Is God good ?

Xmo1 said:
Thomas Aquinas presents the first cause argument asking, what created the universe. Three answers (not the only three) are: God (Aquinas' answer). Second is creatio ex nihilo, Latin meaning "creation out of nothing." Meaning it spontaneously popped out of nothing. Creation though implies a creator, so I would remove it, and say simply ex nihilo -
(as arriving) from nothing. Saying nothing exists is a language idiosyncrasy. The third is that the universe always existed in some form (is eternal). The question is valid.
Click to expand...
Not actually sure how this informs the thread subject.
 
Of course , resistence to the ancient past history , is expected .

Not surprised .

Enki and enlil did exist , in the past .
 
DaveC426913 said:
Not actually sure how this informs the thread subject.
Click to expand...
Ref: posts 18-19, saying that if someone is talking about reality then the history of the philosophy of reality is important, because reality is a subjective notion (somewhat) impacted by that history. Sama said reality wins, but Sama's idea of reality may be completely different from someone else's. Sama also said, God is only as good as the beings that create Him. Typically, when God is capitalized there is the idea that God is an eternal spirit, but I'm not sure Sama is offering a context for that post.
 
Last edited:
Not allowed to walk away from a post for an hour (this one would not let me delete it). Pretty inconvenient admins. Please give us control of our content.
 
Xmo1 said:
Not allowed to walk away from a post for an hour (this one would not let me delete it). Pretty inconvenient admins. Please give us control of our content.
Click to expand...
Can you point me at a discussion forum that allows you to do this?
 
Thomas Cranmer said:
If we determine that God is good, then we are exercising our moral judgement.
But we get our moral judgement from God, because he created us.
So we haven't got an independent method of judging God.
So only God can judge himself.
In order to judge himself, he must compare himself to some standard.
Did he determine the standard ?
Well, yes, because there is no other authority.
Did he have good reasons for that standard?
Well, you might think so, but what makes them good reasons?
The reasons can't be good, because that requires a standard by which they can be judged.
I suppose he could make up reasons, but that wouldn't make them good.
Therefore he didn't have good reasons.
Therefore the standard is arbitrary.
Therefore, for God, goodness is arbitrary.
Therefore God cannot be judged to be good.
So the only logical answer is no.
Click to expand...
^^^
Yes. Christians say humans cannot have good morals without a source but they require no source for god's morals. They say humans should try to be like god yet most of what scripture claims god does/did would be seen as immoral if humans do.

<>
 
Xmo1 said:
Sure:
http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/
Click to expand...
So, you can go back to a post a month old, and edit it?

What happens if someone responds to your post and then you change it?

What if, on Monday, you post "I like babies", and then on Tuesday someone says "Me Too!"
And then on Wednesday, you return and edit your post to say "I like to eat kittens!" Now, the poor hapless respondent likes to eat kittens.

Can you go back and change your prediction of the 2106 election to say "50 bucks says Trump wins!"
 
Actually you can do that on many forums. You rarely can delete a post and certainly not a thread but there are many forums where you can always edit a post. I understand forums that don't allow that and I understand forums that do allow that.

I, obviously, don't go back and change the argument after someone has responded. I do frequently go back to correct typos anytime that is allowed. Sometimes I don't notice it the first time and it's only later that I catch it.

I'm not arguing which way is best, but it does commonly exist on many forums.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Can you point me at a discussion forum that allows you to do this?
Click to expand...
Quora - which might not exactly qualify as it is more giving answers to questions asked
But you can go back anytime to edit/revise anything you post

:)
 
Editing all the posts in a thread would make it unreadable, I think. Editing a post to prevent oneself from looking like an utter loon? Where's the entertainment value in that?
 
"In the beginning there was the word..." I believe "The Word" is the duality of morality (Good and evil.) Goodness is natural and remains, however evil is neccessary because only evil can be regretted and "undone." This is called a conscience.
 
Is God good? Who else gets CREDIT for killing nearly every living thing on the planet? God's righteous man, Lot, offers his virgin daughters to the mob if they'll leave his angels alone. Then God kills his wife for looking back at everything she's ever known, everyone she's ever cared about, being destroyed because God can't make a human that works like He wants them to.
 
Why even discuss the character of an entity that has yet to be established as a fact.
Its like kids sitting around discussing ghosts, after a while they seem real simply because there has been a lot of chat but in both cases the proposition needs a basis before it can be discussed something that shows the discussion is about something real.

Is is God good or bad...who cares unless we have something real to be the object of discussion.

May as well discuss the grazing habits of unicorns before we have established that unicorns are real.

But theists like kids discussing ghosts believe by discussing their God it makes him real but sadly for them it does not.
Alex
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
I just like pointing out that anyone who worships the creep has really bad people skills.
Click to expand...
And please dont hold back.
Why does a God need to be worshipped I just dont get that part.

Can you imagine a father expecting the kids to worship him because he fathered them...stupid.

The whole thing does not add up and given the whole thing is made up you would think they would at least construct a plausible story.

Alex
 
Thomas Cranmer said:
If we determine that God is good, then we are exercising our moral judgement.
But we get our moral judgement from God, because he created us.
So we haven't got an independent method of judging God.
So only God can judge himself.
In order to judge himself, he must compare himself to some standard.
Did he determine the standard ?
Well, yes, because there is no other authority.
Did he have good reasons for that standard?
Well, you might think so, but what makes them good reasons?
The reasons can't be good, because that requires a standard by which they can be judged.
I suppose he could make up reasons, but that wouldn't make them good.
Therefore he didn't have good reasons.
Therefore the standard is arbitrary.
Therefore, for God, goodness is arbitrary.
Therefore God cannot be judged to be good.
So the only logical answer is no.
Click to expand...

We determine the guilt and innocence of other people all the time.
We do so based on human moral judgements, no matter where anyone claims they come from.
So can humans be good? How do we know?
We have nothing else to compare our own standard against.
Therefore humans cannot judge other humans to be good.

Or if God is a necessary existence, its necessity makes it good to all contingent existences.
Otherwise, denying the goodness of God also denies the goodness of your own existence.
 
Vociferous said:
Otherwise, denying the goodness of God also denies the goodness of your own existence.
Click to expand...
My own existence is real so I can not understand why my goodness is dependant on an entity that has yet to be shown to exist.
Would my goodness not be a judgement made by others, real people, based on their values of what may or may not be good and based upon their values ... hopefully without reference to a morality made up thousands of years ago.

Alex
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top