Is God A Moral Monster?

[4588686]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1311449263' post='2274431']
Mr.CatholicCat,

I didn't know you were an atheist now, but I suggest you read St. Paul's letter to the Romans, where he talks about the inscrutable mystery of God's will. But read the whole letter, because it's important to understand the whole letter in context. I read it recently and it is very profound for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

A big theme in the letter is Abraham as our model of faith. Recall that God told Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac, and Abraham was going to do it in faith, but God stopped him at the last minute. Now in response to your question, "Is God a moral monster," I will only point out that what God did not require of Abraham, he carried out himself. God did not require Abraham to sacrifice his son, but God himself did send his only-begotten son to be sacrificed. We cannot even begin to try and understand the Old Testament unless the Cross of Christ is put at the center of the discussion.


Some people will read this and conclude that God is unjust and a "moral monster." But not me. It's not easy to take, don't get me wrong. But when I read this, I am completely humbled at the absolute irrelevance my own will has. That is the entire message of the Gospel: our relationship to God is an act of absolute abandonment, and this is what we call faith. Not only can we not will ourselves to heaven, but we cannot even will ourselves to being loved by God. We can only abandon ourselves to him, and in doing so we are following the example of Abraham, and the example of Christ, because nobody has ever abandoned themselves to God more than Christ.


[/quote]



Ok.

What light does the Cross of Christ shed on this

[url="http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html"]http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html[/url]


?

[Era Might]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1311449454' post='2274432']
Ok.

What light does the Cross of Christ shed on this

[url="http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html"]http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html[/url]


?
[/quote]
Maybe you should take to a monastery and find out for yourself. Nothing I say is going to convince you (which is not so much a bad thing, since it means that I cannot will you to faith...that too requires abandonment, on my part as much as yours).

Edited July 23, 2011 by Era Might

[Polsky215]

[quote name='Mr.CatholicCat' timestamp='1311316686' post='2273654']<br />How many people has god killed, according to the Bible?<br /><br /><a href='http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>http://dwindlinginun...s-in-bible.html</a><br /><br />What is more violent, the Bible or the Quran?<br /><br /><a href='http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/06/which-is-more-violent-bible-or-quran.html' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>http://dwindlinginun...e-or-quran.html</a><br /><br />Cruelty and violence in the Bible?<br /><br /><a href='http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>http://skepticsannot...uelty/long.html</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Some thoughts for consideration.<br />[/quote]<br /><br /><br />

Morality in the Catholic perspective is simply being in union with God. But God doesnt need to be in union with Himself. We dont know what compensation He gave to those people He killed. God knows what He's doing. So there are two points to understand.
(1) The human rules of morality (e.g. do not kill) were given by God to help people follow the "main idea," that is love God (the greatest commandment). Thus God does not need to follow those human rules. Hes already in union with Himself and has no need.
(2) God is loving and He clearly thought that ending the lives of those people was more to their benefit or at least of no less cost to those people than letting them live.

[Ziggamafu]

The Bible is not a complete record of history, but only records (without error) that history necessary to best convey the message of salvation. We may know that God exists (and God must logically be the source and standard of goodness), and there are sufficient grounds for our faith in Christ (and, by extension, the Church and the Bible). So when we come to troubling passages, it may well be that we simply do not have the extra information that would make God's action not only reasonable, but unarguably perfect. The Bible paints a picture of history; it does not convey every detail, nor does it convey its own words without the need for interpretation.

We may know God. We may know faith in His Son and His Church. We may not know all the answers to the questions the ancient Scriptures prompts, but we may certainly know enough to trust in the perfect, Eternal Act of an omnibenevolant God of mercy and grace, and in the ways in which that Act affects the myriad moments of our temporal, created world. My stance not only applies to the tragedies recorded in Scripture, but to those of our contemporary world as well. When we wrestle with tragedy and apparent injustice, we wrestle with God; and so it is in the very act of this wrestling that our souls, consciously or not, advert to a God who is very much there, a Source and Standard of Goodness by which our discomforts are vindicated in the first place.

