How is Yahweh not immoral?

[Brakeman]

I'll bite. What if God is untrust worthy? Now what? What authority or power do you have to effect change? How do you punish God? will you just show up with your evidence and insist that he change? What if He tells you to piss off? Then what? Do you think you and everyone who thinks as you do from the beginning of time till the end has the power or authority to make a difference? Or will you have to align yourself with something or someone with the power to force change on your behalf?

In all of the bible who could that be???

DRICH, the point is that we decide if we will worship him, disbelieve in him, or defiantly suffer his injustice like the some of the British soldiers in German concentration camps during WWII. IF we judge him to be imaginary, we ignore him, but argue with his followers. If we judge him to be evil but real, we defy him as best we can.

Besides, if you observe the biblical claims, you'd see that despite once being powerful and active, god has grown very senile and can't even get out of bed to shit anymore.

[Whateverist]

DRICH, the point is that we decide if we will worship him, disbelieve in him, or defiantly suffer his injustice like the some of the British soldiers in German concentration camps during WWII. IF we judge him to be imaginary, we ignore him, but argue with his followers. If we judge him to be evil but real, we defy him as best we can.

Besides, if you observe the biblical claims, you'd see that despite once being powerful and active, god has grown very senile and can't even get out of bed to shit anymore.

I got this. I got this.

In my best Drichy voice:

"Oh we'll see how senile He is when he opens a can of whoop ass vengence on your ass at the judgement!!

[Drich]

/Yawn, standard appeal to might by Drich. Judges decisions are reversed, judges are taken off the bench, so clearly we have the ability to both question the ruling and authority of a judge. Nevertheless it isn't the judges moral character (whether good or bad) that wields the authority to compel you to pay a parking ticket. My opinion of a god doesn't matter with respects to a god regardless of whether or not such a creature exists. However, my opinion of the appeals made by you in defense of your god as they apply here, in the realm of reality - do matter.

Then it should be really easy for you to explain how it matters. And for that matter please explain how God as your final judge will be "taken off the bench?"

I said the only way you could do this is to appeal to the other 'power' in creation that apposes God. Is this your plan? Or again do you just hope to appeal to God's 'fairness' to step down even after you have judged Him to be unfair?

Your eagerness to argue in favor of tyranny so long as the tyrant is mighty is disturbing...not because I feel that there is any merit to this as an accurate assessment of some other-world, but insomuch as I then wonder what keeps you from stumping for the same here, in the realm of reality.

What you still do not understand is the trivial perspective in which YOU have judge God a tyrant. I have asked and asked for you to provide some kind of standard in which you or anyone else can judge God. The best you have been able to do is simply will God a tyrant because You do not agree with Him. It this really, the petty crap you hope to build your 'tyrant' arguement on? Or are you holding on to an Ace that waiting to spring on me?

Because if this is all you have, then I do agree (based on what you have said here) that one has to be weary about who he follows or the morals he ascribes himself to. Why? Because in your anti might makes right arguement, you appeal to" might makes right." In that you look to align yourself and your moral values to the larger group of people who just happen to think as you do, (even if it appeals to another goup of people) but as with all morality it is constantly changing and as such will change from soceity to soceity and even generation to generation, so again you are right. When your morality is based on nothing more than might makes right, one has to contantly be aware of who is currently in the 'right,'and then change his morality to fit the pack when it suits him.

The point of what? Bringing light to tyranny or injustice even in the absence of the ability to pursue it?

You have failed to submit a plan on how you are going to bring God to your sense of justice. So Yes what is the point of judging someone when you have no power or ablity to do anything about it?

A cursory glance at our history would provide you with countless examples of why one might find a point to this. Tyrants are not always within reach, their tyranny is not always easily opposed, but this does not alter the contemptuous nature of what they have done to deserve the title. Are we to pursue justice only when it is convenient, and otherwise bow our heads in complicity? I refuse.

Again Explain How you plan to over throw God's Authority and bring Him to Justice as you see it. Feel free to use as much "history" as you like.

