1st Degree Murder by Divine Command?

[RascalPuff]

The Old Testament scriptures say that Abraham had a personal relationship with God - that they communicated with each other on a regular basis, and that Abraham benefited from his rapport with the Supreme Being, whose favor Abraham had enjoyed for a long time...
By and by, one day, God ordered Abraham to murder his own son (Isaac)...

"God said to Abraham, kill me a son.
Abe said, 'Man, you must be puttin' me on'.
God said 'No', Abe said 'What?'
God said, 'You can do anything you like, Abe, but...'
'The next time you see me comin', you better run'.
Abe said 'Where do you want this killin' done?'
God said, 'Out on Highway 61'." - Bob Dylan

The agreement that God finally coerced out of Abraham is philosophically called, a 'teleological suspension of the ethical'.

In other words, as long as a higher authority orders you to do something that you're not supposed to do (something wrong), then you are exonerated from any responsibility for doing it.

Now, it is true that an angelic representative of God did - at the last moment - intervene just in time, to tell Abraham to put down the dagger and release his son from the sacrificial altar - because God was simply 'testing' Abraham.

But it is also true that Abraham did - under acknowledged duress - agree to commit murder... 'Because God told him to'...

'Son of Sam' for example, had likewise actually murdered several people and maimed several others, 'because God told him to'...

Recent and long bygone history abounds with similar circumstances of murderers proclaiming that their murderous behavior was 'the will of God'.
All of this issuance is to culminate in the observation that murder is murder, regardless of who tells or orders you to do it - including God (or your dog, as in the case of David Berkowitz - 'Son of Sam').


Perhaps the most famous issuance of this subject was the post war trials of Nazi war criminals at Nuerenberg, where their defense lawyers based their case on the premise that the defendants were 'only following orders'.


Truly Yours submits that Abraham should have disobeyed God's order, even if God did in fact take his life - or otherwise punish him - for 'disobendience of a direct order', or something like that.


Yet, the Scriptures don't clarify the mistake that Abraham made - by agreeing to carry out God's immoral order. Is the Bible remiss in this renowned dilemma, or is there some other reasonable interpretation of this event and its import?

[Mikal]

Huge parts of the Bible should not be taken literal.

The story of Abraham is one of them and is an allegorical story referencing that there will be the confronting of tragic choices in life. It is also a notion of the teleological suspension of the ethical and transference from levels of outer ethics to more higher inner level ethics concerning a need for a higher regard for life.


Regards Mikal

[labelwench]

By circumstance, I was raised as an Anglican and for many years participated in weekly bible studies, church, and taught the Kindergarten students on Sundays.

Once moved away from home and able to pursue more avenues of examination, I abandoned my earlier conditioning, save for those of it's teachings which align with the philosophy of being respectful to all and attempting to treat others as one would hope to be treated in kind.

While it would be nice to contemplate a greater wisdom than acquired experience of the individual and the collectives of our species, I find myself uncomfortable and unable to operate within the conflicted parameters that I perceive in the religion of my youthful conditioning.

My wildest imaginings likely pale in comparison to most, then, for in the end, my 'reality' must pass the tests of the senses and be applicable in daily life. My viewpoint is not limited, yet by application of many filters, the options from which I eventually select does get winnowed to a very few.

Yet, from a single point, the directions of travel are limitless.

Yet, the Scriptures don't clarify the mistake that Abraham made - by agreeing to carry out God's immoral order. Is the Bible remiss in this renowned dilemma, or is there some other reasonable interpretation of this event and its import?

The ethics of all personal choice in relation to survival, and continuance, must be choices that the individual and society are able to contemplate for future application.

If hindsight grants 20/20 vision, it would be encouraging to think that we would only act erroneously once and then learn from our misconduct.

In my opinion, this is not the case, for in spite of recorded history, the scales are still far from balanced.

[austintorn@aol.com]

In the Beginning…

At an arbritrary point in time

God obtained some material somewhere,
Stuck with its limitations,
And thus created
The Heavens and the Earth.

Eve then cost Adam a rib,
Later on an arm and a leg.

Cain killed Abel to have sex
With (whom?)
Since it was so hard to multiply
While being fruitful.

Cain killed Abel and so
We are all Cain’s children.

So, our ancestors descended
Not from the trees,
But from God’s
Evil human nature Design.

Noah married Joan of Arc and then took her
And all their pets on a world cruise,
Noting the rest of the human race
As dead and drowned.

God played a big joke on Abraham,
Whose kind had often made burnt offerings
When popping the corn or
Overcooking the Lamb of God.

Moses then tied his ass to a tree
And wandered away to cleanse the tribes,
Then lost his way for 40 years,
Not even stopping to ask directions.

The ancient Egyptians fleeced the electrolytes
While the Futurians wrote many letters.

