The Free Will Defense of God
- Sooner28posted 10 years ago
0I plan to write a hub about this, because more and more, I see this defense as ridiculously weak, especially for the conservatives who believe in an afterlife.
I'm only going to contest one point here: That people are allowed to do evil things because God doesn't want to interfere with their free will.
Take the Ariel Castro case as an example.
Now, all theists agree that God only acts morally. He is the "moral standard bearer" and every action or inaction he takes is morally justified.
People also agree that violent self-defense is sometimes morally justified (in cases where lethal is the only option), and this applies to watching a crime occur and not helping, such as seeing a woman getting raped and doing nothing to stop it, or defending oneself against a relentless attacker. There can also be lethal self-defense as a last resort.
Now, let's consider the fact that the three girls could not fight back against Castro, both for physical and psychological reasons. This means that if someone were to defend them against Castro, that someone would be morally justified, because they couldn't do it themselves.
However, no one else knew the girls were being held, at least if everyone involved in the case is telling the truth. I'll make that assumption for the purposes of this argument.
So, the only "person" who could defend the girls would be God. We've already agreed that God only acts morally, and that the moral choice in this case is some sort of defense of the girls, since they were powerless. It thus follows that if God is moral, he should have stepped in to save these girls.
God would not have to use deadly force, or anything painful at all. Castro could've been put into a deep sleep (like Adam), and this would give the girls time to escape. Or think of any other scenario you like, and the result is the same.
The applications of this argument are far reaching. Anytime God allows an innocent person to be slaughtered, raped, etc, and does not step in, he is acting immorally; he is morally negligent.I have to be honest and state that stories like the Castro incident you talk about, do cause me to doubt the existence of God. Either that or he has a non-intervention policy.
The argument and your subsequent argument is flawed because it is based on "man's understanding" of morality and Justice.
The term "man's understanding" means one whose do not comprehend purpose of man, which incorporates knowledge of his state of existence without body...
The morality ond Justice of God does incorporate such knowledge.Our understanding of morality and justice far exceeds anything written in a holy book and is far more relevant.
Baloney. We don't based our purpose on ancient myths and superstitions. You are free to do so.
Those are fairy tales for children.are youb ever going to change the color of that air?
Are you ever going to stop talking nonsense? One must follow the other.
Okay then carry on, carry on.
You are heading somewhere with that ofcourse.
What could be ethical about not saving those girls? I think our sense of ethics and morality is as good as it gets. How dare you justify what happened to those girls as someone being moral according to God?
If you can curb your zeal to speak,
you would hear differently,
thus you'd find good reasons to stay silent.Yes,
If you had read my original post and ignored the chatter in your own mind,
you would see how unnecessary/irrelevant your response was.what exactly is it that makes you feel that you're so superior to people who disagree with you, and consequentially puts you in a position to judge them?
I think you started insulting me because you have no argument against my comment. You see, any real God or Man/Women for that matter wouldn't allow or justify anyone to raping 3 girls for 10 years without stopping them. Your justification for this behaviour is weak at best and if I may say a little embarrassing.
Not to mention I'm not the one claiming to have chatter in my mind.and you can continue making no points whatsoever and just criticizing individuals instead of their arguments.
Standard Atheistic response,
Cry foul, when someone wont play their gameWhat game is that, exactly?
Do you have a relevant point to make, or do you just like pointing the finger at the people actually participating?The game of reducing the debate to a duel of personal insults (though ignoring the fact that he possibly made the first one)
His point was relevant (to him, and I can understand where he sees the relevance) in relation to his original statement on this thread. His original statement (and I'm paraphrasing with interpretation) is that our standards of morality are limited and flawed because we are human and earthly beings and as such cannot fathom the mind of God with regards to his works. With this in mind, he basically was telling Rad that had Rad read and understood his initial statement then he wouldn't have made his point. The issue with this, of course, is that being atheists you, Rad, ATM, and others are not bound by the ideas of a God that is higher than you and thus has his own set of rulesYou're close. You see he and others give God a pass for extortion and other unethical deeds by rationalizing that it's beneath us to understand Gods deeds. You would think a God would know that and act accordingly even if our perception is wrong.
Really we are left with two possibilities that come to mind.