I think you need to turn the lens inward on this one Drich. "We" as in human beings, are the -only- authority on these matters, because we are the only ones considering them, and the only ones even capable of considering such things so far as we know. Our own authority over ourselves has been established, while you are incapable of establishing so much as the existence of this god creature, let alone any authority you may care to claim for it (and I'm being generous here, because it's painfully transparent that you are claiming authority for yourself, not any god, with your remarks).

Red Herring.
You have changed the focous of this discussion. We were Speaking about God and the Authority of God to Judge. If you were engauged in this discussion(You Were Btw) then for the sake of this discussion, you have acknoweledged the existance of God. To just now appeal to the existance of God is intellectually dishonest of you. Your arguement in it's orginal form has failed, and now you want to change the arguement into something you think you can win. Which Unless you can provide a standard of Proof, (What the prameters of proof of God would look like) that arguement fails as well.

Here, where I live, no one has the authority or right to even be a master of slaves, so asking me whether or not a slave has the right to judge it's master comes across as an entirely juvenile question.

Why? Because you do not have the knoweledge nor experience to answer what has been asked of you? Allow me, the answer is no. A slave does not have the right to Question His master.

The master, by brute force of establishing himself as such requires no judgement to be made by the slave because the business of making another human being your property is itself a condemnation of law and character.

This is an assumption based on what? The TV series 'roots?" In your self admitted "juvenile" understanding of slavery, is 'brute force' the only way a slave can be subserveiant to his master?
If you knew you did not have the wherewith all to answer the first question what makes you think you answered the second correctly?

Again, allow me. I know it may be hard for you to understand because of how slaves were treated in Victorean era, but some slaves (Even now) love their masters and willingly submit to them.

Why would you appeal to such a hideous argument in the first place, am I to assume that you support the institution of slavery?

If you live in the modern era then you are a direct benficiary of slavery. The Slaves of the past who were beaten in the cotton fields of the south and Modern day slaves (allbeit they are not alled that for PC reasons.) I (Being only the 2nd generation born outside of slavery) have no issue identifying slavery nor benfiting from it, as we all have our parts to play in soceity. Futhermore I can quickly identify the role or level we must submit ourself to before God will welcome us as sons and daughters. If this is my lot in life then I will be a slave.

If you do not, then perhaps you shouldn't appeal to it's conventions?

So then I should right??

---

[quote='Brakeman' pid='366591' dateline='1353979651']
DRICH, the point is that we decide if we will worship him, disbelieve in him, or defiantly suffer his injustice like the some of the British soldiers in German concentration camps during WWII. IF we judge him to be imaginary, we ignore him, but argue with his followers. If we judge him to be evil but real, we defy him as best we can.

Besides, if you observe the biblical claims, you'd see that despite once being powerful and active, god has grown very senile and can't even get out of bed to shit anymore.

I got this. I got this.

In my best Drichy voice:

"Oh we'll see how senile He is when he opens a can of whoop ass vengence on your ass at the judgement!!

Oh, Oh Let me go now, Let me Go...
(In my best "Cinjin" or "Faith no more" voice)

"That is 25 point for preaching! How many times must we post the rules on preaching? Derpa, derpa, Stop being a martyr! Herpa, Derpa, We have been nothing but fair and understanding..."

[Kirbmarc]

So Yes what is the point of judging someone when you have no power or ablity to do anything about it?

So I guess that according to you, there was no point for the Jews to think that what the Nazis did to them was unjust, since for what they knew they had no power or ability to do anything about it.

he best you have been able to do is simply will God a tyrant because You do not agree with Him.

The character "god" is a tyrant because he commits genocide, murder and several other criminal acts. The evidence for those acts is in the Bible.

A slave does not have the right to Question His master.

"Christianity: the religion of love".

some slaves (Even now) love their masters and willingly submit to them

Where can you find slaves now? Where do you live, Drich?

[The Grand Nudger]

Then it should be really easy for you to explain how it matters. And for that matter please explain how God as your final judge will be "taken off the bench?"

I already explained why it matters in my last post. Just because a tyrant is mighty, just because they may be out of reach, doesn't mean that I'm going to roll over, and doesn't change whether or not they are a tyrant. I simply wont accept tyranny as the ultimate authority of the cosmos. I may be powerless in the face of any given tyrant but this only strengthens my assessment of precisely how tyranny is achieved.

