tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8318987186297385798.post6352221546524394837..comments2011-02-26T19:29:56.222+13:00David Hillaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12270742541175771322noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8318987186297385798.post-37229823834178128472011-02-26T19:29:56.222+13:002011-02-26T19:29:56.222+13:00oops,<br />Correction:<br /><br />&quot;Christian ethics is <b>NOT</b> absolute.&quot;Lord Keyneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8318987186297385798.post-89731241169604657662011-02-26T19:25:28.148+13:002011-02-26T19:25:28.148+13:00Divine command theory collapses into a subjective theory of ethics.<br /><br />If what is moral is commanded by god, then what standard/system does god have, or use, to consistently decide what is moral?<br /><br />If there is a standard, then morals do not come from god, but independenly from that standard, which - since we are rational human beings - should be able to discover for ourselves.<br /><br />If there is no standard/system, then God&#39;s commands must be arbitary. His law is nothing but a subjective system.<br /><br />When Jesus died on the cross, the Torah/Old Testment law was swept away - you no longer had to follow the law to be saved, but accept Jesus and have faith in him, following moral injuctions as well St Paul commanded. <br /><br />But many things that were previously sins wre no longer sins (e.g., eating pork etc).<br /><br />Isn&#39;t it perfectly obvious that absolute morality requires that if something is wrong, it is ALWAYS wrong?<br /><br />Christian ethics is absolute.<br /><br />And divine command theory does not appear to be objective either.<br /><br />One thing that might save divine command theory is the idea that God is the perfect utilitarian: he - as an omnipotent and omnisicent being - can foresee ALL consequences, good and bad, and command what is best, by consequentialist ethics.Lord Keyneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8318987186297385798.post-3276905522022834662011-01-13T02:54:50.335+13:002011-01-13T02:54:50.335+13:00Paul, I&#39;d rate your perspective worth more than tuppence!David Hillaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12270742541175771322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8318987186297385798.post-33132692105713094842011-01-13T01:56:05.245+13:002011-01-13T01:56:05.245+13:00Re: the development of the law - is it really the case that it has some noble foundation ? I thought it was the codification of the prevailing social order - we&#39;re rich and we have property and we intend to keep it thank you very much.<br /><br />Just my tuppenceworth. :-)Paul Bairdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06269660700687899683noreply@blogger.com