What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Randy Carson]

If you stop to read the articles that I posted on this subject (or any one of the DOZENS of similar articles that you can find with a quick Google search), you will discover that it's not me "saying anything" to hold onto my views...the answers I have provided are solid exegesis of the scriptures by people who have spent more than a few minutes considering them.

The challenge for you, of course, is that this exegesis doesn't resonate with the "moral monster" view you have of God.

Oh - I have no doubt you haven't come up with all this yourself. Still - you're the one, who preaches this nonsense here, to people (atheists), that you know are bound to find it offensive.

Now, that's interesting.

Why should YOU, an atheist, find it offensive to see an example of God calling people to a higher standard of behavior?

I thought this was exactly the kind of thing that you would appreciate as mankind evolved into a more empathetic and compassionate species.

[das_atheist]

Good behavior is the intent to increase societal happiness and bad behavior is the intent to decrease societal happiness.

[Pyrrho]

Oh, I understand his position perfectly.  

That's why I just had a little vomit rise in my throat.

Randy's point is that if God had come out and hit everyone with all the morals all at once, it wouldn't have worked. People wouldn't have listened. People would have just dismissed it all right away and never changed. So God had to do it slowly for it to actually work. That's all Randy is saying here. I don't see why that should make you want to vomit.

(i'm going to keep saying this is randy's position not mine so that I don't get accused of believing things I don't actually believe)

If that is true, then god is not omnipotent.  It is a weak, ineffectual being that cannot do what it wants when it wants.  You are right to distance yourself from such heresy.

[Homeless Nutter]

Now, that's interesting.

Why should YOU, an atheist, find it offensive to see an example of God calling people to a higher standard of behavior?

[...]

It's insulting my intelligence. You say - god called people to a "higher standard of behavior". I say - primitive tribes came up with all that by themselves over the course of tens of thousands years - because it suited them at the time. You're simply trying to rationalize the fact that 3000 or so years ago your god's morals were the same as those of desert dwelling barbarians, by claiming he had to slowly introduce better morals. 

He's supposed to be god, who presented himself to those people, by means of miracles and such. A few extra miracles and I'm sure they would've somehow swallowed the idea that women are not cattle. 

Of course - all that can be easily explained by the conclusion you're desperately trying to avoid - god and his laws were in fact created by barbarians and as such should have no bearing on our modern society, other than as a historical curiosity.

[Catholic_Lady]

Yes. As I said previously, God met the Israelites where they were at and began to form them into a better people. This process took time.

Randy, a god who takes his time implementing a process forgoes the suffering of everyone else who is going through the situation. How could a loving benevolent god think this was the best possible way? If me, a finite mortal being can think of a better way to execute this master plan while minimizing suffering and maximizing happiness what does that say about god?

I see what you're saying, and I actually agree. (which is why I don't believe the OT stories were real occurrences)

But Randy's position is that people wouldn't have ever come to a better understanding otherwise. The only way God could get people on the right path was to take it slowly, otherwise it wouldn't have happened. This is per Randy's views. If that is truly how he feels (which I 100% believe it is), then I can't hold that against him.

[Metis]

I see what you're saying, and I actually agree. (which is why I don't believe the OT stories were real occurrences)

But Randy's position is that people wouldn't have ever come to a better understanding otherwise. The only way God could get people on the right path was to take it slowly, otherwise it wouldn't have happened. This is per Randy's views. If that is truly how he feels (which I 100% believe it is), then I can't hold that against Him.

I don't hold it against him Catholic_Lady, but I do think it gives an incredibly dark impression of the Christian God (if the other posters haven't accomplished that already ). It suggests the ends justify the means for one, what does one or one hundred women mean if I can teach a lesson across history? What does an entire civilization mean? What does any of your lives mean?

A core element of Catholic teaching is that the ends do not justify the means, and as a perfect being God cannot go against his perfect nature by committing a sin. As Cardinal Newman said in his Apologia it is better for the stars to fall and all humanity to die than a single sin be committed. It seems a remarkably uncatholic interpretation, but of course I say that as an outsider.

[iburnwater]

Randy, a god who takes his time implementing a process forgoes the suffering of everyone else who is going through the situation. How could a loving benevolent god think this was the best possible way? If me, a finite mortal being can think of a better way to execute this master plan while minimizing suffering and maximizing happiness what does that say about god?

I see what you're saying, and I actually agree. (which is why I don't believe the OT stories were real occurrences)

But Randy's position is that people wouldn't have ever come to a better understanding otherwise. The only way God could get people on the right path was to take it slowly, otherwise it wouldn't have happened. This is per Randy's views. If that is truly how he feels (which I 100% believe it is), then I can't hold that against him.

Do you believe the NT stories were real occurrences? And if so, how do you tell the difference?

"The only way God could get people on the right path was to do it slowly?" Noah's flood wasn't slowly.  God smiting people left and right wasn't slowly.

[tonechaser77]

Randy, a god who takes his time implementing a process forgoes the suffering of everyone else who is going through the situation. How could a loving benevolent god think this was the best possible way? If me, a finite mortal being can think of a better way to execute this master plan while minimizing suffering and maximizing happiness what does that say about god?

I see what you're saying, and I actually agree. (which is why I don't believe the OT stories were real occurrences)

But Randy's position is that people wouldn't have ever come to a better understanding otherwise. The only way God could get people on the right path was to take it slowly, otherwise it wouldn't have happened. This is per Randy's views. If that is truly how he feels (which I 100% believe it is), then I can't hold that against him.

Yes I think Randy truly believes this but as another poster said it's really just a rationalization so that he doesn't have to concede the laws allegedly directed by god were barbaric.

[Catholic_Lady]

I meant in regards to this discussion about rape in the OT.

It's important to state that "the good book" is not so good to protect women from being raped by their husbands. Billions of people still justify their atrocities, using OT.

Then perhaps you should focus your energy on those types of people. Randy is not one of them.

I, for one, have never met a single Christian or Jew who honestly believed God wants them to rape. Not saying there aren't crazies out there, but the normal person does not come out from reading the bible believing that this is what God wants. As long as Randy believes rape is wrong, why does it matter, to you, that he reads/believes the bible? This is an honest question, btw. Not trying to be rude. I'm just a little perplexed as to why anyone would let it bother them so much.

[Metis]

Then perhaps you should focus your energy on those types of people. Randy is not one of them.

I, for one, have never met a single Christian or Jew who honestly believed God wants them to rape. Not saying there aren't crazies out there, but the normal person does not come out from reading the bible believing that this is what God wants. As long as Randy believes rape is wrong, why does it matter, to you, that he reads/believes the bible? This is an honest question, btw. Not trying to be rude. I'm just a little perplexed as to why anyone would let it bother them so much.

Because fundamentalists of any creed are dangerous Catholic_Lady. Just look at what ISIS is doing in Palmyra at the moment. Slaughtering untold millions, erasing all traces of mesopotamias ancient past.

I'm not saying Randy is going to fly a plane into a building or find some virgin to rape and marry, but this line of thinking is a very slippery slope.