Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This equation of God with particular interpretations (especially those made by more primitive humans at an earlier stage of our spiritual development) is a common error. God is not responsible for ANY interpretations . . . humans are. Christians have accepted (as a minimum) that the characteristics displayed by Jesus are those that God possesses (whether or not the next step is taken to merge them). All this debate over primitive interpretations is moot.
I don't see anything in this person's quote about primitive interpretations. I guess if you consider the bible primitive, which I do. All you have to do is read the bible to find that "God" is a vengeful, unjust, prejudice, violent deity. Just because some parts of the bible say he is good and kind does not make the other parts not exist.
I don't see anything in this person's quote about primitive interpretations. I guess if you consider the bible primitive, which I do. All you have to do is read the bible to find that "God" is a vengeful, unjust, prejudice, violent deity. Just because some parts of the bible say he is good and kind does not make the other parts not exist.
You contradict yourself. Of course he is referencing primitive interpretations and explanations recorded by primitives and interpeted by others without any attempt to understand the cultural and societal contexts within which these primitive explanations were made. Would you evaluate your 7 year old's explanations as if they were that of a fully competent adult?Why do so with the recordings from the "childhood" of humankind?
Logic, troop et al,
you have both pointed out, along with many others, the seemingly whimsical, hateful, bigoted actions of God as displayed in the bible. You have said, in so many words, that this God is not worthy of acceptance even if He did exist, thus making a moral judgment upon his actions. A moral judgment. With what standard are you making these accusations about the wrongness of God's actions? Is it based on what you think?, what you deem to be decent and right? If so, who made you the judge of God?
Ought we to place you in his stead as the ultimate definer of what is good or evil? if the answer is yes, this is the first step down the road to megalomania. If the answer is no, then why would we heed what you say? if the answer is i don't know, how many more emphatic, definitive and absolute claims will you make about reality based on an agnostic platform?
Sirs, I believe these questions must be answered. From one man to another, i believe it is encumbant upon us because we take our worldviews into the world and work change it accordingly. I believe there is meaning to life, as do you in some sense, and if there is to be meaning there must be consequences (good or bad, right or wrong, productive or unproductive) for what we say and do. Ideas have consequences.
The way i see it, you are using your innate understanding of what is right and wrong, which was given to you, using that understanding to invalidate the source for your own moralilty. You are on a limb trying to saw yourself away from the tree.
tic
Logic, troop et al,
you have both pointed out, along with many others, the seemingly whimsical, hateful, bigoted actions of God as displayed in the bible. You have said, in so many words, that this God is not worthy of acceptance even if He did exist, thus making a moral judgment upon his actions. A moral judgment. With what standard are you making these accusations about the wrongness of God's actions? Is it based on what you think?, what you deem to be decent and right? If so, who made you the judge of God?
Ought we to place you in his stead as the ultimate definer of what is good or evil? if the answer is yes, this is the first step down the road to megalomania. If the answer is no, then why would we heed what you say? if the answer is i don't know, how many more emphatic, definitive and absolute claims will you make about reality based on an agnostic platform?
Sirs, I believe these questions must be answered. From one man to another, i believe it is encumbant upon us because we take our worldviews into the world and work change it accordingly. I believe there is meaning to life, as do you in some sense, and if there is to be meaning there must be consequences (good or bad, right or wrong, productive or unproductive) for what we say and do. Ideas have consequences.
The way i see it, you are using your innate understanding of what is right and wrong, which was given to you, using that understanding to invalidate the source for your own moralilty. You are on a limb trying to saw yourself away from the tree.
tic
I don't see how murder is not wrong, even if God does it. I guess all the district attorneys in the country are megalomaniacs.
The point is that these atrocities in the bible are evidence against an all-loving god, which the bible also professes that he is.
I don't see how murder is not wrong, even if God does it. I guess all the district attorneys in the country are megalomaniacs.
The point is that these atrocities in the bible are evidence against an all-loving god, which the bible also professes that he is.
Interesting that you would not attribute the contradictions to the fallible human interpreters "wrongly attributing things to God" and prefer to assume that God is at fault for being contradictory or hypocritical or whatever. Whatever claims may be made for these writings by humans . . . they are writings by humans (and very unschooled, unknowledgable, and primitive humans at that.)
Logic, troop et al,
you have both pointed out, along with many others, the seemingly whimsical, hateful, bigoted actions of God as displayed in the bible. You have said, in so many words, that this God is not worthy of acceptance even if He did exist, thus making a moral judgment upon his actions. A moral judgment. With what standard are you making these accusations about the wrongness of God's actions? Is it based on what you think?, what you deem to be decent and right? If so, who made you the judge of God?
Ought we to place you in his stead as the ultimate definer of what is good or evil? if the answer is yes, this is the first step down the road to megalomania. If the answer is no, then why would we heed what you say? if the answer is i don't know, how many more emphatic, definitive and absolute claims will you make about reality based on an agnostic platform?
Sirs, I believe these questions must be answered. From one man to another, i believe it is encumbant upon us because we take our worldviews into the world and work change it accordingly. I believe there is meaning to life, as do you in some sense, and if there is to be meaning there must be consequences (good or bad, right or wrong, productive or unproductive) for what we say and do. Ideas have consequences.
