Morality vs. deity

[Tuddrussell]

If God, or a god you happen to worship/respect came to you and ordered you to do something against your nature (like say: kill, rape, torture etc...) or face eternal damnation/the wrath of the gods, would you hold firm to your beliefs and defy a direct order from a god, or would you harden your heart, and draw your blade/unzip your pants?

I am just curious, I don't mean to offend anybody. I personally would never do anything that went against my code of honour, though it would hurt deeply to defy my god, or goddess... I would do so in a heartbeat. As such I pray that day shall never come. Blessed be.

[OnceConvinced]

I have learnt something significant over the last few months. Christians believe that if you aren't a Christian then you are going to be manipulated by the devil, that you are going to wallow in sin, that you will have no morals. Last year my girlfriend and I broke up. I determined that I was going to make up for all the time I wasted as a youth being a good Christian and trying to please a non-existant God. I decided to go out and have some fun. Meet lots of women and have lots of sex. Do lots of fornicating.

Just before Christmas I hit the jackpot and found myself dating three women. No kidding. Three! I thought "Wow, I've always wanted to be in this situation! It's a dream come true." And I figured "yeah, I'm gonna keep seeing these three women for a while and have my fun and then pick one to have a serious relationship with." You know what? I couldn't do it. I just couldn't bring myself to see someone behind another women's back. I couldn't just use women for sex. It just grated against my morals and principles (and I am well and truly an ex-Christian now). It just ate away at me for about three days. So I picked one and let the other two down as gently as I could and felt a lot better afterwards.

Now someone please try to tell me that because I'm no longer a Christian I no longer have morals, I'm now a tool of Satan. To me this is further evidence that man doesn't need God for morals.

So bringing this back around to the thread topic, I'd have to say that my morals will stand firm in the face of God telling me to do something against those morals. God would have to threaten me with torture or death before I wold buckle.

[MagusYanam]

Christians believe that if you aren't a Christian then you are going to be manipulated by the devil, that you are going to wallow in sin, that you will have no morals.

Not true in my case. spetey, the guy who introduced me to these forums, is an atheist and one of the most moral people I've met. The entire point of morality is that all people are capable of having it to some degree or other, and agnostics and atheists often tend to take moral issues more seriously than people who believe them to be dictated to them by God.

So bringing this back around to the thread topic, I'd have to say that my morals will stand firm in the face of God telling me to do something against those morals. God would have to threaten me with torture or death before I wold buckle.

Well, hey, power to you.

Just because I subscribe to Kierkegaard's idea of 'faith' doesn't mean everyone can or should.

[cnorman18]

Okay, looks like I'm the first to put 'deity' over 'morality', and it looks like I'll be facing some stiff opposition, but that's fine.

Perhaps I have an unfair advantage. Since my religion teaches that the best and perhaps the only way to serve God is to use and trust my own rational thought and moral judgment to the best of my ability - and, not incidentally, specifically to distrust miraculous voices and apparitions - this situation is not possible.

Before you ask; if it were possible, one trusts one's own judgment and not that of a deity with, apparently, less moral sense than oneself. Cf. Abraham's bargaining, some would say arguing, with God over the fate of Sodom in Genesis. In the Jewish religion, NOTHING excuses one from applying one's own moral judgment. "I vas chust followink orders" doesn't work for us, even if the orders come from God.

Well, let's look at a more problematic story, though. Nothing was being demanded of Abraham in the Sodom and Gomorrah story more than 'hear me out', and nothing more of Lot than 'pack up and leave'. What about when God instructs Abraham to take his son Isaac to Moria to be sacrificed as a burnt offering? Abraham does it - everything but actually killing and burning the poor kid (who is spared at the last minute)! From the moralistic point of view you present, we must condemn Abraham as a murderer and his action as infanticide! He had no way of knowing that that sheep would appear. At the very least, we must deem him insane.

It may not surprise you to learn that that is precisely the view of many Jews, including many rabbis. One strand of Jewish thought about the Akeidah, as we call it, is that Abraham should have told God to stuff it. Another, related, idea is that this was a test for Abraham, and he failed it.

