Is there a god?

[ding]

Taz, if you are looking for evidence all you need to do is look inside yourself.

"Now the position would be quite hopeless but for this. There is one thing, and only one, in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation. That one thing is Man. We do not merely observe men, we are men. In this case we have, so to speak, inside information; we are in the know. And because of that, we know that men find themselves under a moral law, which they did not make, and cannot quite forget even when they try, and which they know they ought to obey. Notice the following point. Anyone studying Man from the outside as we study electricity or cabbages, not knowing our language and consequently not able to get any inside knowledge from us, but merely observing what we did, would never get the slightest evidence that we had this moral law. How could he? for his observations would only show what we did, and the moral law is about what we ought to do. In the same way, if there were anything above or behind the observed facts in the case of stones or the weather, we, by studying them from outside, could never hope to discover it.

The position of the question, then, is like this. We want to know whether the universe simply happens to be what it is for no reason or whether there is a power behind it that makes it what it is. Since that power, if it exists, would be not one of the observed facts but a reality which makes them, no mere observation of the facts can find it. There is only one case in which we can know whether there is anything more, namely our own case. And in that one case we find there is. Or put it the other way round. If there was a controlling power outside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe—no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase or fireplace in that house. The only way in which we could expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way. And that is just what we do find inside ourselves. Surely this ought to arouse our suspicions?" C.S. Lewis

So you have no proof except "look inside yourself". Gee, what a surprise!

Why would you need anymore proof than that?

 

[Taz]

"The purpose of the universe is create intelligence aka consciousness. Consciousness is the pinnacle of creation." What does proving this quote have to do with any moral law?

It doesn't. Consciousness being the pinnacle of creation tells us what the purpose of the universe is. You can't tell what the purpose of something is until it is practically complete.

So you have no proof for that quote, just more mumbo jumbo. Got it. Man, seriously, get your debating shit together, you suck at this.

lol, I think you just described your position, Taz.

Can you name something more advanced than consciousness?

Wouldn't god be the most advanced in your world?

The painter is not the painting, Taz.

"The purpose of the universe is create intelligence aka consciousness". So you have no proof for this statement. Got it.

 

[Taz]

Is that why the US is in such chaos all the time?

Can you give me an example of a virtuous country living in peace and harmony?

Yes, because we stopped following the moral law.

Yes, there are numerous examples. Here is my witness.

Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Upon my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country. Religion in America...must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of it. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief. I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion -- for who can search the human heart? But I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society. In the United States, the sovereign authority is religious...there is no country in the world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature than that its influence is powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth. In the United States, the influence of religion is not confined to the manners, but it extends to the intelligence of the people...

Christianity, therefore, reigns without obstacle, by universal consent...

I sought for the key to the greatness and genius of America in her harbors...; in her fertile fields and boundless forests; in her rich mines and vast world commerce; in her public school system and institutions of learning. I sought for it in her democratic Congress and in her matchless Constitution Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great. The safeguard of morality is religion, and morality is the best security of law as well as the surest pledge of freedom. The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other Christianity is the companion of liberty in all its conflicts -- the cradle of its infancy, and the divine source of its claims.

One Nation Under God: Alexis de Tocqueville

"Yes, there are numerous examples." So give me 5.

Early America.

Early China.

Early Israel.

Early Western Civilization.

Early Mesopotamia.

All those examples are filled with war, massacres, rapes-as-a-weapon and slavery. Please try again.

The moral law is what we ought to do, not what we do. I have already explained to you that we rationalize that we didn't do evil but never reject the concept of right and wrong.

In other words, morality is subjective. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[ding]

No. That is an example to show that man is subjective. The moral law is absolute. Outcomes prove that.

Virtue is the ultimate organizing principle. A virtuous people will live in peace and harmony. A people devoid of virtue will live in disorder and chaos.

This is the evidence you have been seeking as an agnostic.

So what is the moral law? List its components.

For any given conduct of behavior find the highest possible standard that exists. That is the moral law for that conduct of behavior.

So your moral law depends on what you find?

Name some "highest possible standard that exists".

Every great philosopher or thinker in the history of mankind has acknowledged that the moral law is discovered.

Don't kill
Don't steal
Don't put words in other people's mouths
Don't make assumptions
Don't bear false witness
Be true to your promises
etc.

You mean the moral law is the 10 commandments? LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!

The moral law is more than that, Taz. For any given thing there is a final state of fact. We call this objective truth or reality. Once discovered it is known that it was always that way and will always be that way. Truth is eternal and unchanging. Which is the definition of God. Ergo, God is truth. Ergo, God is reality. Ergo, God is existence.

