I'm back from a long hiatus and ready to hit the ground running. Sorry for the long delay, I hope to more than make up for it over the next few weeks.
This morning I agreed to meet with some Mormon missionaries -- you may remember that I'd met with some missionaries a number of times before, and the last time I mentioned that I was probably finished with it. I had figured that I would be, but I got a call earlier this week and the temptation too great to pass up.
So this morning, I met with 2 missionaries and 1 other mormon (not a missionary) at the mormon institute for missionaries converting people (not the exact name). The missionaries that I had normally talked to were gone for various reasons, so I had two new people for fresh encounters. It was nice, I ran through a number of arguments that I've written about and a few that I haven't yet written about.
One of the Mormons tried to convince me that God exists because we have an innate moral sense. I immediately agreed that we have an innate moral sense that we can use to determine right and wrong. I then asked, so how is it that you worship a God that commanded people to kill others with a sword? Specifically, God (allegedly) ordered people to go into a certain tribe and kill every man, woman, child, and infant. That's clearly wrong -- if our moral sense can ever give a clear answer it's on this situation. I will elaborate on it more, but I worded the question that was for a reason -- it covers all the basic reactions that you'd get (which I got). If you are a seasoned conversational atheist yourself, you may be thinking of the answers yourself:
- Maybe these people were truly awful people and deserved to die
- Whatever God orders is moral
- How do you expect me to explain God's actions and thoughts?
Among others.
I'll just indulge in how I've responded to the second choice for this blog entry. Since we'd already established that humans have an innate sense of right and wrong, I said, we can rightly judge whether the actions of God are good or evil. Perhaps they will say something as silly as "Whatever God does is moral" or something equivalent. The best question is, "Does God have free will? Can He choose to do evil?" -- If He can, the question of whether He does is valid (and both answers are available). If God does not have free will (rare claim to find people making); then He is not praiseworthy for his actions, He's an automaton that could not have done otherwise.
Anyway, I had a grand time today (too much fun). I'll be elaborating on the discussions in the very near future. Let me know if you have any questions/comments.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=d310dab0-d8c1-4a76-a00f-6d6158639453)
{ 14 comments }
Welcome back! I found this to be an interesting read, as those three responses are ones I've heard multiple times but not had the perfect rebuttle on the spot.
Inviting none-missionary mormon is a technique used – they say – that increases the chance of baptism thorough "fellowshipping" the investigator.
Andrew, were you a mormon? Or how did you know this?
I used to be a mormon – and a missionary too from 2002 to 2004 :D
Andrew is right in a sense.
Mormon missionaries are trained to try and establish a bit of a personal relationship as a part of their efforts to convert people. I know because I served as a missionary in Japan.
To some, that may seem manipulative and insincere.
But consider – we’re talking about 19 year old kids here. Social grace isn’t exactly a defining feature of the age demographic. It’s something they have to be taught.
Like any group of people, some will pick up on the concept better than others. Some missionaries will wind up phony and forced. Others will integrate it well, resulting in a genuine and sincere interaction. Just like people at your office job. I encountered all sorts of missionaries. Some were rude and pushy, others were the nicest guys you’d ever meet. Some didn’t give a damn about anyone except themselves and their own heavenly checklist. Others were incredibly giving.
The important thing is not to judge the whole group by the two you happened to run into the other day.
I served with some bona fide jackasses on my mission.
I also met some of the best men I’ve ever known. Like all things in life, it’s a mixed bag. We’re not robots. We’re people, and there’s a lot of variety.
As to the original post and the question of “genocidal God” – I probably would have responded that the Bible is a mixture of God’s will and man’s thoughts about God.
Few notes though:
1. People a thousand years removed from certain events need to be cautious about judging the morality of those events.
2. People a few thousand years removed from the events a modern written account is describing need to remain skeptical about the accuracy of that written account.
I try to keep open to all the options in my faith life.
"People a thousand years removed from certain events need to be cautious about judging the morality of those events."
I disagree. Those events are immoral by our standards. By this sentence, we shouldn't judge the morality of human sacrifices committed by native tribes.
"The important thing is not to judge the whole group by the two you happened to run into the other day."
Couple of quick things. 1. I was not complaining about this interaction in any way. 2. I think that the missionaries were very patient and respectful.
Now, in response to your "People need to remain skeptical about the accuracy of that written account…" — I'm all for skepticism. But just for my own curiosity, if there was some way to verify that God did make these commands of people, would you then condemn God's actions?
Hi Conversational Atheist. I am a Mormon. I was once a Mormon (LDS) MIssionary.
Discussing God's existence, and related topics, with atheists isn't really my thing, so forgive me for not diving into that debate. Instead, I'd only like to request that you please not make the mistake of assuming that our young missionaries represent the best in LDS scholarship. They do not, nor do they come close. They are kids barely out of high school with absolutely no training to deal with the kinds of arguments you are presenting them.
I know, it might sound a bit hokey to you, but it is a function of the methodology that Mormon missionaries are taught to employ. Their primary methodology for bringing "converts" into the Church is to "testify" of what they know and then invite others to study their message and pray about it. Admittedly, they are not well equipped for a seasoned atheist like yourself.
There are few voices in LDS scholarship that discuss atheism, but by and large it is an underdeveloped field within LDS scholarship. We have enough trouble dealing with anti-Mormon criticisms from other Christians. As a Mormon, I appreciate the work that non-Mormon theists have done in developing argumentation for theism.
In summary, don't expect the LDS missionaries to have any clue when it comes to discussing atheism. You might be surprised by one or two now and then who are sophisticated or who have done their own study on the issue before leaving to serve as a missionary, but by and large it simply isn't their "thing".
