Passing the test

[_Inconceivable]

Jesus, UNLIKE all the tens of thousands of the ANIMALS slaughtered, was a WILLING participant. Jesus was given the CHOICE.

This is where Similitude grinds to a screeching halt.

[_asbestosman]

When Union soldiers shot their Confederate brothers (sometimes literally), did they pass the test?

[_Some Schmo]

When Union soldiers shot their Confederate brothers (sometimes literally), did they pass the test?

In what way is this even remotely analogous?

[_asbestosman]

In what way is this even remotely analogous?

Take a guess.

[_Some Schmo]

In what way is this even remotely analogous?

Take a guess.

I tried, but since there was no god in the scenario, I came up empty.

[_asbestosman]

I tried, but since there was no god in the scenario, I came up empty.

That's what I suspected your objection to be. My analogy was about how killing people when ordered to do can sometimes be the right thing. Nobody had to kill anyone if the North simply let the South alone on slavery (well, and some other issues). Nobody had to kill anyone if Nephi and co. didn't need the plates.

If your objection hinges on God, then there may be nothing to discuss since neither you nor TD belive that such a being exists (at least not a personal God like we do). If there really is a being with authority who sees things better than we do (and who has proved Himself trustworthy), then perhaps it's wise to follow His orders.

Abraham knew that God would fulfill His promise through his son Isaac. He knew that God would raise Isaac from the dead if necessary (Heb. 11:17-19). That knowledge and that promise is, I think, a significant difference between Abraham's situation and that of crazy people who think God is saying the same thing. The crazy people always expect God to intervene before that moment, but they never say anything about the promises Abraham received about posterity.

[_Some Schmo]

That's what I suspected your objection to be. My analogy was about how killing people when ordered to do can sometimes be the right thing. Nobody had to kill anyone if the North simply let the South alone on slavery (well, and some other issues). Nobody had to kill anyone if Nephi and co. didn't need the plates.

If your objection hinges on God, then there may be nothing to discuss since neither you nor TD belive that such a being exists (at least not a personal God like we do). If there really is a being with authority who sees things better than we do (and who has proved Himself trustworthy), then perhaps it's wise to follow His orders.

Abraham knew that God would fulfill His promise through his son Isaac. He knew that God would raise Isaac from the dead if necessary (Heb. 11:17-19). That knowledge and that promise is, I think, a significant difference between Abraham's situation and that of crazy people who think God is saying the same thing. The crazy people always expect God to intervene before that moment, but they never say anything about the promises Abraham received about posterity.

Given your assumptions, fair enough. But being blindly obedient to god is the important point of contention, as far as I'm concerned.

If a human being is ordered to kill by another human being, the person who is supposed to do the killing is still required to make an assessment about the validity of the order. War criminals do not get away with their crimes using the "I was ordered to do it" defense. And even if the reasons were sound for going to war and killing members of the opposite army, killing your son “because I said so” isn’t a sound reason.

This idea that "well if god ordered it, it must be ok in all circumstances" just doesn't wash. Assuming there is a god for a moment, are we to believe that he thinks obedience is more important to him than not killing? In those circumstances, it’s not too much to ask for a decent explanation.

There's no way to justify it. Chalking it up to, "well, god's a lot smarter than I am" type rationales are nonsensical and wholly unsatisfactory. I've said it before and I'll say it again; if god does exist, and this is the type of god he is, I have no problem not worshipping him. If he can't be bothered to make it clear why obedience is more important than avoiding murder, for instance, then I can't be bothered to really care what he thinks. That's not unreasonable.

I think this all goes to show that the god concept is manmade. It’s just too easy to criticize, because it was never fully thought through. If god was, he’d have a far more airtight case.

[_asbestosman]

War criminals do not get away with their crimes using the "I was ordered to do it" defense. And even if the reasons were sound for going to war and killing members of the opposite army, killing your son “because I said so” isn’t a sound reason.

Right, which is why I mentioned God's trustworthiness. There's more to it than that of course. I think that both Nephi and Abraham not only considered the source, but also considered the consequences and circumstances of their actions (as can be seen in the scriptures). I don't see war criminals doing that beyond a simple "I was following orders."

[_asbestosman]

But being blindly obedient to god is the important point of contention, as far as I'm concerned.

Fair enough. I don't think obediance to God is blind. I think it's based on trust just as one trusts the conclusion of experts in certain areas. It's not completely blind. Even though you might not have the capacity to argue for or against their decisions, you can at least reason based on what you know and what you know about them.

[_Sethbag]

Abman, people killing other people because the voices in their heads said so is really bad human policy. This is what crazy people do. Your God seems to operate in ways that are impossible to distinguish from the way people with schizophrenia, or hallunications, or whatever, operate.

Doesn't that put up any red flags in your mind? At all?