Only god can judge me

I have heard phrases like that many times in my life, and always by believers who assert that the morality of god is beyond reproach.

They say that only god can judge, yet they are swift to state their opinions about morality and claim divine backing. It seems that even though only god can judge, he frequently delegates to his followers.

But those who were judged can be saved. They can ask for forgiveness from god, and be absolved of all wrong doing on the sole concession of complete and abject submission to god. Gullibility, in other words, is the road to heaven. Even for the darkest soul.

But even if you do not repent, god will judge. Blasphemers, killers, thieves, rapists…

…the victims of rape, slaves, and the innocent who’ve never heard of Christianity. All face God’s Divine Judgement. And god is the only arbiter of justice. The only true moral yard stick. The only path to absolution, and the only true path of affront.

Criminals owe nothing to the victim. Only god can judge them.

By God’s moral yard stick, killing people isn’t wrong because of the ‘killing of people’. It’s wrong because God SAYS its wrong. And when he says that it’s RIGHT, then it IS right. Killing and dying for god is just as moral as helping an old lady cross the street. Owning slaves can be moral, and it can be immoral to resent being a slave. It all depends on how God feels.

And Christians say that we have no right to judge them. Or that we have no way to measure our own goodness. That we are all inherently evil, and incapable of serving as moral moderators on our own accord. The only way to determine morality is from a higher point of view. As though we are all bickering children incapable of resolving any issue between ourselves. We always need that parent to step in, grab us by the scruff of our necks and shake us until we stop crying.

“Tell daddy what happened. Daddy will be the judge of this!”

And of course everybody gets a spanking. And if we don’t cry hard enough, maybe even a bloody beating. Have we groveled enough, father, or will you smite us until we lay sprawled on the ground, bawling in abject misery.

That’s god’s justice. And like all abusive authority figures, he’ll tell us he only beats us because he loves us.

“I don’t want to smite you, baby, it’s just that you make me so MAD sometimes! Come back over here and squirm at my feet and I promise we can live forever in heaven.”

I reject it.

You DO have to answer to me. And to your family. And your neighbors. And to everybody else. Just like I do. And Just like the president does. And just like the Pope does. And just like God does.

If you harm your neighbor, you owe them. You don’t have to wait for a magical inter-dimensional entity from beyond time and space to tell you that breaking into their house is bad.

I will tell you that it is bad. And so will your neighbor. You have to answer to US for treating us like garbage.

Only god can judge you?

I judge you.

Society judges you.

And society judges me.

Which is the more moral position? That you can rape and pillage if it is in the name of your god and nobody can say squat about it? That victims be damned until God judges us all? Or that you owe it to your neighbors not to rape and pillage. Because they didn’t do it to you.

Reciprocation.

Not killing your neighbor is the birth of cooperation. Cooperation is the birth of morality. And we cooperate because teamwork is more effective than going it alone. If we understand just that, then we understand how morality springs from ancestry.

Where is the objective third party mediator?

It’s easier than people tell themselves. You know what it looks like. Don’t pretend you don’t. Think of the last person you hurt. On accident, or by malice. You know what it looks like.

The depth of a person’s hurt is subjective, but the fact of the hurt is not.

How do we define harm? When does one person’s pleasure out weigh the suffering of another? When does the good of the one fall behind the good of the many?

Those are complicated questions, and reams of paper have been inked on them. They are not easily answered, but that is because there is no black and white right and wrong. If there was, these answers would all just fall into place. The fact is that morality is a giant plate balanced on a needle. We seek the best possible outcome, and that is always a compromise.

What is good is what leads to cooperation. What is bad is those things which disrupt cooperation. Things can get shady when you add in legalese, but the murkiness of it is the proof of it’s fallibility. Proof that morality is the construct of animal consciousness, not a fundamental law of the universe.

And no god’s whim can change that.

Johnson1010, your questions are not complicated. God's judgment does not mitigate the temporal penalties of sin/law breaking.

The existence of god would not create inviolate standards of morality.

in fact, it would make them MORE arbitary. Because god doesn't follow someone else's rules. He isn't bound by any law, therefore any moral standard given by a god is subject to that god's whims.

It means that tomorrow, helping old ladies cross the street may be deemed evil by god. Why? Because he made it all up to start with. Helping old ladies isn't moral because of the "helping of old ladies". It's moral because god says so. And god could and according to christianity, has changed his mind.