To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
Psalm 19:1-11
I’ve never met anyone who could only eat one bite of pizza (I have met a few who could limit themselves to one slice), but for all of us, there comes a time when we are forced to admit that we can’t eat one MORE bite. It seems the time has come for
. He has stated that he has posted his last in our fun ‘Pizza and Sushi’ letter exchange. We will miss him.But this does not mean, at all, that I am done. My appetite for Pizza, and Sushi… and discussions of religion and morality… remain unabated. I, to misquote a famous naval gentleman, have not yet begun to eat. Or write. Or discuss. Or whatever.
The Last Pizza
So Fallible raises a number of interesting issues in his last post (or ‘last’ post, we’ll see :) ). I think I can boil them down to two:
How do we choose between all of the various sources and systems of morality?1
Is there a possibility of morality without God?
But before I get to those, I think I will take this opportunity to lay out the discussion, as I have seen it. In a word, a…
Summary
The “Pizza and Sushi Discussion” has been a letter exchange with Fallible Father. In it we discussed issues of the importance of religion, God, and morality… comparing them to the importance of Pizza and Sushi. It started when he posted a post entitled ‘Religion’ and specifically comes from this line: “Arguing over religion strikes me as the same as arguing over whether sushi or pizza is better.” Russell Gold has also contributed.
It has been a very fun ride, and I am open to continuing it with anyone. Here are my posts in the series, and a summary of how I think the discussion went. I encourage everyone to read both my posts and his responses, and to join in the discussion.
Sushi, Pizza, and the Existence of God // Podcast Version
In which I bring out some of the many issues that religion (and ‘non-religion’) are forced to address in life: Issues such as how we got here, why we are here, and what right and wrong is. And I emphasise that I am here to discuss Christianity, not religion in general.
In response Fallible published ‘Why Settle’, in which he said that, of course, there can be morality without God, and suggested that we take the best things from all religions.
Pizza, Sushi, and the Definition of Morality // Podcast Version
In which I lay out some definitions, and point to the impossibility of objective morality, without an objective rule maker.
In response Fallible discussed the definition of ‘objective’ morality (as opposed to ‘universal’) and talked about how definitions, and technology, change.
The knowledge of Pizza, Definition of Sushi, and Existence of Food // Podcast Version
In which I lay out some of the differences between existence, knowledge, and definition.
In response Fallible says that pizza, sushi, and morality exist, and we know what they are.
A Piece of Pi // Podcast Version
In which I point out that when a thing actually exists, we can’t change its definition, we can only change the words we use when talking about it… or not talking about it.
In response Fallible points to the conscience, and seeks to establish it as the ‘standard’ to which we must adhere.
A Pound of Pizza // Podcast Version
In which I argue that ‘observable’ means ‘measurable’, and that morality is measurable.
In response (see the comment thread to the above post)
says that I completely misunderstand him, and points to issues of epistemology: a system of morality might exist, but how are we to know it?The Source of Sushi
In which I point out that the conscience is at the middle of any argument about morality, and we need to exam each end: where morality comes from, and whether we do it.
In response to which Fallible says that it does, indeed, seem as if morality must have its source in God, and yet he doesn’t believe in God.
It’s Not Pineapple Pizza // Podcast Version
In which I discuss the differences between ethics and morality, and point out that nothing comes from nothing.
In response he goes into a rather odd discussion of sex, which rather drifts from moral considerations.
All the Pizza Toppings // Podcast Version
In which I ask: is it turtles all the way down? Can we be content with merely noticing that there are moral rules without wondering where they come from and what grounds them?
In response Fallible says… well, that is what this post is about.
Left on the Table
Before we get to his points, I also want to address some issues that I believe he has ‘left on the table’. Issues that I brought up along the way that I don’t seem to have seen his answer to.
Marriage, Prostitution and Adultery
Several times in this exchange I have referenced issues of sexual morality. In particular I have mentioned the importance of marriage, and the evils of prostitution and adultery. To my disappointment Fallible did not respond to these. I never got to learn how they fit into his system of morality without God. Is he cool with ‘open marriage’, open to his daughter being a prostitute or his wife sleeping with other men?
