Is God a tyrannical dictator of morality?

[Moonlight Graham]

Many Judeo-Christian religions etc. teach that if you don't follow what is right or wrong as determined by God, you will go to hell etc. or otherwise be punished.

But who is God to tell me (or religions to tell me that God tells me) what I should believe is morally right or wrong? Do I not have the right to respectfully disagree with him, and to have a philosophical debate with him on issues of morality? If I think people should have the right to divorce, or that homosexuals can have sex, do I not have the right to believe these things?

If I were a homosexual, would it be admirable/honourable to defend my right to have sex with my gay boyfriend & so acting & believing what I think is morally just, by accepting whatever punishment (going to hell, purgatory, etc.) God will impose on me?

Do we have a right to define our own morality instead of blindly following what is tyrannically dictated to us by God as stated in a horribly flawed & human-edited/written book?

Am I starting a revolution vs God, and if so, do you think we could kick his ass & dispose of his rule over us if we had enough guns? If successful, should we install a democratic regime of morality where we the people determine what is right/wrong instead of a tyrant God?

[olpfan1]

Their views of God make him a genocidal maniac

there is no love there

he has his "son" die just so he can hang it over our heads for the rest of our lives

Anyone who believes that needs to re-examine their head

[Moonlight Graham]

Let's all assume for a second that God does exist. Would you rather live by your own free thought and concept of what is right/wrong and go to hell, or accept his doctrine of right/wrong and be his bitch but go to heaven for eternity?

I guess if God did exist and created me I suppose I'd already be his bitch, so I'd choose heaven lol.

[Wolf Larsen]

God does not exist, he's an invention of man.

Immaculate conception is the greatest lie ever told.

Religious morality is a bunch of hypocrisy. The holier-than-thou types say one thing in public, and do another thing in private.

[olpfan1]

I believe in a higher power that nobody can speak for

that goes for the Bible too, its just a bunch of stories made by men

The higher power created us to live on this earth and thats all

I believe we're not the only humans out there.. there is probably millions of galaxies with people on them

with the same problems as us

but maybe I am crazy haha

[Guest Manny]

No, God is not Stephen Harper.

[-TSS-]

You have just put into words what I have often been thinking. Namely, when there is a break from main-stream religions it is all too often because those people who break away think that God must be a petty-minded policeman and that religion they broke away from did not match that view.

[cybercoma]

who is God to tell me (or religions to tell me that God tells me) what I should believe is morally right or wrong?

This is a question that points to a strange claim, imo. For religious people, God is the source of morality. There can be no morality without Him in Judeo-Christian faiths. That's one of the reasons why you constantly hear atheism condemned by them. An atheist can't be moral.

[Smallc]

It's an interesting view of humanity, to be sure. It presupposes that without someone to tell us something, we can't learn on our own what is right and wrong. God, in my opinion, is simply a manifestation of the human fear of death. The systems that were designed from that came later, and were built from that central fear of death. As we learn more about our world though, religion and God have less and less of a place, even if the fear of death remains. IMO, it becomes harder and harder to sustain in the face of scientific progress.

[Guest Manny]

Many Judeo-Christian religions etc. teach that if you don't follow what is right or wrong as determined by God, you will go to hell etc. or otherwise be punished.

But who is God to tell me (or religions to tell me that God tells me) what I should believe is morally right or wrong? Do I not have the right to respectfully disagree with him, and to have a philosophical debate with him on issues of morality? If I think people should have the right to divorce, or that homosexuals can have sex, do I not have the right to believe these things?

There's a lot of ways to interpret the meaning if the concept "God". Maybe it's just a way to establish some kind of social order. There needs to be a hierarchy for people to live together in large groups. There needs to be leaders and rules.

There needs to be something to tell little kids when they find ot they're mortal and must die. And sad to say, if people don't have some kind of fear of consequences, they won't be afraid to do whatever they desire. And the human mind can have a very twisted imagination.

Enter God.

There's other good reasons to live by some kind of moral code such as in the bible. Of course, you may disagree and do your own thing. But if/when your pecker falls off from syphilis and you go mad, don't blame "God"!

[Guest Manny]

As we learn more about our world though, religion and God have less and less of a place, even if the fear of death remains. IMO, it becomes harder and harder to sustain in the face of scientific progress.

Really?

There's a heck of a lot of believers out there. Maybe about 50%, or more.

As to scientific progress, it's not the saviour either. We need to know what to do with our scientific progress. Without the idea of a God, without consequences whats to stop us from having an Ayn Rand type of world- all that matters is what I want and what pleases me. There's no obligation to help the less fortunate. In fact there's good justification to just take what we want from whomever we want. Survival of the strongest. The master race. Eugenics.

Here's a big one, imposition of the power of the state over the supremacy of the human being, whom "God" created.

[Smallc]

Really?

There's a heck of a lot of believers out there. Maybe about 50%, or more.

Yeah, and in western society, those numbers are dwindling.

As to scientific progress, it's not the saviour either. We need to know what to do with our scientific progress. Without the idea of a God, without consequences whats to stop us from having an Ayn Rand type of world- all that matters is what I want and what pleases me. There's no obligation to help the less fortunate. In fact there's good justification to just take what we want from whomever we want. Survival of the strongest. The master race. Eugenics.

That's something that supposes, again, that humans aren't capable of being moral for its own sake. I think we are. In fact, since God probably doesn't exist, I know we are.

Here's a big one, imposition of the power of the state over the supremacy of the human being, whom "God" created.

For me to find that profound, I would have to have a definitive belief in God.

[jbg]

Many Judeo-Christian religions etc. teach that if you don't follow what is right or wrong as determined by God, you will go to hell etc. or otherwise be punished.

