I would NOT do God's will if he were immoral

[MaxWeiss]

This was inspired by tomdemaine's post.

I would happily do god's bidding if he showed me he was in fact god via a miracle or two, and gave me some good things to do to help the world. Or even just to spread the word, since you know, he's really real, and people ought to know about it. And since apparently not believing also sends you to hell for eternity, it would seem pretty pressing to me to convert people I love. Although, I would ask him "WTF is with hell" if he's such a nice guy, there's not much I can do about it, so I'd just go on preaching.

I would not, however, commit any immoral acts which did not have something good come from them in the material world. I would kill a guy if god showed me that he was about to kill some other people and the only way to stop him was by killing him. But I wouldn't kill him just on god's word that he was bad. If he is bad, surely he will try to do bad things, and I can be in position to witness his attempt and stop it, thus both showing proof of his badness and also killing him. There would be no reason for me to act prior to this, unless god had been showing me this for some time and I had built up trust in his decisions AND it was clear that the time wasted by waiting would allow for another crime to be committed.

Similarly, I would not commit any immoral acts even if good would come from them. I of course define my morality solely on how much good comes from my actions, so that is a bit of a useless explanation. Well, let's have a few examples to clarify what I mean, since I suck at communicating. First, let's say god tells me that the new Jesus will be born if I rape some woman who would not otherwise have sex with me. I would absolutely not do that, under any circumstances.

Similarly, I would not kill my child as a testament of my faith.

God asking either of those would be deplorable and I would not hesitate to tell him so and implore him to set a better example for his creation.

Do you all think this is wrong, evil, or sinful?

[tame_deuces]

For you it probably makes sense, but it all hinges on your definitions of evil, sinful, bad, good, immoral, deplorable which like the rest of us' views are probably fairly debatable.

For example in your example: Ff you refuse to rape a woman to allow for a messiah to be born, then you are putting your own moral view and her fate above the rest of humanity's potential for eternal salvation - sounds like a very selfish act to me. Isn't it ok for 2 people to suffer so the rest can be saved - surely it would in no way put the world 'worse off' than it is today?

Moral debate is never easy.

[surftheiop]

Im pretty sure God's morals are more important than your "morals"

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Im pretty sure God's morals are more important than your "morals"

[/ QUOTE ]
Please show me the proof that a God, should it exist, is benevolent or interested in the greater good. I can't think of a single reason they would be. If you look at the Christian bible, that's overwhelmingly not the case.

Also, the foundation of free will (and the very idea that humans can be free agents) rest on the notion that justice, morality and in a broader sense, structure, exist independently of God, and that we can come to valid insights on our own.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Im pretty sure God's morals are more important than your "morals"

[/ QUOTE ]

I know cause might makes right amirite?

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Im pretty sure God's morals are more important than your "morals"

[/ QUOTE ]

I know cause might makes right amirite?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good insight! Let's fight in the night out of spite for the blight by the site where the kite hit the light.

[madnak]

I think this is the most courageous and the most logical position. It may also be the most correct position (if we were to learn that a wrathful God does exist, that God could very well be demiurgic). Of course, it would be a [censored] situation to be in, under the imminent threat of hell.

[surftheiop]

By most definitions of God it is imposible for God to do wrong. God invented the concept of right and wrong and gave it to humans.

Now if we are talking about some sort of "weak" god who didnt invent the universe and everything in it (including morality) then maybe you have a case

[Splendour]

quote: Similarly, I would not kill my child as a testament of my faith.


If this is some kind of glancing stab at the crucifixion of Jesus I'd just like to note that most religious people don't see it like that. God knows how to reconcile the problem of sin for mankind. Its through the person of his perfect and blameless Son. God knows if his Son can do what he did that all of mankind that believe on Jesus will be reconciled to God. Jesus as a man had free will. In the Garden of Gethesmane he prays a prayer that not his will but that his father's will be done. Why does he allow his father's will to be substituted for his own? Because he knows God is good, he loves God and he loves his fellow men. He didn't seek primacy. He could have refused to do what he did and stayed as the only child of God, but instead he made all who believed on him fellow brothers and sisters as "children of God". Why? Because "man has no greater love than to give his life for a friend". God in sending his Son knew it was only a temporary situation. That his Son could do it, that his Son would be resurrected. In effect his Son could die a physical but not a spiritual death and prove that God can defeat death. Jesus is now much higher than any angel in heaven.

If it simplifies things think of God as the father of a fireman. A fireman knows he can get killed doing what he does but he does it anyways. The father of the fireman knows its a risky occupation for his son but he's proud of him. In the case of God he knew he was getting his son back in even better than his original condition and he was getting a lot more "children" along with him.

[Sephus]

[ QUOTE ]
quote: Similarly, I would not kill my child as a testament of my faith.


If this is some kind of glancing stab at the crucifixion of Jesus I'd just like to note that most religious people don't see it like that.

[/ QUOTE ]