Can God be "morally wrong"?

[gnostic]

If God do exist, and he gave you an order that you think was morally wrong, would you still carry out this order? Could you still worship him?

Let’s just say hypothetically, you were in the same position as King Saul in 1 Samuel 15 (the Amalekite incidence). Like Saul, you’re a king (or queen), God gave you either a direct order or an order through one of his prophets, which is, to kill every man, woman and child, and even infant should not be spared.

To not carry out God’s order, you would lose God’s favour as Saul did.

In the story of Saul and David, the price of losing God’s favour was that God will choose another favourite, and you will be inflicted with paranoia and extreme jealousy, where eventually Saul lost his life in the end.


Could you carry out such order?
Was not God wrong in giving such order?

Is God’s favour worth, having even women and children massacred?

Could you still worship him if what you thought was morally wrong?


In Genesis, God ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, but it was a test, and Isaac was spared. Even though it was not carry through to it ultimate end, isn't such a test, morally wrong?

 

[ellenjanuary]

God is being. Where do morals apply to being? God is unity. Where do morals apply to one?

 

[Madhuri]

God is being. Where do morals apply to being? God is unity. Where do morals apply to one?

Quite frankly, this doesn't make sense to me. Morality is part of One. Everything is.

ETA: I see God as being Within and Without. So while God might not be 'subject' to morals, morality is very much a part of reality and reality is God.

 

[Madhuri]

Gnostic,
I only do what makes sense or feel right to me. If God asked me to do something I didn't understand, I'd ask Him/Her to explain it to me. The God I believe in is not an aggressive or punishing God. He isn't 'jealous' or brutal. In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna tells Krishna (God) that he does not want to participate in the war- he wants to retreat into the forest and live the life of a sage and give up all things material. But Krishna tells him that it is his duty to enter the war. However, the entire text is Arjuna asking questions about why he should and Krishna explaining the philosophy of life, and why it is not wrong. In the end, it is still Arjuna's choice. But nowhere did Krishna say that he would be punished if he chose to walk away from his responsibilities.

 

[gnostic]

God is being. Where do morals apply to being?

Every humans are "beings" too.

God is unity. Where do morals apply to one?

If you applied God as being "good" or a personification of all that's good, then aren't you already applying morality on such being in any case?

 

[LDox]

The Christian God you speak of if it exists is both moral and immoral. After all God is everything. To that end yes God can be immoral.

 

[ellenjanuary]

God ain't got nothing to do with morality, not in my experience. God may have lent a name, but the mortal aligns with the divine. Morality is a purely mortal concern.

 

[gnostic]

God ain't got nothing to do with morality, not in my experience. God may have lent a name, but the mortal aligns with the divine. Morality is a purely mortal concern.

Sure, it's all mortal concern, which is way I think that all the morals, laws and customs written in all the scriptures were written by man, with no inspirations from God or gods. There is nothing divine in the bible, all relating literature; constructs of mortal men.

 

[Man of Faith]

Three comments:

I suspect that if the Amalekites were not destroyed by Israel they would still be fighting them today. The Amalekites attacked Israel when they left Egypt on the way to the promised land and they kept fighting them for a long time. God finally decided to end it permanently. You see the Israels are God's chosen peoples. Don't mess with God.

God cannot be immoral because he made morals. God knows the future and what needs to be done to have is plan completed.

Without a moral maker, there are no morals. If someone says that God is immoral then what they are doing is validating that there is a God and there are morals. If man made the morals then killing women and children are not necessarily immoral and what happened back then isn't immoral.

 

[Father Heathen]

God cannot be immoral because he made morals. God knows the future and what needs to be done to have is plan completed.

Without a moral maker, there are no morals. If someone says that God is immoral then what they are doing is validating that there is a God and there are morals. If man made the morals then killing women and children are not necessarily immoral and what happened back then isn't immoral.

Gotta love the convoluted, inconsistent logic here.

 

[liberator]

who is God?

 

[chinu]

If God do exist,

Not "if", Surely "He" exist.

