Does god have morals?

[nobspeople]

Morality is highly subjective to time and geography as well as the individual:
some say stealing is immoral while others make exceptions for what's stolen and the reason;
some say being gay is immoral while others say it's only the act while others say neither is immoral and still others say it's immoral (or at least unacceptable when it's men with men, but not women with women);
at one point, some said it immoral to marry a different race when today, it's mostly seen as a non-issue.
The list continues, but you get the point.

This makes me wonder if god is moral?
The quick answer is either yes (normally said by the faithful because that's what they're supposed to say) or no (mostly by 'the others'). But isn't that judging god's actions by human standards?
What if god has its own moral code, different from humanity's? After all, god didn't think it immoral to wipe out a whole city or drown 99.99% of the population (including babies and women in the middle of giving birth - what did those babies do to you, o god?!?!) as well as almost all living land animals. And god didn't see it immoral to kill various armies in the bible.

For discussion:
Is god, by human standards, moral or no?
Or does god have its own moral code which we can't access?

[JehovahsWitness]

When was the last time you asked your car where it wanted to drive? Biblically* speaking, God is under no compulsion to offer his creation any explanation at all for his commands. In many cases (and I am making no claim here, just offering a bible based point of view) ... in many cases, scripturally, he condesended to explain his actions and ask kindly we comply.

This is such an inapt analogy, it deserves special mention. Its failure as an analogy is pointed out inadvertently by your own post and in even the same paragraph where you agree (inherently) humans are sentient and even your version of God reasons with them through 'condescension and 'explaining.' One does not reason with a car.

It works perfectly well for my point, namely that the Creator owes nothing to his creaion sentient or not. Indeed the bible uses another better illustration that of the porter and the clay

ISAIAH 45:9 - Berean Study Bible

Woe to him who quarrels with his Makerone clay pot among many. Does the clay ask the potter, What are you making? Does your work say, He has no hands?

JW

[JehovahsWitness]

I thank you for your candor ...

You are most welcome.

.... this is a horrifying concession and perfectly supports my argument about the moral bankruptcy of this imaginary and all too human 'god' ...

I'm sure you'll live. Most people faced with a hypothetical situations do. Indeed most people I know enjoy good fiction and horror is a multimillion dollar sector of the entertainment industry. Still one has to wonder why anyone overly sensitive to fictional horror, doesn't avoid exposure to it.

.... .. the moral bankruptcy of this imaginary and all too human 'god' created by an ancient tribe lusting for land and power.

Which god are you refering to? History has a plethora of them.

I can't think of a better reason to totally reject "Jehovah's Witnesses" and any form of Christianity ...

That would be somewhat hasty since Jehovahs Witnessses do not worship a god of the above description but ... thanks for sharing.

... Christianity the puts obedience to their ruler over morality

For Jehovahs Witnesses that is a false dichotmy, our view is that worship of Jehovah is "morality". The two cannot be seperated.

... So if God is a rapist, a torturer, a slaver, that is just fine, because he is the one with the ultimate power?

It wouldn't be fine in the real world that exists but in theory, if god were such a being, his creation would only know it was not fine, UNLESS if he himself programed them to not find it fine. Do you follow me? Let me try and simplify it for you...if THE Creator were evil, you and I would love evil and would worship him happily since there would be nothing to compare it to. In a universe of no water there can be no thirst. Get it?

[JehovahsWitness]

More often this tyrant 'god' murders people ...

DOES GOD MURDER?


Murder is unlawful killing; the God of the bible is presented as lawgiver , judge and (on occassion) executer and thus biblically can never be accused of murder.

Although some challenge Gods judgements as depicted in scripture, there is no valid reason to conclude God has ever acted unjustly. Biblically, as the supreme ruler of the universe, YHWH (Jehovah ) reserves the right to judge any living thing as unworthy of preserving the life they have been given on condition. The biblical pattern indicates when He does so he can always be understood to have done so with good reason although we do not always have all the details of his jugements in the biblical narrative.

[Diogenes]

More often this tyrant 'god' murders people ...

DOES GOD MURDER?


Murder is unlawful killing; the God of the bible is presented as lawgiver , judge and (on occassion) executer and thus biblically can never be accused of murder.

Although some challenge Gods judgements as depicted in scripture, there is no valid reason to conclude God has ever acted unjustly. Biblically, as the supreme ruler of the universe, YHWH (Jehovah ) reserves the right to judge any living thing as unworthy of preserving the life they have been given on condition. The biblical pattern indicates when He does so he can always be understood to have done so with good reason although we do not always have all the details of his jugements in the biblical narrative.

You write "...when He [God] does so he can always be understood to have done so with good reason although we do not always have...." This is a common rationale and it can be stated as "We relinquish our own reason and accept God knows best, regardless of the apparent evidence."
In the flood myth [which I assume you take literally] God decides to kill everyone.* Is it reasonable to assume EVERYone is so evil they deserve to die? This god does not appear to taken much care to look into the circumstances and heart of 'everyone.' The one guy he talks to, Noah, convinces him with argument. I'm sorry, but this 'god' portrayed in Genesis appears to be a boob, like some right wing nitwit who makes sweeping statements about entire groups, unable to see exceptions or individuals. Do you really think it unlikely there were others, children perhaps, who were innocent and did not deserve to be drowned in is capricious flood?

