Believers, why are you sure that god has the right moral values?

Great Debates
81

That is not exactly what I was saying in that message.

My point there was not to argue that gods morals are right or wrong. Rather, I wanted to point out, that since our moral values are so different from those held by the god of the old testament, how can believers be sure that they are acting in agreement with god in everyday life. Our moral compass is, I think, useless as a guideline. For example, if you are a believer and you see a drowning atheist, do you think god wants you to save him. And if so, why?
I don’t think I, or god, or anybody, can set up a “Definite and valid moral standard.” That makes as little sense to me as setting up a “definite and valid” standard for taste. But of course this doesn’t mean that I don’t think The Beatles made better music than Britney Spears, or that I dont think people who murder innocents should be put in jail.

82

[QUOTE=Mayo Speaks!]
The question is answered in the thread title: “Believers, why are you sure that god has the right moral values?” The answer is that we believe. Belief is not a matter of logic or evidence or collection of data. It is a matter of a feeling in one’s soul. I don’t know why God created the Universe and I agree that it seems strange that He would require us to worship him. It seems illogical. But in my heart, I believe it to be true. People who are perplexed by what they see as inconsistencies and logical fallacies in Christianity don’t understand this. Basically, if you don’t believe, you can’t understand the mindset of those of us who do.

I’ve been a Christian my whole life. The aforementioned passages in the Bible have always troubled me. But I believe that they fit into God’s plan in some way that I don’t understand. That’s (to me) a decent summary of a definition of Faith.
[/QUOTE]

I appreciate the direct simplicity of this answer. Someone already pointed out to you that their are people on this board, like myself, who were Christians and now are not and we do have a little insight about believing.

My question to you is what exactly do you believe in? Do you believe in God? Jesus? Christianity? All of those probably. Who is it that tells you what those are?
Your minister? Your particular denomination? The weight of Christian history and tradition?

Two of the key passages for me “The truth will set you free” and “God is a spirit and those who worship him must do so in spirit and in truth”
If you believe in God and seek to do God’s will then you must have some kind of commitment to the truth , over any desire to to please your pastor, or friends and family at church. I understand how we can ignore the things that don’t really make sense because we feel good being part of a group. I understand having a hard time entertaining the thought that good people you care about might be wrong. Still, your spiritual obligation as a believer is to worship God in spirit and truth not simply according to the tradition taught to you by people.

In another post of yours you talk about the difficulty of discerning God’s will and even the voice of God within. How do we know if the spirit is guiding us or it’s our own ego and desire. We don’t always. So if God issued a command to kill someone you would have to be absolutely certain it was from God before you did it. Do you want to be that sure about your beliefs as well? Are you willing to question them and seek the truth about them as much as you would seek God’s will about killing someone? Are you willing to really look at the evidence and make your own spiritual judgement call apart from what tradition and others tell you is “right”?

83

Cosmosdan:

I agree with you analysis. And don’t misunderstand me, and think I am saying that one can learn nothing from the bible. What I am saying is that if people are using the bible just as a source of moral inspiration, and don’t think that what is written in it is necessarily correct, then they should be honest about this. And they should stop using the bible to argue against abortion, homosexuality, evolution, or anything.

84

[QUOTE=Shodan]
How do we know that your morals are right and God’s are wrong?
[/quote]

Morals canot be objectively “right” or “wrong.” They are completely subjective. All I can say is that my morals are MINE, and try to stay true to them.
Y

No moral standard has any validity except for the individual who holds it. This is just as true for theists as for non-theists.

No. Morality does not and cannot work this way. Morality is an aesthetic. God can’t establish an objective moral standard for the same reason he can’t establish an objective standard for beauty or for what tastes good. Perhaps even more significantly, God has not communicated any way for humans to KNOW what he thinks is “moral” so a hypothetical divine moral standard would be utterly useless to humans in any case.

If it’s valid to me, it’s “valid.” Just like my taste in music is valid. Theists have a much larger problem in that they have absolutely no way to KNOW anything about their imagined divine morality. Can you prove that theistic morality is derived from anywhere but the asses of theists? If not, then how can you know it’s “valid?”

How do you know what morality is “God-based?” Until you can answer that question, your morality is every bit as subjective, arbitrary and personal as the athi-est atheist.

]

85

I agree with the viewpoints you expressed in your post, especially that morality is and aesthetic.