Remember that Abraham is NOT held up as a great, infallible hero and good guy in Genesis. He tried to pass off his wife as his sister - twice - for purely cowardly reasons, and seems to have had his share of character flaws. It's unwise to presume that ANY story in the Torah is presented as a positive example of the morality demanded by God, even if the text says so. Trying to find a moral code in the Bible without reference to what Jewish tradition says about the passage in question makes no sense. Would you assume you understand the moral lessons of, say, Hopi myths and legends without asking a Hopi about them, and presumably a Hopi who was thought to have some understanding of them himself?

I said that those were two of the strands of Jewish thought on the subject. There are many, and we believe that all are worth thinking about. That's why we include multiple interpretations and even multiple rulings on the meaning of Jewish law; since no one can know the will of God, we must look for truth and value in our own thought.

But we can never actually know the will of God. If I were presented with something that I could not reconcile as a hallucination, as a command directly from God, I hope I would do it, even if it went against the entirety of my moral being, even if it meant sacrificing myself.

And I realise this must seem like lunacy, but from the outside faith always looks like lunacy. It isn't rational.

On the contrary; resisting irresistible power looks more like lunacy to me. But loony or not, it's the right thing to do.

Think of it this way; if some government official ordered you to murder an infant, you'd refuse, right? Even if it meant you were going to jail?

The difference in the power of the commanding official, and in the consequences of disobedience, between some government official and God is only one of degree. The morality involved is the same. If you KNOW something is wrong, it's cowardly to do it just because some powerful personage tells you to.

McCulloch, TuddRussell and probably you would likely have to condemn me as a madman. As ethical as you are, I would expect nothing less. I would do so for myself if I were placed in such a situation.

But that's the burden of creating your own values, and then holding them up to the power that created you in the hope that they will be accepted. But it's a hope that exists in fear and trembling, since - as you remarked in the other thread - we cannot know God, never fully.

And shouldn't we have the courage of our convictions, and "hold up our values" even to God, as opposed to abandoning them when so commanded? As noted before, Abraham did. So did Moses; he argued with God more than once.

In Jewish tradition, we have a covenant with God; that means a contract, and both sides have obligations under it. We are perfectly within our rights to argue with God about what is moral, and in fact we are morally obligated - according to the principles taught us by God himself, in our tradition - to do so.

[Goat]

Okay, looks like I'm the first to put 'deity' over 'morality', and it looks like I'll be facing some stiff opposition, but that's fine.

Perhaps I have an unfair advantage. Since my religion teaches that the best and perhaps the only way to serve God is to use and trust my own rational thought and moral judgment to the best of my ability - and, not incidentally, specifically to distrust miraculous voices and apparitions - this situation is not possible.

Before you ask; if it were possible, one trusts one's own judgment and not that of a deity with, apparently, less moral sense than oneself. Cf. Abraham's bargaining, some would say arguing, with God over the fate of Sodom in Genesis. In the Jewish religion, NOTHING excuses one from applying one's own moral judgment. "I vas chust followink orders" doesn't work for us, even if the orders come from God.

Well, let's look at a more problematic story, though. Nothing was being demanded of Abraham in the Sodom and Gomorrah story more than 'hear me out', and nothing more of Lot than 'pack up and leave'. What about when God instructs Abraham to take his son Isaac to Moria to be sacrificed as a burnt offering? Abraham does it - everything but actually killing and burning the poor kid (who is spared at the last minute)! From the moralistic point of view you present, we must condemn Abraham as a murderer and his action as infanticide! He had no way of knowing that that sheep would appear. At the very least, we must deem him insane.

It may not surprise you to learn that that is precisely the view of many Jews, including many rabbis. One strand of Jewish thought about the Akeidah, as we call it, is that Abraham should have told God to stuff it. Another, related, idea is that this was a test for Abraham, and he failed it.

