is god moral ?

[insanity]

hi
sry about the other thread and that i did not read the stickys… that happens when you register on a forum and want to star a interesting debat whilst being extremly tired
ok so now refreshed with 2 cups strong coffe lets start again.

so my point is that in my view of what is moral , the god in the bible does not fulfill the moral standarts expected from an all powerfull all knowing and loving god.

ok , so humans are often described as gods children , but what father would allow his children to be tortured (i am not saying he tortures , simply that he allows for it to happen) for the “crime” of not loving him back (back is an important point since he suposedly loves us all , allowing for someone to be tortured whom you dont like is allready a evile thing… but someone you love?)? what kind of moral and loving god is that ?

also a infinite punishment is not ok to be used to punish a crime which caused a finite amount of harm

ok lets begin ( ipod spellchecker is giving me a hard time :S )

 

[Perplexity]

The only way God’s permission of an agent’s enduring eternal conscious torment could be morally justified is if in doing so, a greater good could obtain, or a greater evil would be prevented.

It’s incumbent upon God’s defenders to identify either what this greater good would be, or what this greater evil would be.

If no satisfying answer is forthcoming, then I’m with Rowe, and I’ll make the noseeum inference.

 

[insanity]

but what greater good would be obtained by torturing a person in a place which does not affect this world (or what evile prevented ?)

also since the punishment of the tortured soul is infinite the good obtained or evile prevented would also have to be infinitly ( in order for the infinite evile created through torture the good obtained would have to be a bigger infinity )

(if you say hell is not direct torture but rather a complete absence of god, a complete lonlines for eternety… a all powerfull god surly could simply make a soul vanish rather than make it spend an eternety on its own.)

 

[Perplexity]

There are a few options, I suppose.

They might say the operation of free-will is worth more than the eternal conscious torment of an agent: that free-will has more goodness than hell has badness. (I find this absurd) But, here, they’d also have to show that free-will couldn’t obtain without God permitting hell.

They might say ‘soul-making’ or moral character formation has more goodness than hell has badness, and that such formation couldn’t obtain without God permitting hell.

They could say a heaven populated with moral agents who freely got there has more goodness than hell has badness, and that such a heaven couldn’t obtain without God permitting hell.

etc.

 

[fhansen]

It’s a bigger picture than that IMO.The rejection of God is the rejection of love. Hell is existence in a loveless universe.

 

[insanity]

ok lets assume for a second that hell is necesary for free will , why would it have to be permanent ? (i wanted to say why couldnt god simply lie that hell exists , but many would argue that god cant liebut then i ask… not even for a greater good ? and if god cant lie… is he all powerfull ? but this goes away from the topic)

 

[fhansen]

If, as has been stated, existence is an objective good (regardless, IOW, of ones subjective viewpoint on the matter at any point in time), then so long as our rejection of love is permanent, hell would be necessarily be permanent. We create hell; lack of love is it’s own hell.

 

[indymb]

Perhaps the better question is “Who and what is God?” I think from there you might gain some sense, as best as we humans can on estimating God, as to God’s morality. In that vein, your question to my eyes reads something like, “Can we trust truth?” Keep seeking! YIC, indy

 

[LilyM]

God is MORALITY. We creatures are moral in that we conform more or less to His code for us.

What makes you think sin only does a finite amount of harm? Sin required the ultimate and infinite sacrifice - for God Himself to assume human form and suffer and die in that form. The sufferer is eternal, therefore it stands to reason that the suffering and harm is also eternal, and thus worthy of eternal punishment.

The analogy I use is if you injure someone with your car and they are 95 years old and already suffering some terminal illness which means they could never expect to live long anyways, you will be required to pay less compensation to them than if you did the same injury to a fit young strong 20 year old whose life expectancy, and therefore suffering, will be longer and who has in consequence lost more in being injured.

 

[insanity]

“can we trust truth” hmm to start to answer that you would first have to prove that god exists and then that he is loving or that he is truth.

 

[insanity]

God is MORALITY. We creatures are moral in that we conform more or less to His code for us.

What makes you think sin only does a finite amount of harm? Sin required the ultimate and infinite sacrifice - for God Himself to assume human form and suffer and die in that form. The sufferer is eternal, therefore it stands to reason that the suffering and harm is also eternal, and thus worthy of eternal punishment.