God is real and extorts our love with the threat of eternal hell fire on our soul (not sure if a soul would be bothered by fire). Humans being made in God's image understand extortion and know to do so is unethical. Hence the paradox, either God is unethical or extortion is ethical and the mafia boss's will be the first in line.
or
There is no God and those who wrote the bible thousands of years ago didn't think extortion was unethical. So the only way they (some believers) can wrap their minds around God's seemingly unethical deeds is by claiming humans are to stupid to understand the ethics of God's ways.Actually, there is a third possibility. There is a God, but those who wrote the bible either had no clear understanding of him or sought to find a way to control others be instilling fear into them and as such extortion seemed to be the way to do it. Which of course could be against what God intended from the beginning
So, why didn't God do something about that?
I have an answer for that, but not one that is satisfactory for anyone (even me at times), so I will give the best answer I can in this situation ...STOP ATTACKING ME!!.:LOL:.. I'm J/k. my true answer is I really have no idea of why. It could be because of the whole free will thing, could be because one of the other options Rad listed are possible.. I do not have an answer to that one and will not even attempt to give one..
There is nothing wrong with simply saying "I don't know". It is a waste of my time for me to try to rationalize everything by saying "he is God and can do whatever he wants". While this may be true (if...), making that the go-to answer for everything shows a lack of desire to fully examine things as critically as possible because if people examine things enough they should have as many answers as possible then when we run out of answers just say I don't know. It is possible to hold on to beliefs even when you don't have the answers.. that's why they are beliefs.
Chris sometimes says "I don't know" I think that's why I like him as well. It's rather rare.
Fair enough. Notice how easy it is to question religions and find them wanting?
It's very easy to question a belief because beliefs come without full knowledge. Saying I don't know doesn't totally negate the whole system. It opens one up to continue to search for answers or to sit and be happy with the answers they currently have.. I fall under the category of the former. But until I find the answers that I seek for myself, I continue to hold to the beliefs that are working best for my life at this point
There is no knowledge whatsoever contained in a religious belief.
You know as well as I do there are no answers to be found with religions.True, either they are fantasy based or reality based questions.
If you want fantasy based answers or reality based answers.
Yes, we have a choice.
Then without the bible we are left with no clear message of what or who God or Gods are. Perhaps there are many, it's actually a likely scenario that there would be a family of them as then we could at least account for where they come from. Perhaps we are like an ant colony contained in a child's bedroom. We need to recognize that if the text are only partially flawed they may be completely false.
And what game is that? The one where you start insulting with personal attacks because you have no direction in the conversation?
Blaming God for mans inhumanity is the easy scapegoat, take a look and when you understand the purpose maybe you will realise its not what the organised religions keep telling you it's about what is actually in the bible that matters.
There is an issue far greater than whether you believe in god or not, if you can't see it I can't show it to you.Why don't you at least try to show us, or is your opinion of our intellect that low? Maybe if you at least tried to show us, some of us could possibly grasp your great superior wisdom and understanding...even if only on a plebeian level.
I wasn't being condescending I was being truthful. To many people believe that the bible tells them something which it doesn't. There is now mention of hell, hades yes and the Greek word hades pertains to the common grave, hades is a man made idea, the same as going off to heaven when you die, some rewards or punishment for Middle Ages Christians so to keep them in line.
If you have read the bible and understand it you will see the bigger picture then you will know why god isn't interfering, just as with Job the act has to play its way out.
If god is indeed eternal than a few thousand years of mankind is a few seconds on his eyes and a conclusion will come when it comes. But if course you knew all these things already but overlooked them because your priest, pastor or clergy follow there religions theocratic line.
The Devil making a good play of it.And out of the many interpretations of the bible, how do we know that yours is the correct one?
It has to play out like job? Have you read job? God made a bet with the adversary and slowed him to do whatever he wanted to him short of taking jobs life. It is disgusting. Thigh, when job finally cracks after losing everything, god rebukes him for questioning him. How morally repulsive is that story?
Did you read the last part of the story of Job?
Actually god gave him 10 times as much as he had previously. But that's exactly what i am on about, we could read the same bible and come to a different conclusion, mainly because of previous teachings.
No one needs to defend god they only have to defend their own actions when called upon.