The way i see it, you are using your innate understanding of what is right and wrong, which was given to you, using that understanding to invalidate the source for your own moralilty. You are on a limb trying to saw yourself away from the tree.
tic
I think you're right. I think this is a question that needs to be answered. Because I would like to know where this innate sense of right and wrong comes from as well. How dare I feel that something who terrorizes, tortures, and literally kills first-born children is something not worshiping? How can I pass judgment on this God? Simple. Because he does not exist. It is no different than me passing judgment on Santa Claus for being a fool-hardy old man full of scourge and demented anger for putting coal in children's stockings - what man would do such a thing?!
Yet, the question you pose brings up a different facet and avenue. If I sense this moral platitude of right and wrong in what I see in the Christian God, than where does this moral platitude come from? If it is OK for this God to terrorize and torture people than why is it not OK for me to do so as well? Lead by example, isn't that what Jesus supposedly did? And the Apostles?
Nay, I think that what is happening here is not that I am developing a megalomaniacal sense of judgment for myself but I am using that which is innately given to us free of deities and celestial harbingers to argue against the morality of this "perfect" God.
For, if my sense of apathy directed towards a God that kills and unmercifully tortures people is given by some higher power, than obviously it must be Satan, right? And this is where I continue to lose my patience with the absurdities of the Christian faith. Not only is there apparently some sort of God roaming the heavens who can rain down his thunder when he so chooses but disavows any of his other creations from doing so but he also created some angel in heaven with the pre-conceived notion of what he'd turn out to be and when it happened he scratched his head in confusion.
Thus, perhaps it is Satan that is giving me this sense of right and wrong. Perhaps he is sneakily crawling his abdomen-dwelling body across the ground and whispering into my ear that it's wrong for people to be unjustifiably killed. But, this brings up the conundrum... Which one is, from our perception, the better of the two Gods?
Nah. Stop speaking to us like God is a real entity that has actually done such a thing. My judgment is passed on him specifically because I don't believe there is a thing as some sort of divine Congress in the sky setting forth and dictating laws and rules for everyone to live by. Thus, I think it's apt for me to say that if God does not exist, he is a human mental creation, and if he is a human creation he has all of the workings and dealings of an inept and fallibly evolved species. Does this put me above their ideologies? Absolutely not but it does allow me to consider alternative perceptions without feeling like I will be thrown into a fiery pit of eternal damnation and hell.
Remember. It was you who entered into this forum. Not vice versa.
Nah. Stop speaking to us like God is a real entity that has actually done such a thing. My judgment is passed on him specifically because I don't believe there is a thing as some sort of divine Congress in the sky setting forth and dictating laws and rules for everyone to live by. Thus, I think it's apt for me to say that if God does not exist, he is a human mental creation, and if he is a human creation he has all of the workings and dealings of an inept and fallibly evolved species. Does this put me above their ideologies? Absolutely not but it does allow me to consider alternative perceptions without feeling like I will be thrown into a fiery pit of eternal damnation and hell.
Remember. It was you who entered into this forum. Not vice versa.
Actually you probably should say you believe that Nature is the divine Congress dictating the laws and rules for the universe to operate under . . . including us . . . wouldn't that be more accurate? That would then relegate all those "human mental creations of an inept and fallibly evolved species" to the status of flawed descriptions only (of course the use of God instead of Nature raises the issue of naming as well). Still . . . the innateness is the from the same Source . . . just differentially described (and named).
I find it interesting that you accept the concept of rightness and wrongness (which can only be in respect to some standard or standard giver) . . . while accepting the indifference of your version of the source. I would be interested to know how this rightness or wrongness is to be determined using your source.
I find it interesting that you accept the concept of rightness and wrongness (which can only be in respect to some standard or standard giver) . . . while accepting the indifference of your version of the source. I would be interested to know how this rightness or wrongness is to be determined using your source.
I know this wasn't directed to me but I wanted to throw out my opinion. It has been a long standing belief among people who are religious that human beings have been given a set of rules and regulations in the form of the Bible or other religious texts that are supposed to dictate what sort of behavior is acceptable or unacceptable and there are no grey areas. It's my belief that all of this is the result of the experiences of mankind as a whole and has not been handed down from some imaginary being. In order for any civilization to be viable and prosper there must be some sort of order that establishes safety and civility for the general population and to control behavior that threatens this stability such as punishing those who murder, rape, steal, etc. After the nomadic lives of human beings living as hunter gatherers had ended and we discovered agriculture, the domestication of animals and permanent settlements it became necessary to establish what could be described as law and order for lack of a better phrase. All of the words of the Bible (which were written by men) have one basic purpose and that is to control human behavior. The Ten Commandments and all of the other rules and regulations that claim to have authority over human behavior were in fact written by humans themselves. This seems self evident to me and it's quite apparent that the concepts of right and wrong are an ever changing set of values that are constantly being reevaluated as civilization progresses. An obvious example is the fact that slavery seems to be perfectly acceptable in biblical times and Jesus himself says nothing against it and yet today it is perceived as brutal, cruel and immoral. I think we're making progress despite all of the misunderstanding regarding the nature of religion and the belief in the supernatural.
