Comments on: XFiles Weekend: It’s more like “guidelines”

By: Wedge

Wedge — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:36:31 +0000

A beautifully concise description of a concept that is difficult to explain clearly–thank you for this!

And mikespeir, I had to look up “adscititious.” Cheers for a great new word.

By: Hunt

Hunt — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 05:03:46 +0000

You would think that a reasonable natural progression like this would suffice to convince anyone that something like it, perhaps not exactly in every detail, but close enough, is what happened. Instead many people still believe our moral conscience requires the Sky-Cheney.

It’s like if you came into the kitchen every morning and there was a fresh brewed cup of coffee waiting for you, and you formed the opinion that the kitchen fairy left it there for you. Later it was explained that your wife was leaving it right before you got up, but you continue to believe in the kitchen fairy.

By: Deacon Duncan

Deacon Duncan — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 22:18:11 +0000

Plus even if God does appeal to secular standards to show that His designation is correct, that just goes to show that the secular standard, and not the divine fiat, is the true measure of morality. And, incidentally, it allows us to review some of God’s past moral judgments, like genital mutilation, slavery, and selling one’s daughter for sexual purposes.

By: mikespeir

mikespeir — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:26:32 +0000

Some will object that God, in determining murder is wrong, did so precisely because he knew it would be deleterious to human society. It isn’t a whimsical “blue is good and green is evil” sort of thing. But God, then, becomes altogether adscititious, an explanation for something already adequately explained without him–just as you have done in this post.