The analogy I use is if you injure someone with your car and they are 95 years old and already suffering some terminal illness which means they could never expect to live long anyways, you will be required to pay less compensation to them than if you did the same injury to a fit young strong 20 year old whose life expectancy, and therefore suffering, will be longer and who has in consequence lost more in being injured.

so what basicly you say its like injuring a person who could have become infinitly old and therefore an infinite compensation has to be payed.what i see wrong with this argument is that he suposedly took human form and therfore could not have reached infinite age ( even if… at some point in time the sun will have such a intensity that everything on earth will die, so he would have died in human form latest at that point), therefore his death would not require infinite compensation

 

[LilyM]

so what basicly you say its like injuring a person who could have become infinitly old and therefore an infinite compensation has to be payed.what i see wrong with this argument is that he suposedly took human form and therfore could not have reached infinite age ( even if… at some point in time the sun will have such a intensity that everything on earth will die, so he would have died in human form latest at that point), therefore his death would not require infinite compensation

You would be right if He were ONLY human. But He wasn’t. His body rose again from the dead - still bearing the wounds it suffered for our sin, mind you, as Thomas observed. And then He went, wounded human body and all, to heaven - where both His still-wounded body and spirit live on eternally.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

hi
so my point is that in my view of what is moral , the god in the bible does not fulfill the moral standarts expected from an all powerfull all knowing and loving god.

Whose moral standards? Who can judge God?

also a infinite punishment is not ok to be used to punish a crime which caused a finite amount of harm

By whose judgment?

ok , so humans are often described as gods children , but what father would allow his children to be tortured (i am not saying he tortures , simply that he allows for it to happen) for the “crime” of not loving him back (back is an important point since he suposedly loves us all , allowing for someone to be tortured whom you dont like is allready a evile thing… but someone you love?)? what kind of moral and loving god is that ?

Look at it this way. You are a judge and you teach your child good and bad, you make the rules very clear. Now your child has grown-up and tells you he doesn’t like you. He then goes on to commit horrible crimes. So he’s dragged to your court, and when you ask him to repent, he shows no remorse. Would it not be completely righteous to condemn that child?

ok lets assume for a second that hell is necesary for free will , why would it have to be permanent ? (i wanted to say why couldnt god simply lie that hell exists , but many would argue that god cant liebut then i ask… not even for a greater good ? and if god cant lie… is he all powerfull ? but this goes away from the topic)

Some Fathers, like Origen and St. Gregory of Nazianzen, believed in the Apocatastasis, that all souls will eventually enter heaven. Even the devil could then be saved. We don’t expect it, but we do pray and hope for it.

 

[insanity]

well the thing is , can you wound a god with something as simple as nails and betrail ?
and why doesnt god simply forgive this sin? in mu eyes it shouldnt be hard for a being who created the universe to forgive its death in human form.

also i want to make the point that since god is suposedly all knowing he must have known at creation that humans would betray him if he created them in this way.

now at this point i also want to argue that god didnt realy give free will.

imagine this , you have to chose between A and B , since god is all knowing he knows what your choice will be ( lets say B ) … now you cant choose A because an all knowing being allready knows you will chose B . since the being is ALL knowing the probability you will chose B is 100% and A 0% , therefore its no longer a choice , therefore no free will.

if you say that god cannot predict every choice you make with 100% certainty and you therefore have free will you have to accept that god is NOT all knowing…

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

well the thing is , can you wound a god with something as simple as nails and betrail ?

You cannot wound or pierce the Divine, yet the Word sufferered in the flesh.

and why doesnt god simply forgive this sin? in mu eyes it shouldnt be hard for a being who created the universe to forgive its death in human form.

That would be baptism, in which our sins are forgiven.

also i want to make the point that since god is suposedly all knowing he must have known at creation that humans would betray him if he created them in this way.

now at this point i also want to argue that god didnt realy give free will.

imagine this , you have to chose between A and B , since god is all knowing he knows what your choice will be ( lets say B ) … now you cant choose A because an all knowing being allready knows you will chose B . since the being is ALL knowing the probability you will chose B is 100% and A 0% , therefore its no longer a choice , therefore no free will.

if you say that god cannot predict every choice you make with 100% certainty and you therefore have free will you have to accept that god is NOT all knowing…

God knows what decision we will make with our free will. He is not bound to time, for time is his creation. He’s outside of time. We however, do experience time.

 

[LilyM]

You can forgive, so can God. So does God. But it won’t do any earthly good to the person who hurt you unless they also accept that they did wrong, understand why, apologize to you or God, learn from the mistake etc etc.

well the thing is , can you wound a god with something as simple as nails and betrail ?
and why doesnt god simply forgive this sin? in mu eyes it shouldnt be hard for a being who created the universe to forgive its death in human form.

also i want to make the point that since god is suposedly all knowing he must have known at creation that humans would betray him if he created them in this way.

now at this point i also want to argue that god didnt realy give free will.

imagine this , you have to chose between A and B , since god is all knowing he knows what your choice will be ( lets say B ) … now you cant choose A because an all knowing being allready knows you will chose B . since the being is ALL knowing the probability you will chose B is 100% and A 0% , therefore its no longer a choice , therefore no free will.

if you say that god cannot predict every choice you make with 100% certainty and you therefore have free will you have to accept that god is NOT all knowing…

 

[grannymh]

It is obvious, that some people (including both non-theists and theists) have an underlying desire make God human. The comparisons of God to humans have increased. For example. At times, God is evaluated according to human perceptions based in the material/physical world. When God does not live up to human standards, then it is easy to dismiss Him.

