Originally posted by twhitehead Why? Does the goodness or badness of what you do have something to do with the morality of the accuser? What a strange system of morals you have.
Thought I was clear enough that no one who is not free from moral blemish can accuse another of wrong doing. Is that a strange system ? Do you want murderers to sit in judgement of victims of murder?
Originally posted by rvsakhadeo Thought I was clear enough that no one who is not free from moral blemish can accuse another of wrong doing. Is that a strange system ? Do you want murderers to sit in judgement of victims of murder?
But apparently you (who are surely guilty of wrong doing) claim to be capable of judging God (and his incarnates) as having no wrong doing. Surely if you can accurately judge a lack of wrongdoing then you can judge the existence of at least some wrong doings?
Originally posted by rvsakhadeo Who are humans to sit in moral judgement about an entity who does not have any denotation ? If you insist,however, then let that person cast his first stone at God for causing miseries in the world only if he can claim moral high ground ! Such a high moral ground can come only with extraordinarily virtuous and totally selfless nature. Perhaps only Jes ...[text shortened]... ologies to God,it is clever plan of giving a dog( a God in reverse) a bad name and hanging him!
I think of moral reactions as being emotional responses, not "judgements." I suggest using our moral reactions to the stories of God's doings, as a check on our characterization of God. I suggest that we do best when we adhere to the principle that the essence of God has to be goodness, and any depiction of God or story of God's doings that I react to with moral repugnance or disgust, points to a need to either revise the depiction of God, or revise my moral values. I do not see this as placing myself on a higher moral ground than God. I prefer a depiction of God who wants me to think about things this way and does not want me to dismiss my moral reactions to the stories that are told. For example, I prefer the universalist position that we all will eventually be saved, to the position that God would let some people suffer forever. If someone wants to convince me that my preference reflects a flawed moral standard, I will consider their argument. I do think this is how we should use our moral reactions to the various competing depictions of God.
Originally posted by JS357 I suggest that we do best when we adhere to the principle that the essence of God has to be goodness,....
And where does that principle come from?
I prefer a depiction of God who wants me to think about things this way ... By 'prefer' do you mean you hope it is true, want it to be true, or think it is most likely to be true?
Originally posted by rvsakhadeo A recent post has equated a sadist and Jesus ! Although I am not a Christian but a devout Hindu,I cannot even begin to think in terms like these about Jesus.
Jesus,according to every sensible human being who has read Bible,was unquestionably an incarnation of God. His gentle and loving persona comes through the scripture like a cool breeze which comfort ...[text shortened]... but I would never call him a loony.
Why then this vicious vilification of God ? Any comments ?
If you don't believe in God then it is logical that Jesus was either a very misguided sadist or the single most evil person in the history of history.
Originally posted by twhitehead And where does that principle come from?
[b]I prefer a depiction of God who wants me to think about things this way ... By 'prefer' do you mean you hope it is true, want it to be true, or think it is most likely to be true?[/b]
I think that principle (assuming the essential goodness of God) came to me from my mother, more than anyone. Although it was my late sister who got me to start thinking of God as a principle.
Preferring a depiction of God who wants me to think about things this way and does not want me to dismiss my moral reactions to the stories that are told, means I prefer a depiction of God that gave me emotions like moral outrage, and therefore wants me to pay attention to them. It doesn't necessitate that such a God "exists" so it's more like a working principle than a belief.
Originally posted by tomtom232 If you don't believe in God then it is logical that Jesus was either a very misguided sadist or the single most evil person in the history of history.
31 May '11 17:06
Vilifying God
Back to Top