Tag Archives: Objective Moral Value

Saturday Quote: Peter Kreeft on Moral Absolutes


“We no longer like to talk about moral laws, values, and about moral absolutes. But we do like to talk about morality, a morality without absolutes. But a morality without absolutes is not a morality at all. “Do as you please” is not morality, “do as you ought” is morality. “Do whatever you think will have the best consequences” is not morality; it is a calculation. “Do what works” is not morality, it is efficiency. Morality means something different from doing what we please, or what we calculate will turn out all right, or what works; morality means doing what we ought to do. Morality is not optional, like a “value,” but obligatory, like a law. A morality without laws and obligations is simply a confusion, like a triangle without angles.”[1]


[1] Peter Kreeft “Are There Any Moral Absolutes?” Making Choices: Practical Wisdom for Everyday Moral Decisions (Cincinnati, OH: Servant, 1990), 28. Print.

What God has Joined Together


By Arptas de Najraham.

The opinions expressed in this essay are solely those of Arptas de Najraham.

Nobody likes the way things are supposed to be. The perfect thing for people to do is to be in absolute awe of God and worship Him with all our hearts, minds, and strength; but we do not do that. We aspire to do that but gradually get distracted with the things of the world. Since the fall, nothing has been the way it was supposed to be: our relationship with God, the way we are to relate with people in perfect love and respect, nothing!

Christians, who believe that God has not condemned homosexuality, should know that God has not said anywhere that homosexual marriage is allowed either. In our sinfulness, we people have created idols and worshiped them as gods. Similarly, homosexual unions have followed that trend. Heterosexual union is what God intended, but sub-images of marriage have corrupted that holy union. Therefore, though authors Myer and Scanzon have made an affirmative biblical, psychological, and sociological case for the goodness of gay marriage, I take the courage to differ and say that goodness does not necessarily mean right. Continue reading What God has Joined Together

Sunday Terminology: Atheism


Atheism in the Greek αθεος [1], meaning without God is a position that denies the existence of any deity. It is the opposite of theism which believes in the existence of God. Atheism simply rejects the belief that there is no need for a supernatural being to justify the existence of this universe. “Atheism views the universe as “all there is” – there is nothing beyond it – and atheists believe the universe arose purely by chance, without any intelligent cause whatsoever.”[2] They also believe that God is man’s invention, hence devil does not exist either. Atheism views that absolute moral values do not have their independent existence by which we live. So, morality is either determined by the given situation or is relative.

____________________________

Footnotes:

[1] αθεος first appeared in the Epistles to the Ephesians 2:12 on the 3rd century Papyrus 46 (P46) in the New Testament, referring to those who were living without God. Nevertheless, this word is not found in the Koine Greek Version of the Old Testament.

[2] Norman Geisler and Joseph Holden, Living Loud: Defending your Faith (Nashville: Broadman and Holman Pub., 2002), 72. Print.

Saturday Quote: William L Craig on Objective Moral Values


‎”By contrast God is a natural stopping point as a foundation for objective moral values and duties. For unless we are moral nihilists, we have to recognize some stopping point, and God as the ultimate reality is the natural place to stop. Moreover, God is by definition worthy of worship, so that He must be the embodiment of perfect moral goodness. Again, God, by definition, is the greatest conceivable being, and a being that is the ground and source of goodness is greater than one that merely shares in goodness. So theism isn’t characterized by the sort of arbitrariness and implausibility that afflicts stubborn humanism.”[1]


[1] William Lane Craig, “Can We Be Good Without God?” On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 2010), 139-40. Print.

The Problem of Theodicy (II): Rabbi Harold Kushner


Summary on ‘Why do the Righteous Suffer?’ in the When Bad Things Happen to Good People’ by Harold Kushner:


Harold Kushner begins this particular chapter with a question: Why do bad things happen to good people? He argues that the pain and suffering caused by the untimely demise of the loved ones inevitably brings doubts about the goodness, kindness, and even more in the existence of God. But people throughout the history have been trying to justify the world’s suffering by holding themselves responsible for the punishment of their sins.

By doing so, people maintain the attributes of God as benevolent, omnipotence, and who is also in control. People are advised to avoid sin and be good. “It is tempting at one level to believe that bad things happen to people (especially other people), because God is a righteous judge who gives them what they deserve. By believing that, we keep the world orderly and understandable.” Nevertheless, their lives are already hurt by tragedy and no religious and pious explanation could comfort them. Continue reading The Problem of Theodicy (II): Rabbi Harold Kushner