And he(god) gave you an order that you think was morally wrong, would you still carry out this order?

Yes!

Could you still worship him?

In reality, True worship ment by to carry "His"(god) orders seriousely & wholeheartedly wheather it may give us happiness or any sorrow. (this true worship can be done anywhere anytime)
Otherwise we can see number of peoples worshiping "Him"(god) in temples, churches, gurudwaras & other sacred places for the sake of their incompleate wishes & desires, this is not called worship, In the true sence these kinds of peoples are no more than BEGGERS for "Him" (god).

God gave you either a direct order

Direct order of "God" is:
DO WITH OTHERS AS DO YOU ASPECT FOR YOURSELF.

or an order through one of his prophets

I respect the word "Prophets".
But,Beware! Terriost or the normal people can use the respected word "Prophet" in front of their name.
Secondly, The person who is a true prophet, he/she can use supernaturel powers to do anything, he/she does not require to give any types of orders for any kind of work to anybody.

which is, to kill every man, woman and child, and even infant should not be spared.To not carry out God’s order, you would lose God’s favour as Saul did.

There are more than enough FOOLS preasent on this earth, the need is only of FOOL-MAKERS.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ..........................

In the story of Saul and David, the price of losing God’s favour was that God will choose another favourite, and you will be inflicted with paranoia and extreme jealousy,

where eventually Saul lost his life in the end.

Who on this earth is going to live for ever ?
True prophets or true devotees knows only to Die for Others, not to kill others,
In fact, true prophets or devotees has no fear of "Death", in the true sence they are more happy in dying than of living, for them this false world or body is like "Dustbin".

Could you carry out such order?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ...................................... Amen!

Was not God wrong in giving such order?

I don't want to proove "him" (god) wrong, Nor i can stop anybody who will try to proove "Him"(god) wrong, infact, there is no need to teach anybody, the real need is to teach ourself.

Is God’s favour worth, having even women and children massacred?

"He"(god) never favour such things, But one has to pay deeds, because the souls claim's "His" father (god), for the massacreds done on them.

Could you still worship him if what you thought was morally wrong?

If i am wrong, than what is the fault of "God".

In Genesis, God ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, but it was a test, and Isaac was spared. Even though it was not carry through to it ultimate end, isn't such a test, morally wrong,

Once a man was sleeping under tree, unfortunatlly his mouth was open and one snake entered his mouth, one stranger who was passing nearby saw this, he thought that if he directly told the person, it can cause heartattack by hearing this news, As the stranger was strong enough, So he simply waked the person and forcefully poured plenty of water in his mouth and started hitting on his back, when asked by the troubled for the reason of doing such, he didn't answered anything and contiuned the process for one hour, finally the snake came out.

Now the troubled person was Thanking him for saving his life.

Mean to say that How can we wordly people know the bestow's of "God", he always do everything for our goodwill or to remove the SNAKES of Lust, anger, greed, false attachments & Ego residing in Soul,

BLESSED was abraham, who got rid from false attachments by respecting the divine order of "God".

where eventually Saul lost his life in the end.

Tho shall you bow, so shall you reap.

sorry if by mistake any hash word has been used by me

_/\_Servent Chinu.

 

[HonestJoe]

I suspect that if the Amalekites were not destroyed by Israel they would still be fighting them today.

Well I for one am glad God put in all that effort to ensure ongoing peace in Israel today.

God cannot be immoral because he made morals.

I don't see why. If God says it's immoral to kill people but goes on to kill someone is he not acting immorally. Or do the rules simply not apply to God (presumably due a rule defined by God himself - "Do as I say and not what I do")?

If someone says that God is immoral then what they are doing is validating that there is a God and there are morals.

No, if someone proposes that there is a God, that God has defined specific moral rules but that God has also done things which appears to break those rules, questioning the consistency of that claim isn't automatically accepting any part of it. That God exists but is immoral is only one possibility.

If man made the morals then killing women and children are not necessarily immoral and what happened back then isn't immoral.

