Objective Moral Truth

Post Reply New Topic

If it is True that one can derive an objective moral truth that applies in all situations, across all time and across the entire universe(Multiverse?) then shouldn't one know what is supposed to do in all situations that can crop up? What if these objective moral truths conflict? How do you know what you're supposed to do exactly?

This is my question mainly towards conservatives, etc who are against moral relativism.

Well, the only reason we have a *sense* of morality is that evolution has made us that way.
Had we evolved from prehistoric crocodiles, I think it safe to say our view of morality would be very different.

Hence, using what I said as my premise, I must conclude there is no "Objective Moral Truth", in an *absolute* sense, and the morality we embrace is simply arbitrarily based on the whim of the evolutionary process.

---

62 Percent of American's Morality, Includes the Belief that An All Loving,
Merciful, Forgiving God Tortures Naughty Humans Forever in Suffering After Death;

i Must Wonder, if they 'Deserve' to go To Heaven, With Morality, and a Belief Like that....

i'm Guessing, the Path to Heaven Within Now For Them is much Like A Camel Passing

Through the Eye of A Needle...

Sure, Easy for Someone, Like
me to See, Dance, And Sing This; Someone

Now Who Feels and Senses Naked, Enough, Whole
Complete; Someone, Who Sees Beauty in DarK Thru

LiGHT; Someone Who Inhales Peace, Exhales LoVE iN

JoY oF LiGHT; Giving, Sharing, Caring, Healing, Now For All

With Least Harm; Do i Understand Why 62 Percent of Folks in the U.S. Believe

An All Loving, Merciful, Forgiving, God Tortures Naughty Folks in Suffering Forever in

A Place Called Hell; All i Know for Sure is; They Aren't me; And i Can't Imagine a Love that

Small

As i Am
Wired Differently
By Relative Free Will;

Biology; And Environment of

Course As All Work Together to

Create Who i Am And How i Love Completely Now

Unconditionally Yet Yes, No, i Don't Love it When Folks Call me
With Robo-Spam-Calls Attempting to Sell me A Used Car Service
Warranty for my Honda Civic That Are Well Known to Last 200,000
Miles if Properly Maintained; Sort of Like The Human Body, if We See This

Life As Heaven

And Take Care

of Our Bodies

And Don't Wait for
A Better Body After Life

And An Opportunity to Really
Be Happy Then; Feeling that it is

Moral That Other Folks Who Lived A Life
Different than You Believed in, get to Suffer Forever

For Being
And
Acting
And Making
Mistakes Or Just Being
Who They Are Differently than You (Us)...

Some Folks Evolve Out of Ignorance; Some Folks Do Not;
'Some Folks Dance, Some Folks Do Not' Per 'Guardians of the Galaxy' of Love Too;
There Are Mountain's of Human Suffering Built Upon Valley's of Ignorance Indeed;

Science Shows The Human Condition isn't Particularly Rational; Our Feelings, Senses,
Emotions Most Often
Come First Before

Our Reasons;

And i Surely
Believe There
is Still Room For

Love to Evolve to Truly
Unconditional, Where Beauty

May Be Seen As DarK BRings LiGHT...

Seen it Happen in My Life; And Surely That
Lifted Some Veils of Ignorance in the Original
Greek Definition of Apocalypse Way for me Now;

Sure, There is Heaven And HeLL ON EartH;

Been to Both Places; one for 66 Months

Followed by the Other

Place of Love
For All As

Expressed
Above in My
Personal Morality,
Beliefs And Ethics Now;

True, Eight Years, Eight Months
And A Half A Month, And Two And A Half Days in Heaven Within Eternally Now;

God Yes, A Real Place Both Objective And Subjective Morally True FoR Me at Least...

Yes, We LiVE iN A Country in the United States With Separation of Church and State

And that Indeed Lends Plenty of Room For Folks To LiVE iN Both Heaven And HeLL ON EartH

And The
Tween
of Grey
Shades
of Existence
Forever now True too...

What Heaven Spells Is
How i Bring Love to Life For Real...

Considering That Some Countries
See Morality in Female Genital Mutilation;

Other Countries Bury Lesbians to Their Chest
And Stone Them To Death; And in This Country
There is A Push For Women Who Are Raped to
Enforce Their Inability to End Their Suffering

To Terminate A Pregnancy That Way; Even
if Daddy Raped His Little Girl Violently;

Morality IS RELATIVE TO THE HARM
IT DOES INNOCENT OTHERS

AND IT'S ONLY AS

HELPFUL

AS

HUMAN IGNORANCE
SHEDS ITS VEILS OF BLINDNESS

FOR THE HARM IGNORANCE DOES TO INNOCENT OTHERS NOW;

Yet What You Do Ya Expect From Folks With a Morality And A Belief
in an All Loving, Merciful, Forgiving God That Tortures Naughty Folks
in Suffering Forever;

Culture, Indeed,

Will Be A Seeding

Ground for All Kinds

Of Evil Harming Others to
Escape From the Pit of Human

Imagination and Creativity Bringing Nightmares to Fruition...

