LOL, I totally reject your “thesis”.
As said before, the Principle of Reciprocity is the only means of knowing what is evil and what is not.
Your god is not the trinitarian Judeo-Christian god. So, how can you say your god is the “objective truth” while a vast plurality believes that the trinitarian god (which you reject as utter falsehood) is the source of this so-called “objective truth”? What objective standard do you have in accepting one concept and rejecting the other? Specify, please.
I asked you to answer, but you failed in doing so, how did you learn about this god of yours? Through words conveyed to you by other, fallible humans? Well, then the knowledge you have of your god is contingent on your faith in the humans who delivered the knowledge to you, BEFOREHAND.
So, your “truth” is not objective, but merely subjective to whose opinion you consider as acceptable truth, and whose you don’t. Likewise, those believing in the trinitarian god have the same issue to contend with - since neither you, nor they, have had a first-hand experience and reception of this knowledge you consider as “objective truth”. Does this clarify it for you? If not, specify which part, so that I know you won’t divert from the discussion.
As said before, the Principle of Reciprocity is the only means of knowing what is evil and what is not.
On what grounds? Because that is James C. Bennett's personal opinion? Just last night you were accusing everyone who invoked G-d of invoking only "personal beliefs." You don't think you have personal beliefs? You think that your own hang-ups correspond to Ultimate Reality? You're the only person in existence who has no "opinions?" You think that somewhere outside the universe is a gigantic pillar with the words "thou shalt not circumcise thy children" carved into it?
All you have done is to assert your personal opinion about circumcision. But your personal opinion is not self-evidently true.
You accuse me of not answering you, yet I have pointed out that unless G-d exists and is the sole arbiter of right and wrong, that no objective law can possibly exist. There are only social constructs which we create and destroy at will. And that's exactly what your beloved "rule of reciprocity" is: a meaningless social construct you just happen to personally approve of. But your personal approvals and disapprovals do not define what is right and what is wrong.
Your god is no the trinitarian Judeo-Christian god.
Are you really that uninformed? There is not "trinitarian Judaeo-chr*stian gxd." Judaism rejects the trinity and always has. Chr*stianity is merely one more false religion dreamed up by people. Could it be that you are so naive that you don't even know this? Could it be that you don't know that Judaism doesn't believe in the "trinity" or J*sus? You've been in the Outback too long.
So, how can you say your god is the “objective truth” while a vast plurality believes that the trinitarian god (which you reject as utter falsehood) is the source of this so-called “objective truth”? What objective standard do you have in accepting one concept and rejecting the other? Specify, please.
The proof of the Truth is the Revelation at Sinai . . . an objective fact of history that could not have possibly been invented at a later date and retrojected. The Revelation at Sinai is the proof by which we judge all that happened before and all that happened after. It sits in judgment on all claims of "revelation." And it isn't based on "blind faith."
I asked you to answer, but you failed in doing so, how did you learn about this god of yours? Through words conveyed to you by other, fallible humans? Well, then the knowledge you have of your god is contingent on your faith in the humans who delivered the knowledge to you, BEFOREHAND.
I was not always a Noachide. I used to be a chr*stian. But I gave up chr*stianity because I learned it was wrong. Let's see you change your life based on your knowledge.
By "fallible humans" do you include yourself and your almighty theory of "reciprocity," or are you alone exempt from fallibility? Maybe you think you are "gxd" and that you created the universe, because that's the only way your personal hang-ups would have any objective validity.
So, your “truth” is not objective, but merely subjective to whose opinion you consider as acceptable truth, and whose you don’t. Likewise, those believing in the trinitarian god have the same issue to contend with - since neither you, nor they, have had a first-hand experience and reception of this knowledge you consider as “objective truth”. Does this clarify it for you? If not, specify which part, so that I know you won’t divert from the discussion.
The Jewish People had a first-hand experience with G-d Himself. They received the Torah from Him and not any human being, whether he claimed to be a prophet of G-d or (chas vechalilah!) "gxd incarnate." Three million people heard His Voice that day. And they taught their children, and they taught their children, and so on, down until today. There is no other religion in the world based on such a claim. Not one. Nor will there ever be.
On what grounds do you dismiss "my truth" as subjective and insist that your own personal hang-ups about circumcision conform to Objective Reality? You're just another fallible human, after all . . . aren't you? Or do you have delusions of gxd-hood?
Why don't you justify your belief in an objective moral reality when you believe the universe is utterly meaningless? Let's see you do that. Any ignoring of this request will be taken as an admission that you cannot.
Thank you.