And of course, there is also the concept that not only Abraham was being tested by God, he was TESTING God. Then, of course, I heard the explaination that Abraham made sure that the Ram was going to be there , so he could provide an
exchange for Issac for the ram, right from the start. Nothing beats a miracle that you plan for ahead of time, and make happen yourself.

There is a long Jewish tradition about arguing with God..

[MagusYanam]

It may not surprise you to learn that that is precisely the view of many Jews, including many rabbis. One strand of Jewish thought about the Akeidah, as we call it, is that Abraham should have told God to stuff it. Another, related, idea is that this was a test for Abraham, and he failed it.

Remember that Abraham is NOT held up as a great, infallible hero and good guy in Genesis. He tried to pass off his wife as his sister - twice - for purely cowardly reasons, and seems to have had his share of character flaws. It's unwise to presume that ANY story in the Torah is presented as a positive example of the morality demanded by God, even if the text says so. Trying to find a moral code in the Bible without reference to what Jewish tradition says about the passage in question makes no sense. Would you assume you understand the moral lessons of, say, Hopi myths and legends without asking a Hopi about them, and presumably a Hopi who was thought to have some understanding of them himself?

I said that those were two of the strands of Jewish thought on the subject. There are many, and we believe that all are worth thinking about. That's why we include multiple interpretations and even multiple rulings on the meaning of Jewish law; since no one can know the will of God, we must look for truth and value in our own thought.

I can buy that, and respect it. I wasn't attempting to make the claim, after all, that Abraham was supposed to be the moral hero of this story, or that the Akeidah was supposed to be a moral guide; quite the contrary. As a story, it is nonsensical - hence, why the multiple interpretations you cite should be necessary to make sense of it.

Think of it this way; if some government official ordered you to murder an infant, you'd refuse, right? Even if it meant you were going to jail?

The difference in the power of the commanding official, and in the consequences of disobedience, between some government official and God is only one of degree. The morality involved is the same. If you KNOW something is wrong, it's cowardly to do it just because some powerful personage tells you to.

Even if it meant I would die, I would refuse that order. But the government official is not the one to whom I am ultimately existentially accountable with all of my life's actions, so the analogy is not a good one. It's not an issue of power, it's an issue of commitment.

[cnorman18]

It may not surprise you to learn that that is precisely the view of many Jews, including many rabbis. One strand of Jewish thought about the Akeidah, as we call it, is that Abraham should have told God to stuff it. Another, related, idea is that this was a test for Abraham, and he failed it.

Remember that Abraham is NOT held up as a great, infallible hero and good guy in Genesis. He tried to pass off his wife as his sister - twice - for purely cowardly reasons, and seems to have had his share of character flaws. It's unwise to presume that ANY story in the Torah is presented as a positive example of the morality demanded by God, even if the text says so. Trying to find a moral code in the Bible without reference to what Jewish tradition says about the passage in question makes no sense. Would you assume you understand the moral lessons of, say, Hopi myths and legends without asking a Hopi about them, and presumably a Hopi who was thought to have some understanding of them himself?

I said that those were two of the strands of Jewish thought on the subject. There are many, and we believe that all are worth thinking about. That's why we include multiple interpretations and even multiple rulings on the meaning of Jewish law; since no one can know the will of God, we must look for truth and value in our own thought.

I can buy that, and respect it. I wasn't attempting to make the claim, after all, that Abraham was supposed to be the moral hero of this story, or that the Akeidah was supposed to be a moral guide; quite the contrary. As a story, it is nonsensical - hence, why the multiple interpretations you cite should be necessary to make sense of it.

Nonsensical is one of the judgments available, to be sure. More accurate perhaps to say obscure or ambiguous. Whether it's literal history or a fictional literary creation, there is clearly more happening here than "nonsense." Or at least we consider it acceptable to think so.

Think of it this way; if some government official ordered you to murder an infant, you'd refuse, right? Even if it meant you were going to jail?

The difference in the power of the commanding official, and in the consequences of disobedience, between some government official and God is only one of degree. The morality involved is the same. If you KNOW something is wrong, it's cowardly to do it just because some powerful personage tells you to.