In short, the only way God could be a moral monster is if the records in Scripture were exhaustive and complete, and if (in that case) the God depicted turned out to be no God at all. It seems as though there are more than a few presuppositions involved in using the Bible against the God depicted within its pages.

God bless and keep you.

[Winchester]

The only way God can be a moral monster is if morality has an existence outside of Him. In which case, He would not be God.

[stevil]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1311476965' post='2274661']
In short, the only way God could be a moral monster is if the records in Scripture were exhaustive and complete,[/quote]
The same argument could be made for knowledge of god being good.

the only way God could be good is if the records in Scripture were exhaustive and complete

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1311477616' post='2274665']
The only way God can be a moral monster is if morality has an existence outside of Him. In which case, He would not be God.
[/quote]

Morality cannot exist without God, anyway. If God does not exist, morality is merely a subjective illusion produced in a single, meaningless species of a meaningless evolution on a meaningless rock spinning briefly within a meaningless universe. In other words, the claim that God is immoral seems self-refuting.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1311477685' post='2274666']
The same argument could be made for knowledge of god being good.

the only way God could be good is if the records in Scripture were exhaustive and complete
[/quote]

No. God's goodness does not rely on the Bible. That God exists may be demonstrated without recourse to the Scriptures. That God is Good is simply a logical consequence of God existing; if God exists, God must be the Source and Standard of all goodness - that is, Goodness itself - or else not God at all.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1311478206' post='2274673']
Morality cannot exist without God, anyway. If God does not exist, morality is merely a subjective illusion produced in a single, meaningless species of a meaningless evolution on a meaningless rock spinning briefly within a meaningless universe. In other words, the claim that God is immoral seems self-refuting.
[/quote]
I said it more succinctly.

[stevil]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1311478422' post='2274674']
No. God's goodness does not rely on the Bible. That God exists may be demonstrated without recourse to the Scriptures. That God is Good is simply a logical consequence of God existing; if God exists, God must be the Source and Standard of all goodness - that is, Goodness itself - or else not God at all.
[/quote]
I guess I'm more refering to our ability to recognise if god is good or a monster. We don't have enough information either way. We don't even know if god exists. We don't even have a clear definition of what determines what a god is. There is no clear definition of the term.

[Winchester]

In order for the God of the Bible to be evil, He would have to be a liar. Else He is the creator and thus cannot be evil.

Edited July 24, 2011 by Winchester

[Guest]

So what if God kills. Look at your government. Its killed millions of babies and isn't slowing down. I'm comfortable with God killing on moral grounds. He is a loving Father and wants to protect His children. Big difference between a killer and a murderer too. I'd be honored if you called me a killer. Delivery Killer Boy.

Edited July 24, 2011 by Guest

[Papist]

No one knows why God does what He does.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1311373432' post='2274010']
I think there is a good discussion to be had here.
I have never read the bible so have only heard of bits of it.

But..

Stories about god setting a couple of she-bears onto a group of children for teasing a man about his bald head. How is this reasoned?
If a person did that in our society they would be scorned as a horrific monster and would be locked up for a very long time.

I understand that Christians take god as being perfect and all loving and hence come up with a reasoning which tries to align with that. God always gets the benefit of the doubt, and hence can do pretty much anything, including killing all the people, all the animals, all the plants of the entire world except two of each. Then this story is glorified and seen as a significant good that god has done.
[/quote]

I do think there is a good discussion here. But regretfully there isn't going to be one.

[quote name='Brother Adam' timestamp='1311384764' post='2274117']
I agree L_D's response is very strange. However, I don't know what you think, just what your document dump thinks, which is no way to really start a conversation. When you say "If sourcing verifiable facts is argumentative, then I am willing to concede that my post is argumentative. If it is anti-christian to have concerns about these sort of verses in the Bible, then I am willing to concede it is anti-christian." it makes me think you really aren't interested in a genuine conversation at all, but are just angry with the Church you once called home.