May you experience the joy of Easter,
granny

Then the angel said to the women in reply, "Do not be afraid! I know that you are seeking Jesus the crucified. He is not here, for He has been raised just as He said.
Matthew, Chapter 28

 

[EricFilmer]

well the thing is , can you wound a god with something as simple as nails and betrail ?

Christ is a divine person with two natures: divine and human. In his human nature he could experience death.

and why doesnt god simply forgive this sin? in mu eyes it shouldnt be hard for a being who created the universe to forgive its death in human form.

God is merciful, so he is willing to forgive sin. But God is also just, and although sin can be forgiven, God can’t pretend that sin never happened. There is still an accountability for sin, and God is the one ultimately responsible for the proper satisfaction of justice. According to the Bible, the wages of sin is death (because sin is the rejection of God who is life itself, and the only realistic consequence of rejecting life is death). But Christ satisfies justice by agreeing to pay the deadly consequence of sin on our behalf. Even though Christ did not sin, it is permissible for someone to pay the debt of another.

also i want to make the point that since god is suposedly all knowing he must have known at creation that humans would betray him if he created them in this way.

And therefore…?

now at this point i also want to argue that god didnt realy give free will.

imagine this , you have to chose between A and B , since god is all knowing he knows what your choice will be ( lets say B ) … now you cant choose A because an all knowing being allready knows you will chose B . since the being is ALL knowing the probability you will chose B is 100% and A 0% , therefore its no longer a choice , therefore no free will.

Passive awareness does not equate active coercion. As someone else stated, God exists outside of time and therefore can observe temporal events from different perspectives, including the choices we will make. Consider this within the following example: I know (from historical resources and actual documentation) that John Hancock signed the U.S.’ Declaration of Independence. Let us say that I took a time machine to go to Independence Hall on the day of the signing in 1776. As the people gather in the hall, I am present only as a passive observer. When John Hancock steps up to the table, he still has the free choice to either sign or not sign. Even though I know he will sign, my knowledge does not somehow rob him of his freewill.

My example, of course, is not a perfect representation of how all this works with God. For example, one could argue that my future knowledge is no longer accurate if I go back in time, because my presence in Independence Hall would change the past (and therefore altering the course of events in one way or another, possibly even resulting in Hancock not signing the document). But unlike me, God is both present and transcendent, and therefore can choose what sort of impact he has on creation.

 

[neophyte]

…ok , so humans are often described as gods children , but what father would allow his children to be tortured (i am not saying he tortures , simply that he allows for it to happen) for the “crime” of not loving him back (back is an important point since he suposedly loves us all , allowing for someone to be tortured whom you dont like is allready a evile thing… but someone you love?)? what kind of moral and loving god is that ?..

You’re not a parent, are you.

 

[Cadellin]

( ipod spellchecker is giving me a hard time :S )

What sort of a god is it that would allow such a thing to happen?

Seriously though, the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden (however you interpret that story) tells of a time when God didn’t allow these atrocities to happen. So long as they obeyed God’s commandment they lived without suffering, but they disobeyed God and thereby forfeited the paradise God gave them. God still doesn’t allow these things to happen, but we have decided to be masters of our own fate and, like Adam and Eve, reject God (or even the very notion of God) and, like Adam and Eve, we suffer the consequences. It’s a lot like rejecting what the doctor has to say about how we must live to stay healthy and then complain about various ailments and illnesses we come down with, consequently.

also a infinite punishment is not ok to be used to punish a crime which caused a finite amount of harm

That’s right. Finite punishment for finite harm is dealt in Purgatory for those who are sorry for what they have done. No one goes to Hell (infinite punishment) for committing a sin (finite harm). We’d all go there if that we’re the case. They go to Hell because they have decided that want to have nothing to do with God (and consequently don’t seek forgiveness for their sins). God, being a loving God, allows them to have their way and in his mercy and love has created a place for them, namely Hell. The problem is that we were made for God and to live without him completely, which we can’t do in this world, would be utter hell, literally. The main pain we’d feel in Hell is the loss of God, something we don’t feel in this world because of all he has given us here.