Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Perhaps after reading the title for this thread, one could become enflamed. Yet chill for a second and engage this topic honestly. When we think about it, who are we to accuse God of something? If you disagree with God on something, its not like you can override Him. In this, when it comes to God, all of us are in the same boat. I'm not better than you, and you are not better than me. I'm not smarter than you, you are not smarter than me. When it comes to God, our accolades mean nothing. Our very lives mean nothing. The only reasonable thing to do concerning Him, is bow and prostrate ourselves in His presence.
Now, of course I say all of this if He is real (and yall know I believe on Yahweh) If you would indulge me for a second, pretend God or a god is real, that is to say the creator of the universe. How can we legitimately accuse Him of something like being evil or doing wrong? For instance in the Bible, God floods the world due to His judgment of the people in Noah's day. Was God wrong for doing that? If you think He was, who are you to criticize God? (Hence the title of the thread )
Now for everyone, I'm laughing, I'm having a little bit of fun asking this. Yet let's look at this in another way. All of us have dealt with insects in our homes right? If we saw a spider and squashed it, nobody would call you a murderer. I'm not saying God sees us as bothersome insects, but we certainly didn't create the insects. What right do we have to take their lives? Yet nobody cares (for the most part) if we swat flies, clapped mosquitoes out of existence, or blast a can of raid on a cockroach. If we have the right to do those things to creatures we had no part in making, how much more the creator and owner of the universe have the right to do what He wills with His own creation? From a philosophical standpoint, I believe we can agree to this summation. If not, discuss why not.
Who do you think you are, to claim to speak for god? How are your claims superior to all the other (often conflicting) claims out there?
Who do you think you are, to claim to know the One True God(tm)? To disparage the devotion and piety of every follower of, say, Allah, Vishnu, or Odin?
Who does anyone think they are, to decide what is right and wrong and which to embrace?
We are all moral agents, doing the best we know how to. I maintain that what success looks like for any moral system is whether it objectively increases beneficial outcomes and reduces harmful ones, whether it increases or decreases human suffering. And not just in some abstract, theoretical sense, but in lived experience.
I am where I am because of self reflection over several decades about what works and what doesn't for me and, what I have observed to work best for others. As well as what compassion informs me would best help suffering fellow humans I encounter along the way, where and when I have an opportunity to be of help to them on their journey.
I am not a christian. I don't believe in a creator god at this point in my life. So I am free to critique the bible and anything related to it.
I agree, but we have an imagination. So if God or a god/gods existed, more specifically if a creator of this universe existed, could we legitimately criticize him?
I agree, but we have an imagination. So if God or a god/gods existed, more specifically if a creator of this universe existed, could we legitimately criticize him?
Yes. Why not. (notice that's a period not a question mark)
Who do you think you are, to claim to speak for god? How are your claims superior to all the other (often conflicting) claims out there?
Who do you think you are, to claim to know the One True God(tm)? To disparage the devotion and piety of every follower of, say, Allah, Vishnu, or Odin?
Who does anyone think they are, to decide what is right and wrong and which to embrace?
We are all moral agents, doing the best we know how to. I maintain that what success looks like for any moral system is whether it objectively increases beneficial outcomes and reduces harmful ones, whether it increases or decreases human suffering. And not just in some abstract, theoretical sense, but in lived experience.
I am where I am because of self reflection over several decades about what works and what doesn't for me and, what I have observed to work best for others. As well as what compassion informs me would best help suffering fellow humans I encounter along the way, where and when I have an opportunity to be of help to them on their journey.
If we assume there is a creator, would you agree we couldn't criticize his actions?
If we assume there is a creator, would you agree we couldn't criticize his actions?
Not at all.
If we assume an infallible, all powerful, but insecure and emotionally unstable creator -- as opposed to all the other possible qualities it might have -- such a creator might well forbid inquiry or questions, or decline to give explanations beyond, "because I said so" or "trust me". And it might shoot lightning bolts or drop pianos on people who do so.
But if we assume a deity who is not jealous and proud enough of it to say so, a deity that is mature and truly all powerful (meaning non-dependent on anyone or anything, including whether their creations ever have the temerity to question them) -- why, they might be happy to answer questions, or they might simply ignore the questions. Maybe the puny humans would klutz around in their laboratories and french philosophy cafes and eventually figure out answers. Who knows?
What if the creator wandered off and got interested in something else and is nowhere to be found? Or is simply indifferent for whatever reason?
What if the creator is malevolent and sadistic, like a child who pulls the wings off flies?
You see, in "assuming there is a creator" you aren't saying much. You talk in generic terms, but what you really mean is "assuming the creator is who and what I think it is, that is the Jewish war god, Yaweh, absolute despot of heaven and earth who will in my particular understanding of him brook no dissent or even questioning because none are worthy and he is a jealous god". However, even THAT god is said to have stated, "come, let us reason together, says the Lord". So ... even assuming your pet god concept, he actually wants to have a relationship with us and so one would think would welcome respectful and intelligent questions and also, one would think, keep his many lavish and oddly specific promises, such as blessing the righteous and confounding the wicked.
Sand & Salt is absolutely right, "god can take it". He is, after all ... god.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yet chill for a second and engage this topic honestly. When we think about it, who are we to accuse God of something? If you disagree with God on something, its not like you can override Him. In this, when it comes to God, all of us are in the same boat. I'm not better than you, and you are not better than me. I'm not smarter than you, you are not smarter than me. When it comes to God, our accolades mean nothing. Our very lives mean nothing. The only reasonable thing to do concerning Him, is bow and prostrate ourselves in His presence.
)