
    Posts
    17,482
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 813 Times in 749 Posts

    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    121114
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    I see that the way you're using "objective," that this is the case.

    I offered up another meaning for "objective moral" for thought.

    'Idea being, that whatever morality we're discussing, there is the moral offense itself, which is objectively determinable (whether someone did it or not), and then there is what's 'behind the scenes' within the mind of the objective moral offender, such as for example, were they coerced in any way, was there a credible threat on an innocent person's life /limb, anything that might render what they did, not fully attributable to their own free will choice.

    In such a case, while the determination of whether a moral offense has been committed (objectively) is untouched, the guilt imputed to the offender might be less than complete, even completely nullified, again due to certain circumstances that render the offender's choice something less than completely due to their free will.

    Just food for thought.
    People are influenced by others and people make their own decisions, so who is responsible?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 1 guests)

  1. Idolater

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us