Your question (accusation) is almost as old as the Church itself (almost as old as 'why do bad things happen to good people?' and 'how can God let children die?') and is dealt with in the Catechism, writings of the Fathers, and in many contemporaries. The answer, by the way, has to do with the nature of God's relationship to man, but I think all of the scholars and other Catholics want to know that you want an answer before getting into a long debate.
[/quote]

Yes very strange.

But I am not angry at Christianity, but I am generally disappointed. But the problem isn't why bad things happen to good people, the question is why did God directly or indirectly cause the death of people?

For example in the book of numbers, God supposedly kills over ten thousand people for complaining about God killing their people.

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1311428549' post='2274287']
Since God would be The Good, it's impossible for God to be immoral. Your morality and the laws laid down for humans need not apply to God. This question was settled in ancient philosophy.
[/quote]

Philosophy, no. Theology, yes.

But can you demonstrate how "god", in particular your god, is "the good". This doesn't exclude god being a "moral monster". But why is god not bound by his own rules and truth?

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1311449263' post='2274431']
Mr.CatholicCat,

I didn't know you were an atheist now, but I suggest you read St. Paul's letter to the Romans, where he talks about the inscrutable mystery of God's will. But read the whole letter, because it's important to understand the whole letter in context. I read it recently and it is very profound for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

A big theme in the letter is Abraham as our model of faith. Recall that God told Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac, and Abraham was going to do it in faith, but God stopped him at the last minute. Now in response to your question, "Is God a moral monster," I will only point out that what God did not require of Abraham, he carried out himself. God did not require Abraham to sacrifice his son, but God himself did send his only-begotten son to be sacrificed. We cannot even begin to try and understand the Old Testament unless the Cross of Christ is put at the center of the discussion.


Some people will read this and conclude that God is unjust and a "moral monster." But not me. Don't get me wrong, what St. Paul is saying here is not easy to take. But when I read this, I am completely humbled at the absolute irrelevance of my own will. That is the entire message of the Gospel: our relationship to God is an act of absolute abandonment, and this is what we call faith. Not only can we not will ourselves to heaven, but we cannot even will ourselves to being loved by God. We can only abandon ourselves to him, and in doing so we are following the example of Abraham, and the example of Christ, because nobody has ever abandoned themselves to God more than Christ.

[img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif[/img]
[/quote]

I am a skeptic, at the least. But it seems your answer is suspending critical thinking, this "abandonment" you mention. Is that the only way to believe in God? But while I find the admission that its a mystery refreshing, but it isn't an answer.

[quote name='Polsky215' timestamp='1311456376' post='2274479']
<br /><br /><br />

Morality in the Catholic perspective is simply being in union with God. But God doesnt need to be in union with Himself. We dont know what compensation He gave to those people He killed. God knows what He's doing. So there are two points to understand.
(1) The human rules of morality (e.g. do not kill) were given by God to help people follow the "main idea," that is love God (the greatest commandment). Thus God does not need to follow those human rules. Hes already in union with Himself and has no need.
(2) God is loving and He clearly thought that ending the lives of those people was more to their benefit or at least of no less cost to those people than letting them live.
[/quote]

What gain is there in ordering violence against women and children?

[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1311476965' post='2274661']
The Bible is not a complete record of history, but only records (without error) that history necessary to best convey the message of salvation. We may know that God exists (and God must logically be the source and standard of goodness), and there are sufficient grounds for our faith in Christ (and, by extension, the Church and the Bible). So when we come to troubling passages, it may well be that we simply do not have the extra information that would make God's action not only reasonable, but unarguably perfect. The Bible paints a picture of history; it does not convey every detail, nor does it convey its own words without the need for interpretation.