Morality DarK Thru LiGHT is the Nightmares to Dreams We Bring to
Fruition Now...

Who Needs

'The Twilight
Zone' And 'Rod

Serling' in a Place like 'This'...

Hell, Who even Needs Hell;

Look Around It's Still Falling
From So-called Human-Kind...

With Heaven Still RiSinG From Some Others True too...

YET MEH, Most Folks Are Living in Purgatory Pay-Check
to Pay-Check; Some of them Filling Up their Garages With

Walmart Junk Over-Consuming Resources on the Planet

Earth With A Major

Focus on the Fact

That Gas Has Recently

Gone Up A Buck; While They

Still Believe Folks Deserve to
Suffer Forever in Hell for Being Naughty...

Paint 'Your' Wagon Indeed; Color it With Who You Are...

What You

Have...

And

Where You are...

It's Surely Not Fair;

And It is What We
Imagine And Co-Create Now;

FoR Me at Least What Heaven Spells Now...

Clue:

LoVE ReaL For ALL...

Hehe, Except for those
Damned Robot Spam Calls;

At Least They are Only Machine; And Not Human...

If They Were Human i'd Give 'em A 'Fred-Talk' Like This;

Meh, Chances

Are They

Wouldn't Call Back,

Even With the Very
Best of Intentions from me...

Yet Chances Are They Might
Think About Life Differently in Someway than before...

Meh, The Joy of the Eternal Now is Actually Doing Heaven Now...

THere is Nothing

Anyone Will Take
Away From Someone Who is
Naked, Enough, Whole, Complete, Love Now...

Which Leaves All To Give, Share, Care, And Heal Away, Away, Away, some more...

Yet Again i Am Wired This Way; Through Much Blood, Sweat, Tears, Pain, and Numb in
'the Other Place' too...

LiGHT Comes From

DarK; Perhaps, Everyone

Will Eventually Have to
Go Through Darkness to Finally 'See'..

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/11/23/views-on-the-afterlife/

---

Oh look, an easy question!

First of all, relative versus absolute morality is not a conservative versus liberal issue. It just happens that absolute morality is normally referenced in relation to conservative evangelical theology while moral relativism is driven by narrative—the kinds of people more attracted to liberal politics. It’s a “speak your truth” mindset that applies to postmodernism than anything else. With postmodernism either dead or on the decline, fewer people make claims to relativism now than in the past. The trend is that victim class members are hesitant to deny their reality in relation to the narrative as anything else but absolute fact. The perception of conservatives is that society is bound by “rules for thee and not for me.” So the trend is to flip the narrative so that the “rules…” precept is dictated by the oppressed rather than the oppressor, which you see a clear example of in the early days of Bolshevik-controlled Russia.

That’s why my opinion is that terms like moral relativism are no longer relevant, and postmodernism is more a history topic than a philosophical debate.

So, with that out of the way, let’s talk about objective versus relative morality.

How do we define relative morality? Relative morality is in simplest terms morality that is good within a given narrative. What is good for you isn’t necessarily what is good for me. What is good for one culture isn’t necessarily good for a different culture. On the surface, relative morality appears to benefit the individual. This leads to a conflict of realities among individuals and groups which is resolved through sacrificing the morality and reality of the individual for the sake of the group. Morality is, therefore, something that only exists in the mind, meaning morality is entirely subjective.

To compare the two, we need to drop the term “relative” morality in favor of the more accurate term “subjective” reality since postmodern morality emphasizes irony and contradiction—reality is more or less subjective, created by and existing only in the mind—while subjectivity taken as a whole isn’t so logically constrained. All relativist morality is subjective, while not all subjectivity is relative.

So subjective morality is defined as morality that only exists in the mind. This is a more useful term not only because it is sufficiently broad but because subjectivity itself DOES NOT DENY objectivity. Things can be objective or subjective and coexist.

Objective morality is morality that does not EXCLUSIVELY exist in the mind. It has basis in a reality that exists apart from the mind. I’ll come back to this later.

Notice that I did not define objective morality as absolute. The term absolute is too limiting—it doesn’t allow gradients to morality. In Christian theology, God’s law is absolute and perfect, meaning they are absolutely defined and unquestionable. An action is either right or wrong. The wages of sin, ANY sin, is death. One need only sin one time to incur the death penalty. The addition of God’s justice tempered by mercy introduces the principle of having the punishment fit the crime, which is detailed in the Old Testament. All sin is evil and absolutely evil; the human response is relative to the material severity of one’s failing. So just because morality is objective doesn’t mean that it isn’t relative.

I have yet to find a meaningful discussion about absolute morality that didn’t invoke religion.

