-- Norman [a Town Hall blogger's presupposition in a "debate" with Lonestarblues, et al]
"Murder is wrong because I say God says it is."
-- Counter by Gabriel Hanna and Lonestarblues
"What I say is that they say Norman says God says that murder is wrong is less clear than Norman's original presupposition statement. And therefore should stand without said 'correction'."
-- dullhammer
Lonestarblues and Gabriel Hanna countered Norman's original statement that "Murder is wrong because God says it is" by asserting that a more accurate restatement of Norman's assertion would be: "Murder is wrong because I say God says it is."
I see such a reinterpretation as undercutting not only Norman's statement of presupposition for morality, but it undercuts all language itself as being unable to get beyond hearsay. For example, in order to accurately state the information I have just stated above I would have to actually spell out the fact that-- I SAY "LSB and Gabriel Hanna critiqued it by reinterpreting WHAT I SAY THEY SAY Norman SAYS to essentially say . . ." etc..
You get my point?
Either it is legitimate to be able to state in the abstract what a third party says-- without loss of integrity of meaning-- or it is not.
Following this there might be an attempt to protest that language about God is a special case, as He is either so far beyond the human experience, or else is nonexistent altogether. Either way one can only engage at the level of "what people say God says."
But even if this were the case, the solution would not be the addition of "I say God says . . ." for that too would be meaningless unless the "I" of "I say" could in fact know what he is talking about-- which brings one back to the original issue. And it would have been better to stick with the original issue in the first place. No?
There is, however, a different kind of a language problem in dealing with God which remains. Jesus spoke of differing soils for receiving the Word of God to differing degrees (Mark 4). From not at all, to temporary, to planted but ineffective, to fruitful. He also called for "He who has ears, let him hear." There is a kind of deafness of the soul-- which makes language about God difficult to get started up in the first place. Maybe this is why some are forced to say they can only hear what humans say God says. Even when it's from the very lips of God in human flesh.
Postings to continue the "debate" are welcome in the comments section.