The Moral Argument for God's Existence

@fmf said
If this medical doctor believes that Jesus died for his 'sins", isn't he "forgiven" by your God - according to your beliefs?

You really ought to let God worry about that and try to respond to the main point being made in any given post.

Otherwise one might get the idea you're deflecting from the purpose and intent made in the post.

@secondson said
You really ought to let God worry about that and try to respond to the main point being made in any given post.

I think sonship's "main point" is that his God is going to do something about the medical doctor [while Lemonjello has no such belief] so I am asking sonship to say what - according to his beliefs - he thinks that 'something' is going to be in a case where the said medical doctor believes that Jesus died so that he can be "forgiven".

@secondson said
Otherwise one might get the idea you're deflecting from the purpose and intent made in the post.

I am asking sonship directly about the content of his post and how his beliefs apply to the scenario he used in it.

@fmf said
Lemonjello has written a considerable amount about his thinking and his mindset. Where as he proposed a default mode of "anything goes"?

Within a framework of atheism, 'everything goes' according to personal preference as long as you don't get caught, no matter how you try to spin it.

@divegeester

There is no evidence that cannibals eat their victims to obtain their “moral higher code”.

You are making that up.

I didn't say that. You thought that as you read other words.

I said some cannibals ate their enemies to obtain their positive character traits.
Ie. A brave warrior is killed and eaten to obtain the cooked man's good characteristics.

@LemonJello

It is precisely that sort of thinking that is systemically disallowed by many versions of theological voluntarism, and that’s why those versions are inherently childish.

You really have this "More Grown Up Then Thou" attitude about thiests.

Somewhere in this thread I asked who in human history would you recommend manifested the most moral maturity in human history.

Excuse me you answered and I haven't see it yet.
But valuing moral maturity I'd like to know who you think epitomizes utmost human morality.

Would you accuse Jesus Christ of being "inherently childish" in this matter?
Who would you recommend surpasses Jesus of Nazareth in communicating high human ethics?

@FMF

according to his beliefs - he thinks that 'something' is going to be in a case where the said medical doctor believes that Jesus died so that he can be "forgiven".

The way you frame the question implies that Christ's redemption is not a part of what God would do in the matter of an accounting for every sin.

The redemption of Christ is a part of God's dealing with actual guilt because of actual wrong doing because of actual true moral OUGHTS about life.

My point was that God knows when the sinning doctor assumed no one else knew.
The omniscience of God is related to the reality of a transcendent universal morality and ultimate obligation.

- he thinks that 'something' is going to be in a case where the said medical doctor believes that Jesus died so that he can be "forgiven".

The interesting thing is that many people WANT it that way when THEY are the victims.
But when they have victimized another, their concern for accountability is less.

This is called unequal or in-equal. The word INIQUITY carries this meaning - not equal.
We are not equal.
God is the ultimate Equalizer.

But as to your question, the whole plan of Christ's redemption and justification is not separated from the transcendent Governor seeing to the scales of justice. It is a part of it.

No, "A vindictive God's gonna GET YOU boy!!" was not the sole message of my doctor illustration.

@sonship said
@divegeester

There is no evidence that cannibals eat their victims to obtain their “moral higher code”.

You are making that up.

I didn't say that. You thought that as you read other words.

I said some cannibals ate their enemies to obtain their good moral characteristics.
Ie. A brave warrior is killed and eaten to obtain the cooked man's good characteristics.

What are you on about now?

When did I post that LOL....

@divegeester said
What are you on about now?

When did I post that LOL....

These are your words

There is no evidence that cannibals eat their victims to obtain their “moral higher code”.

I didn't write that cannibals eat their victims to obtain there "moral higher code."
i wrote that they ate them to obtain their "positive character traits."

Here it is:

Let's take cannibalism. I have heard that in some societies cannibalism is a way for the eater to ingest the positive character traits of the person he is eating.

What I am on about is how you inserted what you thought into what you read.
Taking just a little more time to be careful, would help this.

@sonship said
These are your words

There is no evidence that cannibals eat their victims to obtain their “moral higher code”.

I didn't write that cannibals eat their victims to obtain there "moral higher code."
i wrote that they ate them to obtain their "positive character traits."

Here it is:
[quote] Let's take cannibalism. I have heard that in some socie ...[text shortened]... what you thought into what you read.
Taking just a little more time to be careful, would help this.

When was this?

What are you a grave-digger?

@divegeester

Do you object to a moral argument for God's existence in one form or another?
Or are you just looking to be a comedian needling a Christian around for some entertainment?

Would it surprise you that even cannibals have some sense of negative and positive character traits?

@sonship said
@divegeester

Do you object to a moral argument for God's existence in one form or another?
Or are you just looking to be a comedian needling a Christian around for some entertainment?

Would it surprise you that even cannibals have some sense of negative and positive character traits?

Why have you dug up this old post sonship?

You ignored it for what, weeks...