If God asks....

[mandelduke]

How would God go about doing that? Would it be an audible voice?

The only time God ever spoke to me in an audible voice was when I was a sleep driving off a mountain. He spoke to me two times in a dream. All other times he spoke to my heart. Mainly he speaks to your heart.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

If God ask me to kill someone I would kill them in a New York second. And if God had not told me not to kill the person that killed my 18 year old daughter, I was going to kill him very slowly.

What if the person who killed your daughter justified it with; "God commanded me to do it." The fact that you wouldn't stop and think about what is being asked of you before you act on it is a little frightening and doesn't show an ounce of moral judgement. God never intended us to be mindless robots who blindly follow orders.

 

[Skavau]

No

Why?

Do you think God is able to order anything and still be called moral?

 

[Skavau]

It is not my hypothetical, and I want to apologize for one thing before we continue. I assumed, and I should not have, that the hypothetical you presented settled the issue that the Christian God existed.

The hypothetical I presented assumes for argument that God does exist. But God existing is completely different from whether God is worthy of obedience.

Along with that assumption, I carried over certain principles that I personally attribute to God, but I did so only those principles that I figured to be largely accepted by the Christian community. For one, that God is the Creator of everything, and since He did create everything, He created morality. He created Good.

If that was not your intention with the hypothetical, I apologize for the mistake. I probably should not have butted in.

My intention of the hypothetical was to query just how far people will go when it comes to obeying God. A lot of theists talk with great conviction about how moral God is and how superior a world view that entrenches morality on his existence is. They say that it derives from God, that his existence somehow objectifies and codifies morality to a binary black and white standard.

So it must be asked of course: Does that mean you'd literally do anything for God? Does that mean you'd literally follow any order, no matter how obscene or atrocious it might appear to be? If you really would then it would have to be asked what you think morality is because it would have almost no resemblance or relevance to concern and compassion towards humanity but only concern with God, and would thus be a glorified slave-master relationship.

 

[Skavau]

For God? No, he created life and I suppose he in a way takes lives away every single day. In my opinion, God can't do right or wrong.
Who would hold him accountable for his actions? Who's to say what's the right thing for a deity to do?

Anyone who can. Anyone who does an action can be judged.

However, for humans, this would be terrible. I would have to think it to be a test from God. He clearly says don't kill in the Ten Commandments, then commands you personally, to kill people. Isn't that kinda like the whole, "tree of knowledge, Adam and Eve" sorta thing?

Personally, I couldn't really kill anyone because I oppose killing for almost any reason unless they pose a real threat to my life or my family's. Any voice that tells me to do otherwise would be noted to a mental health professional.

I don't understand killing in the name of God, but then again, I don't understand killing of any kind.

The hypothetical assumes that the voice talking to you really is God and really is asking you to kill for him.

 

[Skavau]

If God ask me to kill someone I would kill them in a New York second. And if God had not told me not to kill the person that killed my 18 year old daughter, I was going to kill him very slowly.

This thread is very revealing. Certainly showing up the foul notion of "objective morality".

 

[Carmella Prochaska]

No, it is not wrong. God is entitled to step outside the laws He set for humanity. If he decides to destroy a particular group of people, it is usually as punishment for wickedness & disobedience eg. Sodom & Gomorrah, the global flood of 2304 BC. Sometimes he destroys the wicked because they have outnumbered the good & are basically spiritually decaying as recorded in the ancient scriptures by some of the prophets. Oftentimes he used Israel to destroy the wicked, pagan people such as the Amalekites, Hittites & others. If God did not intervene in certain points in the Earth's past, there probably would have been no more believers left; paganism & other occultic practices, for instance, tend to permeate a society rather quickly.

 

[Rilke's Granddaughter]

No, it is not wrong. God is entitled to step outside the laws He set for humanity.

Why? Doesn't that make us more moral than God?

If he decides to destroy a particular group of people, it is usually as punishment for wickedness & disobedience eg. Sodom & Gomorrah, the global flood of 2304 BC.

And kills all the innocents along with them? God who can do all things? Really?

Sometimes he destroys the wicked because they have outnumbered the good & are basically spiritually decaying as recorded in the ancient scriptures by some of the prophets.

No evidence of this. The Israelites whined constantly about how awful everything was. Didn't necessarily mean that it was.

Oftentimes he used Israel to destroy the wicked, pagan people such as the Amalekites, Hittites & others.

Unless they had iron chariots, of course. Remember: god is powerless against iron chariots.