God made spiritual love to a virgin,
And Jesus was born Jewish,
Then converted to Christianity,
Died, and was born-again
On Easter (Let us Raise the Lord!),

But not before Jesus
Had made water into wine,
Perhaps encouraging alcoholism.

Mass was served by the altered boys
And even odd girls, all then preyed upon.

Lent soon became fast-food only time
And so Fat Tuesday was invented
To tide one over.

(Every Friday the priests had nun.)

God be in my heart,
My mind, and my end.

Thank God!

Sleep be with you.
A-choo.

[austintorn@aol.com]

MY GOD!

If God exists he almost certainly
Would have to be an alien.

True, simplicity is ever found below;
Higher complexity is found ‘above’,
Such as a more highly evolved alien.

We have searched high and low, near and far,
But have only ever found the natural,
And never the supernatural.


It seems apparent that life must have originated
From lifelessness to begin with,
And may do it fairly often.

Yes, god is not needed;
Life is not explained
As coming from another, larger life,
For, then, whence God’s life?

One must still not preach “God did it”,
But, to be honest, one should preach
That God is only a theory;
It is unfair to lie and say that it is a truth;
For, the invisible is still the invisible,
No matter what the imaginary proposition.


If gods exist they would necessarily
Have to be technologically advanced
Far beyond we humans on Earth,
To the point that they became gods.

Yes, look to the more evolved
Or to the future for ‘gods’,
Not to the past or the beginning
Where simplicity reigns.


If God exists he almost certainly would not be
Restricted to any particular body, form, or gender.

Humans built Him,
With this image of the strict Father
In the image of the human family.


If God exists it seems most likely
That he has as much influence
Over the content of canonical texts
As he wants to have.

God must have made them wrong
Since there is no firmament,
No Earth being in the center,
No immutable forms, etc.


If God exists, it seems quite clear
He makes use of the evolutionary method of creation.

He would have to.


If there are things which people consider to be spiritual,
They are most likely actually physical
In ways we just can’t appreciate yet.

Yes, nothing but only the natural
Has ever been found.

Extraordinary claims of souls
And such have no evidence,
Much less extraordinary evidence.

Faith is a belief in the invisible unknown,
It even admitting that there is no basis.

[austintorn@aol.com]

WANTED: Jehovah, for the murder of most of humankind in the Great Flood.

[jag]

Yet, the Scriptures don't clarify the mistake that Abraham made - by agreeing to carry out God's immoral order. Is the Bible remiss in this renowned dilemma, or is there some other reasonable interpretation of this event and its import?
[/SIZE]

Was It not the sons of Abraham that, essentially, put Jesus (the son of God) on the cross? If God knew that this was highly likely to happen, maybe he wanted Abraham to know what it feels like to lose a son at the hands of a murder in the hope that he might change his ways and affect generations to come.

jag

[Wick]

It seems to me that we are all talking about the end of the story without considering the beginning. Getting Isaac into the world was a kind of miracle. The child came from Sarah, Abraham's first wife who was also the child of the birthright. God promised that through Isaac, Abraham would "beget a great nation" which would bless the world. This promise was a covenant between Abraham and God.

Then suddenly, God asks Abraham to kill the child of the covenant--in essence saying do you trust what I have promised? Do you believe that the child of the covenant will become a great nation and live to beget children? Or to be blunt, do you trust that I, God, have told the truth?

Abraham believed that God was a God of truth...that he would not lie. He therefore considered the command to be one that could not be carried out. God could not kill Isaac until the promise was kept. Or if the command were carried out, then God would be obliged to raise Isaac from the very altar upon which he was sacrificed.

This story is not about murder...it is about trust. It is meant to emphasize the principle that God does not lie. Abraham was certain that Isaac would be fine. He never doubted that. And according to the story, his trust was well founded.

[labelwench]

WANTED: Jehovah, for the murder of most of humankind in the Great Flood.

I believe that it was promised in the scriptures that God would never flood the world again.

Revelations speaks to a great number of worse fates to befall.

Personally, I don't hold God responsible.

These predictions may well come true, in large part by our own doing.

Even much of the weird weather we have been experiencing is due to our clear-cut and intensive agriculture, resulting in soil erosion and flooding, among other problems.

The forces of nature don't read scripture, to the best of my knowledge, yet they may well play the part as predicted.

[Wick]

I think so, too. Providence tells us what the laws are and what the consequences of disobedience to laws are. The man jumping over the cliff should not be surprised that he falls to his death. Neither should a civilization or a world which has become so unkind to one another and to their mother planet be surprised when the laws of nature bend themselves to drive the creation back into balance and thereby drive into extinction the cause of unbalance.

By the way the promise was that God would not flood "the whole earth". He never promised not to flood it here and there.