James
They have to be "trained" to defend what they themselves believe? Interesting.
James, thanks for your comment. I'm a bit perplexed why you think that the missionaries needed to be any sort of expert on atheism. The questions that I posed (and that they had a hard time answering in a way that was satisfactory even to themselves) were questions like, "Why do you worship a God that commanded others to kill children and infants with a sword?"
That isn't about atheism, it isn't even about whether God exists. It's just asking for internal reflection.
So while you and I might not expect them to have any clue about atheism; I would hope that they would have a clue about what they believe and why they believe it.
Hi ConverseAtheist.
The common epistemology employed by LDS (even if most don't realize it) is to first determine if the source for LDS beliefs is a good and true source. If and when they determine that the source for LDS beliefs is good and true, then the teachings that come from that source are accepted. So, a LDS missionary (or any layman) can accept in theory that God commanded others to kill children with a sword (in keeping with your example), but not be able to understand or explain why such a belief isn't contradictory or wrong. They can do this because they have already determined that the source for the teaching is true.
The exact reverse is what you are asking them to do. You are asking them to first determine if the teachings are good and true, and then use that determination as an indication of whether or not the source is true. I have no criticism of that methodology, I only point out that it simply isn't the methodoloy that LDS commonly employ.
I have to split this comment into two comments, because it won't publish otherwise. See below for the rest.
So, a LDS missionary could in theory (though not preferably) NOT have a firm grasp on all of the teachings of the Church, nor have a clear explanation for why the believe it other than, "because I know the source of the teaching is true." Again, in my view, it isn't preferable but it is possible (and very common).
The method for determining that the source is true without or before thoroughly evaluating the teachings of the source is a sticky subject, something constantly debated amongst ourselves and with our critics. It boils down to having a spiritual experience with God, subjective as that may sound.
Thanks!
Hello Conversational Athiest. I just stumbled across this post and I found it very intriguing. It just so happens that I am a mormon and I am preparing to serve a mission. I have often found myself questioning the genocide that occurred in the Old Testament in relation to the nature of God as I understand it. I do not consider myself an expert on the scriptures or on God and all of His dealings, but I do have an inquiring mind and I try to make sense of as much as I can. As far as I understand it, during Old Testament times, God was moving his chosen people (the people who believed in Him and the correct principles regarding Him) to the Holy Land, where Jesus would come. He was preparing the world for the coming of Christ. He commanded the killings of men, women, children, and even the cattle because if He had commanded them to kill the men and keep the women and children as slaves then that would give them something to gain from it and arouse greed. Why did He command them to kill anyone? Why does He allow us to go to war at all? Why do we go to war even if it is to fight for our rights? Why must the world be violent? I do not know all of the answers to these questions. I know that we humans are not perfect. We have free agency, which is a marvelous gift from God and one that He will never take away under any circumstances. In ancient times, they needed to conquer various tribes because it was part of the necessary preparation for the coming of Christ to the Holy Land to His chosen people. Because of the imperfections of men, violence was the only solution at the time. (Consider a more recent history – WWII. Do you think God condemns us for fighting that war to stop Hitler? Do you think going to war was the only solution? Personally I don't think it could have been stopped any other way, because of the imperfections of men.) So, God commanded them to kill, but he did not want them to have any personal gain from it, such as growing rich with cattle and slaves. I believe God to be a good and moral God. He is merciful and just. He has free will but He is all-knowing, so His choices and actions are always right and good. In a perfect world with perfect people, of course war and violence would never occur and God would never command it. But we do not live in a perfect world among perfect people and God's plan cannot be stopped by the wickedness of men. I realize that I am not a scholar of scripture by any means and I have grown to learn that I will probably never know all of the answers to my questions and the mysteries of God in this life. But I do know God, and I have learned to trust in Him and His judgement. This is my humble opinion on the matter.
\”I do not consider myself an expert on the scriptures or on God and all of His dealings, but I do have an inquiring mind and I try to make sense of as much as I can.\”
Glad to hear it!
\”Why did He command them to kill anyone? Why does He allow us to go to war at all? Why do we go to war even if it is to fight for our rights? Why must the world be violent? I do not know all of the answers to these questions.\”
So I think you're starting to get off track a bit here. I'm not concerned with God allowing us to do stuff (at least not in this argument); and I'm not even concerned that God wants all these people killed (again, at least for this argument). My issue is that God, who can and has killed people personally (with fire, brimstone, floods, pillars of salt, etc.) passed the dirty work to His followers. I am condemning God for ordering His followers to commit atrocities.
\”Because of the imperfections of men, violence was the only solution at the time.\”
No. That is a very key point. If humans were all that there were — it's possible that humans have a difficult choice to make — that the only solution they see is war/violence/etc. It is not the same with an omnipotent God. He has an infinite number of available ways to obtain His will. If He wants a tribe to be gone from the area of the 'Holy Land' He has unlimited options. 1. Move the tribe to a different place, 2. create more land on the earth and put a mountain range between these tribes and Israel, 3. Make every person in the tribe blink out of existence, 4. Turn them all into pillars of salt. and so on. God is not limited to commanding his followers to kill infants with a sword — and the 'fact' that He does so when He had an infinite number of humane options available makes Him culpable.
\” He is merciful and just. He has free will but He is all-knowing, so His choices and actions are always right and good.\”
He is merciful and just? Based on what? How did you get that answer? He orders His followers to kill infants, how can you say that God is anything but evil? His choices and actions are always right and good? 1. How could you possibly know that? 2. God has free will, so, can God do evil?
Looking forward to your response,
CA
Comments on this entry are closed.