LHoD:
Well, let’s look at God: He created everything in the universe, including humans. He gave humans souls. He’s the guy who decides who ends up in heaven and who ends up in hell for all eternity. I’d say that has moral value, especially that last part.
Note: Please don’t ask me support my assertions about God. I actually don’t believe them. But the OP is worded such that “if those are true, then would you…”
John Mace, how does any of that have moral value? Could not a petty tyrant with omnipotence have done all those things? Could not a sadist have done them?
It could be our lot to be under the command of an evil, vicious, arbitrary being, and our sad moral duty might be to uselessly defy him.
If there is a standard of good and evil independent of God, then we should evaluate God by that standard. If there is not, then good and evil are not terms of morality so much as descriptions of who’s got the power.
Daniel
True. But part of the deal with God is that we mere mortals are incapable of understanding his overall purpose. And that, BTW, is a real problem I have with religion. But if you do believe in an all powerful, all knowing God, it is quite reasonable to also believe that He has a purpose for things beyond our comprehension. Thus, trying to impose logic on God or God’s actions is completely besides the point.
But how do I prove it’s God? How do I know I’m not hallucinating?
In short, if (it seemed to me that) God came to me and said “Kill the boy, kill the boy” I’d have to assume that there was something wrong. Firstly, I already know that I could not pass such a test, as I mentioned earlier. Secondly, it well-established that God doesn’t speak to people directly today and will not until the messianic age. If He didn’t favor Hillel, Shammai, Rabban Gamliel, Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, Ravina and Rav Ashi, Rav Sa’adiah Goan, the Rambam, Rashi, the Ramban, Rabbeinu Tam, the Maharam, Rav Yosef Caro, The Chofetz Chaim, The Chazon Ish, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein and Rav Pam with the gift of prophecy, I’d say the odds that He will favor me with such a gift are so remote so as to be nil.
Zev Steinhardt
Are you saying that God is not bound by logic? If so, how do you come to this conclusion-because don’t you, in fact, need logic to arrive at this? Perhaps I’m reading a little too much into this, so I’ll delay further questions until you clarify for me what you mean.
Isn’t it kind of God’s thing to pick unassuming people to be His prophets?
There are a few difficulties others already pointed out, like how can you be sure it is really God who makes the request.
Further, the only reason I see for such a request is to “test” you on your belief. I see no other reason since if my child “needed” to die for whatever other reason God decides, God shall do it Himself.
In addition to that, you can be sure that God knows what is in your heart, so such a “test” to know that you believe in Him is in clear contradiction with this.
This makes even that if I kill my child, I act in complete contradiction with what my religion tells me about God, and thus I fail the “supposed” test completely.
So I wouldn’t believe for one single fraction of a second it is actually God making such request and tell the “being” or “voice” or “power” or whatever that is making it to go to hell, giving the above stated reasons.
And I shall add to that, that I don’t believe for one fraction of a second that God would use my innocent child, make it suffer and die, merely to be convinced that I believe in Him.
I don’t picture of the “jealous revenging bloodthirsty God” as described in the Bible as being a very accurate one.
Let be the picture of a God torturing his own son to death in order to have his revenging bloodthirsty nature to be satisfied and able to “forgive the sins of humanity”. Which isn’t correct either, sins that so called “original sin” keeps following humanity, accoring Christian beliefs, and makes a splash of water and some prayers and annointing necessary before it goes away from innocent newborn children.
But that is an other discussion 
Salaam. A
Zev: The OP is asking us to assume that we have already convinced ourselves that it is God who is talking to us. You are saying you don’t accept the premise, which is fine, but then why bother continuing with the discussion? The whole idea is that **if[b/] God were to speak to us, what would we do.
LHoD: What I’m saying is that God is above logic, so yes you could say He’s not bound by logic. If God were bound by logic, He wouldn’t exist. With God*you get to invalidate A = A.
*God in the traditional Judeo/Christian sense, which is what the OP is asking us to assume is the case.
He had discontinued participating and only came back to answer a question, that I indicated would not be for debate, only information. My fault. Sorry, Zev, didn’t mean to suck you back into this black hole.
John, I get what you’re saying, but just because a being is supersmart and planning things beyond our comprehension doesn’t mean that the being is the least bit benevolent. Lovecraft’s Elder Gods were superpowerful beings with plans beyond mortal comprehension; that doesn’t mean that I’d obey Shub Niggurath, Beast with a Thousand Spawn, if she asked me to kill my child.
