god’s problem


Caroline in this post writes that their belief in god demands that they consider homosexuality as objectively immoral.

She goes on to write

The funny thing is, many if not most of those who advocate for the legitimacy, normalcy, and morality of homosexuality also reject God as a moral lawgiver. So they have no objective standard by which to judge its moral status. And without an objective, transcendent standard, they likewise cannot judge the morality of opposing homosexuality.

Religion and by extension, its gods and angels are not the sources of our morality. We act morally because we have reason and are social beings. Without the need to exist in social groups, it is unlikely we would have developed any moral codes.

No man is responsible for his make. So, if we are creatures of god(s), how we turn out is god’s problem, they should deal with it.

It seems Caroline plays fast and loose with her bible to defend whatever position she wants. The good book does says in Luke 6:37, and I am certain Caroline takes these as the words of Jesus

“Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.

In the Euthyphro dilemma, Socrates asks if what is moral is so because god commands it or god commands it because it is moral. Depending on your answer to this question either what is moral depends on god’s whim or god has no control over what is moral.

In a world governed by an omnipotent god, one who only need utter a word and it be done, can one act against such a god’s will? At what point is god freed from being responsible for things done by its minions in a world where it has absolute power and sovereignty?

Advertisements

About makagutu

As Onyango Makagutu I am Kenyan, as far as I am a man, I am a citizen of the world

68 thoughts on “god’s problem

  1. Tish Farrell says:

    That last line is a good one, Mak. A serious question. But at the same time I’m having a weird vision: Fox News are on the case.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. grabaspine says:

    Christianity’s problem is that their God of the Bible doesn’t have an objective moral standard either.
    “Thou shalt not kill (murder)” then he tells Israel to kill (murder) the people in Canaan or Amalekites or whoever he says to kill. He’s “prolife” and anti abortion or infanticide, anti rape and adultry…then he kills David and bathshebas child rather than punish David for rape and adultry… and murdering Uriah.
    The moral standard of the God of the Bible is whatever he happens to say to do or not to do at that particular moment. Not an objective, set standard. Especially not for Himself.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Barry says:

    I’m guessing that Caroline would describe as “un-Christian” the 1992 Statement of Affirmation of Same-Sex Relationships made by Quakers in Aotearoa. Personally I think it’s more “Christian” than her stance, but then I might be biased 🙂

    Like

  4. Swarn Gill says:

    In case she is the type to not post things that disagree with her point of view, this is what I said in response:

    The funny thing is, many if not most of those who advocate for the legitimacy, normalcy, and morality of homosexuality also reject God as a moral lawgiver. So they have no objective standard by which to judge its moral status. And without an objective, transcendent standard, they likewise cannot judge the morality of opposing homosexuality.

    I take issue with this claim here for several reasons, not the least of which is that you have no evidence that those who reject God as a moral lawgiver have no objective standards. Of course I can give no evidence myself beyond anecdotal experience but I can speak for many people I know who reject God as a moral lawgiver that we do have standards. One of those standards would be measure the behavior by the societal harm it causes. Does a small percentage of the population engaging in homosexuality cause any harm to society or individuals within the society? I would agree that if all people engaged in homosexual relationships only then this would be problematic from a survival standpoint, but clearly this isn’t the case. If the relationships are consenting then there is no harm to individuals. Yes there are non-consensual relationships and the spread of STDs but these are also present in heterosexual relationships so this is a separate problem. I would also add that I put the right of personal self-determination as an important standard as long as that self-determination does no harm to others. Dictating what consensual relationships (providing a person is of an age or ability to give consent) may engage in tends to have an adverse impact on society, so giving people the freedom to choose the loving relationships they participate in seems morally right.

    The second problem with your statement here is that you say God an objective standard. I mean what you are really doing is giving God a position of authority and just assuming that everything He says is right and wrong is right and wrong. This is not objective. If we give authority to a dictator that dictator may have unjust laws yet we follow based on the authority given. That doesn’t make the dictator objectively right, just that the dictator has authority. If we look at what God did to Job in the bible, if any human did that to another person we would by any standard say this was morally wrong, but if God does it, well then I guess it’s okay. So again God is given authority, but is not objectively right. In fact God is only subjectively right because you apply a different standard to God than you would to other intelligent and sentient beings.

    Finally what is precisely wrong with subjective standards? Certainly this can be bad sometimes, but let’s say my current knowledge of the world leads me to believe there is nothing wrong with the extraction and burning of fossil fuels, but then I come to understand that it does harm to the environment. I would then change my standard because perhaps the long term harm to life by burning fossil fuels is now greater than the harm of not having unlimited availability of energy to power society. Standards can evolve through time to improve human life and well being.

    Liked by 2 people

    • makagutu says:

      Generally she allows comments but hardly responds to heathens. You know being unequally yoked and all.

