The first is that this isn't (so far as I'm aware) directly Biblical.
Remember, from my point of view, "people I know, like and respect say it worked well for them" is a much HIGHER endorsement than "being biblical" :)
what if God told me to do something I thought was immoral? I guess I'd have a problem. But the fact I'd have a problem in such a hypothetical circumstance does not mean I have that problem now.
Well, I think that's perfectly ok! I've faced that question on a smaller scale eg. there are people I respect a lot, and because they're so often right about difficult questions, if I disagree with them, I will assume I'm likely missing something. And if it ever comes up, I am ready to admit that I think they're flat-out wrong about something, but it's hard to think about that in advance.
But that's based on your (presumed) experience that what God tells you is usually right?
I said, "I wouldn't like to follow a religion which included God telling me to do things I think are immoral". By which I mean especially blatant examples like "refusing to see a doctor". You said, that's silly, and I agree, except that some actual real people actually believe that and I don't want to belittle that (even though I think it's a really bad thing when it happens). And then you asked, what would I do if God asked me to do something immoral?
I didn't just start talking about that out of the blue, I answered because it seemed you were asking me that direct hypothetical question. Now I wonder -- is it the case that you assumed that God would never ask me to do anything ACTUALLY immoral (like the not seeing a doctor thing), and that was so obvious that you didn't need to say it? Because now I can see that might have been what you meant, but that's NOT obvious to me.
If you're assuming that God will only tell me to do things that seem immoral because they're actually good, but I'm just wrong about them, then it makes sense to say, I should pay more attention if a message apparently from God. But I seriously don't think that's the case. The right amount of attention to pay to new ideas isn't "infinitely much" and I don't think you can dodge that by saying "live in the moment" even if that's often useful advice -- and given that, there must be ways to be too open to being wrong and ways to be not open enough to realising you're wrong. And I'm fairly sure where my flaws are -- I don't think my flaws are "that looks horrifically immoral to me, but I missed that it's actually a good idea" which is what I'm imagining here -- I think my flaws are more likely to be "here's a large thing I'd not considered enough" and "here's something I think is a good thing in principle, but I need to stop being scared it's beyond my reach and act on it right now"...
Re: Tyrant gods
Date: 2014-12-12 11:04 am (UTC)Remember, from my point of view, "people I know, like and respect say it worked well for them" is a much HIGHER endorsement than "being biblical" :)
what if God told me to do something I thought was immoral? I guess I'd have a problem. But the fact I'd have a problem in such a hypothetical circumstance does not mean I have that problem now.
Well, I think that's perfectly ok! I've faced that question on a smaller scale eg. there are people I respect a lot, and because they're so often right about difficult questions, if I disagree with them, I will assume I'm likely missing something. And if it ever comes up, I am ready to admit that I think they're flat-out wrong about something, but it's hard to think about that in advance.
But that's based on your (presumed) experience that what God tells you is usually right?
I said, "I wouldn't like to follow a religion which included God telling me to do things I think are immoral". By which I mean especially blatant examples like "refusing to see a doctor". You said, that's silly, and I agree, except that some actual real people actually believe that and I don't want to belittle that (even though I think it's a really bad thing when it happens). And then you asked, what would I do if God asked me to do something immoral?
I didn't just start talking about that out of the blue, I answered because it seemed you were asking me that direct hypothetical question. Now I wonder -- is it the case that you assumed that God would never ask me to do anything ACTUALLY immoral (like the not seeing a doctor thing), and that was so obvious that you didn't need to say it? Because now I can see that might have been what you meant, but that's NOT obvious to me.
If you're assuming that God will only tell me to do things that seem immoral because they're actually good, but I'm just wrong about them, then it makes sense to say, I should pay more attention if a message apparently from God. But I seriously don't think that's the case. The right amount of attention to pay to new ideas isn't "infinitely much" and I don't think you can dodge that by saying "live in the moment" even if that's often useful advice -- and given that, there must be ways to be too open to being wrong and ways to be not open enough to realising you're wrong. And I'm fairly sure where my flaws are -- I don't think my flaws are "that looks horrifically immoral to me, but I missed that it's actually a good idea" which is what I'm imagining here -- I think my flaws are more likely to be "here's a large thing I'd not considered enough" and "here's something I think is a good thing in principle, but I need to stop being scared it's beyond my reach and act on it right now"...