I would just like to comment that if you believe that the OT is the word of god, then god has communicated at least some of his moral values to us.

86

[QUOTE=mr. jp]
I agree with the viewpoints you expressed in your post, especially that morality is and aesthetic.

I would just like to comment that if you believe that the OT is the word of god, then god has communicated at least some of his moral values to us.
[/QUOTE]

You still can’t KNOW that the Bible is the word of God, so the decision to accept it as authoritative is ultimately still completely autocratic and personal. You can’t accept that authority without first deciding - all by yourself - that it is “moral” to do so.

And even if you do accept the Bible as morally authoritative you still have a problem in that the Bible does not present a clear, consistent and coherent moral code in the first place. You still have to interpret, cherry pick, harmonize and syncretize some things on your own (either that or make an autocratic moral decision to trust the interpretations of other humans).

87

[QUOTE=crowmanyclouds]
How would you know the difference?

CMC fnord!
[/QUOTE]

If God wanted something to be unambiguous, He would make it unambiguous.

Mayo fnord!

88

[QUOTE=Mayo Speaks!]
If God wanted something to be unambiguous, He would make it unambiguous.
[/QUOTE]

How so?

89

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
I appreciate the direct simplicity of this answer. Someone already pointed out to you that their are people on this board, like myself, who were Christians and now are not and we do have a little insight about believing.

My question to you is what exactly do you believe in? Do you believe in God? Jesus? Christianity? All of those probably. **Who is it that tells you what those are? **
Your minister? Your particular denomination? The weight of Christian history and tradition?

Two of the key passages for me “The truth will set you free” and “God is a spirit and those who worship him must do so in spirit and in truth”
If you believe in God and seek to do God’s will then you must have some kind of commitment to the truth , over any desire to to please your pastor, or friends and family at church. I understand how we can ignore the things that don’t really make sense because we feel good being part of a group. I understand having a hard time entertaining the thought that good people you care about might be wrong. Still, your spiritual obligation as a believer is to worship God in spirit and truth not simply according to the tradition taught to you by people.

In another post of yours you talk about the difficulty of discerning God’s will and even the voice of God within. How do we know if the spirit is guiding us or it’s our own ego and desire. We don’t always. So if God issued a command to kill someone you would have to be absolutely certain it was from God before you did it. Do you want to be that sure about your beliefs as well? Are you willing to question them and seek the truth about them as much as you would seek God’s will about killing someone? Are you willing to really look at the evidence and make your own spiritual judgement call apart from what tradition and others tell you is “right”?
[/QUOTE]
(bolding mine)

What exactly do you believe in? Good question. I consider myself a Christian, maning that I believe that Jesus is the Son of God the Father and that he died for the sins of all humanity.

Who is it that tells you what those are? The Bivle is one, my family, friends, denomination, and pastor are others. But primarily, it comes from within. I heard the stories and explanations in Sunday School, searched my heart, and realized that I found it true in my soul. And that (my heart and soul) is where I continue to look when I have questions about the nature of God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, myself, Christianity, morality, etc.

How do we know if the spirit is guiding us or it’s our own ego and desire. We don’t always. So if God issued a command to kill someone you would have to be absolutely certain it was from God before you did it. Do you want to be that sure about your beliefs as well? I wrestle with this daily. I am sure that my ego and selfish desires often prevent me from hearing God clearly. But while I don’t always get the specifics that God is trying to tell me, I get the basic message: love God, love your fellow man, try to discover and do what is right, and remain open to the voice of God. I can devote my life to that, even if I make mistakes along the way. That is what I believe I (and indeed all of us) should do in life.

I appreciate everyone’s interest and questions in my spirituality and morality, and I’m glad to answer them elsewhere. However, I seem to have inadvertantly derailed this thread from the OP and turned the focus onto myself, so I shall now gracefully leave it.

All the best.

90

[QUOTE=Shodan]
Theists at least can claim that God established a moral standard, sort of how He established the law of gravity. Very much like the computer program example above, where x = 14 because the coder said so. Non-theists don’t have any way to establish the validity of their standard, whatever it is. Thus it tends to wind up in arguments that “God-based morality is arbitrary and wrong because I say so”, which is essentially meaningless.
[/QUOTE]

I believe if God exists he could set up an objective morality system. It would have more validity than mine, because it is in line (thanks to him) with the overall objective standards of the universe.

