Why don't the faithful hold God morally accountable?

Post Reply New Topic

Ragtime. I really say names, but geez man, give the girl some room to think.

I have. My "I understand" was my final post responding to her. I saw that my time to speak with her was over. She had said everyone who calls themselves "Christian" is Christian, and I just wanted to bring up that fallacy here, because it is constantly being implied by others.

Yes, do quote more, I'll see which ones I can answer. And please use this: http://www.breslov.com/ref/Deuteronomy13.htm
or
http://www.breslov.com/bible/Leviticus.htm

Those translations tend to be more accurately translated from the hebrew then whatever version you are quoting.


For Leviticus 21:9

They ment it literally at first, and one cannot walk around that verse, it is troubling.
The Sadducees believed in literal burning, but the Pharisees believed only in burning of the soul. Some time 2300 years ago, after they came back from babylon, a priest in the second temple era did witness a daughter of a priest burned for becoming a whore, but that is the only example. It's never happened since then, and has taken a stance against that literal interpretation by revising it in the talmud.

The way it is understood is that is merely an indicator of the severity, and how seriously the torah takes the issue.



For (Deuteronomy 13:13-19

They are the first generation in setting up the Jewish nation, most of them are very pagan themselves, this was the only way to shape them into the vehicle for monotheism that they will eventually become. They had to wipe out those pagans, who, described in the previous chapter, sacrificed their children to their false Gods. They were primitive, engaged in sex with their syblings, or animals, were ethically FOC's (Fresh Out of the Cave), etc.

The ending of that group of versus ends with the concept: You do what is right in Gods eyes, not what is right in your own eyes. In setting up the Jewish Republic, this was the only way to condition this people into the right ethical model that can then go forth and spread the torah to the world. In other words... this is for the Jew, there isn't much for us to learn from it other then this was how God inculcated Gods values into this group of people to purify them so they can carry out a specific task for God. I can't think of any examples off hand where this policy was carried out, and again, the way its always been understood in Jewish Rabbinic teaching is that it is only to teach us the severity of the matter, and for us to treat it with immense seriousness.

I guess I can't speak for others, or for an old thread I haven't seen, but almost every time I have seen someone "root for satan" it's generally not meant literally. Even in the Black Metal community, which as far as I know has the most satanic related beliefs. They use the term satan figuratively, not literally.

I don't know about you, but I've never heard someone with any sort of social/political merit come out and say:
"Infants/people should be killed in the name of satan"
"Go out and cheat on your spouse because satan said so"
"Lie all the time because satan wants you to"
"Stealing is okay because our lord satan allows it"
(and no I am not referring to tribes that worship "false idols")
I also wasn't aware that pagan automatically meant "satan worshipper"

Yes, people do these things, BUT they do not do them in the name of Satan, or in praise of him. Yes, satan may encourage these actions but he is not associated with these actions by any of the criminals that commit them (yes, i know there are exceptions). And even the people who do these crimes (other than sociopaths/psycopaths) knew that they were wrong to commit the crime, but did it anyway. Which I guess you could say is satan's doing, but how could that truly be known unless the criminal says that is why he/she did it?

The term in Judaism for devil or satan simply means opposer. Christianity gave it the demonic character that it then took on later. I agree with you on the way you frame it, but I also partially agree with the Christian, though more with you.

I only partially agree with Christians because Satan in the Christian faith is understood be the source of all evil, and anything that takes you away from God is also attributed to the influence of Satan. If one has that world view, then it is easy to see how easily everything and anything is fitted into this context. To them, even if the criminal is doing it for a motivation other then to please Satan, Satan and God are in an eternal dual for the fate of humanity, and all of our are actions are either influenced more so by one or the other.

I believe some shady character of the sort exists, but plays little to no role in life, and the same with God. Most things that happen in life are at the hands of people, nature, circumstance, and chance or luck.

I understand that, but just like the term god, it was used to refer a particular deity/entity/whatever term you prefer, which is how it was used in his post. And with the way the battle between god and satan is usually told; if satan is just that little part of your brain that tells you to do bad things, wouldn't that mean that god is also just the part of your brain that tells you to do the right thing?

Sorry I am being poopy, I just realized I have an infected tooth!!

No, really. It sounds like a simple question, doesn't it? One that might admit an easy answer? But it doesn't. The best one I've gotten was from our very own Shrox, who (to paraphrase) said, "He came down to Earth to let us kill Him - sounds like moral accountability to me," (a note to Shrox and others: I'm paraphrasing because I'm too lazy to hunt for the exact quote in the archives. My apologies, and I'll hunt it down if you would like me to).

