Does God operate at a lower standard of morality/ethics than he requires of us?

[Saint Steven]

Which makes me wonder: which atheists have you been reading or listening to lately?

It's been a while. But I do remember a debate where the atheist ate the Christian for lunch.
And the underdog resorted to character assassination in an attempt to get back in the game.
Quite a train wreck really. Logic won the debate. And the atheist played fair and respectfully.
Showed up his opponent in that category. Sad to say.

 

[Saint Steven]

God judgement is a judgement of love.

Is that a fact?
How does that work?

 

[Tolworth John]

If I offered someone an apple for free and they refused it, would it be godly behavior for me to incinerate them?

A strawman argument.

Abetter illistration would be. You have worked hard all your life to make a living, you have supported your children, given them love, care, an education etc etc.
Now as your life ends they reject every thing you stand for, reject every attempt by you to re establish communications. After your death they are disapointed to learn they have been left nothng.

 

[Tolworth John]

This however assumes salvation is based on human decision.

Salvation is from God, but we have to accept it.

 

[Tolworth John]

I don't see anyone on this topic making that claim.
To be clear, I believe God gave us all a conscience as a moral compass for godly morals/ethics.
Do you disagree?

In saying God is unfair/unjust to punish sinners is to implie that those sinners were actual 'good'.

We have a conscience, but if that conscience doesn't line up with God then it is faulty.

 

[Saint Steven]

Abetter illistration would be. You have worked hard all your life to make a living, you have supported your children, given them love, care, an education etc etc.
Now as your life ends they reject every thing you stand for, reject every attempt by you to re establish communications. After your death they are disapointed to learn they have been left nothng.

Is that love?
To take revenge on your own flesh and blood for not agreeing with your personal beliefs?
Nullifying their inheritance to punish them for having their own mind?
Do you suppose this would bring them closer to God?
What sort of tyrant would behave this way? Please don't say, "God."

 

[Saint Steven]

In saying God is unfair/unjust to punish sinners is to implie that those sinners were actual 'good'.

We have a conscience, but if that conscience doesn't line up with God then it is faulty.?

What did God say about everything he created on the sixth day?

How can our God-given conscience be faulty? Hopefully there was a warranty. - LOL

Genesis 1:31 NIV
God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It's been a while. But I do remember a debate where the atheist ate the Christian for lunch.
And the underdog resorted to character assassination in an attempt to get back in the game.
Quite a train wreck really. Logic won the debate. And the atheist played fair and respectfully.
Showed up his opponent in that category. Sad to say.

Perhaps, but being that I've seen dozens upon dozens of instances of this kind of thing, and for the fact that I eat Atheist books for breakfast, and for the fact that I have a degree that centered heavily on Social Philosophy, Ethics and Social Science, I'm probably going to have a different perspective on the supposed 'quality' of atheist gripes that now resonate through the world.

I doubt very much that 'logic' won a debate for which you only now have a dim recollection about, Steven. Which is good really since that might mean there's more exploration of Ethics and Logic for all of us to engage with ...

 

[Saint Steven]

Perhaps...

Reply should have stopped there... thanks.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Reply should have stopped there... thanks.

Why?

 

[ralliann]

I'm surprised that more Christians haven't gone into town with a flame thrower, letting it off all willy nilly, screaming "love your neighbor! Love your neighbor!"

More Christians? I would be surprised that any have at all, let alone more.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The ultimate question for which there is no answer. Right?

It's hard to say, Steven, since so much of what we think is "right or wrong, correct or incorrect" depends on the books and sources we've each individually read and as to which forms of Logic or Reason are in play at any given time in any given discussion ...

So, who's right in Absolute terms where Ethics and Morality are concerned? I can only answer by asking: "Who knows who's right?"

 

[Saint Steven]

The obvious answer is no.
But I suppose that depends on who you ask.

Of course, it would be unusual for someone to state it as bluntly as I have, but the inference is epidemic. IMHO

My favorite example is...

Some other examples would be misunderstandings about The Elect, Predestination, and the Broad and Narrow way.
cc: @MMXX input invited.

The select group known as "The Elect" certainly has a biblical basis, but leaves those paying attention with questions. By definition those not "elected" have been either overlooked or discarded. Same with predestination. If some were predestined to life, what were the rest predestined to? (by default)

James admonishes us against showing favoritism. So how do we square this with what we hope is true about God, he is no respecter of persons. If so, how can there be an Elect, or those predestined to destruction?

And what about the Broad and Narrow way? Few there be that find it? Making salvation seem like a high-stakes game of hide and seek. A puzzle that most will never solve, leading to their own eternal destruction.

Same with "free will" Decisionism as the determiner of our destination in the afterlife. Which assumes that everyone has had an equal opportunity to hear the "message" and respond positively. When those that believe this are pressed, they will make allowances for those who have NOT had an equal opportunity. Thus unraveling their own inflexible doctrines.

Such stances put God in a bad light, calling his standard of morals and ethics into question. What's wrong with this picture?

 

[Fervent]

Some other examples would be misunderstandings about The Elect, Predestination, and the Broad and Narrow way.
cc: @MMXX input invited.