 

[ding]

Yes, because we stopped following the moral law.

Yes, there are numerous examples. Here is my witness.

Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Upon my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country. Religion in America...must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of it. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief. I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion -- for who can search the human heart? But I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society. In the United States, the sovereign authority is religious...there is no country in the world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature than that its influence is powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth. In the United States, the influence of religion is not confined to the manners, but it extends to the intelligence of the people...

Christianity, therefore, reigns without obstacle, by universal consent...

I sought for the key to the greatness and genius of America in her harbors...; in her fertile fields and boundless forests; in her rich mines and vast world commerce; in her public school system and institutions of learning. I sought for it in her democratic Congress and in her matchless Constitution Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great. The safeguard of morality is religion, and morality is the best security of law as well as the surest pledge of freedom. The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other Christianity is the companion of liberty in all its conflicts -- the cradle of its infancy, and the divine source of its claims.

One Nation Under God: Alexis de Tocqueville

"Yes, there are numerous examples." So give me 5.

Early America.

Early China.

Early Israel.

Early Western Civilization.

Early Mesopotamia.

All those examples are filled with war, massacres, rapes-as-a-weapon and slavery. Please try again.

The moral law is what we ought to do, not what we do. I have already explained to you that we rationalize that we didn't do evil but never reject the concept of right and wrong.

In other words, morality is subjective. Thanks for clearing that up.

No. Men are subjective. Morality is absolute. We've been over this a dozen times and you have no answer for it other than a child's response.

 

[Taz]

Taz, if you are looking for evidence all you need to do is look inside yourself.

"Now the position would be quite hopeless but for this. There is one thing, and only one, in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation. That one thing is Man. We do not merely observe men, we are men. In this case we have, so to speak, inside information; we are in the know. And because of that, we know that men find themselves under a moral law, which they did not make, and cannot quite forget even when they try, and which they know they ought to obey. Notice the following point. Anyone studying Man from the outside as we study electricity or cabbages, not knowing our language and consequently not able to get any inside knowledge from us, but merely observing what we did, would never get the slightest evidence that we had this moral law. How could he? for his observations would only show what we did, and the moral law is about what we ought to do. In the same way, if there were anything above or behind the observed facts in the case of stones or the weather, we, by studying them from outside, could never hope to discover it.

The position of the question, then, is like this. We want to know whether the universe simply happens to be what it is for no reason or whether there is a power behind it that makes it what it is. Since that power, if it exists, would be not one of the observed facts but a reality which makes them, no mere observation of the facts can find it. There is only one case in which we can know whether there is anything more, namely our own case. And in that one case we find there is. Or put it the other way round. If there was a controlling power outside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe—no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase or fireplace in that house. The only way in which we could expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way. And that is just what we do find inside ourselves. Surely this ought to arouse our suspicions?" C.S. Lewis

So you have no proof except "look inside yourself". Gee, what a surprise!

I have tons of proof, Taz. You are the one who has none. That's how I know you are a militant atheist and not an agnostic.

"look inside yourself" and a CS Lewis quote is your proof. Tons? That's not even a ton of nonsense, just a small amount.

 

[ding]

It doesn't. Consciousness being the pinnacle of creation tells us what the purpose of the universe is. You can't tell what the purpose of something is until it is practically complete.

So you have no proof for that quote, just more mumbo jumbo. Got it. Man, seriously, get your debating shit together, you suck at this.

lol, I think you just described your position, Taz.

Can you name something more advanced than consciousness?

Wouldn't god be the most advanced in your world?

The painter is not the painting, Taz.

"The purpose of the universe is create intelligence aka consciousness". So you have no proof for this statement. Got it.

I've already proven this point. Consciousness is the most advanced thing the universe has produced. We can only know the purpose of something by its practically complete product. That would be consciousness.

Can you name anything more advanced than consciousness?

 

[Taz]

Taz, if you are looking for evidence all you need to do is look inside yourself.

"Now the position would be quite hopeless but for this. There is one thing, and only one, in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation. That one thing is Man. We do not merely observe men, we are men. In this case we have, so to speak, inside information; we are in the know. And because of that, we know that men find themselves under a moral law, which they did not make, and cannot quite forget even when they try, and which they know they ought to obey. Notice the following point. Anyone studying Man from the outside as we study electricity or cabbages, not knowing our language and consequently not able to get any inside knowledge from us, but merely observing what we did, would never get the slightest evidence that we had this moral law. How could he? for his observations would only show what we did, and the moral law is about what we ought to do. In the same way, if there were anything above or behind the observed facts in the case of stones or the weather, we, by studying them from outside, could never hope to discover it.