Getting back to defining objective morality—In order for morality to be said to be objective, it must have a basis in objective reality, that is, reality that exists apart from the human mind. That requires a single, one-size-fits-all, universal standard for evaluating good and understanding evil. This is not an absolute. How do you decide what that standard is? How do you show that your standard isn’t arbitrary? Your standard will always be arbitrary. But you mitigate this by choosing something that is fairly concrete and observable. We possess one very important tool: the rational mind.

In order for even subjective morality to exist, there must be a mind in which it can exist at all. Remember, subjective morality exclusively exists in the mind; objective morality exists in the mind, also, but not exclusively—it has to be based on something that exists “out there.” All morality draws from experience which is taken by the rational mind and interpreted, the results of which forms a personal moral code, and this might be objective, subjective, or some combination of both.

The first step in formulating a personal, subjective morality is answering the question “does this feel right?” Morality need not even remain consistent from day to day. If it feels right, it is right. Absolute right/wrong does not exist, so how dare you tell me how to live my life? (Relativist fallacy, implying that something is wrong with someone judging you when you claim wrong doesn’t exist). And that’s pretty much the ONLY step in subjective morality formation.

While any objective standard is ultimately arbitrary, it is important to establish a standard that has as broad and universal application as possible. Human life and freedom are the highest values human beings possess. Whether a person is pro-choice or pro-war/pro-death penalty, human beings almost universally agree that human life should be protected. Some would say that human life should be protected at all costs, even at the loss of one’s own life if it means protecting the lives of those they love. Human being will almost always act to preserve their own life as individuals.

Human freedom goes hand in hand with human life as a universal, objective standard since people can’t enjoy life without being free to do so. Denial of freedom is denial of life. Slaves are not living people in the same sense as free people understand what it means to live. A human without freedom is a walking corpse.

A human must be in possession of a rational mind in order to live and exercise freedom. Other animals preserve their own lives through instinctive behavior. They have no choice but to respect their own lives, the lives of other animals, and to establish an equilibrium with other living things. Humans lack this trait, at least to the same extent. Humans can choose whether to live in equilibrium, to enslave or kill each other, or to preserve even their own lives.

To recap: In order to establish a universal objective standard, humans must possess a rational mind to perceive reality, they must value their own lives, and they must be free to think and to act according to their own pleasure and reason.

Once you establish the objective standards of life, reason, and freedom, you can begin to formulate an objective morality built on the foundation of those values.

For example, self-preservation is the highest value and objectively moral responsibility. You might ask “what about people who fight in a war?” Remember, self-preservation is a CHOICE. One may choose to value the life of others as essential to his own life. It is not self-sacrifice when the result is something that is desired. It is an exchange, perhaps of one life for many. And it is a choice one freely makes through reasoning in his mind that the outcome is the preferred one. So while it is morally good to preserve your own life, it is also morally good to save the lives of others by willingly putting yourself in danger.

However…

If you willingly put yourself in danger to save lives without REASONING that the outcome would either make no difference or perhaps cost even more lives, self-sacrifice is objectively immoral. If you give your life unwillingly—that is, you have a choice but don’t want to—that is objectively immoral. If you sacrifice a slave to save your life or another person, that is objectively immoral. If the decision is irrational, unwilling, or needless death results when someone isn’t given any right to their own life, it is objectively immoral.

Being a millionaire and buying a new Bentley every week just so you can drive it off a cliff is objectively immoral because it violates reason—why destroy a valuable luxury car, which is the product of the rational mind and highly prized for its advanced engineering and aesthetic beauty? In a way, you are killing part of the designer along with the laborers who all shared a part of crafting a fine vehicle.

Wasting time instead of engaging in creative activity is objectively immoral—those combined days or even years are time you can never get back or relive. If you aren’t achieving something valuable, you are killing yourself.

Having sex with someone you don’t love is objectively immoral. You reduce yourself to base instincts and unreasoned pleasure seeking, you cheapen the value of your own body, and you disrespect the body of the person you slept with (violating personal freedom and human life. Whether she consented or you raped her is completely irrelevant). And it’s even worse if she’s your wife! It’s no better to cheat on your SO, but at least have the decency of breaking up/divorce than continue a loveless relationship.

Staying faithful to your wife ONLY because you are married is objectively immoral because you are living for someone else, not for yourself.

Fighting a war to protect your people is the proper role of government and is objectively moral. Invading a country is ALWAYS objectively immoral. Establishing colonies that mutually benefit an imperial power as well a native population through trade is objectively moral (although the realities of colonialism are somewhat nuanced. Native Americans presently objectively benefit from the USA government; federal involvement in the Trail of Tears incident was objectively immoral).