On the other hand, my morality system is based on causing people the least amount of harm, and the most amount of pleasure/enjoyment. In that way it has more value to God’s system, as more people are likely to be happier with mine.

I as a non-theist believe that if there is an objective moral system, set up by God, my totally subjective system still has more worth.

91

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]

No. Morality does not and cannot work this way. Morality is an aesthetic. God can’t establish an objective moral standard for the same reason he can’t establish an objective standard for beauty or for what tastes good. Perhaps even more significantly, God has not communicated any way for humans to KNOW what he thinks is “moral” so a hypothetical divine moral standard would be utterly useless to humans in any case.
[/QUOTE]

Putting aside God’s existance or lackthereof, and his ability to communicate his will to humanity, why can’t their be an objective moral standard? Why can’t it be that “Doing X is wrong for everyone everywhere.”

92

I don’t follow you.

ISTM that by definition, an objective standard is more valid than any subjective one. Arguing that some subjective one is better than that is like arguing that even if two plus two equals four, the belief that two plus two equals ninety-six is better. I don’t think “better” can have any meaning in that context.

[QUOTE=mr. jp]
That is not exactly what I was saying in that message.

My point there was not to argue that gods morals are right or wrong. Rather, I wanted to point out, that since our moral values are so different from those held by the god of the old testament, how can believers be sure that they are acting in agreement with god in everyday life. Our moral compass is, I think, useless as a guideline. For example, if you are a believer and you see a drowning atheist, do you think god wants you to save him. And if so, why?
[/QUOTE]
Okay, gotcha then.

This is more of a problem for Jews than for Christians. Christians base their morality on the life and teachings of Jesus, not necessarily the Old Testament. I would argue that when ancient Jews believed that God ratified their decisions to kill large numbers of their enemies, they were mistaken.

But I think the idea of an evolving understanding of God makes sense, from a purely tribal god who smites and favors, thru the official diety of the Jewish kingdoms, and finally culminating in the life and works of Jesus, who fulfills the old covenant and creates a new one in His blood. Under that new covenant, the law is “love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength, and love your neighbor as you love yourself”. And, since Jesus established this as the new covenant, then the only question that needs to be asked to find out what is moral is, “what would Jesus do?” Then do that.

If you are asking how I can be 100% sure I am doing God’s will, the short answer is that I can’t. I don’t know the complete will of God, and I can’t follow it perfectly, any more than I can draw a perfect circle or predict the weather. But I believe we are expected to do the best we can, and, for when we can’t or don’t, there is a thing called forgiveness.

Regards,
Shodan

93

[QUOTE=Captain Amazing]
Putting aside God’s existance or lackthereof, and his ability to communicate his will to humanity, why can’t their be an objective moral standard? Why can’t it be that “Doing X is wrong for everyone everywhere.”
[/QUOTE]

An objective moral standard would have to cover more than a couple of things. There are certainly some acts that can be universally condemned, but they are a small minority of the things we can do. Where we are, our relationships, and our culture all impact what a moral standard should be. There are some things vitally important 2600 years ago that are of no matter now, and moral issues today (like genetic engineering) which could not be conceived of 2600 years ago.

If there were a God, and he did have an absolute moral standard, no book could reflect it - he’d have to arrange for an interactive “Dear Abby” service to answer our questions. I think Jerry Falwell claims to be such a service, but his legitimacy is a bit in doubt.

94

[QUOTE=Captain Amazing]
Putting aside God’s existance or lackthereof, and his ability to communicate his will to humanity, why can’t their be an objective moral standard? Why can’t it be that “Doing X is wrong for everyone everywhere.”
[/QUOTE]

For the same reason that their can’t be an objective standard for beauty. Moral standards are subjective, personal, emotional and cognitive responses to stimuli. Those emotional responses are the “morality.”

95

[QUOTE=Shodan]
How do we know that your morals are right and God’s are wrong?

You seem to be positing a definite and valid moral standard. On what is that based, and how do you justify it?

Theists at least can claim that God established a moral standard, sort of how He established the law of gravity. Very much like the computer program example above, where x = 14 because the coder said so. Non-theists don’t have any way to establish the validity of their standard, whatever it is. Thus it tends to wind up in arguments that “God-based morality is arbitrary and wrong because I say so”, which is essentially meaningless.

Regards,
Shodan
[/QUOTE]

I wonder who says God’s morals are wrong just because they say so? Perhaps contradictory moral messages have something to do with it? (For instance, thou shall not murder, but thou shall kill the children of interfering tribes.) Perhaps that morals changed between the OT and the NT, which falsifies the claim of absolute morals? Perhaps that there are nearly universally accepted morals today which contradict those of the Bible?

I agree with Dio that morals are not absolute, but I do think that morals based on a well-thought out ethical system are more likely to be useful than those spewed out from the likes of say, Fred Phelps.

The OT clearly states (and I can look it up) that someone attempting to change the religion of a Jew should be put to death. Since I don’t believe in Biblical morality, missionaries who come to my door don’t need to fear being blown away. Perhaps you think I’m wrong about this.

96

[QUOTE=Shodan]

This is more of a problem for Jews than for Christians. Christians base their morality on the life and teachings of Jesus, not necessarily the Old Testament. I would argue that when ancient Jews believed that God ratified their decisions to kill large numbers of their enemies, they were mistaken. .

Regards,
Shodan
[/QUOTE]

If you believe the story, how could they be mistaken? This was God’s direct command to Moses, and other direct commands and orders to the same group came true in spectacular ways. This was the group who went through the Passover, crossed the Red Sea, followed the pillar of fire, and was fed by manna. If some priest in a temple said the order was god’s command, sure, but even I would be a believer after going through all that.

Sorry, I know you’d rather deny it, but if you do you should throw out the entire Exodus story. Once you throw that out, you might as well throw out everything. There is no God, and Jesus is his son.

From what I can tell, most Christians base their morality on a lot more than the teachings of Jesus. Is Paul totally ignored? Do no Christians quote OT verses as justification? Plus, while Jewish law, being tribal, does not apply to gentiles, Christians seem to be a bit more catholic. If God truly gave a moral command, that was not clearly ritual, why would it be changed and why should it not apply to everyone? How can God assert absolute morality if he changes his mind?

97

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
For the same reason that their can’t be an objective standard for beauty. Moral standards are subjective, personal, emotional and cognitive responses to stimuli. Those emotional responses are the “morality.”
[/QUOTE]

But moral standards are a set of rules…you know, do x, don’t do y, treat this group of people like this, etc. So why can’t there be one set of rules that should apply to everybody in the world? I’m not saying one set of rules that everybody agrees with or believes in…I’m saying one set of rules that are true whether other people believe them or not.

98

Yeah, I was still assuming the premise of the original post, namely that the OT is the word of god.

If the christians think the old testament is not the word of god, but just some old text, large parts (all the killing) of which is false, then will you not agree that it shouldnt be allowed to make arguments based on it? But yet christians use it argue against abortions, evolution, etc.

99

[QUOTE=Shodan]
This is more of a problem for Jews than for Christians. Christians base their morality on the life and teachings of Jesus, not necessarily the Old Testament. I would argue that when ancient Jews believed that God ratified their decisions to kill large numbers of their enemies, they were mistaken.
[/quote]

When you say you base your morality on “the life and teachings of Jesus,” what you really mean is that you base it on your interpretation of the New Testament (a book written by humans) in which “Jesus” is a character who may or may not have said and done the things which humans who never met him claim he did and taught. You are, in effect, deciding to submit to the moral authority of other human beings and trust that they are telling the truth even though they frequently contradict each other, make factual errors and make claims which could not possibly be true (and I’m not just talking about miracles).

Your comments on the Hebrew Bible seem to imply a personal belief that it is not imbued with the same divine moral authority or “truthfulness” as the NT. If that is the case, then how did you come to that decsion? Is it wrong for Christians to include the OT as part of their Canon?

This was a Pharisaic teaching well before Jesus.

How can you know any of God’s will? How can you ever possibly know what Jesus would do?

How do you know it is “right” to do what Jesus would do?

Regards,
Shodan
[/QUOTE]

100

Yeah, I was still assuming the premise of the original post, namely that the OT is the word of god.

If the christians think the old testament is not the word of god, but just some old text, large parts (all the killing) of which is false, then will you not agree that it shouldnt be allowed to make arguments based on it? But yet christians use it to argue against abortions, evolution, etc.