Is murder a sin prior to God saying it's a sin or only after he says so? If before, why do you need God for morality?
Is murder a sin prior to God saying it's a sin or only after he says so?
Talk religion
Talk religion
Is murder a sin prior to God saying it's a sin or only after he says so? If before, why do you need God for morality?
The law of the jungle would hold murder advantageous, so yes, supernatural law is needed for morality.
Facts, including moral facts, are true independent of your apprehension of them.
God is the source of moral facts and he reveals them (in Christianity)
Divine command theory is just might makes right on steroids. It does not magically make morality objective just because someone more powerful than you says so. Morality can be objective but this is not it
You're confusing objectivity with apprehension, exactly missing my point
so do you admit that divine command theory and other childish notions of ethics that amount to “cuz I sez so” are not objective systems of morality?
if I invented every flavor of ice cream, and I said strawberry was the best flavor, would it be an objective fact?
No, your position relative to these particular flavors doesn't make you the arbiter of flavor
>God is the source of moral facts
How do you know that?
yes, but only for those who believe in god
Sin has always been a sin. God did not made murder a sin the day he said murder was a sin. God simply made the Israelites aware that murder was a sin to save them from sinning. He revealed the law to them because he loved their ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and made a promise to them to be the God of their descendants.
>Is murder a sin prior to God
There was nothing prior to God.
>it's a sin or only after he says so?
God has always existed, thus, murder has always been a sin.
That's not what he asked you troony. He asked is anything a sin prior to God revealing to a prophet that it's a sin?
>He asked is anything a sin prior to God
Nothing is prior to God.
/Thread
What's the point of God even revealing anything if we automatically know everything?
>What's the point of God even revealing anything if we automatically know everything?
We don't know everything, the frick?
Neither, an action is good in and of itself. Your question rests on a false existentialist worldview in which actions have to be imbued with moral value before they can be classified as good or bad.
Is an action good because God says it's good. Or does God like it because it's good?
They're going to make you drink hemlock again if you keep this up.
>Neither, an action is good in and of itself.
That's not neither. That's the second option.
Nice try Plato but God exists prior to the notion of goodness and consequently he defines it
>If before, why do you need God for morality?
You don't, in general, need God to know what is moral. But humans are imperfect and unequal in virtue, so it is fitting that God would lay down laws so that things are clearer than they would have been if we were left to figure out morality on our own. Furthermore, in legal theory, it's generally accepted that the rule of law requires that laws be public. So, if God did not reveal what the moral law was, then, at the last judgment, people would be able to object that they were being judged according to a secret law and were unaware of the consequences of breaking it.
What do you mean by said so? Are you talking about Cain and Abel or when the Law was given? Or are you even referring to God's expressions of displeasure of humanity's behavior before the flood, or what he says to Noah after it? In any case you are in error because God existed before everything.
>In the beginning, God
Your inquiries regarding the nature of sin come from a fundamental misunderstanding of theology that can be easily cleared up by reading the very first line of Genesis.