photo by Luciano Meirelles
One of the most common disputes non-believers have with Christianity (and I would think Judaism, considering the circumstances) is the depiction of morality in the Bible.
As a Christian, I was constantly reminded that God is special and unlike other gods because he valued fallen sinners. I was taught the bible was honestly written because the book shows imperfect people doing horrible things and still God uses them to bring forth his Perfect Plan™. At the time, I believed this was an amazing, praiseworthy reason to trust what the bible said and to love the so-called Author.
Did I ever take an honest look at the morality of God himself? No. God received a Get Out of Jail Free card because according to my beliefs, he was the source of everything that was good, perfect, loving, and just. If he was the source of morality, then he had to be 100% moral (i.e. good). Any evidence to the contrary had to be based in misunderstandings or closed-minded hatred. There was no ability in my mind to think of myself as more moral than my God. If I was, then why worship him? Why trust him? Why should I give up my life for him if my standards seem to surpass those of the Almighty? I wasn’t able to even consider these questions. I had built a protective wall inside my mind: critical thinking and challenging my assumptions on one side—God and faith on the other.
It wasn’t until after I deconverted from Christianity that I took the time to critique this deity and the depictions of its so-called “goodness” that I had accepted my whole life.
Is God moral?
Read the Rest! Post a comment (3)
Image by jemstone
Christians declare God’s perfect justice (Zephaniah 3:5; Psalm 37:28; 2 Thess 1:6-9). But how does God measure up against the imperfect American justice system?
YHWH’s Justice
You are guilty until proven innocent. The laws you are supposed to follow were collected over time thousands of years ago in another culture, but you’re screwed because the laws can’t be amended, reviewed, or doubted. You were born guilty–deserving eternal torture and punishment for something you cannot control. The only way for you to be saved from this terrible pain and suffering is for the judge to kill an innocent person instead of the guilty one. But don’t worry, the innocent guy only stays dead for three days, so it’s only a really bad weekend.
American Justice
You are innocent until proven guilty. The laws you have to follow are agreed upon by your local/state/federal governments instead of just one person; if there is confusion, there will be a final word on what’s okay or not okay to do. Revisions are also possible for the betterment of society. If falsely accused for a crime you did not commit, you can appeal to a higher court. You have a right to be judged by a jury of your peers. You cannot be prosecuted for thought crime. Punishments are not eternal, and only the criminals are punished for their own actions.
P.S. I admit, we all know the American justice system is a bit messy; but its ideals are still better than the theocratic alternative. Oh, and if you’re not American, I’m pretty sure your scenario would be very similar. That is, unless you’re from North Korea.
Last month, a man named John Hunt won his battle to have his record of baptism removed from the church history. This raised some questions, and I hope you’ll tell me what you think.
First, some history.
I was baptized into the Roman Catholic Church as an infant. My mother was Catholic and my father was Protestant, but they agreed to compromise; before you knew it, the stain of original sin was removed from my soul. Or so they believed.
Today, I’m a godless heathen who doesn’t care whether I was baptized, initiated, confirmed, or whatever else. I have left religion behind and I do not believe in a spiritual reality. That baptism was for my parents; in my eyes, it had no effect on me.
Now back to Mr. Hunt. Why do non-theists care whether they were baptized or not? If you don’t believe in a spiritual realm, afterlife, or sin, why is baptism anything more than a splash or dunk of water? It’s an empty religious tradition, isn’t it? Why the fuss about removing it? The only reason I can dream up is that it affects your social status and you don’t want to be identified with that group for legal, political, or safety reasons.
I’m sorry folks, but you can’t undo the impact religion has had on your life; you can’t change your past. I don’t mind if one feels a personal drive to be de-baptized, but all I ask is why?
It’s time to get a little theological up in this piece. In Part 1 I described what it’s like to be separated from God after salvation occurs, and why being close to this deity is up to us weaklings, our work, and efforts.
But how did we get into this predicament in the first place? Where did the separation come from?
First, let’s talk about original sin and the sinful nature of humanity.
Rom. 5:12, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned” (Rom 5:12)
“For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners” (Rom 5:19)
According to the Catholic encyclopedia:
…one man has transmitted to the whole human race not only the death of the body, which is the punishment of sin, but even sin itself, which is the death of the soul…
Well that sucks balls, doesn’t it. Sin is all one guy’s fault (or his wife’s fault, if you’re a fan of that route) according to the Creation myth. Speaking of which, without that myth, would the theology of original sin stand up? Where would the teaching come from? What about the assumption that we’re all born with the ability to sin (sinful nature)? Do non-literalists have a say in where this theology originates?
As far as I can yet understand, Catholics believe original sin can be cleansed during baptism and is not a sin in itself, but rather like kindling for the spreading flame of sin. For Protestants, this fall from grace is evil itself, a sin by its own nature.
The teachings of both Catholicism and Protestantism are clear: every human being is born this way no matter what we do, and the only way to fix it is through Christianity’s solutions: baptism or eventual perfection in heaven. Pretty sweet deal for the leadership, if you ask me. The church tells you you have a birth defect, and you have to follow their specific treatments to be healed.
So what about this separation?
“For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 8: 37-39).
Nothing can separate us from God’s love except sin (Isaiah 59:1-2) . God is all powerful to save and bless humans (Jeremiah 32:17), but he chooses not to because we offend him and go against a moral code (Jeremiah 5:25). God is not a nice guy. He blames us for the way he chose us to be. He chose that Adam and Eve should sin, and he chose that all of that should pass on to us without our choice. He’s not good. He shuts his ears to the cries of his people (Ezekiel 39:23-24). Check out this devotional for a run-down of just how screwed we are.
This neglect and abandonment is, according to God himself, our own faults because we had the balls to be born and act in accordance with our natures. I say this: If we were created sinful (or–to be more palatable–with the capacity for sin) then it’s not our fault; it’s God’s fault. He has the power to make that reality go away, yet he doesn’t. He has the ability to be close to you at any time without your silly efforts and good deeds (aka filthy rags–Isaiah 64:6), and yet he stays away.
The story of humanity is this: God could, but he chooses not to.
That’s not love–that’s neglect at best and malevolence at its worst.
Chris on 
Bill the Heathen on 
jabran on 
Loading ...