Is God evil?

[stilicho]

Originally Posted by stilicho
Certainly the depiction of women is no worse than it is in Hellenistic mythology, where Medusa, the Sirens, the Furies, and almost all of the women in the Iliad/Odyssey are inimical at best and outright horrid at worst.

However, millions of people haven't used Hellenistic mythology to justify the subordination of women and the destruction of entire societies. You can't make the same claim for Biblical mythology.

You might want to re-read your history since an advanced Persian culture was entirely destroyed by Alexander, inspired by the ruthlessness and aggression inherent in Hellenistic culture. Hellenes also deployed a dogmatic philosophy of cultural and intellectual superiority to subjugate tributaries as far away as southern Italy, the region around what became Marseilles, and Sicily, to name but a few.

If anything, the Crusades were rather inspired by the ruthlessness described in Xenophon and Herodotus.

Let's get back to the basics, though. Equal rights for formerly subordinate peoples (race, gender, creed) was a luxury afforded in the occident due to pressures from largely Christian portals. It was Methodism that encouraged the concept of the "Sunday school" to afford working children an opportunity to learn in between shifts in the coal mines. Even the famed suffragette movement was conjoined with religion as a passionate revolt against drunkenness and lasciviousness. The second word in the acronym of the WCTU ought to explain to you its origins and the source of its fervour.

MADD is a contemporary example. You should go and meet these women. They are fascinatingly similar in religious outlook to the old WCTU.

 

[stilicho]

By the way, Elizabeth I, if you do go and meet people from MADD, as I encourage you to do for observation purposes, offer them a name and contact information of somebody you don't particularly like, since MADD is famous for selling your ID information to spammers.

 

[Elizabeth I]

By the way, Elizabeth I, if you do go and meet people from MADD, as I encourage you to do for observation purposes, offer them a name and contact information of somebody you don't particularly like, since MADD is famous for selling your ID information to spammers.

Thanks, I know plenty of people from MADD, and my grandmother was a member of the WCTU.

And whatever you may say, I maintain that it's extremely rare to hear people say, "Get back to your kitchen like the classical Greek women, slut."

On the other hand, it's very common to hear people quote the Bible in an attempt to keep women "in their place."

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The existences of the five cities and others were thought to be myth.
The rest has to be taken on faith, but the myth of the very existence of the cities isn't part of that myth anymore.

The existence of cities and populations in Biblical myths are not the relevant parts of the myths. You are relishing in irrelevant supporting data. But then, that point seems to have escaped you.

Let me give you a more obvious example.

Genesis, (paraphrasing): God said let there be light and there was light.

So we have daylight. Is that supposed to be supporting evidence of the myth?

 

[RobRoy]

...and might go a long way toward explaining recent developments in the Catholic church...

Unfortunately, they aren't recent.

 

[stilicho]

Thanks, I know plenty of people from MADD, and my grandmother was a member of the WCTU.

And whatever you may say, I maintain that it's extremely rare to hear people say, "Get back to your kitchen like the classical Greek women, slut."

On the other hand, it's very common to hear people quote the Bible in an attempt to keep women "in their place."

As I have explained to SG several times, misogyny is rather independent of religious doctrine. It hasn't vanished with "feminism" nor in the rational philosophy of a Rousseau or a Spinoza. In our modern times, in fact, it has become celebrated in music, art, and literature.

Whether misogynists these days are acquainted with the Hellenes is hardly the point. They aren't likely acquainted with the scholarship of religious tomes either.

Singling out the Christian Bible for its misogyny is simply to ignore a larger problem. You could fry the fat out of every single Christian in a fully rational pogrom and you'd still be left with 50 Cent, pornography, and rashly misogynistic literature. A truly sceptical "feminist" ought to wonder why this is so.

 

[Elizabeth I]

As I have explained to SG several times, misogyny is rather independent of religious doctrine. It hasn't vanished with "feminism" nor in the rational philosophy of a Rousseau or a Spinoza. In our modern times, in fact, it has become celebrated in music, art, and literature.

Whether misogynists these days are acquainted with the Hellenes is hardly the point. They aren't likely acquainted with the scholarship of religious tomes either.

Singling out the Christian Bible for its misogyny is simply to ignore a larger problem. You could fry the fat out of every single Christian in a fully rational pogrom and you'd still be left with 50 Cent, pornography, and rashly misogynistic literature. A truly sceptical "feminist" ought to wonder why this is so.

So because irreligious people are also misogynist we should wink at the misogyny of religion? Doesn't the Bible have some pretty strong language in it about beams and motes?

If you want to discuss the truly horrible misogyny of porn, rap, Islam, or any other element of life, start another thread. I'll back you up.

 

[stilicho]

So because irreligious people are also misogynist we should wink at the misogyny of religion? Doesn't the Bible have some pretty strong language in it about beams and motes?

If you want to discuss the truly horrible misogyny of porn, rap, Islam, or any other element of life, start another thread. I'll back you up.

Yes, the Christian Bible does contain strong language. So do Homer and Xenophon.

My original complaint on this thread was that Hosea was a poor example of misogyny in "scripture". That was never addressed and SG hijacked the thread into ever more esoteric goals.

Unlike a lot of the women in the "scriptures", Hosea's wife was named and not provided an allegorical name. That's why most biblical scholars figure that there is at least a modicum of truth in it. Now, SG explained to me that biblical scholars are not to be trusted--"dime a dozen", I think, were her words. That's establishing a most unlevel playing field. It's similar to explaining that structural engineers cannot adequately tell us why the WTC buildings collapsed on 9/11 because, of course, structural engineers are "dime a dozen".

