How is Yahweh not immoral?

[Brakeman]

Who's to say that 40,000 years ago God didn't choose all people? ..

The authors of the bible say so. The Bible is supposed to be the complete word of god, of which we are not to add nor subtract from. Unless, like me, you think this is silly superstition.

That would point to another reason why god is not good. God didn't give Adam or Eve the ability to distingush right from wrong. In fact, the fruit was 'knowledge of good and evil', therefore Adam and Eve didn't even know there was such a thing as wrong. God let Satan tempt them, knowing how it would end, and rather than allowing them to know the difference between right and wrong, he lets them fail, and them punishes them heavily.

Not just that Darkstar, Adam did not pick from the tree himself if I remember the story correctly. He was led to eat of the fruit by the evil temptress eve, of which he was powerless to resist because he had not yet been taught right from wrong. He could not have imagined that Eve had not been directed of god to change the rules. So why was Adam punished?

Eve had been misled by a serpent, some say that this was Satan. If this is true, then she was outwitted by a supernatural being that surpassed the seductive qualities of a billion Madison Avenue Ad agencies and a billion teen age peers. It was a completely unfair advantage over a poor woman who did not know right from wrong nor had experienced any contact with evil.

[Cinjin]

[Darkstar]

Excellent video Cinjin.

Unfortunately, the theists will probably say that we can't judge god (because he says so) and just ignore it. That is another point I would like to bring up. Why can't we judge god's actions? If it is because he says so, then how do we know he is trustworthy? Because he says he is? Not that Christians are strangers to circular logic, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

[Drich]

Excellent video Cinjin.

Unfortunately, the theists will probably say that we can't judge god (because he says so) and just ignore it. That is another point I would like to bring up. Why can't we judge god's actions? If it is because he says so, then how do we know he is trustworthy? Because he says he is? Not that Christians are strangers to circular logic, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

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???

[John V]

Excellent video Cinjin.

Unfortunately, the theists will probably say that we can't judge god (because he says so) and just ignore it. That is another point I would like to bring up. Why can't we judge god's actions? If it is because he says so, then how do we know he is trustworthy? Because he says he is? Not that Christians are strangers to circular logic, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

This theist says you can judge God all you want.

This reminds me of the Seinfeld bit on reservations - anyone can take a reservation, it's the holding the reservation that really counts.

Similarly, anyone can judge. It's the ability to enforce one's judgment that really counts.

[The Grand Nudger]

Meh, not really. That might be all that matters to a person committed to excusing a tyrant regardless of their actions...but thankfully that isn't "all that's important" by anyone else's measure. There are plenty of places on this earth where a truly heinous person can be convicted of something despite the system being incapable of following through with a sentence. Whether or not it's within the power of the judging body to act upon that judgement very little to do with the accuracy of the judgement itself. Things don't become "okay" because any given group is incapable of acting. Your god would fall into this category if it existed. A criminal entity which we are wholly incapable of punishing regardless of how damning the indictment or how sound the evidence the prosecution presents. This would make the situation worse, not better. The only thing salvaging this whole silly affair is that your god doesn't exist, so there isn't some cosmically powerful psychopath running around doing horrible shit to people over millenia immune from any responsibility for or consequence of their actions.

The world might be a shitty place sometimes, but it's not quite -that- shitty.

[Brian37]

Excellent video Cinjin.

Unfortunately, the theists will probably say that we can't judge god (because he says so) and just ignore it. That is another point I would like to bring up. Why can't we judge god's actions? If it is because he says so, then how do we know he is trustworthy? Because he says he is? Not that Christians are strangers to circular logic, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

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???

So then you seem to be screwed because the biggest club right now is Islam, so in order to win you have to align yourself with Allah because he is the only one that can affect change on your behalf.

What? That's silly you say? NO SHIT, just as silly as any omni god claimed in human history, including your pet fictional super hero.

So all you are advocating just like all religious people is being a gang minion.

But, what does make sense is that humans love making up bullshit like Thor and Isis and Apolo and Vishnu, and Allah and Yahweh and magic baby Jesus, and all of you want to be part of something special. But the truth is that the universe was around before human invented bullshit and will continu with no record of any of us.

[Drich]

Meh, not really. That might be all that matters to a person committed to excusing a tyrant regardless of their actions...but thankfully that isn't "all that's important" by anyone else's measure.