And you can go through any number of evils and evaluate their objectivity. I’m pretty sure every Biblical commandment is objective. But even when you examine the Bible, if you don’t interpret Biblical commandments through reason, freedom, and life, NOTHING you believe or do can possibly be objectively moral. Love your neighbor as yourself. Why? Because Jesus said so. That would be objectively immoral. Even if God Himself came down amid thunderbolt and lightning and said so, it would be objectively immoral because it has nothing to do with your willingness nor desire to preserve your own life. You could say God will strike you down if you don’t love your neighbor, but you are sacrificing your mind and freedom. You’re better off dead, anyway, so I’d look God square in the face and say “Go ahead.” But if your mind is free, your neighbor is valuable to you, and through human REASON you know that the preservation of your neighbor’s life means the preservation of your own, the commandment to love your neighbor isn’t a command from God for you to obey “or else,” but rather something God commands out of His own love for humanity.

And I’m only drawing from the Bible as an example because that’s what I’m most familiar with. But I don’t have to. Greed is immoral. What is greed? Greed is the unreasoned desire for things you neither earn nor deserve. It violates the rational mind along with human life and freedom and is therefore objectively immoral. Envy is objectively immoral. What is envy? Envy is the hatred of the achievements of others. Again, it is irrational and therefore objectively immoral.

Gratitude is objectively moral.

Acquiring wealth through the meaningful trade of things and ideas is objectively moral.

Driving the speed limit and observing traffic signs and lights is objectively moral.

Eating meals together as a family is objectively moral.

Refusing to pay for your kid’s college expenses when he or she is engaged in self-destructive behavior is objectively moral.

Now, referring back to the Bible—assuming that all the commandments are obeyed within reason and with a willing mind, all the commandments are objectively moral or at least describe objective morality and immorality. Biblical laws are ALSO absolute in that God gave them and they cannot be questioned. I mean…you can debate them all day long, but they came from God and there’s little you can reasonably do with that. But what we’re talking about here is not actually a religious or theological problem. If a moral has basis in objective reality, it does not exist exclusively in the mind and is therefore objectively moral.

AngelRho, your answers are excellent! I love them. Why can't more discussions like this be on different outlets like The View, Hannity and Colmes, etc?

The only issue I kind of take with is the concept of gratitude. I agree with gratitude to a certain point but where I have an issue is when gratitude depends upon someone else's suffering or someone else being in poverty.

E.g. Parent says to child you must finish your food because there are children starving in Africa.

1. First, this teaches a child to eat more than his fill which is considered gluttonous. Not good eating habits.

2. If Gratitude is a form of morality then what the parent is saying is certain types of morality can only exist if others are suffering or are in poverty. Suffering and poverty must exist for a child to be moral. And, I have to ask how is that a virtuous at all? I think it is not.

So, I do appreciate when things are done for me and if there is a God that has done things for me and has guided me along the way I appreciate that as well except I think gratitude is immoral if that gratitude is hinged upon someone else's suffering and/or poverty status.

My belief:

By the way, I tends towards being an agnostic then atheism. Atheism falls into the same sort of problem as Christianity. Atheism requires a form of faith as well. And, that faith says there is no God, any surpreme being and none of the gods like Zeus, apollo, etc exist as though it is absolutely certain.

The truth is I have no scientific or logical means to prove or disprove any of these religions and beliefs like Christainity, Buddism, Islam, Hinduism, etc. So, which one of these is correct? I don't know and more than likely I won't know for certain until I die.

I do hope there is a form of heaven/paradise and my mother is there.

But, I do try to conduct myself in a way to the best of my ability as though I will be judged by something or someone even though I may slip and get things wrong. I think that is the most rational thing one can do and I do hope anything I have done wrong in my life will be forgiven.

That's kind of how I see things right now.

My faith and my experience are things I know to be reliable and true, so I often refer to that. But I also hope you picked up on the fact that with objective reality it isn't necessary to invoke God for everything. To do so would be to make a different point, but that's irrelevant at the moment. In fact, strict adherents of closed Objectivism are almost always atheists because they do not see the relationship between God and objective reality.

Gratitude is simply accepting what you have and not hating others for what you lack. As a music composer approaching his mid 40's, I know I'll never win any awards or competitions. But rather than respond with envy and bitterness towards those who are achieving the kinds of things I always wanted, I'm excited for them, celebrate their accomplishment, and see what if anything I can learn from their contributions and make my own music better. Gratitude is marrying an amazing woman and remaining loyal to her because you wake up daily making the choice to love her.

Don't overthink gratitude. More than anything it's a mindset or attitude, a commitment to stay optimistic about everything and always believe in yourself. A former friend of ours divorced her first husband because she didn't love him to begin with and because he'd become abusive. She married mainly for the money. As soon as she got bored, she cheated on him. She got out of that marriage, remarried a man with more money and raised her kids as his own, bought her a new house and car, and recently began cheating and plotting to get a divorce. He's never hurt her or done anything to deserve that. But it's primarily her lack of gratitude that seems to encourage her to act out the way she does.

Don't spend too much time trying to decode what "gratitude" is. It's not that complicated.