Logic, troop et al,
you have both pointed out, along with many others, the seemingly whimsical, hateful, bigoted actions of God as displayed in the bible. You have said, in so many words, that this God is not worthy of acceptance even if He did exist, thus making a moral judgment upon his actions. A moral judgment. With what standard are you making these accusations about the wrongness of God's actions? Is it based on what you think?, what you deem to be decent and right? If so, who made you the judge of God?
If it helps, I sometimes thing of god, not as a supernatural being, but simply as an earthly dictator, running a totalitarian country prompted only by his need for adulation and absolute control. Even down to his subjects' thoughts.
We can all think of typical examples of this scenario, and the basic mindset of all dictators is always the same. Let's suppose that America was hijacked in this way, and look at the outcome in terms of how the American people would react.
Undoubtedly, there would be many, perhaps even a majority, who would accept being under such rule with little concern, so long as they are not targeted individually, and would always obey the rules unthinkingly. Conversely, there would also be some very angry free-thinkers who would resent being ordered to behave in a highly conformist way. Of course, the dictator, being a typical megalomaniac, would hate these rebellious individuals with tremendous anger, not because they stand a chance of destabilising his regime, but because he finds it an affront that anybody but himself should have a mind of their own.
As time goes on, the populace stand helplessly by when more and more cruel orders are issued from the top man. Like, kill anyone who's lifestyle is different, punish anyone who criticises the regime, anyone foolish enough to think that the great dictator might be a little mad. Conformity is all... Life soon turns very dull, obeying all the prudish, small-minded dictates that are so rigidly prescribed. All the petty restrictions on what we should wear, eat, or who we should or shouldn't sleep with.
Secretly, a growing number of people would start to question having their lives ruled in this inflexible way, especially when they realise that the dictator's concern is not for the people, but for his own glory and power. All the propaganda posters blare out slogans saying that the despot loves them like his own children - but this, needless to say, is far from the truth. But still, some of the population would sing loud praises, thinking such servitude will bring them favour, but the dictator merely looks at them with contempt, even though they dutifully harass the elements of 'resistance' on his behalf.
Quote:
Ought we to place you in his stead as the ultimate definer of what is good or evil?
if by 'you', you mean somebody who is less obsessed with his own vanity and power-complex, and who is more concerned by the suffering he sees around him - I would say, let that person topple the dictator at the first opportunity, because the dictator's concept of what is good or evil is entirely based on his own selfish needs..... So much so, that he never intervenes to help when help is badly needed - he leaves all that to the kindness of ordinary folks who have a bit of human compassion.
All this may sound very simplistic, but I find it helps me to see religion in some sort of perspective. it is, in effect, a tyranny of huge proportions, and serves no purpose other than to demean man in his own eyes, and making him reliant on orders instead of learning to trust his own conscience and abilities.
Quote:
The way i see it, you are using your innate understanding of what is right and wrong, which was given to you, using that understanding to invalidate the source for your own moralilty. You are on a limb trying to saw yourself away from the tree.
Disagree - if we don't follow our innate sense of what is right or wrong - we fail ourselves totally - it's our only reliable guide to morality and integrity at the end of the day. And It comes from within us, and not from a vague somewhere on high...
Brian.
Last edited by brianrees; 11-21-2008 at 09:27 PM..
I know this wasn't directed to me but I wanted to throw out my opinion. It has been a long standing belief among people who are religious that human beings have been given a set of rules and regulations in the form of the Bible or other religious texts that are supposed to dictate what sort of behavior is acceptable or unacceptable and there are no grey areas. It's my belief that all of this is the result of the experiences of mankind as a whole and has not been handed down from some imaginary being. In order for any civilization to be viable and prosper there must be some sort of order that establishes safety and civility for the general population and to control behavior that threatens this stability such as punishing those who murder, rape, steal, etc. After the nomadic lives of human beings living as hunter gatherers had ended and we discovered agriculture, the domestication of animals and permanent settlements it became necessary to establish what could be described as law and order for lack of a better phrase. All of the words of the Bible (which were written by men) have one basic purpose and that is to control human behavior. The Ten Commandments and all of the other rules and regulations that claim to have authority over human behavior were in fact written by humans themselves. This seems self evident to me and it's quite apparent that the concepts of right and wrong are an ever changing set of values that are constantly being reevaluated as civilization progresses. An obvious example is the fact that slavery seems to be perfectly acceptable in biblical times and Jesus himself says nothing against it and yet today it is perceived as brutal, cruel and immoral. I think we're making progress despite all of the misunderstanding regarding the nature of religion and the belief in the supernatural.
Well said . . . although it doesn't negate the question at the margins . . . why is the universe rule bound at all . . . if its origin was in chaos. Similarly . . . there are innate impulses within us all that can override the social constraints and consequences producing marvelous acts that defy explanation . . . how does such an organism born of indifference and chaos acquire such impulses?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
