Why worship gods?

[Zzyzx]

.
Simple question: Why worship gods?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 30 by theophile]

Operative in this "and Moses said unto them." So I ask, who is it that is doing the ordering here? God or Moses? Looks like Moses, not even in the name of God in this instance. i.e., Moses did not say "God said." He is simply saying, on his own, that these people have acted contrary to God's will - so "let's destroy them."

As such, this is useless to your case that God orders the killing of children. This is a case against Moses, not God.

Where is there mention of God shouting from the heavens "No! Moses, don't say that! I didn't command that, I don't! Hebrews, when Moses says to slaughter everyone, don't do it!"

The problem with the narrative of the story is that Moses is raised up to be the voice of God, so to speak i.e. what he says, is apparently what God says. Only Moses can apparently hear God's voice, and pass on God's instruction.
At no point in the narrative are the Hebrew people given a way to distinguish between what God 'actually' says and what is purely Moses.

Instead of everyone hearing God's voice, apparently he likes working through a middle-man, and of course, as I've just explained, that middle-man can do things on his own, with the rest of the people left at a complete loss as to whether the middle-man is genuine.

[theophile]

[Replying to post 31 by rikuoamero]

Where is there mention of God shouting from the heavens "No! Moses, don't say that! I didn't command that, I don't! Hebrews, when Moses says to slaughter everyone, don't do it!"

Where is it said that God is always there to interject? That God will stop us from making every mistake? ...

At no point in the narrative are the Hebrew people given a way to distinguish between what God 'actually' says and what is purely Moses.

What, the people don't have a conscience? Are they dumb, or without any sense? Don't rob them of their human faculties to think and discern what is right.

The fact that nobody does speak up against Moses, let alone God (except for Moses), shows you how immature Israel is at this point. Moses is the most mature. He is the only one who does stand up and engage with God in seeking out what is right. But yes, he's not perfect.

Also, the fact that you think that Israel needs "a way to distinguish" in order to speak up against Moses misses the point that all of us have a non-relinquish-able responsibility to think for ourselves, to seek out what is right, and to stand up for that against all challenges. (Or to change our view when we recognize our faults.)

We were not called to dumbly nod and blink and follow. We were called to climb the mountain with Moses and enter the debate that seeks out what is right...

Instead of everyone hearing God's voice, apparently he likes working through a middle-man, and of course, as I've just explained, that middle-man can do things on his own, with the rest of the people left at a complete loss as to whether the middle-man is genuine.

It's not a matter of "working through middle-men" or "hearing God's voice." It's a matter of all of us seeking out and standing up for what is right. And wrestling with each other - weighing our views and arguments against each other in the pursuit of wisdom.

Throughout scripture, this usually comes in the form of a prophet. Or a character like Moses who participates in that process with God. And yes, the rest of Israel being "told" because all they want to do is lay low and dumbly follow... Because they haven't stood up and made the ascent to their true status and place in the world as human beings...

But again, dumbly following is not the point. Much better that all of Israel truly participated as well. That is the goal. There is no place for "middle-men" at the end. There is no place for simply "hearing God's voice" and dumbly following. In the end, the voice of the weakest should overcome the strong. In the end, even God can and would be silenced by the least likely of voices... So long as that voice speaks what is right.

That is a more accurate vision of the end that we are called to. (In fact we see it all along, as God is, at times, silenced by "lowly" human beings...)

[ttruscott]

Please explain then how a God who orders children and babies to be hacked to death with swords can possibly "stand for what is right?" Because if there are times when hacking children and babies to death can be "right," the concept of right and wrong has no meaning at all.

Since your position that no righteous GOD can order the death of a childa since all children are innocent is the only opinion about reality that can be accepted as true, has been shown to be wrong many times, this repeated questioning with the moral scorn would seem to fit into cnorman19's list at

... morality policing and mock interrogation....

both used to reinforce 31. Over-reactive shaming: They distort your argument, making it sound ridiculous in order to shame you into not making it.

If you are not intending that, then why ignore the fact that Christians here have told you how your argument is a straw man argument and does not fit Christian doctrine at all, over and over? Asking the same question over and over as if no one has ever given any answer let alone an acceptable one (because there is no acceptable answer) is a debating ploy to manage the person, not the debate.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Please explain then how a God who orders children and babies to be hacked to death with swords can possibly "stand for what is right?" Because if there are times when hacking children and babies to death can be "right," the concept of right and wrong has no meaning at all.

Since your position that no righteous GOD can order the death of a childa since all children are innocent is the only opinion about reality that can be accepted as true, has been shown to be wrong many times, this repeated questioning with the moral scorn would seem to fit into cnorman19's list at

... morality policing and mock interrogation....

both used to reinforce 31. Over-reactive shaming: They distort your argument, making it sound ridiculous in order to shame you into not making it.