I never profess that my conclusion is right Getitrite, i have however read many variations, many editions hand at one time researched as much as i could because i too couldn't and wouldn't believe in a god who could be so cruel, then i realised what was happening and decided that taking the bible as a whole overlaying all the evidence and concluding that there is still more to happen and what ever man does it cant be with gods blessing even if the clergy say it is.No matter which way you try to spend it, the book of Job is one of the worst glorifications of abject psychopathic abuse. Why would anyone pursue worshiping some mentally disturbed monster who purposely tortures weaker creatures just to prove a bet. If God is omniscient, this could only be torture, because He knew the results without allowing the test. And why would He need to prove anything to Satan. I didn't think He had that much respect for Satan. Does He...and why?
Then why are you here doing just that. He could have told us that himself, but for some reason you felt the need to speak for him. Why don't you let him tell us that He doesn't need defending?
In other words, you tricked your mind into believing, despite your best effort at accepting logic and reason.Maybe he will say it, just because he hasn't said it yet doesn't mean he is not going to. Like I said half way through the story and you are guessing the end.
Why do YOU need to tell me that?. Your God is all powerful, He should certainly be able to tell me the same things that you have just stated. Why hasn't He? You are not all powerful. Why are you here stating something in defense of an all powerful being? Do you see just how silly this is?
so the fact that god gave him a new wife, new children and new riches, that makes the abject destruction of everything he had before, the loss of his family, servants and property as well as physical health okay? I don't think so. Job is one of the most disturbing fables in the entire bible - but it's not alone. One of my favorite stories is the two she-bears that god sent to eat 42 children just for calling a prophet bald. Or Jephthah burnt offering of his only daughter. All great lessons in morality.
So should I presume you would be happy if your son is dead and is replaced by 10 others?
I don't know, if you lost your son would you be happy if they were replaced by 10 more sons?
no I wouldn't. No number of "replacements" could take the place of the child that I lost - yet you're claiming that because god eventually gave job more children that it made up for the fact that he gave satan permission to kill the rest of them. That notion to me is absurd.
Well if you read and understood the story then you would see the son and other members of his family cured god and tried to tern Job against god.
The absurdity is in the interpretation of the story.I have read and understand the story. In fact, I've read it in Hebrew. I've spoken to Jews about it. It's amazing what you learn when you spend the majority of your late teens and early twenties working towards a theological degree. Funny, that.
So you know the moral of the story but seem to focus on the incidents in it.
yes, I know that the story is supposed to have morals, but find it completely lacking in goodness or value.
So are you inhuman enough to stop loving your own son if he cursed the person who was, obviously, responsible for the grief inflicted upon him? Would you just forget about your son's death, because he stood up to this bully, but gladly accept gifts from this psychopathic bully who murdered your son, in the first place? Please explain.
Firstly god did not take the sons life and secondly how do you know how I would feel after going through such an ordeal, I can't say because I don't know.
The son and the wife and all the others who died would not have if they were true to god. Also this would have been in a time when many sons and daughters would have died through all sorts of medical complaints and accidents, the loss of a sibling was not unusual.
You should remember god didn't choose Job Satan did and whatever befell Job was Satans doing, god rewarded him for being faithful.Have you read the story? God pointed job out to the adversary. The adversary said "the only reason he worships you is because you blessed him" so god tells the adversary "do whatever you want, as long as you don't kill him" The only reason that the adversary was able to kill job's children (and I don't recall them cursing god at all in the story) was because god game him permission to. How can you justify that?
So many assumptions!
You don't know what would have happened to the son and wife: this was a test of Job, not anyone else, and the pawns in the God/Satan game were just that: pawns. Not worthy of consideration in other manner.
Satan chose Job, with God's permission and agreement. What Satan did to Job was with God's permission and agreement as well; God could (and should) have stopped the game before it even began. Except, of course, Job was just another pawn in the game being played between gods.
And when it was over, God rewarded Job, with a tiny portion of what he had lost.It appears that you lack the basic ability to understand and answer simple questions....without being completely DISHONEST. What kind of mind functions like that?
If not being true to your psychotic God is reason to be killed, then why do you think such a piece of garbage still deserves worshiping? Do the rest of us nonbelievers deserve to just be killed by your bloodthirsty tyrant as well? Why is your God such an insecure little weasel?
Your logic is completely absurd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!maybe you should read the story again
6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.
