[Cont.]
When you make a judgement to 'Leave it up to God', you're throwing all care to the wind and embracing ignorance, then when things go wrong you say it's "Gods Will";
- But really it was your choice in the beginning to throw care to the wind and not stay on top of things yourself, when you 'left the matter up to God'.
And in doing that you created the outcome that you're attributing God's will to.
I can show you a clear example of where this happened in the news just this week with Christians not taking Coronavirus seriously, and where their attitude was inadvertently putting others at risk of harm.
In which case it would never have been God's will other than their own will.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9116&page=0#301098

This woman in the article was willing to put her child at risk of harm, if something happened she'd have said it was "God's will (that her child got the virus)"
It wouldn't be Gods will at all, it would be her will in sending her child to go to school and being placed at an increased risk of harm BY HER,
It was HER WILL in failing to ensure her childs physical and emotional wellbeing, which is HER JOB and RESPONSIBILITY as a parent.
Don't blame God for one's own shite.

You Christians need to learn the difference between God's will, and Man's will.

What does the child suffering COVID-19 think of their mums decision?
"You sent me to school and put me and the whole family at risk of harm, you stupid misguided moron"
Are they wrong to think that of their mother?
Ethics says "Everybody has a right to live however they choose so long as it doesnt have a negative or detrimental impact upon others."
Well her decisions had a negative or detrimental impact on others did they not?

[Cont.]
You think morals are 'guidelines' for correct behavior;
(because you don't know the difference between morals and ethics)
- But I see ethics as 'rules' for correct behavior.

Rules of right and wrong that determine one's ability to make 'moral' decisions.
She broke the rules, because she had no ethics.
She didn't even know there were rules.

She thought that by reading the bible she had some 'moral high ground' but all she had was her 'head up her ass'.

She has substituted religion in the empty space that was originally reserved for ethics.
Her 'morals' are a spinning compass in the Bermuda Triangle, like yours.
Her worldview is ignorance and a danger to others.

So what happens when this moron woman dies and finds herself at Judgement day? (if it exists)
She's like "Oh I had faith in you Lord", and God says "What when you helped infect a further total of 624 people including 12 deaths and all the other impacts like a huge ripple effect you caused by your one single decision. How exactly did you DO UNTO others?"

I don't assume to know the mind of God if he exists, but if he does, I expect your lot is going to have to face up to a lot of shite like this.

[Cont.]
"Christians speak of 'Morality', but what does that mean? Here is another example of your close-mindedness. If you got rid of your anti-Christian baloney, you'd go to the Christian Scriptures to discern what Christian morality is:"

I don't need to learn the recipe for how you failed.
I'm not going to learn anything from your failed system that doesn't produce good results.
You need to learn the recipe for how my system succeeds where yours fails.

"What could be a higher morality/ethical standard than, 'In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you..."

Well you are starting in the right place.

'Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you'; or
'Treat others the way you'd like to be treated'.

- But it's from right back there the scripture twists you into knots and you become lost, like that spinning bloody compass.

As for your mum, yes palliative care, it is what it is.
The important thing is that its not about you, or whatever decisions you find too difficult or confronting to make.
It's about what your mum wouldve wanted.
If your decisions were consistent with her worldview then you acted the right way.
But if she told you before things got bad that she doesnt want to be kept alive and suffering more than she should then maybe your decision wasn't the right one, but this isn't for me to know or say.
I hope she didn't suffer any more than she needed to.

Keep in mind that's my 4 comments Spencer, so I won't be able to respond again to this thread again today if you respond to me.

To Armchair Critic.

I know you've used up your allowed replies in this thread, and if OzSpen replies, then you might want to focus on his response more then mine.

However there is one observation I have to offer too. Situations and experience where I've tried one ethical approach and seen the results, versus trying it the way prescribed in a few verses in the bible that teach on a simular situation (if not on that very situation). From these experiences I've found more value in what's in the bible, then what's debated in ethics.

This is one of the times that strengthen my faith in God and to search more what's from Him then to rely on my own understanding (either through ethics or my own thoughts and assuming they are also from God).

In this instance giving something to God doesn't mean to give up on the matter, or to be unthinking on the matter. But it does still mean to trust Him regardless how well you act in the situation. Some people might be better at giving a matter to God then I am, so perhaps they might be unthinking about it as well. But from what I've seen the examples of actually giving something to God and having faith in Him more often then not has better results then the ones where we try our hardest to make it right.

Just an observation from the other side of the coin.

Armchair Critic,

<<"Those statements are loaded with your presuppositions:" Well truth be told my statements are loaded with decades of experience.
- And they're based also upon 'arguments that hold merit' if you paid attention.>>

Would you believe I have 70 decades of experience? The length of experience does not determine the content of morality/ethics. In your interaction with me, you say <<I can get to the bottom of the issues you raise very easily, but for you it seems like you're a boat in a storm and your compass is spinning aimlessly out of control?>>

To the contrary. I'm not like a boat in the storm in my world view. It is built on the solid foundation provided by the Lord God Almighty with his absolutes of morality.

In my interaction, I have attempted to expose the holes in your world view that a philosophical truck can drive through.

<<No it's an argument based on merit.>>

That's AC's definition of 'merit'.

Armchair Critic,

<<Ethics says "Everybody has a right to live however they choose so long as it doesnt (sic) have a negative or detrimental impact upon others.">>

Who invented that slogan for ethics?

Jesus' view is radically different:

"43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matthew 5:43-48).

Your slogan for ethics is far removed from the Christian understanding:

'"If you have enemies who are hungry, give them something to eat. If you have enemies who are thirsty, give them something to drink. In doing this you will make them feel ashamed.” Don’t let evil defeat you, but defeat evil by doing good' (Romans 12:20-21).