Even if it meant I would die, I would refuse that order. But the government official is not the one to whom I am ultimately existentially accountable with all of my life's actions, so the analogy is not a good one. It's not an issue of power, it's an issue of commitment.

What commitment entails abandoning one's moral code when so commanded? My own religion calls that a betrayal of God.

God no longer determines what is right and wrong in Judaism, and hasn't since Sinai. "The Torah is not in Heaven." The principle is very clear; we are to depend upon miraculous apparitions no longer. We are to think for ourselves, as a people.

Some Christians may have another view. For my money, it's a very dangerous one. It essentially nods at cases where a mother murders or mutilates her children "because God told her to." By your standard, maybe He did, and she was right to cut the child's arms off.

Nope. Even if God doesn't turn out to be the God of justice that I believe Him to be, and turns out to be the vicious, vengeful psychpath of the atheists and fundamentalists; and even if the penalty is Hell, I won't do it. I'll go to Hell knowing my own morality is superior to His, and that my punishment is unjust. I won't murder that child.

I think the person we are ultimately existentially accountable to, with all of our lives' actions, is ourselves. I can make no one else, including God, responsible for my actions. Period.

[MagusYanam]

Nonsensical is one of the judgments available, to be sure. More accurate perhaps to say obscure or ambiguous. Whether it's literal history or a fictional literary creation, there is clearly more happening here than "nonsense." Or at least we consider it acceptable to think so.

Granted that 'obscure' or 'ambiguous' might be a better word, but I still hold that without such further clarifications or interpretations as you have described, Abraham's actions are (when viewed from the outside) absurd and irrational.

What commitment entails abandoning one's moral code when so commanded? My own religion calls that a betrayal of God.

God no longer determines what is right and wrong in Judaism, and hasn't since Sinai. "The Torah is not in Heaven." The principle is very clear; we are to depend upon miraculous apparitions no longer. We are to think for ourselves, as a people.

Some Christians may have another view. For my money, it's a very dangerous one. It essentially nods at cases where a mother murders or mutilates her children "because God told her to." By your standard, maybe He did, and she was right to cut the child's arms off.

It isn't a matter of betraying moral codes or determining right and wrong. As a rule, we don't nod at cases where mothers murder or mutilate their children; we condemn them from an ethical view as immoral and monstrous. But faith is a tricky thing. It involves, as Kierkegaard would put it, a teleological suspension of the ethical, letting go of universal or social dictates and resting as an individual transparent in the power that created you.

Nope. Even if God doesn't turn out to be the God of justice that I believe Him to be, and turns out to be the vicious, vengeful psychpath of the atheists and fundamentalists; and even if the penalty is Hell, I won't do it. I'll go to Hell knowing my own morality is superior to His, and that my punishment is unjust. I won't murder that child.

I think the person we are ultimately existentially accountable to, with all of our lives' actions, is ourselves. I can make no one else, including God, responsible for my actions. Period.

Well, see here we're getting back into the discussion we had on the other thread. God is not completely knowable - we hope, rather, that the ultimate nature of God which surpasses our understanding is a more perfect reflection of the moral dictates he has given.

But I think that you yourself disagree with the last statement you made. You are not accountable to yourself alone (at least, I would hope not!), you are accountable to your community and to the Torah - or at least, you argue as though you are. That's commendable. But what I have been arguing for is not some kind of evasion of responsibility. Indeed, faith requires me to take full responsibility for everything I do. The question is, who is my interlocutor, and who am I in relation to him? Each action you take is a statement about who and what you are. I am saying that, for me, I would rather that my actions reflect a commitment to God, and I hope, rather than know, that these are in line with my own moral vision.

[cnorman18]

Nonsensical is one of the judgments available, to be sure. More accurate perhaps to say obscure or ambiguous. Whether it's literal history or a fictional literary creation, there is clearly more happening here than "nonsense." Or at least we consider it acceptable to think so.