If you are not intending that, then why ignore the fact that Christians here have told you how your argument is a straw man argument and does not fit Christian doctrine at all, over and over? Asking the same question over and over as if no one has ever given any answer let alone an acceptable one (because there is no acceptable answer) is a debating ploy to manage the person, not the debate.

This is what my "straw man argument" actually looks like in living color. No one who can ever defend this as sometimes righteous and necessary has any moral standing. No religion that can defend and promote such actions as being sometimes righteous and necessary has any moral standing. This is as repugnant as things are possible to be.



How horrific was the slaughter committed by the Jewish soldiers depicted in the OT? So horrific that the soldiers who carried out the orders had to be kept separated from the main body of the Jewish people for seven day while undergoing purification rituals.

Numbers 31:
[19] And do ye abide without the camp seven days: whosoever hath killed any person, and whosoever hath touched any slain, purify both yourselves and your captives on the third day, and on the seventh day.
[20] And purify all your raiment, and all that is made of skins, and all work of goats' hair, and all things made of wood.
[21] And Eleazar the priest said unto the men of war which went to the battle, This is the ordinance of the law which the LORD commanded Moses;
[22] Only the gold, and the silver, the brass, the iron, the tin, and the lead,
[23] Every thing that may abide the fire, ye shall make it go through the fire, and it shall be clean: nevertheless it shall be purified with the water of separation: and all that abideth not the fire ye shall make go through the water.
[24] And ye shall wash your clothes on the seventh day, and ye shall be clean, and afterward ye shall come into the camp.

No amount of purification could ever wash away the contamination of such deeds. Or of justifying them.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to post 30 by theophile]

Thank you for the thoughtful response. The circumstances we are considering here, mass murder, and specifically the mass murder of children and babies as described in the OT, can really be narrowed down to one very important point. Did God personally order mass murder to be carried out? And the Bible very specifically indicates, in Ezekiel 9:4, and 1 Samuel 15:2, that indeed it was the Lord God Himself who ordered that this mass murder to be done. Joshua 11:19 indicates that God ordered Moses to order that mass murder be carried out.


Joshua 11:
[20] For it was the Lord himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the Lord had commanded Moses.

To question that God Himself was responsible for ordering this mass murder is to question the very authority of the Bible itself. And according to believers, the Bible is "the very Word of God." The Bible tells humankind who God is, and what God expects of us. It is the source of all understanding of the very nature of God. If no God was actually responsible for the mass murders depicted in the OT, then the OT is NOT the Word of God at all. It is a book written by ancient people explaining and detailing their particular view of reality and the motivation for their actions. And without the authority of the OT, the NT is meaningless.

What can we conclude from this? The obvious conclusion is that the Bible has no bearing on understanding our existence and the operation of the universe whatsoever. The Bible is exactly what it appears to be; the musings and ruminations of ancient people, reflecting their very limited understanding of the world that they lived in. If we are to continue to ask such questions about existence and the operation of the universe, we are forced to pursue another line of inquiry entirely. And that is the nature of science, which seeks to examine and understand the nature of what the universe is telling us. Science is an avenue of investigation that must be pursued without preconception. And what the universe has to tell us we must accept at face value. The universe is under no compulsion to placate us with warm promises. All it can do is offer us the truth. And the truth is all we can hope for.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 32 by theophile]

Where is it said that God is always there to interject? That God will stop us from making every mistake? ...

If I were dealing with humans...let's say I'm in the army. Captain Adam tells me, a soldier, that orders have come down from General Brown to bomb that village over there.
Brown is standing there, listening to the conversation but says nothing.
If Brown is not in fact issuing such orders, if in fact, they are the antithesis of what he would ever order, why does Brown not speak up? He's a general, why not pull rank on the captain? Why not speak up to prevent a heinous slaughter?
In fact...doesn't Brown have a duty, an ethical duty, to countermand such orders? If its so for Brown, why not God? If Moses is going to order massacres in God's name that are not in fact what God wants, why doesn't God countermand him?

Think about what you said. You likened God not speaking up to correct or overrule Moses, to a mistake.
Getting a spelling wrong is a mistake. Misnaming the capital of a US state is a mistake.
But not knowing for sure whether or not God's prophet, the one designated by God to speak in his name, is actually doing so?

What, the people don't have a conscience? Are they dumb, or without any sense? Don't rob them of their human faculties to think and discern what is right.

All I have to say to this is one word: Abraham.
What is Abraham MOST famous for, in the OT?
That's right, obeying God when being called upon to sacrifice his son.
Funny how the concept of a conscience doesn't come into play there, with the patriarch of the religion.

Also, the fact that you think that Israel needs "a way to distinguish" in order to speak up against Moses misses the point that all of us have a non-relinquish-able responsibility to think for ourselves, to seek out what is right, and to stand up for that against all challenges. (Or to change our view when we recognize our faults.)