The position of the question, then, is like this. We want to know whether the universe simply happens to be what it is for no reason or whether there is a power behind it that makes it what it is. Since that power, if it exists, would be not one of the observed facts but a reality which makes them, no mere observation of the facts can find it. There is only one case in which we can know whether there is anything more, namely our own case. And in that one case we find there is. Or put it the other way round. If there was a controlling power outside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe—no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase or fireplace in that house. The only way in which we could expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way. And that is just what we do find inside ourselves. Surely this ought to arouse our suspicions?" C.S. Lewis

So you have no proof except "look inside yourself". Gee, what a surprise!

Why would you need anymore proof than that?

Sorry, I thought you had some proof. Maybe it's time for you to buy a dictionary?

 

[ding]

Taz, if you are looking for evidence all you need to do is look inside yourself.

"Now the position would be quite hopeless but for this. There is one thing, and only one, in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation. That one thing is Man. We do not merely observe men, we are men. In this case we have, so to speak, inside information; we are in the know. And because of that, we know that men find themselves under a moral law, which they did not make, and cannot quite forget even when they try, and which they know they ought to obey. Notice the following point. Anyone studying Man from the outside as we study electricity or cabbages, not knowing our language and consequently not able to get any inside knowledge from us, but merely observing what we did, would never get the slightest evidence that we had this moral law. How could he? for his observations would only show what we did, and the moral law is about what we ought to do. In the same way, if there were anything above or behind the observed facts in the case of stones or the weather, we, by studying them from outside, could never hope to discover it.

The position of the question, then, is like this. We want to know whether the universe simply happens to be what it is for no reason or whether there is a power behind it that makes it what it is. Since that power, if it exists, would be not one of the observed facts but a reality which makes them, no mere observation of the facts can find it. There is only one case in which we can know whether there is anything more, namely our own case. And in that one case we find there is. Or put it the other way round. If there was a controlling power outside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe—no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase or fireplace in that house. The only way in which we could expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way. And that is just what we do find inside ourselves. Surely this ought to arouse our suspicions?" C.S. Lewis

So you have no proof except "look inside yourself". Gee, what a surprise!

I have tons of proof, Taz. You are the one who has none. That's how I know you are a militant atheist and not an agnostic.

"look inside yourself" and a CS Lewis quote is your proof. Tons? That's not even a ton of nonsense, just a small amount.

Then let's see your argument against it. OK?

 

[ding]

Taz, if you are looking for evidence all you need to do is look inside yourself.

"Now the position would be quite hopeless but for this. There is one thing, and only one, in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation. That one thing is Man. We do not merely observe men, we are men. In this case we have, so to speak, inside information; we are in the know. And because of that, we know that men find themselves under a moral law, which they did not make, and cannot quite forget even when they try, and which they know they ought to obey. Notice the following point. Anyone studying Man from the outside as we study electricity or cabbages, not knowing our language and consequently not able to get any inside knowledge from us, but merely observing what we did, would never get the slightest evidence that we had this moral law. How could he? for his observations would only show what we did, and the moral law is about what we ought to do. In the same way, if there were anything above or behind the observed facts in the case of stones or the weather, we, by studying them from outside, could never hope to discover it.

The position of the question, then, is like this. We want to know whether the universe simply happens to be what it is for no reason or whether there is a power behind it that makes it what it is. Since that power, if it exists, would be not one of the observed facts but a reality which makes them, no mere observation of the facts can find it. There is only one case in which we can know whether there is anything more, namely our own case. And in that one case we find there is. Or put it the other way round. If there was a controlling power outside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe—no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase or fireplace in that house. The only way in which we could expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way. And that is just what we do find inside ourselves. Surely this ought to arouse our suspicions?" C.S. Lewis

So you have no proof except "look inside yourself". Gee, what a surprise!

Why would you need anymore proof than that?

Sorry, I thought you had some proof. Maybe it's time for you to buy a dictionary?

I have done that over and over again, Taz.

Where is your proof that my proof is wrong?

 

[Taz]

So what is the moral law? List its components.

For any given conduct of behavior find the highest possible standard that exists. That is the moral law for that conduct of behavior.

So your moral law depends on what you find?

Name some "highest possible standard that exists".