Granted that 'obscure' or 'ambiguous' might be a better word, but I still hold that without such further clarifications or interpretations as you have described, Abraham's actions are (when viewed from the outside) absurd and irrational.

EDITED TO ADD (forgot to get back to this):

Of course. In my view, the Torah was INTENDED to be ambiguous and to require discussion and explication. That, to me, is the meaning of the Oral Torah.

Whole different subject.

What commitment entails abandoning one's moral code when so commanded? My own religion calls that a betrayal of God.

God no longer determines what is right and wrong in Judaism, and hasn't since Sinai. "The Torah is not in Heaven." The principle is very clear; we are to depend upon miraculous apparitions no longer. We are to think for ourselves, as a people.

Some Christians may have another view. For my money, it's a very dangerous one. It essentially nods at cases where a mother murders or mutilates her children "because God told her to." By your standard, maybe He did, and she was right to cut the child's arms off.

It isn't a matter of betraying moral codes or determining right and wrong. As a rule, we don't nod at cases where mothers murder or mutilate their children; we condemn them from an ethical view as immoral and monstrous. But faith is a tricky thing. It involves, as Kierkegaard would put it, a teleological suspension of the ethical, letting go of universal or social dictates and resting as an individual transparent in the power that created you.

Nope. Even if God doesn't turn out to be the God of justice that I believe Him to be, and turns out to be the vicious, vengeful psychpath of the atheists and fundamentalists; and even if the penalty is Hell, I won't do it. I'll go to Hell knowing my own morality is superior to His, and that my punishment is unjust. I won't murder that child.

I think the person we are ultimately existentially accountable to, with all of our lives' actions, is ourselves. I can make no one else, including God, responsible for my actions. Period.

Well, see here we're getting back into the discussion we had on the other thread. God is not completely knowable - we hope, rather, that the ultimate nature of God which surpasses our understanding is a more perfect reflection of the moral dictates he has given.

But I think that you yourself disagree with the last statement you made. You are not accountable to yourself alone (at least, I would hope not!), you are accountable to your community and to the Torah - or at least, you argue as though you are. That's commendable. But what I have been arguing for is not some kind of evasion of responsibility. Indeed, faith requires me to take full responsibility for everything I do. The question is, who is my interlocutor, and who am I in relation to him? Each action you take is a statement about who and what you are. I am saying that, for me, I would rather that my actions reflect a commitment to God, and I hope, rather than know, that these are in line with my own moral vision.

Well, this is an area where we can agree to disagree with no ill will, I think. I can't say that you're wrong, and I kinda get what you're saying, but that's not my point of view.

Of course, for Jews, on moral matters God and humans are more or less equals. God has a vote, but not a veto, and the decision on what is right and wrong is not in His hands any more, but in ours. If God wants someone to do something today, He has to do it through another human making a rational argument to do it. A parting of the clouds and God giving thunderous commands might be spectacular, but it also might be Dreamworks or Industrial Light & Magic - or the Devil, I suppose. But it doesn't matter; it is actually a formal teaching of Judaism that a "spiritual voice" purporting to be God's, called "the daughter of the voice," is not to be trusted nor listened to, even if it is actually from God.

The main reason I think we'll both be OK with leaving it here, though, is that I doubt very much that the question is ever going to come up in real life...

[ChaosBorders]

If God, or a god you happen to worship/respect came to you and ordered you to do something against your nature (like say: kill, rape, torture etc...) or face eternal damnation/the wrath of the gods, would you hold firm to your beliefs and defy a direct order from a god, or would you harden your heart, and draw your blade/unzip your pants?

I am just curious, I don't mean to offend anybody. I personally would never do anything that went against my code of honour, though it would hurt deeply to defy my god, or goddess... I would do so in a heartbeat. As such I pray that day shall never come. Blessed be.

God already knows what my response would be, thus I would do whatever I thought was the right thing knowing God already knows and would not have bothered asking me to do whatever it was I viewed as wrong unless my refusal to was actually the point of asking in the first place.