[baggins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assuming the reich maintains both its political cohesion and political direction (i.e. Hitler is not demonised by later 'nazi' leaders with their own agenda.) Then yes the political consensus would be that he is a hero.

The point being??

[/ QUOTE ]


I like how you put that. Yes, exactly, assuming all those things.

My point is that there is no objective good or evil. Assuming the following scenario we would live in a world where Jews are considered evil terrorists and those that slaughter them would be the hero's. Good and evil can only be viewed subjectively.


If this is true. Then how can there be a God that presides objectively over what is good and evil?

Anyone who votes 'Yes' admits that there is no God, whether they know it or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

nonsense. voting yes is stating an either/or general opinion about how people would view Hitler under different circumstances post WWII.

you cannot ASSUME that good and evil are subjective and derive that there is no God. that is logical fallacy. there may be disagreement about what is Good and what is Evil, but that doesn't mean that there isn't an objective standard. Those of us who believe in God would say that He is the standard of good and evil. whether people accept that, or have different opinions of whether or not an evil villain was truly evil doesn't affect the fact (true or false) that God is the objective standard of morality.