Again what does "anyone else's measure" truly matter at the final judgement? If you do not have the power or authority to enforce what you 'think' to be right, then labling something or someone as evil or tyrannical is pointless. I think I have used this illustation before, but here it is again anyways:
If you had upaid traffic tickets and were called before a judge, and he told you to pay the tickets or your license would be taken away, then EVEN If you found that judge to be 'evil or tryanical' your options remain the same, for you have absolutly no authority to make the judgement you made and have it mean anything. In that traffic court You are without position authority or power before the judge, the same is true in court of God. so to judge Him as anything than what He has judged Himself to be is futile. For even if you could judge God as evil, ultimatly what can you do about it? What standard would you use? Your personal idea of morality? Again who are you and why do you think it will matter?

There are plenty of places on this earth where a truly heinous person can be convicted of something despite the system being incapable of following through with a sentence. Whether or not it's within the power of the judging body to act upon that judgement very little to do with the accuracy of the judgement itself.

Then truthfully what is the point?

Things don't become "okay" because any given group is incapable of acting. Your god would fall into this category if it existed. A criminal entity which we are wholly incapable of punishing regardless of how damning the indictment or how sound the evidence the prosecution presents. This would make the situation worse, not better. The only thing salvaging this whole silly affair is that your god doesn't exist, so there isn't some cosmically powerful psychopath running around doing horrible shit to people over millenia immune from any responsibility for or consequence of their actions.

You really do not understand what is being discussed here do you?

You are speaking as if 'we' had ANY claim or authority to justify our own actions. Does a slave have the ablity to judge his master? Again if you judge God to be Evil what standard do you use? How is this any different than telling the traffic court judge that he is out of order for making you pay your fines?

Bottom line is that if a proud man is found guilty in a court then the proud man will not want to recognize the courts authority and will say or do anything to try and dismiss the authority held over him. The problem for the guilty is (just as any life-ers) The Courts have offical standing and that means they have authority over men even if they do not want to recognize that authority. The Same is true with God. Meaning even if you want to find God 'guilty' the 'guilt' or sin by your personal standard means little to nothing, to anyone but you in the end Your fate will be whatever God judges it to be.

The world might be a shitty place sometimes, but it's not quite -that- shitty.

Remember in this discussion we are not talking about the 'world' as you know it.

---

So then you seem to be screwed because the biggest club right now is Islam, so in order to win you have to align yourself with Allah because he is the only one that can affect change on your behalf.

what?

What? That's silly you say? NO SHIT, just as silly as any omni god claimed in human history, including your pet fictional super hero.

What are you talking about?

So all you are advocating just like all religious people is being a gang minion.

No, Followers of God submit themselves as slaves, but are welcomed as sons. No idea what you are talking about 'gangs.'

But, what does make sense is that humans love making up bullshit like Thor and Isis and Apolo and Vishnu, and Allah and Yahweh and magic baby Jesus, and all of you want to be part of something special. But the truth is that the universe was around before human invented bullshit and will continu with no record of any of us.

So why not just opt out early?
what is the reason anyone would want to stick around?

[Darkstar]

Similarly, anyone can judge. It's the ability to enforce one's judgment that really counts.

So, basically, god is good because he says so...or else!!!

[The Grand Nudger]

Again what does "anyone else's measure" truly matter at the final judgement? If you do not have the power or authority to enforce what you 'think' to be right, then labling something or someone as evil or tyrannical is pointless. I think I have used this illustation before, but here it is again anyways:
If you had upaid traffic tickets and were called before a judge, and he told you to pay the tickets or your license would be taken away, then EVEN If you found that judge to be 'evil or tryanical' your options remain the same, for you have absolutly no authority to make the judgement you made and have it mean anything. In that traffic court You are without position authority or power before the judge, the same is true in court of God. so to judge Him as anything than what He has judged Himself to be is futile. For even if you could judge God as evil, ultimatly what can you do about it? What standard would you use? Your personal idea of morality? Again who are you and why do you think it will matter?

/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.

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.

Then truthfully what is the point?

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

You really do not understand what is being discussed here do you?

You are speaking as if 'we' had ANY claim or authority to justify our own actions.

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).

Does a slave have the ablity to judge his master?

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

Again if you judge God to be Evil what standard do you use?