7 And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
8 And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
9 Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought?
10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.
11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face.
12 And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord.
13 And there was a day when his sons and his daughters were eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother's house:
14 And there came a messenger unto Job, and said, The oxen were plowing, and the asses feeding beside them:
15 And the Sabeans fell upon them, and took them away; yea, they have slain the servants with the edge of the sword; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.
16 While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, The fire of God is fallen from heaven, and hath burned up the sheep, and the servants, and consumed them; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.
17 While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, The Chaldeans made out three bands, and fell upon the camels, and have carried them away, yea, and slain the servants with the edge of the sword; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.
18 While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, Thy sons and thy daughters were eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother's house:
19 And, behold, there came a great wind from the wilderness, and smote the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young men, and they are dead; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.
20 Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped,
Finally, at the end of the story, when god (who has been silent to job through all of these horrors, finally speaks to him out of a whirlwind, and gives him the chance to question him - and then rebukes JOB the guy that he just allowed to be destroyed in the first place:
Moreover the LORD answered Job, and said, ‘Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct Him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.’ Then Job answered the LORD, and said, ‘Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer Thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth. Once have I spoken; but I will not answer: yea, twice; but I will proceed no further.” Job 40:1-5 (KJV)
I won't be happy. But you propose replacing the sons of job was a blessing!
Then, don't praise God for mans humanity.
If you have a god who can be defended or not, your god is too small. My God understands far more than I do about the future or the passed. His economy uses the good and the bad farther into the future than I can even imagine.
Sounds like you are defending your God, because He should have been able to say that for himself.
He has, that's the only reason I could say that.
I don't understand why nice people like you buy into such a vengeful version of God.
It seems once again the non believer believes he is right, he has no evidence as to who god is or what he is, all he can do is blame god for the woes of the world when he understands nothing and will argue to the end of time that he is right and righteous.
The depiction of god as being cruel and horrid is one that others also have especially as they have searched for reasons not to believe in god.
What I ave taken from the story of Job is that if someone keeps their faith they will be rewarded, it also shows that man can endure anything if he believes in it.I know nothing about how Jobs family or even if they believed in god so how can we know whether or not what happened to them was deserving or not. The story is about Job and his dedication.
It certainly shows that just being aware of god is not enough and conviction in and worship of god is required to received the rewards promised..
However if you believe there is no reward then the story or indeed the bible itself is of no use to you and maybe you should look elsewhere.So now you're backpedaling. You originally said that jobs family cursed god so they deserved to die. Now you're saying we don't know.
New International Version (©2011)
His wife said to him, "Are you still maintaining your integrity? Curse God and die!"
New Living Translation (©2007)
His wife said to him, "Are you still trying to maintain your integrity? Curse God and die."
English Standard Version (©2001)
Then his wife said to him, “Do you still hold fast your integrity? Curse God and die.”
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Then his wife said to him, "Do you still hold fast your integrity? Curse God and die!"
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Then said his wife unto him, Dost thou still retain thine integrity? curse God, and die.
Holman Christian Standard Bible (©2009)
His wife said to him, "Do you still retain your integrity? Curse God and die!"
International Standard Version (©2012)
Then his wife told him, "Do you remain firm in your integrity? Curse God and die!"
NET Bible (©2006)
Then his wife said to him, "Are you still holding firmly to your integrity? Curse God, and die!"
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
His wife asked him, "Are you still holding on to your principles? Curse God and die!"
King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Then said his wife unto him, Do you still retain your integrity? curse God, and die.
American King James Version
Then said his wife to him, Do you still retain your integrity? curse God, and die.
American Standard Version
Then said his wife unto him, Dost thou still hold fast thine integrity? renounce God, and die.
Douay-Rheims Bible
And his wife said to him: Dost thou still continue in thy simplicity? bless God and die.
Darby Bible Translation
And his wife said to him, Dost thou still remain firm in thine integrity? curse God and die.
English Revised Version
Then said his wife unto him, Dost thou still hold fast thine integrity? renounce God, and die.
Webster's Bible Translation
Then said his wife to him, Dost thou still retain thy integrity? curse God, and die.
World English Bible
Then his wife said to him, "Do you still maintain your integrity? Renounce God, and die."