Or does he agree with ‘traditional’ morality on these issues? And if so, from whence cometh it? If we are but atoms in motion, how can he object to these things? Where does he draw the lines?
Transgenderism
As if condemning adultery wasn’t easy enough, I added the idea of someone allowing a 12 year old girl to cut off her breasts. That seemed a no brainer for anyone who claimed the name of ‘father’. A Godly father would die before he allowed such a thing, and kill the person who tried it. I would have thought even an atheist father would be appalled… and would say so.
But Fallible remained silent. I refuse to believe it is because he is in favour of such a thing, so it must be that he thought it a distraction. But as for me, I would still like to hear his response. Or perhaps someone will take up the gauntlet and respond for him.
Choosing Between
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Romans 1:18-22
Now, let us get to the first of his final issues. How is Fallible to choose between the hundreds of offerings on the buffet table? Should he choose to be a Reformed Baptist, or an Orthodox Jew? A Buddhist or a Mormon?
I hope my answer won’t disappoint, but I am going to point him back to the principles we have already discussed. Before he can move on to individual choices, I believe he needs to determine his first principles. Is he going to eat sushi, or pizza? Or hamburger?
If he is going to choose wisely, he must realise that there can be no morality without God. And, indeed, a God capable of producing morality.
And this morality needs to be objective, not subjective. It can’t be merely ‘do your own thing’.
I hope this answer isn’t too disappointing but I think that this is where he needs to start. Once he has settled on these things… once he has said that adultery must be evil, ergo any proposal which leaves it still on the table is not a valid choice, then we can (and I am very willing to go there) start talking about which system of morality works for that. Which metaphysic leads in that direction.
No Morality without God
To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.
The fool hath said in his heart,
There is no God.
They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.
There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.
Psalm 14:1-5
Which means that his second question is really his first. Can there be morality, right and wrong, good and evil, darkness and light, without a creator? That is the first question, that is the first step. Is there, or isn’t there, a God who reigns over all creation, and whose Will is binding upon Fallible Father? Is Fallible the master of all he surveys, or is he subject to another?
In the end the Christian claim is that the issue is not one of ignorance, or of decision, but of rebellion. That the ‘atheist’ is not someone who does not believe in God, but who is in rebellion against Him.
Invitation
And so my invitation… to Fallible and anyone else. I, at least, am not only willing but eager to continue this conversation. My keyboard stands ready to be typed on for yet millions of words.
This conversation began with the question of whether the issue of ‘religion’ was more important than that of food. My answer was, and is, that even with the addition of a blasphemy such as pineapple pizza the answer is, yes, in every way. The claims of God, and the foundation of morality, rise far far above any mere question of food, however nutritious, cultural, or delicious. Morality is not, and cannot be, turtles all the way down.
Thank you for reading Von’s Substack. I would love it if you commented! I love hearing from readers, especially critical comments. I would love to start more letter exchanges, so if there’s a subject you’re interested in, get writing and tag me!
Being ‘restacked’ and mentioned in ‘notes’ is very important for lesser-known stacks so… feel free! I’m semi-retired and write as a ministry (and for fun) so you don’t need to feel guilty you aren’t paying for anything, but if you enjoy my writing (even if you dramatically disagree with it), then restack, please! Or mention me in one of your own posts.
If I don’t write you back it is almost certain that I didn’t see it, so please feel free to comment and link to your post. Or if you just think I would be interested in your post!
If you get lost, check out my ‘Table of Contents’ which I try to keep up to date.
Thanks again, God Bless, Soli Deo gloria,
Von
He also raises some issues about the relationship between Christians and the OT law. I am happy to answer these, but they seem outside of the mainline of his argument, thus I will keep them for, as he calls it, a ‘side post’.
Is transgenderism more like pineapple pizza than sushi?