I said the only way you could do this is to appeal to the other 'power' in creation that apposes God. Is this your plan? Or again do you just hope to appeal to God's 'fairness' to step down even after you have judged Him to be unfair?

Firstly, just to get this out of the way yet again...I'm not looking to have a god step down..because no god stepped up in the first place Drich. I'm addressing the weakness of your analogies, and the contrast between the tyranny you propose and the way in which we go about a similar process.

What you still do not understand is the trivial perspective in which YOU have judge God a tyrant. I have asked and asked for you to provide some kind of standard in which you or anyone else can judge God. The best you have been able to do is simply will God a tyrant because You do not agree with Him.

By the same standard with which we would judge a man, as I've already explained to you. Not because I disagree, but because -WE-, yes, you too Drich, would disagree.

It this really, the petty crap you hope to build your 'tyrant' arguement on? Or are you holding on to an Ace that waiting to spring on me?

I didn't build the tyrant argument, you did. Personally, if I were going to go about imagining a god it wouldn't be a tyrant, and I wouldn't have to make excuses for it's tyranny that equally excuse myself or anyone else - because I wouldn't propose tyranny in the first fucking place. I certainly wouldn't propose it and then call it righteousness, or justice, or fairness. If I wanted to imagine a tyrannical god..I'd just own the results of my imagination. I'd say hey, he's a fucking tyrant, so what..what you gonna do about it. Now, it seems to me that our various imaginings of a god twist us in knots, and here's an opportunity to elaborate on that. You -do- propose the tyrant, and you do say "hey, what're you gonna do about it weakling?" - the ultimate expression of tyranny....but you refuse to then own what you have created because you positively -need- this concept of a god to be fair and just and righteous..even if your explanation of it is not.

Because if this is all you have, then I do agree (based on what you have said here) that one has to be weary about who he follows or the morals he ascribes himself to. Why? Because in your anti might makes right arguement, you appeal to" might makes right." In that you look to align yourself and your moral values to the larger group of people who just happen to think as you do, (even if it appeals to another goup of people) but as with all morality it is constantly changing and as such will change from soceity to soceity and even generation to generation, so again you are right. When your morality is based on nothing more than might makes right, one has to contantly be aware of who is currently in the 'right,'and then change his morality to fit the pack when it suits him.

Not so fast Drich..you've smuggled in your own opinions and presented them as mine. Lets take a nice close look at where that occurred (because this explains exactly why I take the time to argue these points with you in the first place...not because they relate to a god or an afterlife..but because they lead to bullshit here in this life). I do appeal to our agreement when establishing my standard, but I don't consider that standard to be absolutely and ultimately "right" - that is your territory, I'm not looking to impose my standards as a function of the cosmos, I'm just applying them as is....and I recognize the value of dissent in preventing "the tyranny of the mob". When I ask you why a human tyrant cannot excuse himself on the same grounds (of might) I ask you this because I suspect that you do not actually feel that he can, that you do not actually support the argument you offer in defense of a god.

You have failed to submit a plan on how you are going to bring God to your sense of justice. So Yes what is the point of judging someone when you have no power or ablity to do anything about it?

Am I required to, and if there were a god would that even be possible? I doubt it, but that has nothing to do with whether or not this gods will and decrees and judgement amounts to tyranny. Again, what would the point in opposing a human tyrant be if you were incapable of doing anything about it?

Again Explain How you plan to over throw God's Authority and bring Him to Justice as you see it. Feel free to use as much "history" as you like.

Again...your god doesn't exist and has no authority...but I haven't been attempting to bring any god to justice in the first place. I've been attempting to explain to you why the machinery you propose would be incapable of bringing -me- to justice..even if it was perfectly capable of punishing me or extracting a fine or penalty from me.

Red Herring.
You have changed the focous of this discussion. We were Speaking about God and the Authority of God to Judge. If you were engauged in this discussion(You Were Btw) then for the sake of this discussion, you have acknoweledged the existance of God. To just now appeal to the existance of God is intellectually dishonest of you. Your arguement in it's orginal form has failed, and now you want to change the arguement into something you think you can win. Which Unless you can provide a standard of Proof, (What the prameters of proof of God would look like) that arguement fails as well.

