Whenever I question something in the Bible as being morally reprehensible the response I get is that because it is the word of God, and since God sets objective morality, everything condoned by God in the Bible is objectively good. Every person slaughtered and every woman raped is A-OK just as long as God says it is.
What can we assume is implied by this claim?
Well, it means any intuitive sense of morality I may have is egregiously flawed. I can look at the acts of Yahweh and hold reservations about the supposed goodness of his deeds and commandments, but it ultimately doesn’t matter.
But wait just one minute. Why doesn’t this pendulum swing both ways?
If my sense of morality is so faulty that I am unable to judge the God of the Bible as being evil, than how can we trust the moral sense of a Christian to be any better? How can they truly claim that the God of the Bible is good?
Can a Christian reconcile with this issue? I don’t see any means in which this is possible. They certainly couldn’t say that our innate sense of morality is objective. This would mean my claim about God is just as true as theirs. Additionally, they couldn’t use the Bible. The only thing that validates the Bible is the Bible. In order to reach the objective truths in the Bible, a Christian must first know independently of the Bible that what is stated inside is true. This is, of course, a gap in knowledge.
To play devil's advocate (Hah! Deliciously absurd!), you're forgetting the effect of sin.
ReplyDeleteWhether someone is a Christian or not, they're still under the effects of sin, as they are in a fallen state - as are you and I. As such, we cannot trust our innate sense of right and wrong in any particular instance (certainly we can trust it when it justifies God's actions, just not in instances when it contradicts it). Our disgust at God's wholesale slaughter of hundreds of thousands, is merely the clouding effect of sin on our minds.
As for how to provide evidence of this as objectively right, you're indeed right that using the bible to justify the bible is circular. But, as I've been forced to recognize over and over, it's all about FAITH.
They don't recognize God's actions as objective, they simply have faith in God, and he TELLS them what is objectively right. Ditto with whatever bits in the bible need to be true (or false) at any given moment in time.
FAITH powers GOD. GOD powers SCRIPTURE and grants a moral pass to anything in it. So, you see, simply by relinquishing any sense of logic, reason or personal accountability by putting your mind in the hands of faith, God will subsequently justify any action (including your own intellectual sloth, and lack of discipline). ONE HAND WASHES THE OTHER.
That's how John can be certain that he stands on the side of righteous objectivity, and the rest of us, naturally, are relativists who don't really believe in truth, and just want to wallow in selfish wet-genital-friction parties, and drink God's blood, etc, etc.
Drink God's blood? No, that's Christian territory. Wet-genital-friction, on the other hand, is the best way to worship our Lord and Master, Satan.
ReplyDelete...Yes. I should have said there was no logical means in which Christian's could justify their position. I knew this would eventually reach the...*gasp*...F-WORD!
It's unlikely that John will comment (at least in the next several days). He's home from work, feeling pretty out of sorts (may be anemic or caught a bug).
ReplyDeleteBut alas rumors of my death have been largely exaggerated. Still not feeling like a king but I'm doing better (hopefully it was just a bug/dehydration).
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what it wanted of me though.
You ask why it doesn't swing both says.
Well here's the first and probably expected answer from me straight from the Book of Job.
At one point Job says: "I call aloud, but there is no justice."
And God answers:
"Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind. Who is this that darkens counsel without knowledge? ... Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? ... when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? [38:1-2,4a,7]"
I know I'm using the Bible to explain the Bible, but that's not an issue here since we're discussing the faith of Christians which is derived from this source.
But really it's all moot. You're really asking why believe in Christianity independent of the Bible. And the answer you won't like but the one you'll get is faith.
Why do I believe this? Yes, the dreaded F-word.
But there's some supporting evidence. The Church (the big one in my mind) was there at the time of Jesus and in Peter and the apostles witnessed the events of the New Testament. It's still here. I can look at a list of leaders tracing back to then.
Everybody's got a sacred book. Why this one, not that one? My intellectual side doesn't like this answer, but the choice of which one or even no one comes down to faith.
We are made in God's image and likeness, but we are not so like him that we can judge him.
----
I'm going to come back to this after work but here's a preview of my way of dealing with this.
1. God has chosen to work within the concept of human history. There was a time before the Church, a time before Moses, etc. As such, while good and evil remain constant, some things do change.
2. While the Old Testament is scripture same as the new, it's irresponsible to ignore that God's covenant with us now is not the same one it was then.
3. Sin matters. In this one I'll primarily
3. (continued)talk about what Dungy already said.
ReplyDelete"But there's some supporting evidence. The Church (the big one in my mind) was there at the time of Jesus and in Peter and the apostles witnessed the events of the New Testament. It's still here. I can look at a list of leaders tracing back to then."