Every great philosopher or thinker in the history of mankind has acknowledged that the moral law is discovered.

Don't kill
Don't steal
Don't put words in other people's mouths
Don't make assumptions
Don't bear false witness
Be true to your promises
etc.

You mean the moral law is the 10 commandments? LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!

The moral law is more than that, Taz. For any given thing there is a final state of fact. We call this objective truth or reality. Once discovered it is known that it was always that way and will always be that way. Truth is eternal and unchanging. Which is the definition of God. Ergo, God is truth. Ergo, God is reality. Ergo, God is existence.

That's a personal opinion, not proof.

 

[ding]

We know that moral laws do exist because of our behaviors and because of outcomes when we violate the moral laws. There is the proof you are looking for, Taz.

 

[ding]

For any given conduct of behavior find the highest possible standard that exists. That is the moral law for that conduct of behavior.

So your moral law depends on what you find?

Name some "highest possible standard that exists".

Every great philosopher or thinker in the history of mankind has acknowledged that the moral law is discovered.

Don't kill
Don't steal
Don't put words in other people's mouths
Don't make assumptions
Don't bear false witness
Be true to your promises
etc.

You mean the moral law is the 10 commandments? LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!

The moral law is more than that, Taz. For any given thing there is a final state of fact. We call this objective truth or reality. Once discovered it is known that it was always that way and will always be that way. Truth is eternal and unchanging. Which is the definition of God. Ergo, God is truth. Ergo, God is reality. Ergo, God is existence.

That's a personal opinion, not proof.

Observations of behaviors and outcomes are proof, taz.

Where is your proof?

We know that moral laws do exist because of our behaviors and outcomes when we violate the moral laws.

 

[Taz]

"Yes, there are numerous examples." So give me 5.

Early America.

Early China.

Early Israel.

Early Western Civilization.

Early Mesopotamia.

All those examples are filled with war, massacres, rapes-as-a-weapon and slavery. Please try again.

The moral law is what we ought to do, not what we do. I have already explained to you that we rationalize that we didn't do evil but never reject the concept of right and wrong.

In other words, morality is subjective. Thanks for clearing that up.

No. Men are subjective. Morality is absolute. We've been over this a dozen times and you have no answer for it other than a child's response.

So do you have any example of virtuous countries or not? Seems like "not".

 

[Taz]

So you have no proof for that quote, just more mumbo jumbo. Got it. Man, seriously, get your debating shit together, you suck at this.

lol, I think you just described your position, Taz.

Can you name something more advanced than consciousness?

Wouldn't god be the most advanced in your world?

The painter is not the painting, Taz.

"The purpose of the universe is create intelligence aka consciousness". So you have no proof for this statement. Got it.

I've already proven this point. Consciousness is the most advanced thing the universe has produced. We can only know the purpose of something by its practically complete product. That would be consciousness.

Can you name anything more advanced than consciousness?

"Consciousness is the most advanced thing the universe has produced" This has not been proven. It might seems like it know, but who knows what's out there in a universe we've never explored? You could say that it's the most advanced thing we've found so far. But that's about it.

 

[ding]

Early America.

Early China.

Early Israel.

Early Western Civilization.

Early Mesopotamia.

All those examples are filled with war, massacres, rapes-as-a-weapon and slavery. Please try again.

The moral law is what we ought to do, not what we do. I have already explained to you that we rationalize that we didn't do evil but never reject the concept of right and wrong.

In other words, morality is subjective. Thanks for clearing that up.

No. Men are subjective. Morality is absolute. We've been over this a dozen times and you have no answer for it other than a child's response.

So do you have any example of virtuous countries or not? Seems like "not".

Yes, I have already provided that to you. Are you arguing that virtue does not lead to peace and harmony in a people?

Can you provide your reasoning for that or maybe an authority who state that virtue does not lead to peace and harmony?

 

[ding]

lol, I think you just described your position, Taz.

Can you name something more advanced than consciousness?

Wouldn't god be the most advanced in your world?

The painter is not the painting, Taz.

"The purpose of the universe is create intelligence aka consciousness". So you have no proof for this statement. Got it.

I've already proven this point. Consciousness is the most advanced thing the universe has produced. We can only know the purpose of something by its practically complete product. That would be consciousness.

Can you name anything more advanced than consciousness?

"Consciousness is the most advanced thing the universe has produced" This has not been proven. It might seems like it know, but who knows what's out there in a universe we've never explored? You could say that it's the most advanced thing we've found so far. But that's about it.

