• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Is it?

JetLeg

Master Poster
J
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
2,414
Leaving aside the issue, of god's existance, if I have a belief that god is good, but in the bible, he commanded immoral things, is it rational to conclude that these acts are actually moral, (because of my belief that he is good), or that even though they are immoral, they should be done (because we are obliged to our creator)?
 
JetLeg said:
Leaving aside the issue, of god's existance, if I have a belief that god is good, but in the bible, he commanded immoral things, is it rational to conclude that these acts are actually moral, (because of my belief that he is good), or that even though they are immoral, they should be done (because we are obliged to our creator)?
Click to expand...

Please consider reading the following The Science of Good and Evil: Why People Cheat, Gossip, Care, Share, and Follow the Golden Rule by Michael Shermer
 
One question (ok, several questions) you should be asking yourself is, "Why does God need to command lowly humans to do his bidding? Can't he do his own dirty work? If he's not omnipotent then why call him God?"
 
Last edited:
Your problem is that you are starting with "god is good"... which really should be a conclusion. You start from your conclusion and work back to interpret the evidence to support it. You can do that if you like, but it's not good thinking.

I mean, I could equally say "I believe that Charles Manson is innocent. So therefore all the evidence against him, including his own confession, must be wrong; mistakes by the witnesses, misinterpretation, incorrect lab results, whatever - it's irrelevant why, they just must be wrong if he's innocent."

Can you do that? Sure. But does it make any sense? No.
 
One flipant response I got from someone with whom I was discussing this very subject was; "it's ok for god to do all those things that we consider bad because he's god. We are his creations and he can do with us what he wants"

The sound of me slapping my head was said to be heard for miles.

I think the question that should be asked is why God , who supposedly delineated what is moral, be allowed to act in opposition of said morals and still be considered moral?
I guess this is something close to what Siesmo is getting at.
 
One flipant response I got from someone with whom I was discussing this very subject was; "it's ok for god to do all those things that we consider bad because he's god. We are his creations and he can do with us what he wants"
Click to expand...

Growing up I frequesntly listened to Bill Cosby records, from his time as a stand up comedian. One joke of his has his father saying 'I brought you into this world, I'll take you out - you know!' when he is upset with him
-- It's this reasoning on a grand scale which applies to God.

A line of reasoning going back to Plato - If there are reasons for our Morals we should be able to reason them out ourselves w/o God. If God gives us what is Moral vs. Immoral w/o Reasons then it is on his Whim and morals are arbitrary. -- Someone at the Humanist Convention back in April @ Harvard U. Spelled it out. - in short it boiled down to God was redundant.
 
Make up whatever you want. Since religion is just a shared fantasy among the believers, you are only altering the fantasy to suit you... just like everyone else does.
 
ShowerComic said:
Growing up I frequesntly listened to Bill Cosby records, from his time as a stand up comedian. One joke of his has his father saying 'I brought you into this world, I'll take you out - you know!' when he is upset with him
-- It's this reasoning on a grand scale which applies to God.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it does not make god moral, just arbitrary.
Do as I say, not as I do.
I don't see how god can take the moral high ground when he says it is a sin for us to kill each other, but it's ok for him to kill us or to have us kill each other at his command.
 
Cello Man said:
One question (ok, several questions) you should be asking yourself is, "Why does God need to command lowly humans to do his bidding? Can't he do his own dirty work? If he's not omnipotent then why call him God?"
Click to expand...
The word _need_ in that question is extraneous, and a diversion from the original question.

Given the OP postulating God existing, you presumed a need that was not a requirement in the question. For such a powerful being, need is irrelevant, compared to the objects of His orders/instructions/commands.

For your question to fit the OP, it would be more accurate to phrase it thusly:

"Why does God command lowly humans to do his bidding?"

One answer to that would be: "Because He can."

Q: "Can't he do his own dirty work?"

A: "Yes, but he can also choose to delegate it out."

Q "If he's not omnipotent then why call him God?"

A: His omnipotence is not curtailed, nor precluded, by the act of delegating certain tasks to his inferiors/subordinates/created subjects/children. You assumed a need, it was not a condition of the argument.

So, why would He undertake this telling of people to do things?

One answer would be: "To build the character of said humans." :cool:

Another: "For His own amusement."