Rational thought isn’t something The View is known for. Conservative outlets presuppose some elements of Objectivism, but none of those guys are actually objectivists, at least not that I’m aware of. But also keep in mind that these programs are produced with a mass audience in mind for the purpose of entertainment rather than information. Conservative topics aren’t narrative-driven, but they aren’t firmly rooted in reality, either. The View is nothing but narrative.

And, too, if you want to look at these shows as informative, some things are just understood. Objectivism isn’t a frequent topic among most conservatives, but there are common threads such as individual freedom and free market capitalism. And more left-oriented shows like The View aren’t even remotely interested in anything that could be seen as promoting conservative values. So if you want to understand those shows, you need to know your history and learn how to speak the language.

Objectivism is more my thing, I’m not all that concerned with liberal or conservative bickering. Or even libertarianism. I’m not a fan of Leonard Peikoff because that whole segment of objectivism treats Ayn Rand like a closed canon. I think there’s more room to grow and discover things, and I don’t believe Ayn Rand was really finished. David Kelley’s are much more accessible. While many of them are atheists, there’s room for theism—and it makes sense if you pay close attention to Rand’s objections to religion.

Point being, ideas on objective morality will be more the domain of people like Peikoff and Kelley. Websites like peikoff.com and atlassociety.org are excellent places to start. The more you dig into it, the more you understand Republicans and Libertarians are NOTHING like Ayn Rand envisioned. The problem with libertarianism is the belief that government can fix a problem the government caused in the first place, and with Republicans it’s all about compromising values for the sake of retaining power.

Any chance that was meant to be written as "the problem with liberalism" instead of libertarianism; my impression of libertarians is that they are not all that confident a government actually does much true fixing of problems.

If that is true, then why are libertarians politically active? There’s a certain irony to espousing libertarian ideals and running for office.

I guess it is to make attempts to reduce government and implement their principles of small government.

There is one libertarian, Harry Browne, who doesn't even advocate going for office. If you're interested read Harry Browne's "How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World."

https://www.pdfdrive.com/how-i-found-fr ... 71805.html

You can download a pdf version.

I don't agree with some of it but I don't have to agree with all of it to make use of it and I have.

---

HAhahaha,

A Suggestion That So-Called
'God' oF All that is only Wrote one

Book That is the Source oF All

Objective Morality is Simply Non-Sense;

It's A Big UNiVeRSE Baby; Damned Sure
Bigger Than A Patch of Dirt in the Middle
East Reduced to an 800,000 Word or So

Tiny Black Book, Or Even Micro-Scopic
As Such in 80,000 Words or So Calling
the Words in the Book 'God' Or Another
5 Letter Word ALL Alone; What an Idol

Representation of 'God'

Of All That Is Indeed,

HAhahaha,

Unless one is Brainwashed
From Birth to Believe Lies;

YeP, It's a Big UniVerse;
And Perhaps Even Bigger
Than That Inconceivably

to All Of US Now; Yes,
And Considering God
Is "i Am," Alpha Thru Omega

Even in that Little Book by Metaphor in the Slightly Bigger One;

And Beyond All Words Of Course For What We Can And Will 'See'; 'God' Will

Never Be Hidden As PriSoNer in This or That Word or Words Alone;

Unless We Want To Close Our Eyes And Believe in Smaller Words oF Lies;

Expressing So-Called Objective Reality that is Just another Rarified

Human Abstract Construct to MaNiPuLaTE Others For Control And
Subjugation; and Particularly For Reproductive Control and in the Case

of Abrahamic Religions, Making Women Scape-Goats From The Beginning;

And Speaking of Scape-Goats, the So-Called 'Objective Morality' of the Christian
Bible Changes From Beginning to Ending and Beginning to Ending Again; As First

We Have Women Scape-Goated for Tempting Adam With an Apple; And then We Have
Women Scape-Goated For Adultery With Ouch, Stoning By The Community Crowd; Yes, Tortured
And Killed And Even Tortured Forever in a Burning Fire in Even More Evil From a So-Called Higher

Power that in Reality

of A Force of Mercy
And Forgiveness that
Might (Love) Otherwise Be

Associated With a Commandment
of Love is Tabled Long Enough for
Folks Who Break Opinionated Rules to Torture them Forever...

That's Just Plain Sick and Twisted Evil for Damned Sure STiLL for
Anyone With Any Sense of Justice and Fairness in Any World Now Yet

Ignorance That Continues to Harm;
Ignorance That Continues to Maim;

Ignorance that Continues to Rape;
Ignorance that Continues to Kill Now;

And Ignorance Evil Enough to Suggest
That A God of All Love, Mercy, And Forgiveness
Tortures Folks By Burning them Forever now if they

Don't Play
By Rules in a Book
That a Bunch of Unknown

Authors Wrote Thousands of

Years ago, Who Are Still Worshipped

in What is Really Ultimately A Cook Book to Serve Human Beings

And Burn them forever this Way, if they Do Not comply With the

'Demagogue

Dictatorship' as such...