This negates the need for prophets and other assorted holy men, to act as middle-men/go-betweens.
Not saying I'm not in favour of getting rid of them, but just letting you know what your saying here leads to.

We were not called to dumbly nod and blink and follow.

The fellow who picked up sticks on the wrong day of the week has something to say about that.

It's not a matter of "working through middle-men" or "hearing God's voice."

So what was Moses? What did he do? Did he or did he not hear God's voice? Did he or did he not lead the Hebrews in God's name and pass on Godly instructions?

It's a matter of all of us seeking out and standing up for what is right. And wrestling with each other - weighing our views and arguments against each other in the pursuit of wisdom.

In which case, again, we don't need assorted holy men. We can all interpret God (at least, if we're convinced God exists that is...) instead of having one holy man say "This is what is right, this is what God declares"

But again, dumbly following is not the point.

I couldn't disagree with you more. The amount of times OT stories (and quite a few in the NT as well, now that I think about it) describe rejoicing when people obey God, is just too much for me to agree with you.
After all, the Hebrew's holy text has passages like this, from Deut 11

“Love the Lord your God and always obey all his laws. 2 Remember today what you have learned about the Lord through your experiences with him. It was you, not your children, who had these experiences. You saw the Lord's greatness, his power, his might, 3 and his miracles. You saw what he did to the king of Egypt and to his entire country. 4 You saw how the Lord completely wiped out the Egyptian army, along with their horses and chariots, by drowning them in the Red Sea[a] when they were pursuing you. 5 You know what the Lord did for you in the desert before you arrived here. 6 You recall what he did to Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab of the tribe of Reuben. In the sight of everyone the earth opened up and swallowed them, along with their families, their tents, and all their servants and animals. 7 Yes, you are the ones who have seen all these great things that the Lord has done.

[ttruscott]

No amount of purification could ever wash away the contamination of such deeds. Or of justifying them.

Yup, emotional shaming triumphs reason...the logic of how GOD could be just and righteous and cause the deaths of people, including children, is ignored but not repudiated by logic.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

No amount of purification could ever wash away the contamination of such deeds. Or of justifying them.

Yup, emotional shaming triumphs reason...the logic of how GOD could be just and righteous and cause the deaths of people, including children, is ignored but not repudiated by logic.

That there are those who feel that slaughtering children and babies can at times be necessary, logical and even righteous illustrates the inherent danger of blind unswerving faith and repudiates such beliefs in a way that I never could have accomplished on my own.This is exactly why religion must be resisted and rejected.

There are times when a person simply knows that a thing is wrong; no if's, no and's, no but's, no appeals to logic, and no "because God orders it!" When a thing is wrong, it should NEVER be done, PERIOD. No matter what one's lifetime of indoctrination, or their priest/pastor/imam/fuhrer orders them to do. Only a mindless sheep follows orders blindly.

[PghPanther]

[Replying to Zzyzx]

Well from an anthropology standpoint both the ideas of worship of the supernatural, or a supernatural entity or plurality of them.........along with innocent subjects of animals and/or humans in blood sacrifices are the result of superstitious rituals all based on fear of the unknown attributed to undocumented assumptions of a supernatural cause behind it...

It is a prescientific claim on reality by all cultures which is being decimated in modern society by the simple fact that the scientific method as a process for understanding reality works...............and the other junk is just superstitious tribal behavior..

Go to any primitive society that is left today and you still see witch doctors, voodoo, curses etc............and ironically these superstitious societies are the first to convert to Christianity in droves because they are easily able swap out one fairy tale for another and call it reality.

From a Christian theological standpoint it would make no sense to worship this so called God of creation...........all through the old testament he demanded and threaten in the worst ways those that didn't bow down and worship him and he was pissed off at all of us because we failed his set up in the garden while letting another supernatural agent Satan to bully our innocence to fall into sin and said our own free will was the actual cause such a fall...............yeah right..........a tree planted right smack in the middle of the garden and told don't touch..........and then let Satan temp us before we knew right from wrong or good from evil to begin with....................how was Eve to know that before she ate the fruit?

Then this God curses us for this conjob set up.................me thinks theology Christ would be unemployed and stuck in heaven if God didn't get us the screw up so his son would have something to do down here or a purpose for even existing.........get it?

All this is such utter fairy tale nonsense that the writers didn't even logically sit down and think what a con job the whole garden story is............

And this so called God wants us to worship it?

Sure............you don't even exist as claimed in the Bible.

Theology is the study of make believe........might as well be an expert on Santa Claus and then claim its part of reality.