Can you think of anything that would be more advanced, Taz?

You can solve this by inspection.

 

[Taz]

Taz, if you are looking for evidence all you need to do is look inside yourself.

"Now the position would be quite hopeless but for this. There is one thing, and only one, in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation. That one thing is Man. We do not merely observe men, we are men. In this case we have, so to speak, inside information; we are in the know. And because of that, we know that men find themselves under a moral law, which they did not make, and cannot quite forget even when they try, and which they know they ought to obey. Notice the following point. Anyone studying Man from the outside as we study electricity or cabbages, not knowing our language and consequently not able to get any inside knowledge from us, but merely observing what we did, would never get the slightest evidence that we had this moral law. How could he? for his observations would only show what we did, and the moral law is about what we ought to do. In the same way, if there were anything above or behind the observed facts in the case of stones or the weather, we, by studying them from outside, could never hope to discover it.

The position of the question, then, is like this. We want to know whether the universe simply happens to be what it is for no reason or whether there is a power behind it that makes it what it is. Since that power, if it exists, would be not one of the observed facts but a reality which makes them, no mere observation of the facts can find it. There is only one case in which we can know whether there is anything more, namely our own case. And in that one case we find there is. Or put it the other way round. If there was a controlling power outside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe—no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase or fireplace in that house. The only way in which we could expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way. And that is just what we do find inside ourselves. Surely this ought to arouse our suspicions?" C.S. Lewis

So you have no proof except "look inside yourself". Gee, what a surprise!

I have tons of proof, Taz. You are the one who has none. That's how I know you are a militant atheist and not an agnostic.

"look inside yourself" and a CS Lewis quote is your proof. Tons? That's not even a ton of nonsense, just a small amount.

Then let's see your argument against it. OK?

That's not how things are proven or disproven. It's a homily and a quote from an author's musings. Your proving skills are in need of an upgrade.

 

[Taz]

Taz, if you are looking for evidence all you need to do is look inside yourself.

"Now the position would be quite hopeless but for this. There is one thing, and only one, in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation. That one thing is Man. We do not merely observe men, we are men. In this case we have, so to speak, inside information; we are in the know. And because of that, we know that men find themselves under a moral law, which they did not make, and cannot quite forget even when they try, and which they know they ought to obey. Notice the following point. Anyone studying Man from the outside as we study electricity or cabbages, not knowing our language and consequently not able to get any inside knowledge from us, but merely observing what we did, would never get the slightest evidence that we had this moral law. How could he? for his observations would only show what we did, and the moral law is about what we ought to do. In the same way, if there were anything above or behind the observed facts in the case of stones or the weather, we, by studying them from outside, could never hope to discover it.

The position of the question, then, is like this. We want to know whether the universe simply happens to be what it is for no reason or whether there is a power behind it that makes it what it is. Since that power, if it exists, would be not one of the observed facts but a reality which makes them, no mere observation of the facts can find it. There is only one case in which we can know whether there is anything more, namely our own case. And in that one case we find there is. Or put it the other way round. If there was a controlling power outside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe—no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase or fireplace in that house. The only way in which we could expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way. And that is just what we do find inside ourselves. Surely this ought to arouse our suspicions?" C.S. Lewis

So you have no proof except "look inside yourself". Gee, what a surprise!

Why would you need anymore proof than that?

Sorry, I thought you had some proof. Maybe it's time for you to buy a dictionary?

I have done that over and over again, Taz.

Where is your proof that my proof is wrong?

Nonsense cannot be disproved. It's one of the fundamental laws of the universe.

 

[Taz]

So your moral law depends on what you find?

Name some "highest possible standard that exists".

Every great philosopher or thinker in the history of mankind has acknowledged that the moral law is discovered.

Don't kill
Don't steal
Don't put words in other people's mouths
Don't make assumptions
Don't bear false witness
Be true to your promises
etc.

You mean the moral law is the 10 commandments? LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!

The moral law is more than that, Taz. For any given thing there is a final state of fact. We call this objective truth or reality. Once discovered it is known that it was always that way and will always be that way. Truth is eternal and unchanging. Which is the definition of God. Ergo, God is truth. Ergo, God is reality. Ergo, God is existence.

That's a personal opinion, not proof.

Observations of behaviors and outcomes are proof, taz.

Where is your proof?

We know that moral laws do exist because of our behaviors and outcomes when we violate the moral laws.

If I lie to save my life, then violating the moral law has a positive outcome. Fuck brah, this is too easy.