Hi all! Valerie here. (You can assume that all blog posts will be written by me while Bret fiddles with buttons and mix levels and all kinds of other goobldy gook recording stuff that I don’t understand.) Just wanted to rant about a some global flood thoughts swirling around in my brain that didn’t make the time cut of our episode.
It wasn’t until we were planning what we were going to talk about that I realized I never quite knew how to handle the story of Noah and his circus boat, which is why I posed my two statements at the end of our episode:
1. If you believe the global flood story is a myth, are you sure you can use the bible as an authoritative text? How do you determine which parts are true? 2. If you believe the flood story is literal, how do you rationalize you aren’t worshiping a heinous, murderous god?
If someone had pointed these statements out to me in my early 30’s I would’ve either come up fighting, or feverishly searched the internet for an apologetic that would let me keep both my biblical views AND my belief in an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving god. I decided this week to PRETEND that I do want to believe in the accuracy of this story and defend god simultaneously. How would I do that? What kind of arguments could I use?
I have to say, I found some pretty impressive, Olympic worthy hoop-jumping, and even a few articles where theists straight up admit that science can’t find any evidence for a global flood. The remaining monologue is something like “what do we do with this?”
I really, really appreciate these people who simply admit they’re backed into a corner with no easy escape route.
It’s so vulnerable and honest. My love language.
Also, they have my sympathies. They are on a treacherous path.
In his article “Noah: One of the Most Moral Stories Ever Told”, Dennis Prager does his best to turn the murder of 99.99% of the human race into an act that shows “God cares more about goodness than anything else.”
Ok, let me make sure I get this right. God makes a bunch of humans and, although he is supposed to know everything that is going to happen on his planet, is strangely surprised by how evil they turn out.
So he murders them.
God cares about goodness so much, that he does the opposite of goodness to solve the issue. And that… makes sense somehow? Genesis 6:5,7 says that, “every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time” and that he “will wipe from the face of the earth the human race [he has] created.” Really? Alllllll humans, except for 8 persons, who were conveniently part of the same family, were full of evil thoughts? What kind of evil thoughts do kids and babies have? What about the unborn babies? Pretty nasty for a god who is so opposed to abortion.
One particularly funny response to “how could god kill babies?” is that since the world was so evil there probably weren’t any children left anyway. And that if there were any kids hanging around it was the parent’s responsibility to get them on the boat in the first place.
Well, if we’re going to follow this ridiculous path, where kids are suddenly not in the course of events, couldn’t god just wait for the human race to die out on it’s own? Shouldn’t take too long without any children to propagate the human race. But, I have to admit, it’s pretty impressive what we’ll come up with to keep god out of the principals office.
And this really all ties into a Twitter debate I had with some poor sap a few weeks ago… my stand being that there is no such thing as objective morality coming from the god of the christian bible. Since he makes the rules, he can at any time change the rules… making his morality completely SUBJECTIVE. God murders all men, women and children via drowning… and it’s moral. Because his obsession with goodness trumps all. Later he says that murder is wrong, going to far as to write it in stone. Unless it’s a little MORE later and he wants you to murder the Amalekite’s, at which point it’s suddenly moral again. All morality is subjective to the mood of this moody god.
Now, if you’re one of those people who believe that you wouldn’t know it’s wrong to murder without a god telling you so… PLEASE, for all of our sake’s, don’t stop believing in your god. We need you to hold onto that. The rest of us understand where morals actually come from.
They come from us.
We, as a culture, decide what is moral and what is not. Evolution has dictated to us the most useful behavior for the longevity of our species. In a democratic country, I don’t understand why it’s so hard for us to grasp the concept that WE THE PEOPLE are perfectly fit to govern ourselves.
When I left my belief in god behind, I embraced a whole new moral code that is, in fact, more encompassing and more compassionate than ANY biblical mandate. My moral code says that that ALL persons deserve well-being, despite their gender, sexual identity, religion or political affiliation. My moral code informs me that I don’t get to tell you how to live your life just because I don’t understand it or because it makes me uncomfortable. My moral code taps on my shoulder day and night and says, “Psst! You aren’t right and they aren’t wrong. Dummy.”
While I feel I’ve left my religion behind years ago, the writing of this post feels significant to me. Because today I declare the death of my old morals and the god they were attached to. Once, I was baptized and my “old self” was drowned… today I drown God. I drown him in his own, fucking flood. No more will I allow toxic beliefs from the bible dictate how I treat humans, how I respond to a person’s rights to well-being or which person’s freedoms I support at the polls. Human morality, and therefore MY morality, are superior to God’s.
Yes. I said it. And I am free because of it.