If I judge a god to be a fictional representation of evil (this much needs to be very very clear) I do so by reference to my own standard, yes, a standard which becomes more compelling if it is agreed upon in part or in whole by those with whom I am speaking. Often, in these sorts of discussions, I simply ask what sort of opinion one might form about a human being who is said to have done whatever I feel to be evil. If a habit of excusing a deity for things which would condemn a man becomes a theme of the conversation I might ask what grounds this pardon has been given (and why it has been withheld in the case of the man). An appeal to might does not satisfy me as an answer for such a question, because I could just as easily invoke a mighty human tyrant. Which I have, repeatedly. If might excuses what others call evil and invalidates all other opinions by brute force of itself then it does so for the mighty human tyrant just as easily as it does for any god. I don't believe that it does, and from your own comments (about the pointlessness of our own opinions - I am at least mighty with regards to my own opinions, there is no one with more power over my opinions than myself) you don't appear to believe that it does either.

How is this any different than telling the traffic court judge that he is out of order for making you pay your fines?

The differences here illustrate a stark and damning contrast between your analogy of judges and traffic fines and the god you propose.

Firstly, judges exist.

Secondly, their authority is established, they themselves are not the source of this authority, and that authority can indeed be questioned and revoked. Their judgements are not sourced from their will, they are confined as much by law as I, they cannot order me to pay a fine for an infraction which they cannot establish. I can go so far as to refuse to pay a fine for an infraction which has been established an appeal to yet higher authority. The door is never closed to me.

Thirdly, even if my appeal was denied by the highest court, I can still appeal to the public in an effort to change the law. The law itself is malleable and subject to the consent of those it governs, ultimately, otherwise we accurately assign that law (and all of it's enforcing machinary) the term "tyranny".

Finally, the fines themselves are finite, the amounts are known (and just as malleable as the above). I will not be fined an infinite dollar number for going five miles over the speed limit.

But perhaps more simply, even though I took the time to humor you, the analogy doesn't even apply. I have called your judge a tyrant, I have demanded that this judge establish it's authority. Whether or not I have a fine to pay, in regards to this, is irrelevant. If I refuse the fine, and I am denied appeal - instead having said fine extracted from me, the penalty exacted upon me...what will your god have established besides it's ability to extract a fine, to exact punishment? This does not establish authority, only the ability and willingness to engage in tyranny. In our (demonstrably superior) system of law the person who is charged must understand what they have been charged with, why they have been charged with it, and what rights they have with regards to the process itself. Even if they do not agree, this must be established, if we have reason to suspect that they are incapable of understanding any of these things this affects or ruling on the matter (all of this assumes absolute guilt..btw...which is something we do not assume in this endeavor). I've had occasion to say this before, in a similar scenario. If my mind is to be changed in this regard, it would require an explanation from a god, and that explanation would have to detail all of the ways that you and yours have completely fucked the pooch in explaining any of this. I may still have a fine to pay, but at least then I would know what I paid it for, and that the authority that enforced it is both legitimate and just.

Bottom line is that if a proud man is found guilty in a court then the proud man will not want to recognize the courts authority and will say or do anything to try and dismiss the authority held over him. The problem for the guilty is (just as any life-ers) The Courts have offical standing and that means they have authority over men even if they do not want to recognize that authority.

They are still accountable to those who refuse to recognize their authority nevertheless. To suggest otherwise is to suggest tyranny. Their authority, again, does not arise from their own invocation of it.

The Same is true with God. Meaning even if you want to find God 'guilty' the 'guilt' or sin by your personal standard means little to nothing, to anyone but you in the end Your fate will be whatever God judges it to be.

The same is most definitely not true. You have not presented any compelling similarity between our own laws and the laws of your god. You have achieved exactly the opposite. If our laws were legitimized, arranged, and enforced in the manner that you have described as being the SOP for gods laws we would be completely justified in rejecting this creatures authority. In fact, we've done something very similar to this many times throughout history in rejecting the authority of kings and despots time and time again, going so far as to depose them. To be completely blunt, every step forward we've ever taken in the arena of law and authority has been a step away from the god you propose as the ultimate example of both.

Vae victis

Remember in this discussion we are not talking about the 'world' as you know it.

Clearly, because the world I know is far superior to the world you propose - all of us under the thumb of an unimaginably powerful dictator who's only explanation for it's various atrocities and judgements appears to be "because I can"-...and that's saying a lot, what with how shitty it gets

Do I need to throw up the dick jerking smiley or can that just be something understood between us by now?