You're as bad at identifying fallacies in this thread as you are in the other. I'll humor you. It matters very little whether or not god exists. Rocks exist, but their existence doesn't confer any authority...now does it? My argument, in it's original form..is that I don't recognize the right of tyrants to rule (and I'm going to go so far at this point as to openly state that I don't think you recognize an authority such as this either). What about that argument has failed, and when did it fail? I keep reminding you that your god doesn't exist because you keep responding as though it did, and as though it's existence and claimed power had some bearing on my refusal to acknowledge justice or authority by means of tyranny. It doesn't.

Now....with regards to slavery, I'm afraid that you and I will never come to any agreement on this subject or anything derived from it. We have absolutely no common ground on this issue, and we never will. To be completely blunt, I think you're being more than a little dishonest with me. Again this reinforces what I said above about how we imagine god tying us into knots. Your fantasies of god have left you in the position where you feel that you must argue in favor of the ownership of a human being, and even though I don't actually think you would put your money where your mouth is - that you even had the nuts to do so is both admirable on the one hand..and disturbing on the other. If you're so willing to become a slave, to lower yourself to the status of property..then what value does the opinion of a piece of property have weighed against the opinion of a man? Property has no power, no authority, and since you seem to think that power is so important, my standards count, and yours don't. I don't have too many conversations about justice with my shoes Drich. Let me just take a stab in the dark here and guess that you, for some reason, feel that I should take you - a piece of property- seriously. You expect me to consider you my equal...don't you...at least enough to address your comments as an equal might........

[Drich]

[quote='Kirbmarc' pid='366862' dateline='1354046590']
[quote]So Yes what is the point of judging someone when you have no power or ablity to do anything about it?[/quote]

[quote]So I guess that according to you, there was no point for the Jews to think that what the Nazis did to them was unjust, since for what they knew they had no power or ability to do anything about it.[/quote]Not even close. Were the Nazis God? If you took the time to read what I wrote I said that if your 'morality' is based on what soceity deems to be right and wrong then one must constantly be checking and recalibrating his 'moral' compass. Nazis were apart of soceity. For a time their 'morality' was deemed acceptable, until it wasn't anymore. Because those of us with 'more might' said so, and we made them stop. God is the final authority the ultimate might. Their isn't anything beyond that. so again where it is pointless to appeal to a 'morality' beyond God, it is expected to constantly be looking to adjust man's morality.

[quote]The character "god" is a tyrant because he commits genocide, murder and several other criminal acts. The evidence for those acts is in the Bible.[/quote]So?

[quote]A slave does not have the right to Question His master.[/quote]

[quote]"Christianity: the religion of love". [/quote]
Actually Christianity is the religion of Agape
So a slave who "Loves" or has Agape for his master does not question Him.


[quote]Where can you find slaves now?[/quote]Christianity is full of them.

[quote] Where do you live, Drich?[/quote]
Orlando, Fl

[Kirbmarc]

Because those of us with 'more might' said so, and we made them stop. God is the final authority the ultimate might.

Morality isn't "might makes right", my friend. You need a crash course in moral philosophy.

So?

It's really telling that you don't have an answer when you're presented with a reason why god is tyrant, even though you repeatedly asked for one.

So a slave who "Loves" or has Agape for his master does not question Him.

This isn't love, it's called Stockholm Syndrome.

Christianity is full of them.

Are you a slave, Drich?

Orlando, Fl

Are there any slaves in Orlando?

[The Grand Nudger]

Orlando, well fucking christ that explains it...Orlando's a goddamned shithole. Some dumbass thought it would be a good idea to plop a theme park down in the steaming asshole of Florida and here we are a few decades later.
(hey, property...google "special pleading")

[Drich]

I already explained why it matters in my last post. Just because a tyrant is mighty, just because they may be out of reach,

THEN EXPLAIN HOW YOU WILL REACH HIM!!!

doesn't mean that I'm going to roll over,

THEN EXPLAIN WHAT YOU CAN DO!

and doesn't change whether or not they are a tyrant.

