Love me or else (Part Two) (Where is it now?)

by dhw, Friday, December 21, 2012, 19:05 (4136 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

I am going to try and extend my earlier summary of the discussion, as this will be my last post for about ten days (see dhw going away).-Hyjyljyj and I find little comfort in religions that order us to love a God who inflicts savage (possibly eternal) punishments on those who do not love him. I quoted Matthew ("Thou shalt love the Lord thy God" etc.) and Peter ("Fear God"). As a prime example of God's savage punishments, I referred to the Flood. Hyjyljyj and I alluded to hell as part of God's threat to those who don't love him, and we found nothing lovable in the tests to which God put Abraham and Job. -As regards the latter, I have never disputed that they were being tested. My objection is to the mental and physical torment to which they were subjected (though in fairness to you Abraham doesn't actually seem too bothered). The difference between us is therefore not about what happened, but about our view of God's attitude. -Tony, both you and BBella say that Ancient Hebrew has no equivalent word for abstractions like fear and love, and you referred me to a website which offers three words that might mean fear. You say the correct meaning is 'revere'. 1) I don't know why you should assume that 'revere' is the correct meaning, since meaning depends on context, and in the many exhortations to fear God, there is often no context. 2) Perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought Peter's epistle (if indeed he wrote it) was in Greek. 3) It doesn't make the slightest difference to the basic argument, which is that the God of both testaments gives us ample reason to fear him.-You say that love is not a feeling. Since Ancient Hebrew has no word for abstractions like love and fear, I'm surprised you haven't challenged this translation as well, but you have accepted it. If you think love means performing kind actions, and does not mean the emotion that leads people to perform kind actions, we shall have to agree to disagree.-I'm appalled by the story of the Flood, which I take as a prime example of God's terrifying use of his power. You say the bible states that all the victims were wicked. I'll take your word for it that this really is the meaning of the Ancient Hebrew. (Who knows? All translations are suspect, as indeed are all the original texts, since they were written by fallible humans, though you would probably dispute that.) Forgive my scepticism, but I can't imagine for one moment how newborn babes and toddlers can be classified as wicked. Your defence is that God will give them a better life. There can be no meeting of minds here, I'm afraid. I do not dismiss human suffering on the grounds that there may be compensation in another life. -This brings us to the subject of hell. You tell us that nowhere in the bible is there any mention of eternal damnation or torment of the dead. Hyjyljyj and I gave three (out of several) specific references from the New Testament. You have diligently demonstrated that the words used in the Old Testament do not mean hell. The Oxford Companion to the Bible, which I assume has been compiled by reasonably competent scholars, shows with detailed references to both OT and NT that there were/are different concepts of what we call hell. Some of them explicitly entail eternal damnation and torment of the dead. But of course there are as many interpretations as there are interpreters.
 
The relevance of this to our discussion is that no matter what kind of punishment is threatened, I find no comfort in a religion that orders me to love God (my understanding of love, not yours) or an almighty power will punish me. I have throughout my life tried to be kind to people and not to do harmful things, and I worry if I feel I have hurt someone, but this is out of love and empathy for my fellow humans, and not out of love for God. Nevertheless, I have done wrong things, and if God exists I'm not going to blame him for my sins or for the sins of others (one of your more misanthropic arguments). But the starting point of this whole discussion was my statement (in the section entitled "Where is it now?") that there is no comfort to be had from religion. I'm afraid your study of Ancient Hebrew and your ingenious defence of God's actions still bring me no comfort.-I'm sure you will have an answer to all of this, and I'll try to catch up when I return.