_________________
*later he is talked out of this by Noah and agrees to save Noah and his family

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #43

Although some challenge Gods judgements as depicted in scripture, there is no valid reason to conclude God has ever acted unjustly.

If Zeus is supreme god, is there any valid reason to conclude that Zeus has ever acted unjustly?

[Miles]

Although some challenge Gods judgements as depicted in scripture, there is no valid reason to conclude God has ever acted unjustly.

Just to put things in perspective, perhaps in god's eye he doesn't see himself as acting unjustly, but that's not the issue here. You're claiming that no one, or at least Diogenes here, should see no valid reason to conclude God has ever acted unjustly. But he has. Diogenes sees at least some of god's killing as murder, an unjust act. Now, you claim:

"Murder is unlawful killing; the God of the bible is presented as lawgiver , judge and (on occassion) executer and thus biblically can never be accused of murder."

But exactly why does being a lawgiver, judge, or executioner absolve a god of being accused of a crime? Has he ever claimed as much or announced that none of his killings are murders? To my recollection he has not.

And just to clear up the matter of your "biblically." I'm not sure what import your "biblically" is suppose to lend to your claim, but how about unbiblically? Could god rightfully be unbiblically accused of murder"?

If not, consider your rational here, which works equally well with members of the U.S. and State Legislatures, our nation's lawgivers (those who draw up and enact laws), and, who under your reasoning, can never be accused of murder. (Also applies to our judges and executioners, btw.)


.

[JehovahsWitness]

Diogenes sees at least some of god's killing as murder, an unjust act.

Maybe he is going by a different definition of murder, but if we hold to the real meaning of the word ....




source : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/murder

If therefore, as is the case in scripture, God is the ultimate lawgiver and it is He who sets whatnis "lawful" (See dictionary definition ) or not, then biblically Je cannot break the law. Ergo biblically God cannot commit the crime of murder.

But exactly why does being a lawgiver, judge, or executioner absolve a god of being accused of a crime?

One can accuse anyone of anything, (there is no shortage of wild unreasoning rants and ramblings in this world). However, for an accusation that a crime has been committee one has first to establish by law what crime that is. One cannot reasonably conclude a crime has been committed if no there is no law against that act.

If the US state drew up a law that said no member of the Senate can be accused of murder before any State legislative body then then no member could commit the crime of murder. One might in this case call the law unjust and refuse to recognise it on moral grounds, that is ones perrogative, but this would still not negate that there would be no legal basis to declare a crime has been committed since there would be no such crime on the statue books.

If God is the ultimate lawgiver (ie. the one who decides what actually is a crime) and if he deems that none of his killings are unjustifie, then there is no crime of murder which he can commit. Biblically* (as in according to scripture) , YHWH is not "above" the law .... God ** IS** the law. And it is the law (whether moral or statutory) that is the real basis for any reasonable accusation of crime.

[ * ] PLEASE NOTE: I refer to scripture(biblically) as I am presenting my opinions which are based of the bibles view. I am ONLY mentioning the bible to show what Christianity says in line with subforum guidelines, not to prove that a statement or story therein is true. I am not presenting the bible as authorative or proof of truth and have no intention to add an argument to that end in this subforum See LINKS for details: viewtopic.php?p=213491#p213491

[JoeyKnothead]

Does God have morals?

I submit that nobody know the answer to this question of God and morals.

And if they say they do, it might be they don't.

[JehovahsWitness]

Could god rightfully be unbiblically accused of murder"?

God could unbiblically be accused of anything (including not existing) but it seems to me if one is going to use the bible to establish his so-called "crimes" one at least should recognises that same source also "absolves" him of them. In short, it would be counted productive to accuse believers of ignoring parts of the bible where God (by their reading) commits so called atrocities while themselves ignoring the parts of the bible that support an alternative rationale. I think the term "cherry-picking" might come to mind.

[nobspeople]

Well, that would depend on what is meant and what that entailed. Mistreatment and abuse of a person is of course abhorrent to me but if what is being referenced was protective and beneficial then yes.

One can be protective and offer beneficial treatment without requiring that someone else be owned as personal property.

Did I claim otherwise ?

The way I have read your posts is as a defense of slavery. I find the defense of any form of slavery abhorrent.

I recall I saw once, someone ask (all paraphrased, of course) 'would you kill your child if god asked' and it was said 'yes, in a heartbeat - I'd lite the match'.
That being said, it comes as no surprise that one would not be 'against slavery' or any numerous terrible things outlined in the bible if they're willing to burn 'lite the match' and kill their own child.
Belief and what it instills in people is a weird and powerful thing.

This thread is a year and a half old, yet during that interval, no Christian apologist has responded. Is this a concession that Christianity has no argument against slavery, or killing one's own child, or rape, torture, or murder IF 'God' so commands?
Over and over on this forum apologists have argued that morality must ultimately come from God. Yet their 'god' appears to have no morality except what pleases him; no ethic apart from "Do what I say."

Very few christians are more 'bite than bark'. Why? Because it's easy to be more 'bark than bite'. And people love lazy. They love telling others what to do, pontificating on how great they are while telling you how terrible you are, looking down their noses at others and justifying themselves to themselves (which is where their god lives - in their own minds).
The biblical god is very much 'do as I say not as I do' and the typical Billy Bob believer is always on the look out to justice such a thing's behavior. Therefore, I don't think we could rightly expect christians to be acting any different, unfortunately.