Because only you can change that. That term is so trivial it means nothing. Because you can use it to describe anyone you do not like for what ever reason.

I simply wont accept tyranny as the ultimate authority of the cosmos. I may be powerless in the face of any given tyrant but this only strengthens my assessment of precisely how tyranny is achieved.

This is the core of the matter. This is why you have been given this life. To make this desision. To either be with God or to turn away from Him. Again you can dress up the reason you want to turn from God with any words you like (tyrant, butcher unjust, absent unloving, etc..) whatever your reason they are yours, and God will not change to suit you. you either fall in line or seperate yourself from Him. If you want to 'fall in' but can't then He can help whatever your reason if you just a/s/k. If not then know he will allow you the reasons you currently want to hang on to.

All I am saying is follow your reasons to their ultimate ends. So you judge God a tyrant. now what? Does it change anything? It is better to rot in Hell with your judgement or ask God to help you see the Truth (not the subjective truth that allowed you to judge God with your own standards) But the Unwavering unchanging truth.

The Devil is in the details and you have skipped over alot of the 'details' to make you final judgement.

Firstly, just to get this out of the way yet again...I'm not looking to have a god step down..because no god stepped up in the first place Drich. I'm addressing the weakness of your analogies, and the contrast between the tyranny you propose and the way in which we go about a similar process.

If your going to change the arguement we have nothing to discuss. we have come to an impass.

I didn't build the tyrant argument, you did. Personally, if I were going to go about imagining a god it wouldn't be a tyrant, and I wouldn't have to make excuses for it's tyranny that equally excuse myself or anyone else - because I wouldn't propose tyranny in the first fucking place. I certainly wouldn't propose it and then call it righteousness, or justice, or fairness. If I wanted to imagine a tyrannical god..I'd just own the results of my imagination. I'd say hey, he's a fucking tyrant, so what..what you gonna do about it. Now, it seems to me that our various imaginings of a god twist us in knots, and here's an opportunity to elaborate on that. You -do- propose the tyrant, and you do say "hey, what're you gonna do about it weakling?" - the ultimate expression of tyranny....but you refuse to then own what you have created because you positively -need- this concept of a god to be fair and just and righteous..even if your explanation of it is not.

The word tyrant is an expression based on personal persepective. For example king George was a tyrant to all of those in the 'colonies.' but a hero to all of those who benfited from the taxes and raw materials comming from those colonies.

I have no issue stating this again. God can be viewed the same way. For all of those looking to seperate themselves from God will view him as a tyrant. It is in your nature to do so. What is the difference between King George and God? Their is Absolutly nothing you can do about God. God is unchanging and the ultimate and final authority on everything in all of creation. Which means if He is the standard and we are out of that standard then 'we' are the unjust monsters, not God. For we disrupt, corrupt, and bend things to our will want and desire. Despite what God has built and purposed it for. You have the right idea, you have just projected your failings onto the holy God who has created everything and given it purpose, and then justified what you have done by labling God the tyrant.

Not so fast Drich..you've smuggled in your own opinions and presented them as mine.

If I have I appologize. most of you jump in and out of each other conversations it is sometimes hard to keep track who said what.

I do appeal to our agreement when establishing my standard, but I don't consider that standard to be absolutely and ultimately "right" - that is your territory, I'm not looking to impose my standards as a function of the cosmos, I'm just applying them as is....

Then why use them to judge God as unjust or a tyrant?

and I recognize the value of dissent in preventing "the tyranny of the mob". When I ask you why a human tyrant cannot excuse himself on the same grounds (of might)

I've answer this. I can't say for sure I answer you directly but I did answer this twice now. (last post) matter of fact. In short I said humans would and do have to continually default to 'tyranny' as it is a term built on another perspective of unfair treatment. Their will always be tyrants as not everone will always be happy with the direction of another. At somepoint Might makes right, because we will have to force the minority to accept what is best for the majority.

I ask you this because I suspect that you do not actually feel that he can, that you do not actually support the argument you offer in defense of a god.

I am not sure what you are asking here.

