Is God good ?

Thomas Cranmer

Thomas Cranmer

Registered Member
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.
 
Good God? No. GOOD GOD!!! Yes. Why kill the tiger cubs, you stupid fool?
690px-Gustave_Dor%C3%A9_-_The_Holy_Bible_-_Plate_I%2C_The_Deluge.jpg
 
Granting, for the sake of argument, the existence of God, I agree 100% with the OP.

By definition, there is no higher standard by which an alleged Creator of Everything can be judged.
 
Hmm.. there is a distinction between , the Lord and god .

god is enlil , Lord is enki .

Why the differnce , because god , enlil wants to eliminate Humanity , whereas Enki , Lord , wants Humanity to thrive.
 
Thomas Cranmer said:
no.
Click to expand...
"Abiogenesis or biopoiesis is the natural process of life arising from non-living matter such as simple organic compounds."-
planetary-science.org/astrobiology/thoery-of-abiogenesis/

They use early Earth models, but life could have been synthesized in space like the stars. So when I look into the Universe (the soup), I see life, and everything else that is not life. That's all there is in the universe. It's really that simple.

Guess I should address the question. Is God good?
I think you're reading into the universe. Don't be surprised if you don't get an answer.
Good?
Relative good is like relative truth. It is what people are most familiar with.
Absolute truth however is more like the universe. It is something that is always true.
Good also is always true. Truth and goodness are not real. They are ideals.
Is God the universe? No.
Is God good? No.
You might say that God is greater than the universe, good, and truth.
But like I said, I think you're reading into it using a brain that is evolving.
Life begets life. That's how it's been since the origin of life. I don't see anything else.
Thom Aquinas might enjoy talking with you about it, but no doubt he would be the first one to beat me with a stick for being a heretic. My philosophy is to enjoy life. It doesn't last forever.
 
Last edited:
Xmo1 said:
"Abiogenesis or biopoiesis is the natural process of life arising from non-living matter such as simple organic compounds."- planetary-science.org/astrobiology/thoery-of-abiogenesis/
They use Early universe models, but life could have been synthesized in space, like the stars. So when I look into the Universe (the soup), I see life, and everything else that is not life. That's all there is in the universe. It's really that simple.
Click to expand...

It's not that simple .

Both life , through genetics can be manipulated , and basic elements can be manipulated .
 
river said:
Actions

Lord saved Humanity from the flood .
Click to expand...
Yeah, but having one family indulge in incest to reproduce the human race. Brilliant plan. But then "God" is not good at planning.

1. He created a theme park and left two naked teenager in charge. He admittedly planted two huge biohazards in the park and left them open to access by kids utterly unaware of what the consequences would be. Then, when they acted like teenagers, He condemned the entire human race to endless suffering for His oversight.

2. When all the HUMANS failed to live up to His standards He had no recourse but to kill EVERYTHING on the planet that wasn't in that one highly improbable boat.

3. After cousin mated with cousin enough time for the Earth to repopulate, including China and Australia, in less than two thousand years, He sent His Son on a suicide mission to straighten out the mess made by created He created. He didn't however, see the need for His Son to have His words written down. The Son didn't convert a single person who could read and write, or who had enough money to hire someone who could.

♫Why'd you pick such a strang place in such a strange time?
Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication!♫
 
river said:
It's not that simple .

Both life , through genetics can be manipulated , and basic elements can be manipulated .
Click to expand...
The OP asked, is God good. So my post addressed the purest form of God and good without any attachments or modifications, and those would be at origin.
 
Dywyddyr said:
You mean a non-existent "deity" saved humanity from a non-existent flood?
Yay! That shows exactly how "good" he is/ was.
Click to expand...
I know where you're coming from but, if one is going to contribute, it is de rigueur to at least grant, for the sake of argument, the premise - in this case, that God exists - and instead look for internal inconsistencies in the Mythos.

Otherwise, every post #2 of every thread in the religion forum would be "God doesn't exist! End of discussion!" :wink:
 
It wasn't so much a ""god" doesn't exist" comment as it was a "Oh, river's bringing even more drivel about who/ what "god" is[1] and using a fictional event to bolster his claim as opposed to addressing the logic of the OP".
Or, to paraphrase you "I wonder if it is counter-productive to try to argue characteristics of a "god" by using a known-to-be-fictional event."

1 This Enki/ Enlil crap is not what the thread is about - river's contention is that those "beings" were aliens rather than "gods" (in the "usual sense") per se. Likewise, since we know that the flood didn't happen then using it to demonstrate that "god" is good is as useful as claiming "Of course he/ she/ it is because the Bible/ preferred holy book says he/ she/ it is".
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
And reality would win another round.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top