But who is God to tell me (or religions to tell me that God tells me) what I should believe is morally right or wrong?

My view and a lot of my religion's view of G-d is that G-d created man and the earth and then left the rest up to us, to make lemons or lemonade out of.

[WWWTT]

I have always found religion to be filled with numerous errors.

Much like the saying "when you tell a lie you end up having to say more lies to cover up for the first lie,and eventually you'll get caught in your lie".

Another thing that bothers me is the image of god or "God"

Its always an old white guy with a white beard,dressed in a robe, living on clouds.

I'm not saying that I do not have my beliefs,just that one of them is not a "white old bearded robed man living on clouds that I will only see if I go to heaven after I die" one.

WWWTT

[capricorn]

My view and a lot of my religion's view of G-d is that G-d created man and the earth and then left the rest up to us, to make lemons or lemonade out of.

And making lemons or lemonade is a product of free will.

[jbg]

And making lemons or lemonade is a product of free will.

You nailed it.

This by the way is the thesis of Kushner's famous book When Bad Things Happen to Good People.

[olpfan1]

You nailed it.

This by the way is the thesis of Kushner's famous book When Bad Things Happen to Good People.

Higher power does not intervene in anyones life, I don't know why people thinks it does

shit is just random, thats the best I can explain it

[bush_cheney2004]

Higher power does not intervene in anyones life, I don't know why people thinks it does

shit is just random, thats the best I can explain it

Depends on where you live....this is not random:

[Moonlight Graham]

God, in my opinion, is simply a manifestation of the human fear of death. The systems that were designed from that came later, and were built from that central fear of death. As we learn more about our world though, religion and God have less and less of a place, even if the fear of death remains. IMO, it becomes harder and harder to sustain in the face of scientific progress.

I think it goes beyond the fear of death. I think it seeks to explain those big burning questions people couldn't (and sometimes still can't) answer. Where did humans come from? How did the earth and the stars and the universe come to be? What happens when we die (relates to the fear of death)?

For other religions, like Greek or Roman mythology, it can explain things like why does it rain, why does it thunder/lightning? Why do we have earthquakes floods etc.?

As you say, science has helped answer many of these ancient questions.

[kimmy]

Am I starting a revolution vs God, and if so, do you think we could kick his ass & dispose of his rule over us if we had enough guns? If successful, should we install a democratic regime of morality where we the people determine what is right/wrong instead of a tyrant God?

We already have, don't you think?

Religious people like to talk about how their faith gives them an absolute morality grounded on higher principles; us faithless heathens on the other hand have no basis for morality, or so they claim.

But the Bible is full of ideas that we have rejected (and the same can be said for probably any other religious scripture as well.) We have thrown away a huge number of laws from the Bible, and kept just a few very important principles-- principles that coincidentally happen to be almost universal across virtually every human society.

The Bible says to put adulterers and gays and disobedient children to death; even conservative Christians and Jews know that is morally reprehensible. Would they say that if their religion were a source of "absolute morality"? No, they wouldn't. Their religion's morality has evolved over time and is really not absolute at all. In fact the way people understand and interpret their scripture is a product of the society they live in; as western society has become more enlightened its religion has followed.

I think we've already more or less overthrown god and installed a democratic regime, Moonlight.

-k

[Moonlight Graham]

We already have, don't you think?

...

I think we've already more or less overthrown god and installed a democratic regime, Moonlight.

Yes I suppose you're right.

[Guest Manny]

Yes I suppose you're right.

No she's not. Lot's of people still believe in God, and they have the power to vote.

Also, we cannot "overthrow" something that's not tangible. God is an idea, and it's part of the human consciousness. That's why everywhere in the world there are societies that believe in some sort of god. Even on tiny little islands in the pacific.

You can't eliminate god any more than you can eliminate human emotion. The commies already tried it, and it got them nowhere.

[eyeball]

I think we've already more or less overthrown god and installed a democratic regime, Moonlight.

-k

We still rely on something sitting up on high to inform us what is right or wrong and when and why.

[kimmy]

We still rely on something sitting up on high to inform us what is right or wrong and when and why.

I disagree. We have lots of different forces trying to shape public opinion (and the church remains one of them) but ultimately there's no single source leading it. No prime minister or religious leader or public figure has the power to redefine what our culture understands as right and wrong. These people have what influence they have because their vision fits closely enough to a large enough number of people. If they fall out of step with the vision of their supporters, that influence would vanish very rapidly. If some political leader announced he was bringing back slavery, or if a religious leader announced that it was time to put sinners to death, there would be a mass exodus of their supporters and their influence would vanish in a heartbeat.

Ralph Klein once said that the way to succeed in politics is to figure out where the parade is heading, and get there first. I don't think any politician or religious leader or public figure is capable of directing the parade where he wants it to go. A leader who tries to tell the parade where to go and waits for it there is going to end up by himself with no parade and no further relevance.

-k

[kimmy]

No she's not. Lot's of people still believe in God, and they have the power to vote.

Also, we cannot "overthrow" something that's not tangible. God is an idea, and it's part of the human consciousness. That's why everywhere in the world there are societies that believe in some sort of god. Even on tiny little islands in the pacific.

You can't eliminate god any more than you can eliminate human emotion. The commies already tried it, and it got them nowhere.

I'm not saying that god has been eliminated.

I am saying is that god is no longer (as Moonlight put it) a "tyrannical dictator of morality". The morality that our religions endorse has become (as Moonlight put it) a "democratic regime of morality". The morality endorsed by religions in our society has changed in accordance with the views of our society.

Why did European Christians stop burning accused witches? Because Europeans came to realize that it was barbaric.

Why do African Christians continue to kill accused witches? For the same reason that non-Christian Africans continue to kill accused witches.

-k