How is Yahweh not immoral?

[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.