Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    CC Candidate Master Gnostic Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    402

    Is Yahweh breaking an objective moral tenet?

    Is Yahweh breaking an objective moral tenet?

    I have found few examples of an objective moral tenet but think that, --- the good of the many, outweighs the good of the few, --- to be an objective moral tenet. It seems correct in all situations.

    You might disagree with an example where this tenet is not objective or applicable.

    Yahweh seems to put the good of the few ahead of the good of the many. Scriptures indicate that the many will end in hell while the few will end in heaven.

    In thinking of this, I also thought that Yahweh was breaking another moral tenet by putting his life above his own child’s. He sent Jesus to die instead of stepping up himself, to appease his own wrath against man.

    Should fathers put themselves and their lives above their children’s, or should fathers protect their children at all costs?

    I know that few like to answer moral questions as we all have a bit of moral coward in us.

    Do try to answer both of my questions please.

    Regards
    DL

  2. #2
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Gnostic Bishop View Post
    I have found few examples of an objective moral tenet but think that, --- the good of the many, outweighs the good of the few, --- to be an objective moral tenet. It seems correct in all situations.
    Without getting into alleged deeds of alleged Yahwehs, it is not that simple. Even if one accepted that there were any moral tenets at all, and that in some sense maximising the good was one of them, there are many subsidiary questions to consider:

    * How much good for the many vs how much good for the few? A significant amount of good for the few may outweigh an insignificant benefit for the many.

    * How much good do the many and the few already have? If the few are very deprived of the good, then a certain amount of it for them may outweigh the same amount for the many. (Essentially this may collapse into the first question - giving a dollar to a poor person rather than a rich person provides the poor person with more benefit, unless they immediately waste it.)

    * Who is more worthy of the good? If the many are criminals, perhaps they don't deserve it. This is probably the defence that hellfire-believing Christians would attempt, the problem with it being that it the underlying doctrine of original sin is monstrously unjust and any deity employing it would be obviously evil.

    Should fathers put themselves and their lives above their children’s, or should fathers protect their children at all costs?
    When it comes to humans I would say there isn't a right answer. It may be noble for a father to sacrifice his life to save his child, but that doesn't mean it's wrong for him not to.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    7,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Gnostic Bishop View Post
    Is Yahweh breaking an objective moral tenet? I have found few examples of an objective moral tenet but think that, --- the good of the many, outweighs the good of the few, --- to be an objective moral tenet. It seems correct in all situations.
    That is a rather extreme form of the ethical philosophy of utilitarianism. I can think of many cases where most people would reject its application. For example, I'm in favour of progressive taxation, but I'm not in favour of taking so much money from Bill Gates that he's reduced to a mere millionaire, even though that could benefit an enormous number of people. A communist would probably have a different view, of course.

  4. #4
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    7,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    ... * Who is more worthy of the good? If the many are criminals, perhaps they don't deserve it. This is probably the defence that hellfire-believing Christians would attempt, the problem with it being that it the underlying doctrine of original sin is monstrously unjust and any deity employing it would be obviously evil.
    Based on his recorded speech, I think we can safely say that Yahweh is a deontologist, rather than an utilitarian In other words, if you follow his rules, he rewards you; if you don't, he punishes you.

  5. #5
    CC Candidate Master Gnostic Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    Without getting into alleged deeds of alleged Yahwehs, it is not that simple. Even if one accepted that there were any moral tenets at all, and that in some sense maximising the good was one of them, there are many subsidiary questions to consider:

    * How much good for the many vs how much good for the few? A significant amount of good for the few may outweigh an insignificant benefit for the many.

    * How much good do the many and the few already have? If the few are very deprived of the good, then a certain amount of it for them may outweigh the same amount for the many. (Essentially this may collapse into the first question - giving a dollar to a poor person rather than a rich person provides the poor person with more benefit, unless they immediately waste it.)

    * Who is more worthy of the good? If the many are criminals, perhaps they don't deserve it. This is probably the defence that hellfire-believing Christians would attempt, the problem with it being that it the underlying doctrine of original sin is monstrously unjust and any deity employing it would be obviously evil.