We may know God. We may know faith in His Son and His Church. We may not know all the answers to the questions the ancient Scriptures prompts, but we may certainly know enough to trust in the perfect, Eternal Act of an omnibenevolant God of mercy and grace, and in the ways in which that Act affects the myriad moments of our temporal, created world. My stance not only applies to the tragedies recorded in Scripture, but to those of our contemporary world as well. When we wrestle with tragedy and apparent injustice, we wrestle with God; and so it is in the very act of this wrestling that our souls, consciously or not, advert to a God who is very much there, a Source and Standard of Goodness by which our discomforts are vindicated in the first place.

In short, the only way God could be a moral monster is if the records in Scripture were exhaustive and complete, and if (in that case) the God depicted turned out to be no God at all. It seems as though there are more than a few presuppositions involved in using the Bible against the God depicted within its pages.

God bless and keep you.
[/quote]

Divine command is not a logical or supportable ethical model. But your argument that we don't have the entire story fascinates me, it's an original approach. I will have to think about it.

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1311477616' post='2274665']
The only way God can be a moral monster is if morality has an existence outside of Him. In which case, He would not be God.
[/quote]

Circular argument and unfalsifiable.
[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1311478206' post='2274673']
Morality cannot exist without God, anyway. If God does not exist, morality is merely a subjective illusion produced in a single, meaningless species of a meaningless evolution on a meaningless rock spinning briefly within a meaningless universe. In other words, the claim that God is immoral seems self-refuting.
[/quote]

Disagreed. God arbitrarily determining holy or evil, good or bad, right or wrong, true or false is not objective... it is subjective. If one does not believe in god, the case for divine command fails. Meaning that it is dependent on faith, making it subjective and arbitrary... Also largely unsupportable.

[quote name='Ziggamafu' timestamp='1311478422' post='2274674']
No. God's goodness does not rely on the Bible. That God exists may be demonstrated without recourse to the Scriptures. That God is Good is simply a logical consequence of God existing; if God exists, God must be the Source and Standard of all goodness - that is, Goodness itself - or else not God at all.
[/quote]

Respectfully disagreed. Unless you can demonstrate how.
[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1311485459' post='2274750']
In order for the God of the Bible to be evil, He would have to be a liar. Else He is the creator and thus cannot be evil.
[/quote]

[b][url="http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/god_lie.html"]Does God lie?[/url][/b]

You argued previously that it was impossible for god to be evil, because god is the good. Now you seem to be implying that it is possible to qualify god as evil? But why can the creator not be evil or malevolent? Why can't the bible be faulty?

Edited July 30, 2011 by Mr.CatholicCat

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='Delivery Boy' timestamp='1311499402' post='2274797']

So what if God kills. Look at your government. Its killed millions of babies and isn't slowing down. I'm comfortable with God killing on moral grounds. He is a loving Father and wants to protect His children. Big difference between a killer and a murderer too. I'd be honored if you called me a killer. Delivery Killer Boy.

[/quote]

Will do.

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1311527286' post='2274988']

No one knows why God does what He does.

[/quote]

Papist I like your response, I think you try to be as honest. I truly respect that a lot.

If I were to play devil's advocate for this case, I would argue that these these horrifying instances of violence is less than 10% of the Bible, are chiefly of the Old Testament, and are not central to the Catholic faith. Also that there is reason to believe "god" may have been treating his creatures as they treated each other, changing the moral standard from divine to human. Which is supportable since the Bible spends a lot of time manfesting "god" in a way that is understandable and human,and there are many more instances of generosity and benevolence.

The counter-argument would be that it doesn't moot the violence or god's supposed involvement. That because it is apart of the religious text of Catholicism it is sill relevant to Catholic theology. But this apologetic defense could also mean that the human writers were merely writing god to be a better manifestation of themselves. That it distracts from the central point, "god" directly or indirectly commanded the death of millions. By human standards of any time period, this would be a monster, regardless of reason.

I found the discussion interesting and it was the reason I posted it in the theology board, for a more formulated reply. Regretfully... I haven't seen that. I never do... It's apart of why I find Catholicsm disappointing...