ReplyDeleteI don't claim to know what the apostles thought they laid witness to, but it's hardly proof of Jesus' divinity. I can come up with plenty of explanations for what Jesus was that are just as or more legitimate than the claim of divinty:
1: He was a fraud
2: He was mentally ill or a liar
3: He was a mentally ill or lying fraud
4: He was an alien
5: He was a time traveler who went back in time to witness the historical Jesus. Unfortunately, the real Jesus turned out to be severely mentally handicapped, so the time traveler used his knowledge of the gospels, psychology, and some magic tricks to play out the part of the messiah (plot of the book "Behold the Man").
"Everybody's got a sacred book. Why this one, not that one? My intellectual side doesn't like this answer, but the choice of which one or even no one comes down to faith."
Answer a question for me. Where does faith come from? I presume your answer would be God. The source of your faith come directly from the Almight. What about those who hold faith in a different religion? Is there faith not from God?
"We are made in God's image and likeness, but we are not so like him that we can judge him."
Are you not making a judgment about God when you say he is good?
Please don't allow my minor comments distract you too much from the three points you wish to make. I eagerly await them.
Not to pile on (this is Matt's blog, so he should get the priviledge of being Grand Inquisitioner), but wanted to add another possibility to Matt's list.
ReplyDelete6. Jesus existed, and he wasn't a liar or a fraud, but what he actually did and said isn't well represented by the Gospels.
Considering the many years between the death of Jesus and the appearance of the first gospels, that's feasible. What historical evidence we have shows a fragmented "church" that differed wildly from place to place and person to person, when it came to the topic of Jesus, his divinity and his teachings. That lasted up until Constantine, when an enfranchised and state sponsored church began eliminating the fringe believers and making an effort to establish an orthodoxy.
I'll start with my three points and get back to the rest.
ReplyDelete1. God has chosen to work within the concept of human history.
This is something, like many things in my faith, I struggle to understand. God, who is outside of time, created us within time. It is real for us. The Bible says 1,000 years can be a day to him, but to us 1,000 or in this case 2,000 years is 2,000 years.
But given that God was working in the framework of time, it's not unreasonable to think that he might (I'm admittedly speculating here) reveal himself over time. If one believes the bible, he initially created us all but at some point he dedicated Israel his chosen people. It would be through them he revealed himself and through them salvation would eventually come to all.
As such, one might argue that a) the people he commanded to be killed were not innocent, but that seems unlikely as some were children.
The other option, is that for Israel to rise to prominence or continue to exist, threats to them had to be wiped out.
Admittedly when dealing with an omnipotent being outside of time, this argument feels weak, but it's one idea I got. God at the time was protecting his chosen people and for reasons unknown to me, seemed unconcerned with the lives of the people in Jericho etc., though he would judge their souls according to their lives and it's likely many of them are in heaven.
2. While the Old Testament is scripture same as the new, it's irresponsible to ignore that God's covenant with us now is not the same one it was then.
(After writing a chunk on this, I am abandoning this as a terribly relevant position. Sorry.)
3. Sin matters.
This is a biggie. We have knowledge of some things innately. Most societies developed a handful of universal moralities (murder and stealing bad etc.) This , from the Christian view, is because God's law is written on our hearts and because his truths are echoed just about everywhere.
But we can't see the whole thing. It, like Eden itself, is hidden from us as a result of original sin.
Because of that, what we might think is a moral act (assisting the suicide of a terminally ill person, say) is not moral. In that case, the person, if they chose suicide would be committing a mortal sin and may end up in hell for eternity, and we would be culpable too.
In the same way, our sin clouds our ability to judge God's actions fully. Just because something seems immoral to us, even say the clear cut appearance of genocide, doesn't mean for sure that it is.
And even without sin, based on our insignificance in comparison to him.
Should I wait for response for this or hit on the others?
"1. God has chosen to work within the concept of human history."
ReplyDeleteI fail to see how this argument assists your position. God's sheer laziness in revealing himself has been scrutinized as a weakness of Christianity. What conceivable reason would there be for God to have to do this?
“As such, one might argue that a) the people he commanded to be killed were not innocent, but that seems unlikely as some were children.”
What do you mean by not innocent? Are they guilty of sin? Say, at what point does God start tallying for the original sin, anyway? Is it only after Jesus or is it something he’s always been particular about? Of course, the severity of the original sin varies from sect to sect, so depending on what type of Christian you ask, God may or may not have condoned the slaughter of innocent children. Isn’t this an interesting game? I love how convoluted religion is. I really do.
“The other option is that for Israel to rise to prominence or continue to exist, threats to them had to be wiped out.”
Well, I could point out that all archeological evidence points to the Israelites being native Canaanites. Indeed, the concept of a violent conquest of Canaan undertaken by the Israelites has fallen out of favor in the academic world. It makes one wonder why the author(s) of Joshua felt inclined to make God condone genocide and why God would be ok with this blatantly confusing depiction of himself.
Regardless, let’s take your statement at face value. Threats to them had to be wiped out? The minor city-states (most of them hardly even deserve this distinction) of the region where of no threat to the Israelites. Who was doing the slaughtering here, anyway? If anything God should have been protecting the Canaanites from the Israelites. Rise to prominence? Only for the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah to be defeated and dismantled by the Assyrian and Babylonian Empires.
“2. While the Old Testament is scripture same as the new, it's irresponsible to ignore that God's covenant with us now is not the same one it was then.”
New rules for a new era. Sure, God alters the barriers of objective morality, thus dismantling anything objective about it.
“3. Sin matters.”
How exactly do my countless sins cloud my ability to judge God condoned genocide as evil, anyway? Let me guess. It does…just because it does….because it is a convenient answer which offers the faithful a simple little prepackaged answer that allows them to ignore the issue and pretend as though their deity is anything but manmade. Harsh, I know, but true.
You say we have been given innate knowledge of certain moral acts, and yet, if God were to command you to kill someone (and maybe not even someone who might arguably deserve it – maybe a child) you would be fully expected to ignore these deep-seated feelings and perform the deed. How could you possibly excuse such a thing? How could you possibly say it is moral for God to give humans these feelings only to command them to perform the opposite?
You are making yourself unable to understand the Christian position because you are making yourself to be the height of judgement and morality.
ReplyDeleteIf in fact, you are that, then you are totally right. If you believe you are that, you won't listen anyway.
There is nothing I can say that will convince you otherwise because you're faith is in yourself as supreme judge of sorts.
I know God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit. You aren't required to believe me based on that and you won't.
As it pertains to sin I failed to mention I was talking about original sin. Adam and Eve's sin was passed on, preventing humans from being the purer state they were created to be. As such we are flawed and all kinds of problems follow from that.
On your last point, it sticks with sin. Our fallen nature distorts our perception. If you don't think it does, take a look at the believers who do just about whatever they want because they "feel" God wants us to be happy.
Our feelings are only a part of the equation to guide how we are to live. But we are not the end all be all of the universe.
John - If you accept that your own perceptions and judgements are flawed, subjective and clouded by sin, then isn't your image of God and Church possibly clouded by that as well? Faith requires a choice to believe, and perception and understanding make up every choice we make. Hasn't the whole cycle been tainted by sin? How can you trust your faith or your own perception if we are all clouded and confused?
ReplyDeleteHow do you know that your faith hasn't been twisted by the devil from the start? Even though you hold God, doctrine and Church above your own judgement, at some point you still excercised your judgement, when you decided to believe. You bought in. And you continue to do so every day. How can you feel secure that you did the right thing when you were twisted - from birth - out of righteousness?
That is a very fair question that I don't have a very good answer for.
ReplyDeleteAll I can come up with quickly is this. We're flawed yes, but our flaws are no so much that our perception is useless.
It's a difficult situation to try and figure out who has the secrets of the universe figured out if you were to just try and pick a religion. Because we're flawed, we might pick wrong, sure.
But I believe the tools for us to choose right exist. God gave us the Bible and the Church to spread his truth to all corners of the world for all people to hear. Prayer, contemplation and yes even a dose of research. But we cannot simply look inward for our morality and by that token judge the creator of the universe.
The choice to have faith comes with it, at least in my case, a notion I've never challenged seriously -- that God is good. I accepted that on faith probably subconsciously as a kid and the more I develop in my faith the more I'm convinced of it.
It's that big "evil" F-word again. Faith. I have faith that God is good. Faith that in my sincere search for him that he has helped guide me to the right choice and in that case faith that the Church and all that goes with it is right.
I can't say for sure why I picked Catholicism. Certainly I was raised in it as my family is Catholic, but I never had a Catholic friend until Alex so it wasn't friends. I looked around, albeit not so intensely. And I really only considered other Christian faiths. And I stayed Catholic.
It wasn't a well laid out argument, but moments of faith and personal experience that convinced me. I don't really know what else to add.
"That is a very fair question that I don't have a very good answer for."
ReplyDeleteAnd a question that you didn't even give pause to consider... When it comes to answers, you, naturally, already know what's important so this question doesn't hold anything of profit to you. It's just an interesting rhetorical obstacle to be explained away and thus overcome.
That's why Faith is an "evil" "F" word to me. Faith is the opposite of clear thinking, the opposite of calling a spade a spade. A person should be able to look at the slaughter of many thousands, including little babies and old people and say "clearly, this is wrong". You are unable do that, because you've mortgaged that part of your brain to God. You don't decide what's good or bad, the Church does it for you.
I just watched you have to contort yourself into a thousand positions of mental gymnastics to dismiss genocide. You can't say it didn't happen, and you can't say it's wrong, so you must say "I can't judge God, neither can you, and how dare you try". You have the balls to call Matt and I out for hubris because we believe that we can recognize atrocity for ourselves.
Please DO NOT, at this point, indulge in counter-productive self pity.
If you were a quiet kind of God-fearer, you doesn't want any beef, just wants to be left alone, and is perfectly aware that He's given up independence and autonomy in order to be a servant of God - these blogs wouldn't exist.
You are not that meek kinda guy. You are the guy who has to cast judgement on weak minded pagans and relativists, who must vocally advocate his Church. You're the loud-and-proud type.
So... say it loud and proud: "I am a slave". Slave is just another word for servant, afterall. And you freely admit that your own judgement cannot be trusted, even to pick an atrocity out of a line-up. "I am a slave", it's liberating really. It's exactly what God expects of you, obedience, not independence. "I am a slave". You can even add "and my master makes me happy", if you like. Stop wriggling around with explainations of your faith, and history and holy books, blah blah blah. Just come out with it: "I am a slave".
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBlogger John Stegeman said...
ReplyDeleteI endeavor to serve God. If you want to call me a slave, ok, I'm a slave.
No self pity here either. I enter these conversations freely.
"I endeavor to serve God. If you want to call me a slave, ok, I'm a slave."
ReplyDeleteSAY IT LOUD! I'm black and I'm proud!
That's not proud. That's written grumble. C'mon, back of the throat. Like you mean it. This isn't an admission, it's a TESTIMONY. All glory to God! Give all praise to him. He is the LORD. DOMINUS. MASTER OF THE HOUSE. Or am I wrong? Then don't be bashful. C'mon, the people in the back can't hear you.
Afterall, you do claim to value obedience to God, do you not? Then what's the harm of describing yourself as a slave, one who is fully obedient because of ownership (God claims full ownership of his creation)? The only thing being harmed is your pride, which is sin. Don't resist the caricature - embrace it. The true Christian spirit is obedience and service, after all. It's so much more honest then wriggling to pretend that you have some partial independence, which we all know (the LORD included) isn't true. You might be manager, but you're not partner or part-owner. God is the owner.
ReplyDeleteRight? Then say it.
I AM A SLAVE!
ReplyDeleteI hesitated with the word slave for a variety of issues. One is the connotation, the other is the Bible.
In Romans it says we are freed from sin by being enslaved by God, but then in the Gospel of John:
John 15:15 "No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you."
So any aspects of the word slavery do apply, so we can just roll with that.
I AM A SLAVE TO GOD, and I'm fine with that.
Meant to say many aspects, not any
ReplyDeleteI respect that statement. I respect the humility and commitment, because I know that most who call themselves Christians probably wouldn't abase themselves publicly like that, but would rather keep wriggling.
ReplyDeleteNaturally, I think the commitment and humility are misplaced, though. To disown your own innate sense of right and wrong for the sake of an idea (a grand idea, but still abstract and far removed from tangible, everyday life) is kind of a bird-in-the-hand/two-in-the-bush type thing.
Can you live this way though? Not just ignoring a millenia old atrocity, but actually living without judging God. It strikes me as a little reckless to give judgements in favor of God ("I'm so glad you're feeling better, it's surely a blessing!") a pass, while blocking any negative judgements of God. Any judgement of God's actions, or possible actions is wrong, because it's not something you can bestow. You are a slave, a fallen servant and to judge God's possible influence, for good or bad, is not the proper role of a servant.
Do you agree?
I walked out of the room for five minutes and came back to see you two have smashed all the furniture.
ReplyDeleteYou said I could have two friends over, and I didn't, because Joe couldn't make it! So I told Quagmire that we could make Kool-Aid instead of the other friend! Bonnie's WAY cooler than you, Joe gets to play video games!
ReplyDelete"Can you live this way though? Not just ignoring a millenia old atrocity, but actually living without judging God. It strikes me as a little reckless to give judgements in favor of God ("I'm so glad you're feeling better, it's surely a blessing!") a pass, while blocking any negative judgements of God. Any judgement of God's actions, or possible actions is wrong, because it's not something you can bestow. You are a slave, a fallen servant and to judge God's possible influence, for good or bad, is not the proper role of a servant."
ReplyDeleteCan I live without ever questioning and by extension judging God? Probably not.
I wonder why there is evil and I wonder why I'm not 6-4, 230 and playing pro sports and the list goes on.
But the key is that I have faith that what he is doing is just. When Jesus says he's told us what his father told him in that quote I posted, he's not talking about the whole shebang.
We don't know why God made the world, why it is the way it is etc. But we know he's got a plan. That salvation is the goal and victory over sin and death the endgame.
On some level I liken our role to that of a soldier. We might know the enemy is on the other side of the ridge, but the general has us marching a different direction. We don't know why, but if we're good soldiers we have faith that the general knows better than us what he's doing.
As for the positive side, God in essence commands us to praise him and while I thank God all the time, I rarely attribute any good event or bad one to him alone. Kelli's mom had that near death event, I thank God that she is alive, I don't say, surely it's a blessing or sign of God's favor. Does that distinction make sense?
Anyway I'm hungry...bye for now.
"As for the positive side, God in essence commands us to praise him and while I thank God all the time, I rarely attribute any good event or bad one to him alone. Kelli's mom had that near death event, I thank God that she is alive, I don't say, surely it's a blessing or sign of God's favor. Does that distinction make sense?"
ReplyDeleteSure. One is less certain than the other. But if you praise God, even with a degree of doubt as to whether it's really his action/intention, aren't you expressing your own judgement (flattering though it may be) on said action?
For that matter, what is the point of expressing praise if one's judgement is suspect? Just because it's giving glory to God shouldn't, in itself, give that a pass.
Westburo Baptists praise God for dead soldiers. How can we be sure that they're in the wrong? Not knowing God's mind (what with the sin and all), we should not rush to judgement. If we feel we MUST judge WBC, wouldn't it have to be on general terms: you should not presume to think that God influenced or approved of these deaths. And isn't such a general criticism also a criticism of any praise or thanks to God? Bottom line: is it all in or all out? Is any praise acceptable, or none?
Very fair point. I said before our judgement isn't to be totally discounted, but I don't believe that's an adequate answer.
ReplyDeleteLet me think a little more about this one.
There have been times in the past when you expressed a certain... suspicion? Of those without strong belief, because of the lack of "objective" morality. Relativists, in other words.
ReplyDeleteHopefully this has given you the perspective to see what folks like myself, who don't have faith, view you with the same suspicion, exactly BECAUSE of that "objective" morality.
You don't have the autonomy to judge any particular action for yourself, as long as Church/God has an interpretation on the matter.
If we three witnessed a pregnant woman being kicked in the stomach on the street, we'd all be shocked, appalled and disgusted. But you alone among us would be less than 100% certain that the shocking/appalling/disgusting act was wrong. Your judgements are ultimately decided by Holy Mother Church, as a proxy of God. It's possible, however unlikely, that any particular disgusting act could be interpreted as God's will, because of XYZ.
I've been meaning to give some responses and statements. I appologize for my slothfulness.
ReplyDelete"You are making yourself unable to understand the Christian position because you are making yourself to be the height of judgement and morality....If in fact, you are that, then you are totally right. If you believe you are that, you won't listen anyway."
I suspect I probably have a higher sense of morality than a fictional depiciton of God. I suspect I probably have a higher sense of morality than most of the authors and editors of the books in the Bible. After all, people who are surrounded by more harsh and unsavory conditions tend to develop more brutish myths, legends, and folklore. We in the United States are lucky have to have inherited a culture of leisure. We have the time to ponder what the Good Life actually ought to be. Bronze age texts are no longer needed to tell us what to do and I think we've made great strides towards a better understanding of human happiness (I tend to prefer utilitarianism. Moral acts are those which decrease suffering, and not necessarily just human suffering either).
If I may be candid, it truly does bother me that there is no such thing as an objective morality (at least not one which makes itself apparent). I wish I could say there was such a thing as an unquestionable moral code we could live by because it would make the ordeal significantly easier on us. Nevertheless, I recongnize the universe, being the cold and ugly bitch that she is, owes us nothing in terms of the answers we are looking for and it would be irresponsible of me to suspend my faculty of reason for the sake of providing a solution to the questions we don't know.
"On your last point, it sticks with sin. Our fallen nature distorts our perception. If you don't think it does, take a look at the believers who do just about whatever they want because they "feel" God wants us to be happy."
I really like how you placed quotation marks around the word feel, as though your faith is somehow of a more enlightened position than theirs. You can quote all the Bible passages and church leaders you want, but it ultimately comes down to how you and how they feel about God.