    When it comes to humans I would say there isn't a right answer. It may be noble for a father to sacrifice his life to save his child, but that doesn't mean it's wrong for him not to.
    I disagree, given that in this case, Yahweh had a choice to make and made the wrong one. Things were even and he still chose to have his son die to fill Yahweh's own requirement for a sacrifice.

    I cannot reply to your anecdotal examples as I do not have enough information.

    I do agree with Yahweh being evil. That is a Gnostic Christian view that I share.

    regards
    DL

  6. #6
    CC Candidate Master Gnostic Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    That is a rather extreme form of the ethical philosophy of utilitarianism. I can think of many cases where most people would reject its application. For example, I'm in favour of progressive taxation, but I'm not in favour of taking so much money from Bill Gates that he's reduced to a mere millionaire, even though that could benefit an enormous number of people. A communist would probably have a different view, of course.
    I too favor a just taxation system. The one in place today favors the few rich, who are supposed to use their gift from the tax man to produce more jobs.

    They do not do so in great enough numbers, while they can well afford it thanks to screwing regular tax payers all of these past years.

    I like billionaires, when they do what they are supposed to do.

    Regards
    DL

  7. #7
    CC Candidate Master Gnostic Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Based on his recorded speech, I think we can safely say that Yahweh is a deontologist, rather than an utilitarian In other words, if you follow his rules, he rewards you; if you don't, he punishes you.
    The problem is that his rules are satanic just as his religion is.

    What else can be said of s homophobic and misogynous religion?

    Regards
    DL

  8. #8
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Gnostic Bishop View Post
    I disagree, given that in this case, Yahweh had a choice to make and made the wrong one. Things were even and he still chose to have his son die to fill Yahweh's own requirement for a sacrifice.
    I wrote "When it comes to humans". In the purported Yahweh case the whole thing is absurd because there is no need for anyone to die. It is also absurd because Jesus only dies temporarily - granted, he has a miserable time of it dying, but then he comes back a few days later and is supposedly still around, perhaps even to return in physical form. This undermines the value of the "sacrifice" - what has Jesus lost that he now cares about?

    I cannot reply to your anecdotal examples as I do not have enough information.
    They were general hypotheticals, not anecdotes.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  9. #9
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    7,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Gnostic Bishop View Post
    The problem is that his rules are satanic just as his religion is. What else can be said of s homophobic and misogynous religion?
    Regards
    DL
    I'm not saying that I agree with the rules. And most Christians also seem to agree that the rules largely don't work in practice, so they just ignore the ones that don't seem appropriate.

  10. #10
    CC Candidate Master Gnostic Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    I wrote "When it comes to humans". In the purported Yahweh case the whole thing is absurd because there is no need for anyone to die. It is also absurd because Jesus only dies temporarily - granted, he has a miserable time of it dying, but then he comes back a few days later and is supposedly still around, perhaps even to return in physical form. This undermines the value of the "sacrifice" - what has Jesus lost that he now cares about?



    They were general hypotheticals, not anecdotes.
    Thanks for this.

    Regards
    DL

  11. #11
    CC Candidate Master Gnostic Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    I'm not saying that I agree with the rules. And most Christians also seem to agree that the rules largely don't work in practice, so they just ignore the ones that don't seem appropriate.
    Hipocracy, and forcing it onto people, is one of the reasons I dislike the supernatural god religions.

    It creates fools and hypocrites by it's very description and reliance on the faith of fools.

    Regards
    DL

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Was Jesus aware of being Yahweh?
    By Gnostic Bishop in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 13-05-2020, 03:43 AM
  2. Moral Victories
    By machomortensen in forum Australian Chess History
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21-06-2012, 02:28 PM
  3. Primary Objective of Chess
    By TheJoker in forum General Chess Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 22-05-2009, 11:15 PM
  4. Specific Type of Moral Dilemma
    By Aaron Guthrie in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 07-05-2007, 07:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •