Godless (28 page)
But, of course, “Is God moral?” is a perfectly legitimate question. Not only does it make sense to freethinkers, who are outside the religious circle and therefore not required to reduce it to a simple ontological tautology describing the perfection of deity, but it has to make some kind of sense to Christians, if they are honest, in order for them to be able to worship. Can you worship someone who has not earned respect? When Christians or Jews say that “God is good” aren’t they judging God? Don’t they think his character merits praise and adoration? Or, are they simply giving blind obedience to whatever happens to be omnipotent? (I might “respect” the strength of a hurricane, but I would not call it good nor would I worship it.) Most of us do not consider it an admirable moral quality to praise power alone. So, if believers deem God to be good, then it must be because they have judged God to be morally worthy of respect. You can’t praise what you don’t admire.
The question turns out to be something of a trap for believers. If pressed they will have to back off from judging God, and will have to admit that God is moral by definition alone. It doesn’t really matter how God acts: God is good because God said he is good, and we should worship him not because he has earned our admiration but because he has demanded it. Morality is not a question with which mere human minds should wrestle, believers insist. It is something that should be determined by the perfect, omniscient, omnipotent mind of God.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the “revealed” religions that directly or indirectly share the Jewish Law, pretend to find their answer to morality in a holy book that originates from a mind that exists outside the material world. Their way to be moral is simply stated: obey Scripture.
Regardless of whether humanism or other naturalistic ethical systems are successful, or even possible, and regardless of whether we truly need an external moral code, the question can still be raised about the adequacy of any particular religious solution. Is the bible a good book? Is the bible an acceptable guide for moral behavior?
The bible is indeed filled with very specific commandments for living. Let’s look at one of them. The Fourth Commandment says, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” This is one of the Big Ten, so it can’t be ignored. At face value it seems straightforward enough, but what exactly does it mean? How do you “remember” the Sabbath and what happens if you fail? In the book of Numbers the “Lord” gives a specific example of how the Sabbath law is applied, but he first explains that there is a difference between sinning deliberately and sinning accidentally, comparable to the modern idea of “intent.” Although this provides for varying degrees of sentencing, it does not mitigate the crime itself. A sin is still a sin:
“And if any soul sin through ignorance, then he shall bring a she goat of the first year for a sin offering… But the soul that doeth ought [sin] presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him.” (Numbers 15:27, 30-31)
Strong language. There is accidental sin and there is deliberate sin, though it seems that the former should hardly count as a “sin.” In any event, the passage that immediately follows this clarification shows what happens to a person who
deliberately
breaks the Sabbath law:
deliberately
breaks the Sabbath law:
“And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day. And they that found him brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.” (Numbers 15:32-36)
This is clear: don’t pick up sticks on Saturday. If you pick up sticks, God’s followers will pick up stones. Is
this
a good guide for morality? When I was a child, each year my family would spend weeks camping in the mountains of California. My brothers and I had the job of picking up kindling wood for the fire. This often happened on the weekend. Didn’t my born-again parents read the bible? (Perhaps my sin was one of “ignorance.” Where am I going to find a she goat?) The man who was stoned to death was likely gathering firewood to cook food to feed his family.
He
was the one acting morally.
this
a good guide for morality? When I was a child, each year my family would spend weeks camping in the mountains of California. My brothers and I had the job of picking up kindling wood for the fire. This often happened on the weekend. Didn’t my born-again parents read the bible? (Perhaps my sin was one of “ignorance.” Where am I going to find a she goat?) The man who was stoned to death was likely gathering firewood to cook food to feed his family.
He
was the one acting morally.
Some believers assert that these primitive Old Testament laws are no longer relevant and have been superseded by Jesus—but that proves the point! If they use such an argument, they are admitting that at least part of the bible is not acceptable for today’s society. How many of us stop and think what day of the week it is before we pick up sticks? However you interpret it, the 15th chapter of Numbers is still in the bible, the Sabbath law is still in the Ten Commandments, and we see no condemnation of such barbarism, no moral outcry, no denunciation by Christians of these shameful acts committed by their “loving God” in the “Good Book.” We see no pages being torn out of bibles with disgust. What if an ayatollah were to command the execution of a person who picked up sticks on an Islamic holy day because it offended Allah? What would we think of such bloodthirsty, immoral arrogance?
In dealing with such troublesome scriptural issues as capital punishment for picking up sticks on Saturday (the Jewish Sabbath) or Sunday (the Christian Sabbath), some liberal Christians will agree that portions of the bible are now outmoded. The text should not be taken literally, they claim. We should seek instead the “spiritual lesson” that underlies the specific example. (That would be like saying, “I am going to teach you a lesson about obedience by telling you that I killed someone. Don’t worry about the violence or that person’s life, because I love you and want you to learn how righteous I am.”)
There is a subset of fundamentalists, called Dispensationalists, who claim that the Old Testament rules were in effect only for that period of history, and that we now have different rules because God’s plan is unfolding in stages, or dispensations. (Though Jesus said he came to uphold “every jot and tittle” of the Old Testament law.) Other evangelical Christians will assert that tougher measures were required during the struggling infancy of the besieged Israelite nation. God’s chosen people were at war so some “moral rationing” was justified—but that now that Christianity is on the scene such measures are no longer needed. (Though they still preach that the world is more corrupt than ever, and that the forces of evil continue to attack believers.) All of these liberal arguments, at minimum, admit that there are at least some parts of the current bible that are now no longer relevant to proper human behavior. All of us, believers and nonbelievers alike, whatever our reasoning, have to agree that the bible can be downright brutal.