Granted that God is omniscient and a long-range planner: I still have to evaluate his actions and requests the best I can, according to my limited understanding of ethics. If God wants my cooperation, he’s gonna have to explain himself in very small words to me. Otherwise, I have no way to distinguish between YHVH’s (presumably benevolent) plans and the long-range plans of Nyarolathotep the Crawling Chaos.
Daniel
LHoD:
I understand what you are saying.
So, do you think Abraham did the right thing?
hopefully this won’t quadruple-post.
The right thing? Not really, but that’s difficult for me to say.
I believe that (if you accept the story at face value), he genuinely believed he was doing the right thing. I think his morality, however, was not one I’m comfortable with: he seemed to put more trust in God’s goodness than was warranted.
If he was doing it, not out of a belief that God was good, but rather out of terror, then I’d say what he did was understandable, forgiveable cowardice. It’s one thing for me to say what I’d do in the abstract; it’s quite another to condemn a character for the decision he made when faced with the threat of eternal torment.
I hope I would have chosen differently, and I don’t think Abraham’s choice reflects a good moral system; that’s as close as I’ll come to condemning him.
Daniel
Actually, yes. There is a passage in The Talmud where the rabbis are having a debate over something (I think it was the permissibility of an oven, or something like it). One rabbi, Rabbi Eliezer stood contrary to a team of debate combatants. Rabbi Eliezer, convinced of his correctness, asked God to intervene and prove that he was right, by making a river run backwards, a carob tree transplant itself, and even the walls of the Yeshiva to collapse. (I believe Rabban Gamliel admonished the walls to stay out of it, and the walls didn’t completely collapse, but they didn’t straighten.) Then a Heavenly Voice called out that Rabbi Eliezer was correct in this dispute, and the other rabbis said, “The Torah is not in heaven! The majority rules - that is how you told us to figure out law, and we did it. You’re wrong!” And the Heavenly Voice rang out that it was pleased that it was defeated by logic in the name of heaven.
So yeah, it may seem counter-intuitive, but if God announced something that ran counter to Jewish law, He better be ready for a good debate. He told us that was the right way.
Also, such a decree would run counter to the 13 Principles of Faith enumerated by Maimonades. “God will never exchange the law He gave us for another.” If a spiritual voice told us to do something different than Jewish law, it is a pretty safe bet that we should ignore it. God promised that once He gave us His laws, He wouldn’t change them.
Well, come to find out, this whole thing is my fault.
From here.
Abraham did the wrong thing. Only an asshole would kill his own kid even if God did tell him to do it. God was in the wrong and should have been told to boil his head.
I read that as “Jujubees,” and I thought, “What the heck Bible is that?” 
Our passage today comes from the book of Wonka, chapter 2, verse 37.
That’s a bizarre conclusion to draw from what I said. I never said that Abraham was stupid. I said that YOUR CONCLUSION was stupid. Unless you are Abraham, then no I was not calling Abraham stupid. I simply said that it is entirely within the realm of the believable to think that some people would put their children’s lives as a higher priority than their own soul.
I would assume that God was testing ME and not my child. It would be a pretty shitty god who would punish my child for what I did or didn’t do. Of course, IMO the god of the Bible is a pretty shitty god, and that is one of the many reasons I don’t follow that religion.
Uh… no? That isn’t the purpose of life on earth? You are just chock full of bizarre conclusions, aren’t you?
Umm…Diogenes, I know you think it’s not likely that G-d is likely, but if he is; it’s not likely that he is likely to be a physical entity. So discussions about his interaction with your sacred parts and head boiling are somewhat out of the realm of logic. Now it may be that in your enthusiastic disdain, you are merely indulging in a pleasant fantasy, that only appears to border on delusional and if so; is acceptable in a blasphemous sort of way. If this is not the case, here is a link that might be useful to you, in your time of need. As always, peace be with you.
Shodan, I think your question kind of utterly misses the point of the dilemna. No one was saying that it is impossible for there to be good reasons to kill a child, ever. The question is whether or not we can just trust that such a situation is at hand. The shortcut taken by Abraham, assuming he acted out of something other than utterly blind obedience, to answering this question was:
The core question is: is that shortcut acceptable to take? Can you just assume, based on the word of a being who says he is god, that this is the situation at hand?
I’d say no. But the question is not equivalent or extensible in the way you suggest, because it’s an entirely different and rather simple question (would you do something I’ve basically set up as the only right option?). The OP question basically assumes the “yes” answer to your question.