To your point about "winking at religion"--of course not. But the influence of monotheism on advancing us towards a rational world has peaked and now it is up to "progress-driven" philosophy to pluck the baton. Why hasn't it? Why is gender-based politics dead?

The reason is that there is no "masculism" to thwart by championing "feminism". There has never been a gender-based political movement to establish the equal rights of males.

In her arguments about progress and science, SG particularly singled out Meso-America, China and India as examples of polytheistic cultures that had an inkling of calendars, technology, and mathematics. I agree fully with her. But each of those societies were also particularly male dominated and, in some of them still, women could be killed for reasons of gender alone.

Is it simply accidental that Christian ideals of equality were followed by the concept that women were not so frail, uneducatable, or unproductive in other ways than bearing children? Remember who your grandmother was and what she believed.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Yes, the Christian Bible does contain strong language. So do Homer and Xenophon...

What are you talking about?

Most societies up until the late 19th or early 20th century were patriarchal at best and patriarchal and misogynistic at worst.

So what?

 

[stilicho]

What are you talking about?

Most societies up until the late 19th or early 20th century were patriarchal at best and patriarchal and misogynistic at worst.

So what?

We still are patriarchal.

You were the one who mentioned positively that your ancestor was a member of the WCTU. What happened to that?

Again, my only objection originally was the inclusion of Hosea as explicitly misogynistic. The only reason it was included was because SG punched a filtering button on the SAB site.

That was wrong. SAB is a bad resource. I have already established that thoroughly with unanswered examples.

 

[Brian-M]

I apologize for not reading the entire thread (I hope I'm not repeating something that's already been covered), but the question of whether or not god could be considered evil according to the prevailing morals of the times could be resolved by checking whether the bible itself refers to his actions as being evil.

Here's three cherry-picked, out of context quotes to support my specious argument.

But the spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him. And Saul's servants said unto him, Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee.
- Samuel 16:14

Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof, even all the words of the book which the king of Judah hath read
- Kings 22:16

And the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying, Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? because he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the evil in his days: but in his son's days will I bring the evil upon his house.
- Kings 21:28

So in other words:

a) God commands evil spirits to torment people.
b) God does evil things to people.
c) If you beg for mercy, he'll wait until your children are grown and do evil things to them instead, even though they haven't done anything wrong.

It's seems the God of the Old Testament is evil after all.

 

[Ali]

Let's not fool ourselve but let's strive for complete obedience in the Lord.
If you want to be a complete fool thats fine with me, but not with God.

 

[Elizabeth I]

We still are patriarchal.

You were the one who mentioned positively that your ancestor was a member of the WCTU. What happened to that?

Again, my only objection originally was the inclusion of Hosea as explicitly misogynistic. The only reason it was included was because SG punched a filtering button on the SAB site.

That was wrong. SAB is a bad resource. I have already established that thoroughly with unanswered examples.

...aaand here we are back at the beginning of the circle. Whether the Book of Hosea is allegorical or not, if you can't see that the choice of symbol and language is misogynistic, then there's no point in talking to you. If, for example, I want to tell you that you are allowing your talent to be exploited, I could just say that, or, if I have perhaps less respect for women, I could say you were "whoring yourself out." The second phrase is metaphorical, but no less slightly misogynistic for all that.

And with that, I'm through.

 

[RandFan]

Let's not fool ourselve but let's strive for complete obedience in the Lord.
If you want to be a complete fool thats fine with me, but not with God.

God told me what he wants you to do. He wants you to send me all of your money and never eat bread. Bread is unclean and it offends god.

Go in peace.

Hey, why not? Ok, if you want I'll throw in the fact that I rode to heaven on a winged horse to talk to god and he appeared to me as a burning bush.

 

[Ali]

God told me what he wants you to do. He wants you to send me all of your money and never eat bread. Bread is unclean and it offends god.

Go in peace.

Hey, why not? Ok, if you want I'll throw in the fact that I rode to heaven on a winged horse to talk to god and he appeared to me as a burning bush.

I repeat:
Let's not fool ourselve but let's strive for complete obedience in the Lord.
If you want to be a complete fool thats fine with me, but not with God.

If you want to fool yourself that's fine, but God knows how to deal with fools.

 

[blobru]

I repeat:
Let's not fool ourselve but let's strive for complete obedience in the Lord.
If you want to be a complete fool thats fine with me, but not with God.

If you want to fool yourself that's fine, but God knows how to deal with fools.

So who was more important to the rise of science -- God, or Aristotle?

 

[RandFan]

I repeat:
Let's not fool ourselve but let's strive for complete obedience in the Lord.
If you want to be a complete fool thats fine with me, but not with God.

If you want to fool yourself that's fine, but God knows how to deal with fools.

Assuming for a moment there is a lord, how do you know his or her mind? What makes you think you are qualified to speak for god?

My invisible sky daddy is bigger than your invisible sky daddy and if you don't do what I say you are a fool.

Who is the bigger fool, the person who believes in mythology or the person who follows science and turns away from bronze age superstitions?

 

[RandFan]

Let's not fool ourselve but let's strive for complete obedience in the Lord.

Which one?

 

[Ali]

You make science an excuse for foolishness; you confuse yourself with what science has to offer, since you (or anyone else) cannot get very far in it.

 

[RobRoy]

You make science an excuse for foolishness; you confuse yourself with what science has to offer, since you (or anyone else) cannot get very far in it.

Is there something wrong with this statement, or is it just me?