[theophile]

[Replying to post 36 by rikuoamero]

If I were dealing with humans...let's say I'm in the army. Captain Adam tells me, a soldier, that orders have come down from General Brown to bomb that village over there.
Brown is standing there, listening to the conversation but says nothing.
If Brown is not in fact issuing such orders, if in fact, they are the antithesis of what he would ever order, why does Brown not speak up? He's a general, why not pull rank on the captain? Why not speak up to prevent a heinous slaughter?
In fact...doesn't Brown have a duty, an ethical duty, to countermand such orders? If its so for Brown, why not God? If Moses is going to order massacres in God's name that are not in fact what God wants, why doesn't God countermand him?

Again, where does it say that God always interjects?

(1) There is something to trial by error, or failing-forward. That's how most successful startups operate. I get we are all biased and think that loss of human life is the most horrifying, immoral thing ever, but how are we to learn if we're not allowed to make mistakes? If we're not given some freedom? Can children really grow under overbearing parents? ...

I think I've said before, but worth saying again to make the point. On the seventh day: God rests (leaving us in charge). In Genesis 3: God comes to visit Adam and Eve, suggesting absence before. How many parables depict the master of the house, i.e., God, going away on a long journey, leaving the ordering of the house to a steward, i.e., us? ...

(2) More to the point, your argument presupposes a theology of divine omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, etc. So let me be clear: There is no further conversation to be had if we can't get over that view of God and consider a view where the future is open, where God may have limits to God's power / knowledge, where God is not always present / there to interject, and where God is in it with us working out what is right - in fact, modelling the way.

All I have to say to this is one word: Abraham.
What is Abraham MOST famous for, in the OT?
That's right, obeying God when being called upon to sacrifice his son.
Funny how the concept of a conscience doesn't come into play there, with the patriarch of the religion.

You don't think there is conscience there? What do you think is going through Abraham's mind through all this? Abraham models exactly what I've been saying it means to follow God. He ascends the mountain (when everyone else lays low). He sacrifices all his interests so that he can truly enter into the engagement that seeks what is right. i.e., He frees himself of all biases (Isaac) so that he has a mind for all, and can truly care for all in his pursuit of what is right.

This is what we all must do if we are to truly ascend and take our place at God's side. As Jesus says, to follow him means we must hate our own mother and brother, or in the case of Abraham, his only son... Not because we should really hate them / sacrifice them (as we see, Isaac is not sacrificed in the way we think Abraham was called to), but because we need to have our hearts opened to all. Discerning what is right demands this kind of objectivity.

I've been saying this all along, both in this post and elsewhere: the only objectivity we can possibly attain is if we check ourselves at the door, and enter the debate free of our own interests, and with a care only for the interests of all. For Abraham, this means giving up Isaac....

This negates the need for prophets and other assorted holy men, to act as middle-men/go-betweens.
Not saying I'm not in favour of getting rid of them, but just letting you know what your saying here leads to.

That is my point. In the end, we should all be "prophets," if there's still a need for such a role when we're all in the spirit.

So what was Moses? What did he do? Did he or did he not hear God's voice? Did he or did he not lead the Hebrews in God's name and pass on Godly instructions?

The story certainly depicts that. But two modifications I would suggest. (1) I would think less of Moses as a conduit of divine instructions and more as a partner with God in discerning what is right. He engages with God; he doesn't simply listen and repeat God's words. (2) Moses does not always perfectly convey or execute what he and God came to as the right course. As we've discussed in the past, in the golden calf episode, where God relents, and does not destroy Israel (at Moses' advice) Moses decides otherwise when he sees Israel's idolatry for himself.

In which case, again, we don't need assorted holy men. We can all interpret God (at least, if we're convinced God exists that is...) instead of having one holy man say "This is what is right, this is what God declares"

It's not "interpreting God" but rather participating in the process of seeking out what is right. That is, making the ascent. Giving up all self-interest. Making everyone and everything our interest. Working out our salvation together.

You are surprised I don't see a future for prophets, but what also follows is I don't see a future for God. There is nothing in what I'm saying that requires God. Again, first point: on the seventh day, God rests. Leaving us in control. That is the vision set by Genesis 1.

I couldn't disagree with you more. The amount of times OT stories (and quite a few in the NT as well, now that I think about it) describe rejoicing when people obey God, is just too much for me to agree with you.
After all, the Hebrew's holy text has passages like this, from Deut 11

Am I not using the language of "follow"? But following is more a matter of following the way that God shows us. Not obeying every single dictate. As Jesus says of himself, I am the way. We are to follow his way. Not obey his every little word.

There is a difference.

But yes, great citation. The law. Again, Israel is immature at this point. They aren't ready to follow the way that God (Moses and Abraham) show them. They need simple rules to follow instead. As you said yourself in an earlier post, they need "a way to distinguish" right from wrong. They need laws.

But this is not the end, i.e., that we follow laws. This is a tactical measure for an immature people, until they are ready to take up the true way.

Why do you think it took until the Exodus for law to be given?! Abraham sure didn't need it.