Apologize, theologize, demythologize, liberalize and rationalize all you want—those barbaric scriptures are still being sold in bookstores. Many courts use the bible as the standard of truth telling and U.S. presidents place their hand upon it during inauguration—a practice, incidentally, not mandated by the Constitution. But any version of a “holy book” that contains barbaric decrees cannot be
entirely
palatable to the modern world. Perhaps it could be argued that some parts are still relevant, but the bible as a whole is undeniably flawed.
entirely
palatable to the modern world. Perhaps it could be argued that some parts are still relevant, but the bible as a whole is undeniably flawed.
Believers often accuse skeptics of ignoring the good while picking out only the bad parts of the bible. Believers ask why we don’t join them in emphasizing that which is good and beautiful in the bible? This might appear to be a fair question until it is turned around and we ask them why they don’t join us in denouncing the ugly parts. Then, they don’t see the questions as being quite so fair.
Suppose you invited me to your house to see your beautiful garden. “Here, look at this beautiful iris,” you might say.
I might nod my head and smile. “Yes, that is beautiful.” I’ve seen better, but that is not bad.
“And over here, look at this gorgeous rose.”
“Wow, that is pretty,” I might agree, but as I look around the garden I see that it is overrun with weeds and trash. Some of the plants show obvious signs of disease and decay, and bugs are chewing many of the leaves.
Noticing my distraction, you might say, “Oh, just ignore that. I want you to see the good parts.”
“But you invited me here to see your ‘beautiful garden,’ and I have to say I am disappointed. You do have some nice flowers, which actually stand out against the unsightliness around them, but the general impression is chaotic and hideous.”
“But you are not looking at it the right way. You have to ignore all that. Those things you are choosing to stare at do not bother me. Adjust your focus. Don’t concentrate on the bad; look for the good. The disease is not my fault. Someone else threw the trash in there—the original garden was perfect. Who is to say what is a weed? I can’t pull out the weeds because then there would be no contrast and we wouldn’t appreciate how beautiful the flowers are.”
“Yes, a few flowers are nice, but on balance this is an ugly sight. You are not a good gardener.”
“I thought you were my friend!”
“Well, what are friends for?”
Those who can look at the bible objectively, who are not handicapped with the requirement that it be worshiped or respected, notice that there are problems with using it as a guide for behavior:
1. The bible argues from authority, not from reason, claiming that “might makes right.”
2. The bible nowhere states that every human being possesses an inherent right to be treated with respect and fairness—humans don’t matter as much as God does.
3. The biblical role models, especially Yahweh, Elohim and Jesus, are very poor moral examples, often ignoring their own good teachings (what few there are) and ruthlessly pursuing their own tyrannical teachings.
4. Many moral precepts of the bible are just plain bad, even dangerous.
5. On closer inspection, the few “positive” teachings are uninspired, unoriginal, inadequate and irrelevant. (See below.) On balance, this is an ugly garden.
Author Ruth Green calls the bible a “moral grab bag.” Many pick and choose from its pages, most ignore it, and those few who do use it as a guide for behavior do so for religious rather than moral reasons. Those believers who are good people—and I think most of them are—and who credit the bible for their standards are giving credit where credit is not due. Christians, it turns out, don’t have a corner on morality. On average they are no more moral than unbelievers. Some might argue that they are
less
moral. Those few shining examples from the Christian community shine no brighter than the caring unbelievers. But for all their talk about the need for moral guidance, they cannot substantiate the claim that the bible is a good guide for modern behavior.
less
moral. Those few shining examples from the Christian community shine no brighter than the caring unbelievers. But for all their talk about the need for moral guidance, they cannot substantiate the claim that the bible is a good guide for modern behavior.
When someone tells you to do something it is natural to ask, “Why?” Why remember the Sabbath? The bible tells us that we should remember the Sabbath “to keep it holy.” The word “holy” means “set apart,” “sacred” or “clean” and has nothing to do with “good” or “right.” In other words, this commandment does not deal with ethics; it deals with the superiority of God. When true believers say that something is “wrong,” it is because it has been
decreed
wrong by a “holy” deity, not because there is a good ethical reason. The child asks, “Daddy, why can’t I do this?” and Daddy responds, “Because I said so!” If the commandment is violated, it becomes a crime of disobedience—the authority figure should not be offended.
decreed
wrong by a “holy” deity, not because there is a good ethical reason. The child asks, “Daddy, why can’t I do this?” and Daddy responds, “Because I said so!” If the commandment is violated, it becomes a crime of disobedience—the authority figure should not be offended.
“Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” (Hebrews 10:30-31)
“Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.” (Jesus, Luke 12:4-5)
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” (Solomon, Proverbs 1:7)
The humanist, on the other hand, looks for some reason or principle independent of authority. The child asks, “Why can’t I do this?” Daddy or Mommy responds, “If you do it, you will get hurt. I love you and don’t want you to get hurt.” Or the parent says, “If you do this, someone else will get hurt.” The crime is against humanity, not against Daddy. A deity might give reasons for its decrees, but they must be irrelevant. If God gives reasons, then he is appealing to a court outside himself—a court to which we could just as well appeal directly, circumventing his authority. If God needs reasons, then he is not God.
Other books
Witch Hearts by Liz Long
Baiting the Maid of Honor by Tessa Bailey
Warshawski 09 - Hard Time by Paretsky, Sara
Interest by Kevin Gaughen
Mientras duermes by Alberto Marini
The Knife's Edge by Matthew Wolf
The Unofficial Guide to Using Apple Watch by La Counte, Scott
Joshua and the Arrow Realm by Galanti, Donna
The Billionaire's High-rise: A BBW Erotica by Appleby, Jessica
Count Catula (Whales and Tails Cozy Mystery Book 9) by Daley,Kathi