Pretty much. It means morality is relative, which makes the whole issue much more complex and difficult to live with than morality being subjective (be it defined by a god or not). The fact relative morality is more difficult isn't evidence that it's false though.

 

[Penumbra]

If God do exist, and he gave you an order that you think was morally wrong, would you still carry out this order? Could you still worship him?

Let’s just say hypothetically, you were in the same position as King Saul in 1 Samuel 15 (the Amalekite incidence). Like Saul, you’re a king (or queen), God gave you either a direct order or an order through one of his prophets, which is, to kill every man, woman and child, and even infant should not be spared.

To not carry out God’s order, you would lose God’s favour as Saul did.

In the story of Saul and David, the price of losing God’s favour was that God will choose another favourite, and you will be inflicted with paranoia and extreme jealousy, where eventually Saul lost his life in the end.

Could you carry out such order?
Was not God wrong in giving such order?

Is God’s favour worth, having even women and children massacred?

Could you still worship him if what you thought was morally wrong?

In Genesis, God ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, but it was a test, and Isaac was spared. Even though it was not carry through to it ultimate end, isn't such a test, morally wrong?

In a monotheist or polytheist model, morality is subjective. If there existed some god external to me that commanded me to do terrible things I'd refuse. It's not worth it.

It takes something like monism to mean that morality is objective (seeing as how only one thing even exists at all). Or in such a case, morality could be debated to be nonexistent or all-inclusive, depending on the specific model.

 

[Madhuri]

It takes something like monism to mean that morality is objective (seeing as how only one thing even exists at all). Or in such a case, morality could be debated to be nonexistent or all-inclusive, depending on the specific model.

Really, really good point!

 

[Skwim]

God cannot be immoral because he made morals.

I assume this means he made all morals, and that you have proof of this, which is . . . . . . .?

 

[Falvlun]

Three comments:

I suspect that if the Amalekites were not destroyed by Israel they would still be fighting them today. The Amalekites attacked Israel when they left Egypt on the way to the promised land and they kept fighting them for a long time. God finally decided to end it permanently. You see the Israels are God's chosen peoples. Don't mess with God.

God cannot be immoral because he made morals. God knows the future and what needs to be done to have is plan completed.

Without a moral maker, there are no morals. If someone says that God is immoral then what they are doing is validating that there is a God and there are morals. If man made the morals then killing women and children are not necessarily immoral and what happened back then isn't immoral.

Christians often claim that the existence of morality, and especially our conscience, is proof of the existence of God. They claim that God gave us a conscience to determine right from wrong.

So, my question to you is, why would God give us all faulty consciences? Why would he make the idea of killing infants intuitively seem so wrong to us if it really was ok in certain situations? Are you truly willing to claim that our consciences-- our God-given guage of what is wrong and what is right-- are wrong?

 

[EtuMalku]

Can God be "morally wrong"?

WHICH GOD???
If you're babbling about the Abrahamic god, then post this in a DIR or please announce the god/faith you are referring to.

 

[Falvlun]

God cannot be immoral because he made morals. God knows the future and what needs to be done to have is plan completed.

A king can make a law and then break it. Hey, look at our politicians. Just because you make the rules, doesn't mean that you are unable to break them.

Now, God could change the rules in the middle of the game and say that such and such is now allowed, and therefore, avoid actually breaking any rules. But I don't think that jives with your understanding of God.

 

[gnostic]

It is morally wrong to kill women and children, even in war. (That's my personal perspective.) And I know that it happen (that children are sometime the targets), whenever God is involved in or not. And I don't condone it, under any circumstance.

And God made it quite clear the children were to be slaughtered, even if they were infants (referring to 1 Samuel 15). To me, that is immoral.

How do you expect me to condone God's will that the children were to be slaughtered in 1 Samuel 15?

Saul did carry out the slaughter, so children were slaughtered, as God ordered. His mistake was sparing the king that had surrendered. God didn't condemn the slaughter of children, he did condemn Saul for sparing the Amalek king.

Don't you think that it is immoral to kill children? If don't think or believe so, then why do you condone when God ordered it?