      Liked by 3 people

    • basenjibrian says:

      I would also add that the so-called eternal, immutable “objective” standards demanded by God of us sure seem to evolve over time. Just as they would if morality was human-generated. See: Slavery. Or, given the horrible movement of the Overton Window back to the 11th century, is Caroline a fan of “The Peculiar Institution”? If not, what objective, Biblical, God-given reason can she make this claim? I don’t think she can. Maybe Caroline should sell her children into slavery?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Swarn Gill says:

        Absolutely, and I’ve made that argument before as well, I just didn’t feel like putting even more time into it if she is the type to not post the response and/or not reply. lol

        Like

      • makagutu says:

        Those god’s rules are they fixed?
        Is murder wrong at all times? What if you had made a promise to god to kill the first living thing you meet after he grants you victory and there comes your daughter? Do you say killing as bad or as this is a sacrifice it is permissible?

        Like

    • jim- says:

      To scrutinize and thoroughly plow under any belief based on belief is a noble and quite moral thing to do. Nicely done.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. john zande says:

    I left this comment:

    What shall we do with homosexual animals, those that live in life-long same sex relationships, like Laysan albatrosses?

    Liked by 3 people

  6. maryplumbago says:

    All I can say is that I’m just sick and tired of these Christian people and their delusions that allow them to be downright hateful, arrogant and in many cases, quite dangerous.
    If religious feelings would have been built into DNA or brain chemistry in some way to cause a feeling of reverence and care for the earth and all its beauty and fellowship towards all people, think how different it would all be.
    Instead we have this perverted worship of a monster who knows no morals..a worship based on fantasy and a desire to feel superior and righteous.
    I don’t know if the evolution of this is still evolving, but it has been hijacked by the power and control of religion.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. renudepride says:

    As a man without morals and morality who is married to another man without morals and morality, I can for a fact state that we, together, make it *our* business and duty to go out of our way to alleviate the hardship and suffering of others. Our immoral existence is, in fact, filled with others of the same ilk. I’d much rather be myself than a pontificating hypocrite such as those who claim to be “believers.” Naked hugs!

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Caroline is just one more thoughtless Christian, who has to convince herself that her petty hatreds are approved of by some god.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. shelldigger says:

    Great post Mak. I do love me some called out, illogical, sick and twisted, bigoted hypocrisy, in the morning. Love the way you highlighted this asshat x-Ian for what they really are.

    Great comments on this one as well.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. “Depending on your answer to this question either what is moral depends on god’s whim or god has no control over what is moral.” Superb comment. I wanna here the apologists answer this one.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I am shocked, shocked, to find that hypocrisy is going on in Christendom!

    Liked by 1 person

    • heh. It always seems to be the most hateful and fearful of Christians who are most sure that their god reflects them, and who dig through the bible to find the worst parts. Of course, Caroline can’t be bothered to kill those people who dare work on the sabbath (whenever that is since Christians can’t agree).

      Liked by 1 person

      • They must be so sure. Without justification from God and from the Bible, their fearfulness, hatefulness, and bigotry are nakedly exposed for all to see… including themselves.

        What a miserable way to live – to constantly seek reassurance for their malevolence from only a hypothetical invisible being and from a single two thousand year-old book of mythology.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Barry says:

        I don’t think it’s entirely correct to to say that Christians can’t agree on which day is the Sabbath. As far as I can ascertain most Christians recognise that the Sabbath goes from sundown Friday to Sundown Saturday. The argument is over whether or not that specific period must be reserved for the Christian Holy Day. If you search online, you can find a multitude of reasons why early Christians might have chosen Sunday. But I’m not a Christian, so what do I know?

        Like

        • makagutu says:

          My question on this has always been since some of the Christians say gods reckon time differently & 1000days and a day are no different, how do they reconcile these contradictory ideas?

          Liked by 1 person

          • Barry says:

            I suppose what they mean is that an all knowing god can see into eternity so time is irrelevant.

            On the other hand maybe their god has the same problem I have in that I am unable to sense the passing of time. I can’t tell whether 5 minutes or 5 hours have passed without the aid of a clock. Perhaps their god has the same issue as me except on a cosmic scale 🙂

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            An all knowing god would know some people would bee gay and either made it impossible to be gay or not provide any reason for its condemnation, but then, what do i know about all knowing?
            Without a clock, telling whether an hour has passed would be work unless you are out observing the length of shadows. On a cosmic scale, hard work!

            Liked by 2 people

          • Barry says:

            I only need to be able determine time because of other people, it makes no difference to me. If there’s only one god, there’s no others that he/she/it needs to interact with so time wouldn’t matter. It’s all so obvious Mak. I thought someone of your intelligence wouldn’t need my help to work all this out by yourself 🙂

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            Hahaha Barry. God would need to know when to answer prayers, or send an earthquake to kill gays and hurricane to kill atheists

            Like

        • Presbyterians say that the sabbath is Sunday as do every other sect I’m aware of. That’s when we went to church. How are you defining sabbath because what you said seems to be the Jewish sabbath.

          Like

    • Barry says:

      Why shocked? As far as I am aware, all Christians are human, and their institutions are run by humans. Therefore they are no less likely to fall prey to human folly than any other person. And from my personal experience hypocrisy is is just as rife among non-Christians as among Christians. In fact the only person completely free of hypocrisy is myself 🙂

      Like

    • makagutu says:

      There is always room for repentance, penance or better still indulgences

      Like

We sure would love to hear your comments, compliments and thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s