Am I required to, and if there were a god would that even be possible? I doubt it, but that has nothing to do with whether or not this gods will and decrees and judgement amounts to tyranny. Again, what would the point in opposing a human tyrant be if you were incapable of doing anything about it?

In Human based tyranny their is always something that can be done. An appeal to be made a war to be fought. With God their is nothing. Your question should be why. Not what can I do to make God accept my justice or morality.

You're as bad at identifying fallacies in this thread as you are in the other. I'll humor you. It matters very little whether or not god exists. Rocks exist, but their existence doesn't confer any authority...now does it? My argument, in it's original form..is that I don't recognize the right of tyrants to rule (and I'm going to go so far at this point as to openly state that I don't think you recognize an authority such as this either). What about that argument has failed, and when did it fail?

ok so what? You don't recognize a tyrants rule? Who are you to judge someone a tyrant?
Is everyone who treats you unfairly a tyrant? If your fav vice was deemed illegal, and you were caught doing whatever, and got a steep prison sentence would the goverment that deemed your vice illegal then become tryannical? While rotting in Jail would you still claim that you did not recognise that goverment's rule? Can't you see the goverment has authority over you even if you do not recognize it? (otherwise you would not be in jail) That is how you arguement fails. That Authority does not need nor does it seek your permission to rule over you, no matter what you think of it.

Now....with regards to slavery, I'm afraid that you and I will never come to any agreement on this subject or anything derived from it. We have absolutely no common ground on this issue, and we never will. To be completely blunt, I think you're being more than a little dishonest with me.

What part?

Again this reinforces what I said above about how we imagine god tying us into knots. Your fantasies of god have left you in the position where you feel that you must argue in favor of the ownership of a human being, and even though I don't actually think you would put your money where your mouth is - that you even had the nuts to do so is both admirable on the one hand..and disturbing on the other. If you're so willing to become a slave, to lower yourself to the status of property..

You have no clue. I have completely given my self over to God and have been through hell and back as a testament to my commitment. I do know what slave ownership is and i am not saying I would submit myself to the victorean model of slavery in anyway shape or form. But have submitted myself to the role God has askd us to fill in this life. This model is based on the model of slavery He gave to the Jews, so before you say this isn't slavery I will say the model most of you understand to be slavery is not Biblically based slavery I am speaking of. To be a slave is to submit your will and the authority of your life over to another. At which Point the other takes full ownership and responsiablity of those in his care. Victorean slavery did not do this. I honestly do not think you understand what slavery is. White guilt and indoctrination has limited your understanding of slavery to One narrow view of it, not allowing you to see all of it.

then what value does the opinion of a piece of property have weighed against the opinion of a man? I don't have too many conversations about justice with my shoes Drich. Let me just take a stab in the dark here and guess that you, for some reason, feel that I should take you - a piece of property- seriously. You expect me to consider you my equal...don't you...at least enough to address your comments as an equal might........don't you?
[/quote]
My poor confused brother. Don't you understand? You are a slave too. A slave to your sin (If you think your not then try and stop) a slave to your job (again try and stop) A slave to your soceity (if not go against what soceity will you to do) We are not independant men. We are Literal Slaves to the things we give ourselves to. You are no different than me other than I have given myself to God who work load is easy and burden light.

[Kirbmarc]

o you judge God a tyrant. now what? Does it change anything?

Since Rhytm probably doesn't believe that god exists, and neither do I, establishing the Biblical god as a tyrant changes the perception of Christianity in the eyes of the public.

Christianity loses any kind of appeal (except for a small minority of fanatics) when it becomes clear what really it is about.

Who are you to judge someone a tyrant?

Anyone with even a working knowledge of moral philosophy can give you a definition of tyranny. Genocide is an act of tyranny according to any moral philosopher.

y poor confused brother. Don't you understand? You are a slave too. A slave to your sin (If you think your not then try and stop) a slave to your job (again try and stop) A slave to your soceity (if not go against what soceity will you to do) We are not independant men. We are Literal Slaves to the things we give ourselves to. You are no different than me other than I have given myself to God who work load is easy and burden light.

You keep using the word "slave". I don't think you know what it means.