You Are Surely Welcome in the United States Per
Our Laws on Freedom of Expression And Separation
of Church And State to Your Opinion on What is Moral or Not...

Yet it is surely Not Welcome in my Reality and That's For Damned sure...

Yet i've Seen Horror Movies Before; i Will Surely Tolerate them Enough to Read them

in A Book oF Lies

Designed to

Expand Empires;

Subjugate, Control,

And Master Human Beings
Away From Basic Freedoms;

Particularly, Reproductive Freedoms...

Granted, if one is in the In-Group of Ignorance;
One May Find Folks Satisfied to Lose Their Freedoms...

Pretty Much Anything Goes With Human Imagination And
Either Nightmares or Dreams Brought to Fruition; Fortunately,

We Have Separation of Church and State; And At Least Someone (So-Called One Version of

Jesus) Who Had Enough Sense in Part of that Book to Suggest You Don't Stone someone

if You Have Sinned Before; However, Later in Matthew Again That Reality is Gaslighted

By Setting

Folks on Fire Who

Do Not Comply With the Rules in A Book

And Torturing Them Forever in a "Nightmare

on Elm Street" That Never Ends Where 'God' Turns

Out to Be A Much Worse Villain Than 'Freddy Krueger';

It's Worth Noting to me, i Was Raised on Elm Street; Yet i Resisted

The Evil Temptation

of Believing in those

Kind of Lies Written as
Truth in A Worst Horror Story ever Written,

Relatively

Speaking of Course,

for those Who Believe or Do Not Believe in Lies, Ignorantly AS Such...

i Believe It's Subjectively Objectively Moral to Inhale Peace Exhale
LoVE iN JoY oF LiGHT Giving, Sharing, Caring, Healing Now
With Least Harm For All of Existence (God); However,

Not Everyone

Agrees with

The Teachings of Jesus

As Far As Making That the

Only Objective Moral Truth That Counts in A Commandment;

And of Course A Reason is that Jesus (By The End of Matthew,
After the So-Called Beatitudes) Becomes A Greatest Hypocrite
'Worstly' Evil Torturing Enemies Forever in Fire for Judgement

in Just another Gaslit Cook Book to Serve HuMan Ignorance...

Some Folks Don't Buy the Lie; And That is Why We LiVE iN
Yes, A Country With Separation
Of Church And State NoW iN ParT

So far at least... to Some Degree...

Human Ignorance is To Be Expected
By A Species that Neuroscience Shows

Basically Hallucinates their Reality Based
on Hallucinations They Co-Create With Nature before...

Thank God For Science;

And Thank God For Folks

Who Don't Get Off on Harming Enemies

Like the Good Cop Version of Jesus, Before He Changes
Again into 'The Evil One' Burning Enemies Forever again;

Some Humans Are Near Sighted or Far Sighted in Love;

Some Humans Are Near Sighted or Far Sighted in Hate;

Torturing Any Part of Reality Forever is An EPiToMe of The Evil of Hate;

A Pinnacle

of the

Bottom
of the Pit
of Human Imagination

And Nightmares Brought to Reality in Books oF Lies
That Suggest They Bring Moral Objective Truth to
Subjugate By Dictatorship of Demagogues For

Control And

Mastery of

Otherwise

Freer Humans
For Material, Status, And Power Gains;

Yawn That's Not the Reality of Someone

Who is Naked, Enough, Whole, Complete;

As At Least 'Buddha' Doesn't Torture Creation
By the End of His 'Sermon Under A Tree' As He

Understands He is A Leaf of Compassion That Feeds the

Tree Green And Falls to Soils to Sprout New Green of Living Souls...

Yet Of Course Buddha's Hope that His Teachings according to that Story

Will Be Heard

And Not Worshipped

in Idol Ways is Dashed Away

As Folks Still Kneel to His Idol Statue Now...

Some Humans Look Up to 'God'; Others Find
'God' Within And Set themselves Free Even
Per 'Luke 17:21' in that Small Black Book

And Even Do Greater Works Than Jesus
Like Me, Empirically Measurable as Such
in A New 10.3 MiLLioN Word EPiC Longest
Long Form Poem Bible, Solo; Yes, Clearly One
Still Identifiable Author (me); And Sure Lots More
Public Dance Than 'King David' With Celebrating
'God' oF ALL THaT iS iN Many More 'Vile Ways' Than
He could Have
Ever Imagined

And Done Then

With 16,424 Miles
of Clothed to Naked
Dance Now in 103
Months too Whereas

The Tiny Efforts,
Before Folks like
me, With 'John 14:12
Efforts', Took Literally

Thousands of Years
And Innumerable
Ghost Authors
And Other
Dancers
to Complete;

Again,

Naked, Enough,

Whole, Complete;

Yet Like Yours; This is Just my Opinion

That MakeS A Whole Lot More Sense to me than What You And 'They' Said...