The select group known as "The Elect" certainly has a biblical basis, but leaves those paying attention with questions. By definition those not "elected" have been either overlooked or discarded. Same with predestination. If some were predestined to life, what were the rest predestined to? (by default)

James admonishes us against showing favoritism. So how do we square this with what we hope is true about God, he is no respecter of persons. If so, how can there be an Elect, or those predestined to destruction?

And what about the Broad and Narrow way? Few there be that find it? Making salvation seem like a high-stakes game of hide and seek. A puzzle that most will never solve, leading to their own eternal destruction.

Same with "free will" Decisionism as the determiner of our destination in the afterlife. Which assumes that everyone has had an equal opportunity to hear the "message" and respond positively. When those that believe this are pressed, they will make allowances for those who have NOT had an equal opportunity. Thus unraveling their own inflexible doctrines.

Such stances put God in a bad light, calling his standard of morals and ethics into question. What's wrong with this picture?

The same could be said of a God that doesn't set boundaries and enforce consequences, so what you're dealing with is an issue of framing rather than an issue of morality. In your question, you have placed yourself in the role of God's judge....a dangerous place to be. Certainly, God's morality and ethics will be greater than human morality and ethics, but that does not mean that humans grasping in the dark with limited knowledge are able to make grand pronouncements enforcing their opinions on morality on God. We must wrestle with God as He has chosen to reveal Himself, which at times presents difficulties for our opinions of morality. Faith is the recognition that even when we struggle to see the morality in God's action(for instance, commanding the Israelites to commit genocide) that ultimatly it is God who is in the right and the issue is with our knowledge. So to begin with the premise that your morality is correct and so must alter what is revealed within the text of Scripture is a serious error.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

The obvious answer is no.
But I suppose that depends on who you ask.

Of course, it would be unusual for someone to state it as bluntly as I have, but the inference is epidemic. IMHO

My favorite example is what Jesus taught us about godly behavior toward our enemies. See Matthew 5:43-48 below.
If we are required to love our enemies, why would God incinerate his enemies? Sounds like a double standard.
And worse than that, a lower standard for God. Which puts pagans and tax collectors (traitors) at a higher level.
That can't be right.

Does God operate at a lower standard of morality/ethics than he requires of us?

Matthew 5:43-48 NIV
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

The verse ends off with be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect. This also means to imitate God in what he does. This can be understood then to love your enemies as God loves his. Now, how does God love his enemies?

Matthew 13:29-30

"29‘No,’ he said, ‘if you pull the weeds now, you might uproot the wheat with them. 30Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat into my barn.’ "

Look how God treats the weeds. He gives them time they do not deserve. In this way he showing them love, by being patient with them even when they do not deserve it. But that patience only goes so far. When the time is up he will burn them. Thus you can see how God can be both loving to his enemies and burn them later.

 

[Saint Steven]

The verse ends off with be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect. This also means to imitate God in what he does. This can be understood then to love your enemies as God loves his. Now, how does God love his enemies?

Does this mean we should incinerate our enemies? Thus imitating God and what he will do to his enemies?

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

Does this mean we should incinerate our enemies? Thus imitating God and what he will do to his enemies?

No, we are to love our enemies as God loves his, not punish them as God punishes his. We love them by being patient with them as He is with his enemies. As for vengence, it is his to take, so the punishment aspect is to be given up to the Lord.

 

[Saint Steven]

Paul describes it as great patience, not a minor thing like delayed burning. It takes a lot for God to be that patient with them, and thus it is quite a bit of love they do not deserve.

Why would it take "a lot for God to be that patient with them"?
Is he easily angered? That doesn't sound very patient at all.

Why would any human not deserve to be loved?
Didn't God give his only begotten to redeem all of humankind?

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

 

[Hmm]

We must wrestle with God as He has chosen to reveal Himself, which at times presents difficulties for our opinions of morality. Faith is the recognition that even when we struggle to see the morality in God's action(for instance, commanding the Israelites to commit genocide) that ultimatly it is God who is in the right and the issue is with our knowledge. So to begin with the premise that your morality is correct and so must alter what is revealed within the text of Scripture is a serious error.

His perfect revelation to us was Jesus Christ. OT stories about Israelites committing genocide should not be put on a par with this. The Bible is the history of the Israelite's complex relationship with God and they often misunderstood the nature of this relationship. They may have believed that a genocide they committed was carried out on God's command but that does not mean it was. When looked at through the lens of Jesus it's clear enough that this was merely one of these misunderstandings. It's not rocket science.

 

[Fervent]

His perfect revelation to us was Jesus Christ. OT stories about Israelites committing genocide should not be put on a par with this. The Bible is the history of the Israelite's complex relationship with God and they often misunderstood the nature of this relationship. They may have believed that a genocide they committed was carried out on God's command but that does not mean it was. When looked at through the lens of Jesus it's clear enough that this was merely one of these misunderstandings. It's not rocket science.

The same Jesus who said "Those who will not have me be king over them, slay them in my presence"? Jesus is the full revelation of God, but we learn about Jesus from the texts about Him...and what did He say about the Scripture the Jews poured over? "They testify about me." So if Jesus Himself declared the OT stories of the Jews testified about Him, who are you to disagree?