The essential question is this: why is God considered just, moral, and/or merciful when many of his supposed teachings, commandments and actions are unjust (eternal punishments for finite transgressions, slaughter in response to relatively small provocation, commanding his followers to murder gentiles in order to steal and/or rape their women), unmerciful (creation of suffering in response to original sin, death/hell in general) or just straight up immoral (go ahead, check out the OT's policies on rape. No, go on. I will wait while you read)? Starting from a standpoint that God exists and actually Does Stuff with His great omnipotence, why is it that those who choose to believe in Him fail to hold Him morally accountable for His own actions? Aside from Shrox's (rather refreshing) answer, the only one I've ever gotten boils down to, "Well, He works in mysterious ways," which sounds to me like a cop-out method of avoiding thought on one's own theology. Can anyone give me an answer on this? Anyone at all?

It's always a good idea to give your loyalty to the strongest side regardless of your attitude towards it. You'll last longer that way.

Why should one hold God accountable when the majority of our suffering are not natural, but rather, manmade...

If one is fair, then simply ask yourself that, does most of your suffering come from natural causes, like your autism, or the death of a relative due to cancer, or a tornado, or does it come from other human beings, who talk behind your back, who'll mistreat the ones you love, take your wealth, or rob you of your dignity, etc.

If God held humanity accountable since Cain, and despite a flood, we still act the way we do, then if we destroy this world or each other, we are responsible for that, and does not reflect on God.

Sure it does. Because it reflect on God's willingness to allow humanity to destroy what he has created, along with themselves.

As for most of our suffering being manmade, you cannot control the words and deeds of others. So for that God could be held accountable for allowing people to behave this way without punishing them immediately for it.

So lets suppose the universe had a creator.

Like the rest of universe we are his creations.

So working backwards we can surmise that this creator created us on purpose with the traits we have.

One of these traits is mortality.

Even if you live to be a 100 you still die- a victim of God's planned obsolesence.

So does that make you a "murder victim"?

We are not immortal- so does that make god the biggest mass murderer of all time?

On the other hand there would be no people for god to murder if he hadnt created them in the first place. And none would survive as long as we do without having a habitable planet created by god to live on. So even ifyou dub god the world's worse mass murderer he cant be compared to Ted Bundy or to Hitler or stalin et al.

And thats even in a religion without an afterlife.
In a religion with an after life even if god strikes you dead before your time you dont really die.

So comparing the morality of a universe-ruling diety to that of a mortal human is impossible. Its peaches and pears.


There is no violation of internal logic for a diety to be judged differently than the inhabitants of his universe.

There are plenty of possible angles of attack on religion, but this question is just plain juvenile.

If God gave us this world and the freedoms to do whatever we wanted, accountable to him when this life is over, then we are responsible for ourselves and the way we conduct ourselves during this lifetime for the rewards of the next(if you follow that religious understanding). The religious humanist tasks them self then to make this world a better place, and so does the secular humanist, but the secular humanist does so because this is it, there is no after life and we might as well make this world a better place because there is no life after this one.

If it is all Gods fault, and our misbehavior is his doing for simply allowing us to do evil, then let me remind you that we are made in his image, and therefore granted a good many of Gods powers, to create, destroy, organize, imagine, build, and triumph over both nature and our own human nature, and that everything great and amazing that comes forward from this creation(us) is then therefore also to Gods credit. Which is fine by me, but I know it won't sit well with you. It's so easy for one to stack all the cards against God, but if God is to be accountable for all our downfalls and all the bad things that we are capable of, and all the bad things we do, then certainly, we can also then say that everything Good that has come about from humanity is also to Gods credit. But no one who likes to put God on trial for the crappy ways we are to each other ever acknowledges that. Evil argues against God, but doesn't that also mean that Goodness argues for God?

You can't control the words and deeds of others, unless you are their dictator, but you can fight for a better world where people are taught these great ethics of how to treat others better, and, one generation at a time, we can make a better humanity by inculcating these truths into every passing generation.

So, America should have never challenged Britain to gain independence?

Personally, I've always wondered why there is so much anger against God from non-believers in Him, yet they have absolutely zero problem with Satan. Satan and his angels, whether you believe in him/them or not, are the primary influences toward pain and suffering in this world. So, non-believers in him not even having a theoretical problem with Satan always strikes me as interesting, particularly when I hear so much vitriol uttered against God by the same people. I could pick from so many examples, but Richard Dawkins comes first to my mind: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” It is exceedingly rare -- if not without parallel -- for a fictional character to inspire such a level of feeling.
I've never heard Satan even described as, say, "bad" by a non-believer. It's just really interesting to me. The author of the Holocaust and all other pain, suffering, and death, not considered even "bad". But God, the creator of us all, and the giver of life (air, food, water, etc, etc, etc, etc) to us all, who expects simple obedience and respect, He's called vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser, misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, and capriciously malevolent.

I'm not confused by this at all, but on the surface it is quite odd. And it is an incorrect reaction by them, to be sure, even though it's understandable.