A Singaporean man was executed for importing over 1kg of cannabis, highlighting the nation's strict drug laws and capital punishment policy. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.
Pretty simply, do you require help knowing the difference between what is cruel and what is not?
Morality is a supposition
No, because we inherited that knowledge from Adam. The fact that we can tell the difference seems to show that an objective morality exists - this includes things such as taking care of elders and avoiding animal cruelty, something which can’t be explained with evolutionary “survival of the fittest”
Because of the suffering of innocents. Any all powerful creature that allows suffering on the scale we are familiar with either doesn’t know about it, and is thus ignorant, or doesn’t care, and is thus apathetic. Perhaps this creature both knows and cares, in which case it is either powerless to stop it, and therefore not all powerful, or it is a cruel being, and not one by which to set your moral compass.
The suffering is generally called by other people most of the time, and man-made factors. Also, can anyone truly be counted innocent? Humans rebel against authority from the earliesr possible age, often before even their first birthday. Likewise, if humans aren’t innocent, then stopping that suffering would mean immediately wiping out every single one of us. God promises eternal rest where there will be no suffering or crying - God is patient and gives us a fair chance, and then judges us. At that point, the idea of God not caring doesn’t work either- God literally became incarnate as a Human and submitted Himself to death, bearing the punishment for sins. He isn’t uncaring - He’s extremely merciful and doesn’t expect to be “won over” with good deeds.
This relies on a number of assumptions which are mostly wrong. Am I condemning an entire culture or the actions of a few people? Do the people of that culture think this is a good idea? Are there members of that group that condemn this? Are those members represented? Is the practice being condemned harmful?
What if the majority of them were in favour?
So you require someone else to tell you what is right and what is not? Are you incapable of independent thought? Are you devoid of compassion and empathy?
Without God, Human morality can be corrupted, such as chattel slavery or the holocaust.
Should God appear to you and demand you sacrifice your eldest son, would you begin sharpening your knife?
I don’t worship a God who would require me to sacrifice my eldest son, so that question isn’t relevant.
No, because we inherited that knowledge from Adam. The fact that we can tell the difference seems to show that an objective morality exists - this includes things such as taking care of elders and avoiding animal cruelty, something which can’t be explained with evolutionary “survival of the fittest”
The suffering is generally called by other people most of the time, and man-made factors. Also, can anyone truly be counted innocent? Humans rebel against authority from the earliesr possible age, often before even their first birthday. Likewise, if humans aren’t innocent, then stopping that suffering would mean immediately wiping out every single one of us. God promises eternal rest where there will be no suffering or crying - God is patient and gives us a fair chance, and then judges us. At that point, the idea of God not caring doesn’t work either- God literally became incarnate as a Human and submitted Himself to death, bearing the punishment for sins. He isn’t uncaring - He’s extremely merciful and doesn’t expect to be “won over” with good deeds.
What if the majority of them were in favour?
Without God, Human morality can be corrupted, such as chattel slavery or the holocaust.
I don’t worship a God who would require me to sacrifice my eldest son, so that question isn’t relevant.