Is God Immoral?

[seer]

This is an offshoot of a previous thread. And when I say God, I mean the God of the Bible. First, let me explain my position - I too find some things, especially in the Old Testament ethically difficult to justify - and they often seem inconsistent with the teaching of Christ. But I start with the teachings and example of Christ and move backward to the O.T. since I believe that Christ revealed most clearly the mind and heart of God the Father. OK, now for our secular friends. I'm not sure why they find some of the commands and acts of God so morally distasteful. It seems to me that these objections are merely culturally driven emotional responses. I mean if they were raised in Feudal Japan for instance I doubt very much if they would find these acts repugnant. As a matter of fact they would probably laud such a God for taking vengeance. So are our moral objections reduced to mere cultural conditioning? And if they are why should anyone take these objections seriously?

[whag]

This is an offshoot of a previous thread. And when I say God, I mean the God of the Bible. First, let me explain my position - I too find some things, especially in the Old Testament ethically difficult to justify - and they often seem inconsistent with the teaching of Christ. But I start with the teachings and example of Christ and move backward to the O.T. since I believe that Christ revealed most clearly the mind and heart of God the Father. OK, now for our secular friends. I'm not sure why they find some of the commands and acts of God so morally distasteful. It seems to me that these objections are merely culturally driven emotional responses. I mean if they were raised in Feudal Japan for instance I doubt very much if they would find these acts repugnant. As a matter of fact they would probably laud such a God for taking vengeance. So are our moral objections reduced to mere cultural conditioning? And if they are why should anyone take these objections seriously?

I think now you're beginning to see why defending OT atrocities is a waste of time. If you're not even convinced, how do you expect others to be convinced?

[seer]

I think now you're beginning to see why defending OT atrocities is a waste of time. If you're not even convinced, how do you expect others to be convinced?

Try dealing with the question whag. Is your objection based merely on your cultural conditioning and if so why is that objection meaningful.

[jordanriver]

no, seer
the atheists who take the side of the ANE child sacrificing cultures are immoral.

The complaint should not be why did God order those cultures eradicated,
..but instead ,
.... why did He allow them to go on for so long.

and why did God who is omniscient take so long to kill the Canaanite and other ANE Pagan cultures, including the children who were not sacrificed, KNOWING that the ones who didn't get sacrificed, would become adults who committed child sacrifice.

but in the end, GOD DID THE RIGHT THING.

unfortunately, I think the Hebrews didn't follow through, and spared some of the Canaanites and other ANE pagans, and paid for their 'pity' in Judges chapter 6 when those Midianite children and Amalekite children grew up and punished the Hebrews.

[whag]

Try dealing with the question whag. Is your objection based merely on your cultural conditioning and if so why is that objection meaningful.

I think the objection is cultural in the sense that the present culture doesn't assent to stabbing war orphans with spears (or gassing Kurdish babies, or napalming Vietnamese children). It's more of a general cultural agreement on war conduct. Empathy also plays a part. Overall, we've progressed beyond tribal retributive feelings to smash our enemies' babies against rocks.

It's also cultural in the sense that you acknowledged: baby stabbing doesn't sound like anything Jesus would mandate. In a culture that preaches Jesus meek and mild, you're now experiencing cognitive dissonance as you wrestle with God-ordered acts of infanticide. That's normal and healthy.

[Enjolras]

no, seer
the atheists who take the side of the ANE child sacrificing cultures are immoral.

The complaint should not be why did God order those cultures eradicated,
..but instead ,
.... why did He allow them to go on for so long.

and why did God who is omniscient take so long to kill the Canaanite and other ANE Pagan cultures, including the children who were not sacrificed, KNOWING that the ones who didn't get sacrificed, would become adults who committed child sacrifice.

but in the end, GOD DID THE RIGHT THING.

unfortunately, I think the Hebrews didn't follow through, and spared some of the Canaanites and other ANE pagans, and paid for their 'pity' in Judges chapter 6 when those Midianite children and Amalekite children grew up and punished the Hebrews.

1 Samuel 15:3 'Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'"

I'm sure the children and infants deserved to die, but what do suppose the donkeys did?

[whag]

1 Samuel 15:3 'Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'"

I'm sure the children and infants deserved to die, but what do suppose the donkeys did?

They sacrificed virgins.

[whag]

no, seer
the atheists who take the side of the ANE child sacrificing cultures are immoral.

The complaint should not be why did God order those cultures eradicated,
..but instead ,
.... why did He allow them to go on for so long.

and why did God who is omniscient take so long to kill the Canaanite and other ANE Pagan cultures, including the children who were not sacrificed, KNOWING that the ones who didn't get sacrificed, would become adults who committed child sacrifice.

but in the end, GOD DID THE RIGHT THING.

unfortunately, I think the Hebrews didn't follow through, and spared some of the Canaanites and other ANE pagans, and paid for their 'pity' in Judges chapter 6 when those Midianite children and Amalekite children grew up and punished the Hebrews.

Not even the most rabid atheists side with sacrificing babies, as that act is intended to appease non-existent gods.

You'll actually find the argument to be more along the lines of "children aren't responsible for the insane acts of their parents."

[seer]

I think the objection is cultural in the sense that the present culture doesn't assent to stabbing war orphans with spears (or gassing Kurdish babies, or napalming Vietnamese children). It's more of a general cultural agreement on war conduct. Empathy also plays a part. Overall, we've progressed beyond tribal retributive feelings to smash our enemies' babies against rocks.

I'm not sure how much we have progressed. The last century was arguably the most bloody of human history and this one is starting out no better. Also, when you say that we progressed that assume that we are moving from one point to another. That we are moving towards a better moral standard. But no such standard exists (if atheism is correct).

It's also cultural in the sense that you acknowledged: baby stabbing doesn't sound like anything Jesus would mandate. In a culture that preaches Jesus meek and mild, you're now experiencing cognitive dissonance as you wrestle with God-ordered acts of infanticide. That's normal and healthy.

Yes, but that disconnect is based on the teachings of Christ, who is the Son of God. If my objection is simply the result of cultural conditioning then it has little merit.

[seer]

Not even the most rabid atheists side with sacrificing babies, as that act is undeniably a cruel act intended to appease non-existent gods.

You mean like babies in the womb sacrificed to personal convenience. And there are prominent atheists suggesting that we should be able to kill just born babies for any reason whatsoever.

Journal of Medical Ethics

Abstract:
Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

http://www.lifeissues.org/pdf/Journa...cal_Ethics.pdf

[whag]

I'm not sure how much we have progressed. The last century was arguably the most bloody of human history and this one is starting out no better. Also, when you say that we progressed that assume that we are moving from one point to another. That we are moving towards a better moral standard. But no such standard exists (if atheism is correct).

And if you look at the bloodshed, it's mostly generated by people who hold to dopey tribal views or religion of some kind. Even North Korea is steeped in a quasi-religious belief that''s strongly enforced. Spinoza and Paine would have none of that. Name a culture based on the principles of Spinoza and Paine that sheds blood like the tribalists/religionists/occultists do.

Yes, but that disconnect is based on the teachings of Christ, who is the Son of God. If my objection is simply the result of cultural conditioning then it has little merit.

And yet that same God mandated babies stabbed with spears, hence your cognitive dissonance.

[jordanriver]

Innocent children die and go straight to heaven.

Biblically, how is that worse than being an ANE child allowed to grow up and lose innocence sacrificing innocent children

[Enjolras]

They sacrificed virgins.

Darn donkeys.

[seer]

but what do suppose the donkeys did?

Have you ever tried to reason with a donkey!?

[whag]

You mean like babies in the womb sacrificed to personal convenience. And there are prominent atheists suggesting that we should be able to kill just born babies for any reason whatsoever.

Journal of Medical Ethics



http://www.lifeissues.org/pdf/Journa...cal_Ethics.pdf

All the more reason why the Midian campaign generates friction in your brain. You use the same justifications as pro-aborts and expect me not to laugh?