If God did not intervene in certain points in the Earth's past, there probably would have been no more believers left; paganism & other occultic practices, for instance, tend to permeate a society rather quickly.

Got any proof of that?

 

[Skavau]

No, it is not wrong. God is entitled to step outside the laws He set for humanity.

He's able to but why does that mean he is "entitled" to? Because of his power? Because of his position? Just what do you think morality is anyway?

If he decides to destroy a particular group of people, it is usually as punishment for wickedness & disobedience eg. Sodom & Gomorrah, the global flood of 2304 BC. Sometimes he destroys the wicked because they have outnumbered the good & are basically spiritually decaying as recorded in the ancient scriptures by some of the prophets. Oftentimes he used Israel to destroy the wicked, pagan people such as the Amalekites, Hittites & others. If God did not intervene in certain points in the Earth's past, there probably would have been no more believers left; paganism & other occultic practices, for instance, tend to permeate a society rather quickly.

If you're going to say that God has committed genocide to maintain the level of believers in him and then argue that as a good reason for mass murder you're not getting any support from here. For shame.

 

[mandelduke]

What if the person who killed your daughter justified it with; "God commanded me to do it." The fact that you wouldn't stop and think about what is being asked of you before you act on it is a little frightening and doesn't show an ounce of moral judgement. God never intended us to be mindless robots who blindly follow orders.

Maybe you cannot read God never ask me to kill anyone, I was going to kill out of pure hate. God stopped me from doing that. But if God or the president asks me to kill I would do so because of honor and duty, has nothing to do with moral judgment.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

No, it is not wrong. God is entitled to step outside the laws He set for humanity. If he decides to destroy a particular group of people, it is usually as punishment for wickedness & disobedience eg. Sodom & Gomorrah, the global flood of 2304 BC. Sometimes he destroys the wicked because they have outnumbered the good & are basically spiritually decaying as recorded in the ancient scriptures by some of the prophets. Oftentimes he used Israel to destroy the wicked, pagan people such as the Amalekites, Hittites & others. If God did not intervene in certain points in the Earth's past, there probably would have been no more believers left; paganism & other occultic practices, for instance, tend to permeate a society rather quickly.

I think believers who regard divinely ordained genocide as righteous when it is ostensibly divinely ordained automatically give up any pretence of standing on some moral high ground. It takes some convoluted rationalising to pretend that a deity which orders the killing of innocent children is somehow worthy of being praised as 'morally perfect'.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Maybe you cannot read God never ask me to kill anyone, I was going to kill out of pure hate. God stopped me from doing that. But if God or the president asks me to kill I would do so because of honor and duty, has nothing to do with moral judgment.

You would kill unquestioningly because of some misguided sense of duty?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Anyone who can. Anyone who does an action can be judged.


The hypothetical assumes that the voice talking to you really is God and really is asking you to kill for him.

Well hopefully someone else understood what I said because you seem to have completely ignored the point I was making.

 

[Skavau]

Well hopefully someone else understood what I said because you seem to have completely ignored the point I was making.

What did I miss, pray tell?

 

[Illuminaughty]

I think the real problem shows up when people believe that God occasionally gives humans the same exemption too. It's one thing to say that God can kill children and it's still moral. I don't understand the reasoning behind it but it's not something I would be really worried about someone believing. The problem comes in when people think humans can have that same exemption from morality if they are following his will. Couldn't God just use a magical lightning bolt or something like that anyway? Why does he need humans to kill for him?

 

[Skavau]

I think the real problem comes in when people believe that God occasionally gives humans the same exemption too. It's one thing to say that God can kill children and it's still moral. I don't understand the reasoning behind it but it's not something I would be really worried about someone believing.

I would.

It would then become a question of why they think that, because odds are they think it because they would grant God the right to do anything. This would mean that by their own argument, if God asked them to kill they would do it.

 

[Elioenai26]

I would.

It would then become a question of why they think that, because odds are they think it because they would grant God the right to do anything. This would mean that by their own argument, if God asked them to kill they would do it.

What does the word God signify to you?

 

[Skavau]

What does the word God signify to you?

Not answering anything by you until you answer the OP.

 

[Elioenai26]

If God orders the killing of a group of people, no it is not wrong, it is right.

 

[Skavau]

If God orders the killing of a group of people, no it is not wrong, it is right.

God to me is nothing. I am an atheist. I by definition reject any reason to believe in any God(s). How I respond to other theists when they talk of God depends very much on their definition of God. I can recognise and adapt to definitions of God given to me and apply discussion from there.

Why would it always be right if God ordered the killing of a group of people?