Another: "He bloody well feels like it, what are you going to do, try and kick His butt?"

And so on.

One can always choose not to obey said God, and risk His divine displeasure. The choice, Willow, is yours. ;)

DR
 
Last edited:
JetLeg said:
Leaving aside the issue, of god's existance, if I have a belief that god is good, but in the bible, he commanded immoral things, is it rational to conclude that these acts are actually moral, (because of my belief that he is good), or that even though they are immoral, they should be done (because we are obliged to our creator)?
Click to expand...

It's irrational to skirt over the existence question and jump right into the other stuff.
 
JetLeg said:
Leaving aside the issue, of god's existance, if I have a belief that god is good, but in the bible, he commanded immoral things, is it rational to conclude that these acts are actually moral, (because of my belief that he is good), or that even though they are immoral, they should be done (because we are obliged to our creator)?
Click to expand...

So might makes right.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, DR. My questions could have had more "teeth", I guess.

On another note, Seismosaurus also raised the issue of the forgone conclusion which I think is probably a more valid argument. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on it, JetLeg.
 
Uh, can I just ask a few more questions?

Which god?

How do you know the Bible is correct or even the word of the god in which you're thinking of?

How do you know he? she? is not wrong? Because some ancient re-re-translated text tells you so?

Uh, where's he been these past say... 1000 years?

The thing I think is strangest in the Bible is... God sent Abraham to tell the people... and they didn't believe... so he sends Moses... and Noah... and Lot... David... geesh... who else? Jesus... ect. ect. and people just keep disobeying and ignoring him. Either he is the crappiest god ever or isn't very good at his job.
 
JetLeg said:
Leaving aside the issue, of god's existance, if I have a belief that god is good, but in the bible, he commanded immoral things, is it rational to conclude that these acts are actually moral, (because of my belief that he is good), or that even though they are immoral, they should be done (because we are obliged to our creator)?
Click to expand...
By some definitions, yes, these acts are by definition moral because they are god's will.

Of course, such a definition undercuts everything else we ever use "morality" or "goodness" for, so morality and goodness immediately cease being reasonable expectations or guidelins for our behavior. No need to "do good works", because true morality is arbitrarily decided by a god with a track record of capricious behavior.

So you can have one of the two, but not both--either a morality determined by god's will, or a morality we can use to guide our interactions with our fellow humans. I personally prefer the latter.
 
ShowerComic said:
Growing up I frequesntly listened to Bill Cosby records, from his time as a stand up comedian. One joke of his has his father saying 'I brought you into this world, I'll take you out - you know!' when he is upset with him
-- It's this reasoning on a grand scale which applies to God.

A line of reasoning going back to Plato - If there are reasons for our Morals we should be able to reason them out ourselves w/o God. If God gives us what is Moral vs. Immoral w/o Reasons then it is on his Whim and morals are arbitrary. -- Someone at the Humanist Convention back in April @ Harvard U. Spelled it out. - in short it boiled down to God was redundant.
Click to expand...

That is a different issue than the OP, but you can indeed say that morality comes from God's will, and it is arbitrary in this sense. Whatever he commands, even if it is genocide is good simply by the virtue of being said by god.
 
Seismosaurus said:
Your problem is that you are starting with "god is good"... which really should be a conclusion. You start from your conclusion and work back to interpret the evidence to support it. You can do that if you like, but it's not good thinking.

I mean, I could equally say "I believe that Charles Manson is innocent. So therefore all the evidence against him, including his own confession, must be wrong; mistakes by the witnesses, misinterpretation, incorrect lab results, whatever - it's irrelevant why, they just must be wrong if he's innocent."

Can you do that? Sure. But does it make any sense? No.
Click to expand...

But we do it sometimes in our daily life - come to a conclusion, and then judge evidence, knowing that the conclusion we came to is a good one.

For example, we come to the conclusion that gravity exists (or at least that things fall down). So, if someone would tell us that he flies, we would conclude that he is lying because it contradicts our knowledge.
 
JetLeg said:
That is a different issue than the OP, but you can indeed say that morality comes from God's will, and it is arbitrary in this sense. Whatever he commands, even if it is genocide is good simply by the virtue of being said by god.
Click to expand...

The "but we were only following orders" defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom