by digderidoo 261 Replies latest jw friends
If you assume anything god does is righteous, then you can certainly find no unrighteousness in him. As you said, to each his own. It may comfort you, but can you see why it would not convince someone else?Dave
I don't assume anything. My convictions are based on what I've read and observed. I'm not out to convince anyone. The record of God's dealings are there for all to accept or reject.
Sylvia
Hey Sylvia,
I'm not trying to be be argumentative, please don't take it that way. I'd just like to discuss this a bit further, if you don't mind. I'm not out to convince you either. I would just like to understand you.
>>I don't assume anything. My convictions are based on what I've read and observed.
Maybe "assume" was a loaded word for me to use. The idea is the same using the word "convinced" though. So let me change the wording:
If you are convinced that anything god does is righteous, then you can certainly find no unrighteousness in him.
Do you agree with that?
For instance, if you read in the Bible that god personally killed babies for the sins of their parents (Noah/Flood), you would consider that a righteous act. Or if you read where God killed a husband and wife for lying about a real estate transaction (Ananias/Saphira), you would consider it righteous.
In other words, no matter what the Bible records god doing -- things you personally would consider heinous if committed by anyone else -- that thing would be a righteous act by virtue of god's having done it.
So I'm asking how you would ever read and observe your way into that conviction?
Dave
Hi Dave,
The examples of the Flood/Ananias/Sapphira, imo, actually highlight God's righteousness.
The people who perished in the Flood could have saved themselves by turning away from bad. Ananias and Sapphira didn't have to lie about donating the full price of the sale of their property.
They chose their own course - to their detriment. That's the pattern of all of God's adverse judgments. He never does anything capriciously or on a whim. Whoever is at the receiving end of His wrath knows full well the reason for it.
Now, there was a time when I flinched at the graphic accounts of warfare that are recorded in the OT. However, after seeing and experiencing some absolutely evil things in my lifetime, I've gone back and read those accounts with a renewed appreciation for God's handling of matters
I wouldn't presume to understand all of God's thoughts and ways. The little I do know is that He doesn't ask anything of us that He isn't willing to do Himself. Not only does He talk the talk, He also walks the walk.
I mean this from the bottom of my heart.
Sylvia
>> The people who perished in the Flood could have saved themselves by turning away from bad.
What could a 6-month-old baby do? Or a mentally-retarded adult? The flood would have killed people that had no idea what was happening, had never committed a sin to repent for (that Noah wasn't also guilty of), and had no way to board the ark.
>> Ananias and Sapphira didn't have to lie about donating the full price of the sale of their property.
Would you advocate for the death penalty for liars today? Does that punishment fit the crime?
This is where the disconnect is. If anyone else murdered babies and executed liars, we'd be going out of our minds with outrage. But when God is recorded as having done it, it's automatically ok.
Why is that? Why doesn't it make you say, "The God I love wouldn't murder babies. So if a book says my god did it, then either the book is wrong, or it's talking about some other god."
I understand believing in god. I even understand believing the bible is "sort of inspired", with the more egregious chunks considered to be allegorical. (I don't buy it, but I understand it)
But I get mentally lost when I try to understand the "baby murder is ok when god does it" idea.
>>Now, there was a time when I flinched at the graphic accounts of warfare that are recorded in the OT. However, after seeing and experiencing some absolutely evil things in my lifetime, I've gone back and read those accounts with a renewed appreciation for God's handling of matters
Do you have an example in mind of an account that you at first found appalling, but your life experience later led you to feel was well-handled?
>>I wouldn't presume to understand all of God's thoughts and ways.
God's thoughts and ways -- perhaps not. But MAN'S RECORD of God's thoughts and ways? I think it behooves you to at least investigate the more outlandish of those records. How would you feel if you were God, you most certainly HAD NOT murdered babies, and your children believed that you had? Worse, that they felt it was righteous for you to have done so?
>>I mean this from the bottom of my heart.
Hearts are hard to understand, and they are often unwilling to give up their motivations. I hope you'll forgive me probing your heart like this. I am sincerely interested. Only academically, I admit, but very interested nonetheless.
Dave
snowbird:
You're kidding, right? Have you not read the bible? What about the Midianites, the Moabites, the Amorites, the Amalekites etc.?
I most certainly have. These groups attacked Israel FIRST.
Where that's true, it's only so because the Israelites were invading their land. In any case, the crying infants of those tribes had done nothing to deserve slaughter. Make no mistake, they were not "collateral damage", unfortunate but necessary victims of a just war. They were lined up and savagely murdered.
I don't recall such a prohibition. Can you provide a source please? 1 Samuel 21.
That's not part of the law. It certainly implies that David's men avoided sex while fighting a campaign, but that's not what you wrote.
You disgust me. As if genocide or slavery were the only options available. They WERE the only options because God had decreed it so.
Now you've sunk even further in my estimation. Earlier you were trying to justify your god's actions against some independent standard. When that failed, you simply fall back on the default that every savage brutal act your god does is, by your sick and twisted definition, good.
And yet you defend the actions of a people who killed or enslaved anybody who was different? It wasn't because they were different - they were destroyed because of their wicked ways. When the Israelites turned wicked, the same treatment was meted out to them.
No, they were destroyed because they were occupying the piece of land that Yahweh had promised his people.
If He is only an invention, why are you so concerned about what He did?
Because some people actually believe this monster is real, and he is now no longer the god just of a tribe of savages but of half the world. The situation in the Middle East is a direct result of the Jews believing that Yahweh promised them that piece of land, and of Christian complicity with that belief.
I am glad not to live under such a primitive and barbaric regime. As if the modern-day nations are any better!
With a handful of exceptions, they are infinitely better. By any reasonable standard, I live a far far better life now than I could possibly hope to under the Mosaic law. I am free to make many decisions that would be denied me by your god.
You sicken me with your smug prating about that which you know nothing. As I said, walk two moons ...
Perhaps you should try that. Imagine being a young Midianite girl getting to see the barbarians of Israel kill your father in battle, and then slaughter your brothers and your pregnant mother, then being grabbed by a soldier to have your hymen roughly checked for intactness, before being dragged away to be used by him for whatever he wishes.
[Apologies to all for the unpleasant imagery.]
One further comment on something you wrote:
They chose their own course - to their detriment. That's the pattern of all of God's adverse judgments. He never does anything capriciously or on a whim. Whoever is at the receiving end of His wrath knows full well the reason for it.
Just like Stalin. He didn't want to send anyone to the gulags, but people insisted on disobeying him. Everybody in Russia knew that speaking out against Stalin could get you sent to Siberia, and they still did it.
BurnTheShips:
OK, I will try to be more clear, on what basis will you judge Yahweh's actions. How will you make a value judgement regarding them. What makes them "good" or "bad".
Surely you can't be arguing from the position that everything your god does is by definition good and that you have no independent standard of morality? Come on, I'll give you one more chance to come up with a better argument. Arguing that point would demean us both.
Rock on Funkyderek
[Apologies to all for the unpleasant imagery.]
No need. Sometimes I think the reality of what would have happened needs putting in plain black and to have any resonance or meaning for those who blindly would glorify it all as okay - so long as it is in the name of "pure worship". My standards are higher than that. If my standards for equality and fair treatment and protection of my fellow man are higher than God's then why would I worship a lower life form (said loosely speaking since he doesnt exist).
How would you feel if you were God, you most certainly HAD NOT murdered babies, and your children believed that you had? Worse, that they felt it was righteous for you to have done so?
Do you have an example in mind of an account that you at first found appalling, but your life experience later led you to feel was well-handled?
What's this about God's murdering of anyone? I believe the Originator of life certainly has the right to take it away. Especially if the possessor of that life is not using it according to the Giver's instructions.
The example I at first thought egregious was God's telling His people to wipe out the 7-nation of Canaan. I researched (independently of the Bible, thank you) those nations and found out how truly revolting and appalling their way of life and worship were.
What could a 6-month-old baby do? Or a mentally-retarded adult? The flood would have killed people that had no idea what was happening, had never committed a sin to repent for (that Noah wasn't also guilty of), and had no way to board the ark.
Aren't you making some unwarranted assumptions here? Not to mention special pleading? The account of the Flood, while distressing, is also a warning to all of us that God can and will kick butts and take names when the situation calls for it!
Just like Stalin. He didn't want to send anyone to the gulags, but people insisted on disobeying him. Everybody in Russia knew that speaking out against Stalin could get you sent to Siberia, and they still did it.
I'm talking about the Creator - imo there's no comparison or contrast with him and humans. Evidently you have that pseudo-Creator, Satan, in mind.
Perhaps you should try that. Imagine being a young Midianite girl getting to see the barbarians of Israel kill your father in battle, and then slaughter your brothers and your pregnant mother, then being grabbed by a soldier to have your hymen roughly checked for intactness, before being dragged away to be used by him for whatever he wishes.
Or, imagine being an expectant Israelite mother in Egypt who is due to deliver any day. She's hoping that the baby is not a boy, because by the decree of a man who thinks he is God, his life will be snuffed out as soon as he comes forth from the womb.
No, they were destroyed because they were occupying the piece of land that Yahweh had promised his people.
... AND because of their extreme wickedness. They'd been given about 400 years to turn away from their badness. How much time would YOU have given them?
Now you've sunk even further in my estimation. Earlier you were trying to justify your god's actions against some independent standard. When that failed, you simply fall back on the default that every savage brutal act your god does is, by your sick and twisted definition, good.
God doesn't need any justification. We're the ones in need of justification. What have you been smoking?
That's not part of the law. It certainly implies that David's men avoided sex while fighting a campaign, but that's not what you wrote.
I never said it was part of the law. I said Israelite soldiers were forbidden to have sex relations while on a battle campaign. Why do you think Uriah refused to sleep with Bath-sheba (to David's chagrin) when he was not-so-subtly urged to do so?
Please overlook any formatting errors.
Sylvia
snowbird:
What's this about God's murdering of anyone? I believe the Originator of life certainly has the right to take it away. Especially if the possessor of that life is not using it according to the Giver's instructions.
So, once again, the choice is slavery or death! Even if we accept that this premise is correct and just, don't you see a problem with determining what God's decision actually is? The people of Canaan were worshipping their own gods. They thought those gods required them to behave in certain ways, just as the Israelites did.
The example I at first thought egregious was God's telling His people to wipe out the 7-nation of Canaan. I researched (independently of the Bible, thank you) those nations and found out how truly revolting and appalling their way of life and worship were.
Appalling by whose standards? Had the Israelites asked they could have shown them their holy books that told them (for example) that Molech - creator of the universe - required the occasional child sacrifice, and who were they to question Almighty God? You see the problem?
Aren't you making some unwarranted assumptions here? Not to mention special pleading? The account of the Flood, while distressing, is also a warning to all of us that God can and will kick butts and take names when the situation calls for it!
And if he wishes to do so, all we can do is cower in fear and hope he doesn't choose to destroy us. The bigger issue I have is when his servants decide to do what they think God would do if he were able. Had Yahweh wished the land cleansed of Canaanites he could have made them vanish. He didn't need to use men with swords to accomplish his purpose. What if they misinterpreted him? Don't you think that matters?
I'm talking about the Creator - imo there's no comparison or contrast with him and humans. Evidently you have that pseudo-Creator, Satan, in mind.
Comparisons are often made between gods and humans. God is compared to a father or a king. It's not a stretch to compare him to a dictator like Stalin. Their behaviour was remarkably similar. If the best you can counter that with is that Yahweh has a right to treat people like that and Stalin didn't, I'm not impressed.
Or, imagine being an expectant Israelite mother in Egypt who is due to deliver any day. She's hoping that the baby is not a boy, because by the decree of a man who thinks he is God, his life will be snuffed out as soon as he comes forth from the womb.
More atrocities done in the name of religion. You see the problem with obeying the will of your god and having no independent morals.
... AND because of their extreme wickedness. They'd been given about 400 years to turn away from their badness. How much time would YOU have given them?
The little children who were murdered couldn't possibly have been given 400 years. What were they doing that was more wicked than slaughtering and raping children?
How long should Allah have given the United States to repent of its wickedness before sending his servants in to kill 3,000 of them?
Sorry to butt in, don't really have anything to add just wanted to mark the thread for future reference.
I'm really kind of appalled at how people can justify some of the things done in the OT. I suppose a lot of people have a real deep love for their God, and they do say love is blind.
I can't really get involved in this discussion as I don't have the eloquence of funkyderek and AlmostAtheist, but keep it up guys you're brilliant!
I'm not sorry for butting in... Funderburk, you rock... I can't believe my eyes when I hear those like SNowbird say that god needs mercenaires. And how in the world can anyone justify slavery and rape... read Numbers 31 that Funderburk quoted, its obvious these "women who've never slept with a man" were raped.
ANd to hear a person who desended from Africans defend slavery... I can't believe my eyes...If god wanted those people killed he could have used a plague...
I like to read the words of the so called Christ, but the OT God is one sick twisted persona. And since Jesus believed in that same God, he is discounted as the personification of God in my mind. That means the whole Bible is BS.
You're wasting your time Funderburk, once a mind starts defeding the acts of evil men, then you have no hope of changing that mind. Men have always used their Gods as an excuse for rape, murder, and the capture of loot.... they've truly made God in their image.