Go Figure AS NEUROSCIENCE SHOWS AGAIN All Humans Hallucinate and View

Their Worlds Differently

Again, A HUGE PART OF WHY THERE IS BEYOND 45,000 DENOMINATIONS Globally
OF CHRISTIANITY AND A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TO TOTALLY DIFFERENT VIEW

OF ALL THE 'BIBLICAL

POETRY' IF YOU QUESTION PEOPLE

IN JUST ONE CHURCH OF ALL THOSE

DENOMINATIONS...

HAHAHA.. SO MUCH
FOR HUMAN MORAL OBJECTIVITY...

At Least When it Comes to Humans in PewS in Churches...

i Guess i Could Say Dancing And Singing Together is Objectively Moral Clothed or Even Naked;

Yet Surely Folks From 'Footloose' Denominations and Other Religions Wouldn't And DO NOT Agree....

i Guess i could Say it

is Always Morally

Objectively Good

to Breathe; Just Don't

Try it Like a Fish Without Gills Underwater...

Not Unlike A God That Creates A Hell and Tortures Folks

Forever And Calls 'Himself' 'Him' All Loving, Merciful, Forgiving
As if God is Restricted to

One Gender

With A PeNis;

Unless that Particular

'Him' Doesn't Have a PeNis...

And If that's the Case God is
Not Gonna Have Many Christian

Believers When God Reveals God
Doesn't only Have

A PeNis...

Oh Lord,

What
Tom Foolery...

The Size of 'The Problem'...

When Foolishness Says it has
the Authority to Torture Enemies Forever...

Anyway, Beware of Folks With Books Who Suggest
They Serve

Human...

It Just Might
Be A Cook Book
That STiLL Claims to
Burn Enemies Forever....

Pinnacle of Human Tribalism...

Of Course There is No Way Aliens
Really Moved Away From A Planet, if They
Never Learned How to Be A Loving Version of 'Jesus,'

God,
or Whatever
They Call Real Love THere...

And Even Get Along ToGeTHeR 'THere'

Without Calling Each Other Enemies and
Going Extinct Forever

Hmm..

i Guess
That's kind
of An Hell too in Some Eyes;
Yep, Forever Not Existing At all;

Some Folks Disagree With That too...

IN IGNORANCE

And Continue to Harm, Rape, Maim, And
Kill the Nature of the Only Planet They Will Ever

Be Evolved to LiVE oN Now...

Apex Predator, HAhaha;

Zombies of Destruction,

Eating Their Own Face of

Nature;

Choose A Side to Live or Die;
Miracle of Life or Death Now/Then...

Anyway i Know the Difference Between A 'Good' And 'Bad' Story...

In a 'Good' Story An All Loving, Merciful, Forgiving God Doesn't Torture

Any Part

Of Existence

Forever; Oh My

God the Brain FArtS in 'That World' at Least...'
Anyway, Rod Serling Already ASSeSSeD 'The

Problem;
in the 60's...

Nothing New
Under A TV SHoW Here...

Oh Yeah, Serling Also Wrote the
Ending Part of the First "Planet of the
Apes" Movie That Hopefully Isn't Gonna

Be A Prophecy Fulfilled Again too

By that Real

Modern Age
Prophet oF Art for Profits hehe...

Stay Tuned For 'Part 3' if We Do...

i Damned Sure Know if i WaS on A Beach
With A Most Beautiful Woman in the World

i Wouldn't Be Complaining About 'A Statue Sunk to its Chest'...

And
'Buried
Dead Alive'...

Have A Nice Day...
Got Play to Attend to

in

Modern Eden...

~Pass the Popcorn Over Again, 'Rod'...

"BeWare of 'Those' Who BelieVE iN Torturing Folks Forever...
And Or BeLiEve They Have THE Authority to Dominate THE

Rest of Nature
on EartH

Out of

Balance "

-me...

And By All Means,
Call Your Mama While
She is Still Alive And Tell Her You Love Her...

And if You Are Most Fortunate And She Really Loved
You Spread That Love For The Rest of Your Only Life Now...

To Keep Her

Breath Of

Love Alive

After

She
Goes
Away...

~Just

my Opinion...

What Love Spells...

AND NEVER SPELLS
TORTURING ANY PART
OF EXISTENCE Forever, FULL STOP.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIufLRpJYnI



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvuM3DjvYf0



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BfmPdut2x4

---

With me it's relatively simple. I don't think there's such a thing as objective moral truth. Utilitarian philosophy got somewhere towards it with their "maximum happiness for the maximum number of people" thing, but that idea breaks down in extreme cases and sometimes we just don't know what the result of an action will be. I think the closest we can get to certainty about any moral question is when practically everybody on the planet agrees that a thing is horrible - e.g. murdering somebody who did no harm. When the consensus is less, I don't think I (or anybody else) can credibly insist that my (or their) personal view is the correct one.

All the doctrinal stuff and moral instruction I've seen from religion just seems to me like they're making it up as they go along but claiming it to be some kind of absolute truth. I think that happens a lot with faith, because faith is pretending you know a thing that you don't know.

1. You said that Biblical laws are also absolute in that God gave them and they cannot be questioned.

Assuming that there is a God who is perfect in everyway and the entire Bible is true and the general interpretation that is accepted around the world of the Bible is True in every way the thing is though we have to be aware of false prophets.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=KJV

You can be your own false prophet by misinterpreting what the scriptures say. Because none are perfect and we're all prone to making mistakes we can question what is said to make sure we're interpreting the way they're supposed to be interpreted as God ordained it.

2. It may be True that God gave them but did God write down on tablets, paper, papyrus himself or did God have other human beings write things down for him? And, were they given word for word by God or were they inspired by God. Let's say I'm inspired to write a poem based upon a beautiful tree. Did the tree write the poem or did I?

In other words, did God write the Bible or were different people inspired to write the Bible? Or, is it a combination of both?

If certain parts of the Bible were simply inspired then won't that person's conscience mind influence what the words will say?

3. It may be True that God's word is perfect but is man's interpretation of his word perfect? Imagine a game of telephone in which one person says a message and by the time it gets to the 25th person the message has been distorted from what it originally said. The Bible has different versions as well like the NIV, KJV amongst others. Which one of them is the accurate one?

4. And, are we supposed to submit to the beast since he will be an ordained authority figure since God ordains all authority figures and take his mark or are we supposed to reject his mark as God has commanded and ordained as well?

God's word is perfect. But, I'm not. How do I know what to obey in the end times? Submit to God by submitting to the authority figures which includes the beast and take the mark or submit to God by rejecting the mark?

What is to be obeyed here exactly? Which is correct?

The truth is the Bible and God is unobeyable and even God admits it when he says that none are righteous.

https://biblehub.com/bsb/romans/3.htm

My thoughts: The truth is if the Bible is really True as today's Christians interpret it then we've all been set up to fail since the time of Adam and Eve. And, there was no way for Adam and Even to obey God especially if one was to obtain knowledge of Good and Evil by eating the forbidden fruit from the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. The problem with this is how could they have known that disobeying was evil if they had no knowledge of what good and evil were.

Why would God create such conditions to happen where Adam and Eve failed? Why would God leave metaphorical rat poison for Adam and Eve to possible have in the first place?

God is perfect and complete yet who says this exactly? Man, who is imperfect and who more than likely has no idea what perfection and completion is supposed to be? Or God himself and we're to accept what God says because he simply says so? No questioning whatsoever?

How do you know or any of us know that even if the Bible was written by God that it gives the complete story about the varying events at the time and the very nature of God and man? Is it possible that certain things were left out like after Adam and Eve had Cain and Able and Cain was forced to wonder the Earth that there is more to the story because all of a sudden there are other people? Where did those other people come from during the time Cain was exiled?

And, how can God's invisible qualities be seen exactly? How does this work?

Doesn't invisible mean that that the qualities are not discernable, knowable and known? How can something be both not discernable, not knowable and not know vs discernable, knowable and known at the exact same? How does this work?

What does it mean that his invisible qualities can be seen exactly?

And, doesn't the Bible say that if one's right hand causes one to sin one is supposed to cut it off and throw it away? But, isn't it our thoughts though that causes us to sin and nature within our minds and souls? So, if that is true then why is suicide considered not only a sin but an unpardonable sin? Isn't one supposed to lop off the causes of sin which is our thoughts and mind?

Like I said, I have major doubts and because I have these doubts and questions I'm considered disobedient to God and I deserve to burn in hell? Why? Because God says so and ordains it? Why does he say so and ordain it?

Exactly. You refuse to pretend you know something that you don't know. Religionists insinuate this is in some way wrong, and some religionists go so far as to tell you that you'll not get a nice afterlife - perhaps even burn in hell - if you don't adopt their view of the matter. To my mind it's rather unfair of them. What harm does a person do by doubting a thing that can't be proved? And if they're doing no harm, why would anybody want to judge or punish them for that?

What's funny is I did go to church and the pastor said to meditate on all things God in his sermon. I followed his instructions explicitly. The more I did exactly what he said the less and less the Bible made sense and the more I meditated I came to realize how little I understood and guess what I have still don't grasp a lot of it.

I find aspects of the Bible confusing, contradictory and seemingly hypocritical. And, you can forget Revelation. Revelation is one of the most incoherent writings in the Bible and after reading it I felt like I came down from an acid trip mind bender. I thought to myself what in the world did I just read. And, yet Christians are able to come up with a version of the end times from Revelation? How? How do they do that exactly?