Category Archives: Golden Rule

Ethics & Morality

Posted on May 13, 2015 by Maryann Spikes

Below is a collection of my thinking on the grounding and justification of moral truth. I am warming up for something. Divine Essentialism God wills it (right) because He is good — essentialism. 1/4/08 (Not mine. Precursor.) The Sword and the … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Golden Rule, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, Keller's Reason for God, Moral Argument, Natural Law and Divine Command, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, William Lane Craig | 3 Comments

Kindling Conversations with Modesto Neighbors

Posted on April 14, 2015 by Maryann Spikes

You want to love your neighbor as yourself, but it’s hard to get to know them in the space between when the garage door opens and closes. No one answers the door anymore, because the only ones knocking are trying … Continue reading →

Posted in Golden Rule, Neighboring | Leave a comment

Leibnizian Moral Argument?

Posted on June 29, 2014 by Maryann Spikes

I think my moral argument for God’s existence is similar to Leibniz’ cosmological argument (except it has to do with the explanation of the Good, a.k.a. the Golden Rule). If you’d rather not say “the Golden Rule,” then say what everyone … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics Toolbox, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Natural Law and Divine Command | Leave a comment

Hell or Heaven: What about those who have never heard the gospel?

Posted on August 25, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

“What about the unevangelized? What happens to those who have never heard the gospel?” Some answer that such people are “without excuse” and reference Romans 1:18-32 and 2:14-15, Psalm 19:1-6, Romans 10:18. However… Being without excuse only means that Gentiles, like Jews … Continue reading →

Posted in Golden Rule, Predestination, Problem of Evil & Hell | Leave a comment

Defining the good: The Golden Rule

Posted on August 15, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

http://www.pflaum.com IN DESPERATE NEED OF EDITING/UPDATING, DON’T JUDGE! A major argument for God’s existence is that, if there is no God, there is no “true” good, because truth is that which corresponds to reality, to real being. A common counter-argument … Continue reading →

Posted in Euthyphro Dilemma, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief | Leave a comment

The Moral Argument

Posted on January 30, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

Update 1/30: Expanded on some things The Moral Argument I don’t like the traditional version of this argument that argues from the moral law to a moral law-giver: Traditional Argument from Morality Premise 1: There is an objective moral law. Premise … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics, Apologetics Toolbox, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Natural Law and Divine Command | 4 Comments

Dialogue with Tristan Vick on the Golden Rule

Posted on October 22, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

In this Euthyphro Dilemma thread I began a dialogue with Tristan Vick, which I continue in this Golden Rule thread, and bring to the top in the thread you are now reading. Tristan replies: With 1)God commands/reveals in accordance with … Continue reading →

Posted in Euthyphro Dilemma, Golden Rule | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.6: Truth Defined and Defended

Posted on May 6, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

The apologetics study group LOVES this quote from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics: “We may be entitled to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own facts.” p. 124 It’s actually a variant of a quote commonly attributed to Daniel Patrick … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Golden Rule, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, Natural Law and Divine Command, Norris' Epistemology, Reviews and Interviews | 3 Comments

Philosophers’ Carnival #138

Posted on February 20, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

Welcome again to Philosophers’ Carnival, “which aims to showcase the best philosophical posts from a wide range of weblogs. We invite submissions from bloggers and readers, and collate the submitted posts into one big round-up (or ‘carnival’) every three weeks, … Continue reading →

Posted in Carnival, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Ontological Argument, Stephen Law's evil god argument, William Lane Craig | 31 Comments

Is-ought discussion with WLC

Posted on January 7, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

I had a discussion with Dr. Craig in a note I posted on Facebook, but I am deleting Facebook Sunday and the discussion was never resolved, so I am moving it to here. Hopefully he can reply here or in … Continue reading →