H1p0cr8s #fundie

H1p0cr8s #fundie patheos.com

If I'm understanding you correctly, you object to Craig believing that it's not ok for him to kill another, but it's ok for his god to. Why wouldn't a god who made something do as he pleases? Why wouldn't he have the right to set the rules for his creation, but exempt himself? I'm not seeing a conflict here, if you consider the position of the man in relation to his god. Now if a man were to set the rules for others to follow, but he himself didn't... oh, wait, we already have that. Never mind...

43 comments

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child."

-Robert A. Heinlein

"Now if a man were to set the rules for others to follow, but he himself didn't... oh, wait, we already have that. Never mind..."

...oh yes, that's right. You've just exposed your own double standards in the matter. It's called right-wing Fundamentalist Christian hypocrisy.

Example: 'Save the unborn child!', re. abortion, but should someone shoot up a school full of kids - and he's sentenced to death, it's 'Execute the monster!' Yet you do nothing to ensure said schools can't be shot up in the first place, because of your more-than God-like worship of the 2nd Amendment.

No school shootings in Japan.

Seems then, that Shinto's Sun Goddess Amaterasu, coupled with their Goddess of Mercy Kwannon, are the few exceptions, re. Sci-Fi author Robert A. Heinlein's quote.

Doesn't say much for your Biblegod, Hlp0cr8s.

old comment by emau99

Why wouldn't a god who made something do as he pleases?

That would depend on whether or not that God wanted to be an immoral tyrant or not.

It's been well established that the concept of "Might makes Right" is a poor basis for morality. If we puny humans can figure that out in our comparatively brief time on this planet, surely an all-powerful, all-knowing, deity would have figured it out eons ago, and have devised out a better, more moral, system for managing its creation.

Why wouldn't he have the right to set the rules for his creation, but exempt himself?

That would make your hypothetical perfect deity the biggest hypocrite in the universe.

I'm not seeing a conflict here, if you consider the position of the man in relation to his god.

Giving life to something doesn't entitle you to ownership of it. Your children aren't your property, to be mistreated and/or discarded at your whim. Why would the alleged author of all morality treat his creations as less than cattle?

old comment by alleigh

I've actually heard it argued (numerous times, by multiple people, in a discussion about whether it would be morally acceptable to kill someone if God told you to) that it's not possible for anything God does to be immoral because morality comes FROM God. As in, if God does it, it's morally right by definition, no matter what it is or how we view it. Things are morally right or wrong because God says so, not because of any other reason (like, say, causing harm or suffering, which is how I'd define morality).

To which I say, I can accept that idea (I guess it sort of makes sense, if you believe in an omnipotent God), but I would have no interest in worshiping someone who justifies murder or other atrocities, even if they were proven to be real. If God kills someone right in front of me, by plunking a sign that says "Now do you believe in me? (God)" into their head, I might well believe in him/her/it, but I certainly won't like them.

H1p0cr8s #fundie patheos.com

43 comments

Confused?