Young's Literal Translation
And his wife saith to him, 'Still thou art keeping hold on thine integrity: bless God and die.'Job 2:10 He replied, "You are talking like a foolish woman. Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?" In all this, Job did not sin in what he said.
איוב 2:9 Hebrew Bible
ותאמר לו אשתו עדך מחזיק בתמתך ברך אלהים ומת׃
that's his WIFE. I don't think I ever said anything about his wife. I said his FAMILY. His children were among the first to die - and the bible says nothing about them cursing god. You originally said that they were ungodly, then when I pointed out that it said nothing of the sort, you resort to using the ONLY family member that approached job after all these tragedies? Tell me where the bible said his sons and daughters deserved what they got.
18 While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, Thy sons and thy daughters were eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother's house:
19 And, behold, there came a great wind from the wilderness, and smote the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young men, and they are dead; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.
Additionally - job's wife never cursed god. She told him to. Your point fails - and you still can't admit that you were wrong initially - can you?The implication here, JM, is that they were telling Job to curse God and renounce him because they had already done it themselves. That would be the only way anyone would tell someone to curse God.
his wife, yes. Silver implied that his son had done the same - and that's not the least bit true as I have demonstrated. Silver has contradicted themselves epically.
Technically, his wife is his family.. She was the only family he had left after his sons died.. so maybe silver wasn't too far off the mark (note...)
I tend to distinguish a difference between a spouse and the family. My wife is a part of my family, but she's my wife first and foremost. Not to mention silver singled his soon out, which is incorrect
Sorry mate I was wrong. But then it's obvious that you just blame god for everything and your actions prove it.
How do you know what happened with his children, as the only mention was about what happened to them not why and that's usually how a story goes, it's usually about the moral ( in the bible anyway)
By the way I didn't say anyone deserved to die and I am quite sure you said his wife didn't say what she said, read it in Hebrew I think you said.
No news to me, I started that journey 35 years ago.
How long are you going to go without addressing the substance of the discussion?
People claim their God can not interfere with free well yet when a "miracle" happens the same God is credited. I'm not sure how someone can say their god can not stop a bad person but can save someone who is dying.
Another thing how would this God pick and choose who is deserving for a "miracle" and who isn't? Why weren't these girls rescued years ago with one of God's interventions (miracles)?Why did Jesus only heal a small number of sick people in the world?
If you have the capacity to heal someone so easily, you have a moral obligation to do so. Yet, Jesus did not...if i heal myself from a bad doctors, practice actions' and they see a miracle' because your still living isn't that and obscure sigh? That there is something else in charge ,and that it was witnessed by doctors that are supposed to heal us not kill us!
Here is a defense for you if you knew your father was watching would you pretend that you helped' 'Guide a blind mans cane, to the safety of the curb, or just do it because he was watching?
Related Discussions
- 212
How do you prove something is morally right or wrong without using the Bible or
by Joseph O Polanco 4 months ago
How do you prove something is morally right or wrong without using the Bible or appealing to God?
- 97
An Intriguing Question
by Sooner28 11 years ago
An atheist at a presentation given by the philosopher William Lane Craig asked why, if the holocaust was morally abhorrent, is the flood not even more so? Hitler never favored the near extinction of the human race. The flood, if true, would have wiped out most of the population of the...
- 153
Are Atheists morally superior to believers?
by Rishad I Habib 13 years ago
Atheists sometimes claim that & they do have some reason for such claims. Whats your views on this? & WHY?Remember, exceptions should not be examples. We are talking about the majority of the group not individuals.
- 59
Are you able to keep an open mind when it comes to talking about religion with o
by Steven D Jeffers 8 years ago
Are you able to keep an open mind when it comes to talking about religion with other people.There are many topics talking about religious beliefs, and many of them tend to turn into a heated argument. I am a Christian, and I am strong in my faith, but I tend to keep an open mind and have a good...
- 9
God gave believers Free Will to choose morality. It is ours to choose according
by couturepopcafe 13 years ago
God gave believers Free Will to choose morality. It is ours to choose according to His will, yes?
- 34
Are legality and morality synonymous?
by ilmdamaily 13 years ago
Been grappling with this one for a while now. Can't seem to find a way out of it. Is what is "legal" equivalent to what is "moral"? The question is raised because the justification for the enforcement of many laws these days seems to be that it is "the right thing to...