Is God Good?

[there4eyeM]

Hearsay evidence may indicate, whereas personal experience confirms.
The only way to know the way of the universe, of 'God', is to look, watch, receive. Humility and acceptance are necessary. Without that, frustration is certain.

 

[norwegen]

It's biblical, and it does not ignore mercy and redemption.

I don't think the Bible says that God is bad to people who don't worship him which is what is implied when you said God is good to those who worship only Him.

What you think doesn't change the Scriptures.

The Hebrew term sawtawn (the Greek satanas) refers to adversary, as God was with Balaam, though not the most righteous, was His own prophet nonetheless (Numbers 22: 22-30).

In First Chronicles 22, God is again, as always, upset with His spouse, Israel, for her lack of love for and faith in Him. The "Sawtawn stood against Israel." Regarding this incident of a census, 2 Samuel 24:1 records it as the Lord's anger being kindled against Israel.

The entire Old Testament is about God's wrath against His people whose failure of worship is their reason for exile. Hence the Messiah and the new Israel.​

You aren't seeing the full picture. Yes, God got angry at the Jews for forgetting him, but he always forgave them and never stopped loving them. The OT is effectively an account of what happens to a people who cycle between remembering and forgetting God. It serves as a historical parable so to speak.

View attachment 302295



The sun shines on the good and the bad. It rains on the good and the bad. God uses it all.

Being stuck in Fundyland with your theories on Revelation, you don't get the big picture.

A few good eggs - maybe some patriarchs and prophets - do not make for a righteous nation. In the transition from old to new, St. Paul sums up their history for the Roman Christians:

For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (Rom 1:21-23)​

You couldn't be more off base with your assumptions about me. I'm not a fundamentalist and I don't believe Revelations is about the end of times, I believe it is about the end of the Roman Empire.

I totally agree that God does not love having lipservice paid to him, I just question your ability to discern who does and doesn't.

I believe the original sin is worshiping created things instead of the creator which is driven by pride. Speaking of pride, maybe you should check yours because given your tone it would appear that I have wounded yours.

The original sin is idolatry. Mankind ate the fruit of another, we might say.

Pride? I don't see it.

 

[Votto]

I don't think the Bible says that God is bad to people who don't worship him which is what is implied when you said God is good to those who worship only Him.

What you think doesn't change the Scriptures.

The Hebrew term sawtawn (the Greek satanas) refers to adversary, as God was with Balaam, though not the most righteous, was His own prophet nonetheless (Numbers 22: 22-30).

In First Chronicles 22, God is again, as always, upset with His spouse, Israel, for her lack of love for and faith in Him. The "Sawtawn stood against Israel." Regarding this incident of a census, 2 Samuel 24:1 records it as the Lord's anger being kindled against Israel.

The entire Old Testament is about God's wrath against His people whose failure of worship is their reason for exile. Hence the Messiah and the new Israel.​

You aren't seeing the full picture. Yes, God got angry at the Jews for forgetting him, but he always forgave them and never stopped loving them. The OT is effectively an account of what happens to a people who cycle between remembering and forgetting God. It serves as a historical parable so to speak.

View attachment 302295



The sun shines on the good and the bad. It rains on the good and the bad. God uses it all.

Being stuck in Fundyland with your theories on Revelation, you don't get the big picture.

A few good eggs - maybe some patriarchs and prophets - do not make for a righteous nation. In the transition from old to new, St. Paul sums up their history for the Roman Christians:

For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (Rom 1:21-23)​

You couldn't be more off base with your assumptions about me. I'm not a fundamentalist and I don't believe Revelations is about the end of times, I believe it is about the end of the Roman Empire.

I totally agree that God does not love having lipservice paid to him, I just question your ability to discern who does and doesn't.

I believe the original sin is worshiping created things instead of the creator which is driven by pride. Speaking of pride, maybe you should check yours because given your tone it would appear that I have wounded yours.

The original sin is idolatry. Mankind ate the fruit of another, we might say.

Pride? I don't see it.

And what was the fruit called? Was it not the tree of knowledge of good and evil?

For you see, the pursuit of knowledge without wisdom(i.e. void of God who is the source of all wisdom) brings death. Look around you, WMD's, global warming, genetically altered crops that can't reproduce but then cross pollinate with other plants so they can't reproduce either, etc.

As Dr. Oppenheimer who created the atom bomb said, "I have become death".

 

[norwegen]

What you think doesn't change the Scriptures.

The Hebrew term sawtawn (the Greek satanas) refers to adversary, as God was with Balaam, though not the most righteous, was His own prophet nonetheless (Numbers 22: 22-30).

In First Chronicles 22, God is again, as always, upset with His spouse, Israel, for her lack of love for and faith in Him. The "Sawtawn stood against Israel." Regarding this incident of a census, 2 Samuel 24:1 records it as the Lord's anger being kindled against Israel.

The entire Old Testament is about God's wrath against His people whose failure of worship is their reason for exile. Hence the Messiah and the new Israel.​

You aren't seeing the full picture. Yes, God got angry at the Jews for forgetting him, but he always forgave them and never stopped loving them. The OT is effectively an account of what happens to a people who cycle between remembering and forgetting God. It serves as a historical parable so to speak.

View attachment 302295



The sun shines on the good and the bad. It rains on the good and the bad. God uses it all.

Being stuck in Fundyland with your theories on Revelation, you don't get the big picture.

A few good eggs - maybe some patriarchs and prophets - do not make for a righteous nation. In the transition from old to new, St. Paul sums up their history for the Roman Christians:

For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (Rom 1:21-23)​

You couldn't be more off base with your assumptions about me. I'm not a fundamentalist and I don't believe Revelations is about the end of times, I believe it is about the end of the Roman Empire.

I totally agree that God does not love having lipservice paid to him, I just question your ability to discern who does and doesn't.

I believe the original sin is worshiping created things instead of the creator which is driven by pride. Speaking of pride, maybe you should check yours because given your tone it would appear that I have wounded yours.

The original sin is idolatry. Mankind ate the fruit of another, we might say.

Pride? I don't see it.

And what was the fruit called? Was it not the tree of knowledge of good and evil?

The fruit of the tree of knowledge, yes.

 

[there4eyeM]

The knowledge of good and evil is dualism, dividing the universe into two parts when it is only one whole. Yet, humans have indeed cut existence in two. That is our power, and our curse.

 

[ding]

I don't think the Bible says that God is bad to people who don't worship him which is what is implied when you said God is good to those who worship only Him.

What you think doesn't change the Scriptures.

The Hebrew term sawtawn (the Greek satanas) refers to adversary, as God was with Balaam, though not the most righteous, was His own prophet nonetheless (Numbers 22: 22-30).

In First Chronicles 22, God is again, as always, upset with His spouse, Israel, for her lack of love for and faith in Him. The "Sawtawn stood against Israel." Regarding this incident of a census, 2 Samuel 24:1 records it as the Lord's anger being kindled against Israel.

The entire Old Testament is about God's wrath against His people whose failure of worship is their reason for exile. Hence the Messiah and the new Israel.​

You aren't seeing the full picture. Yes, God got angry at the Jews for forgetting him, but he always forgave them and never stopped loving them. The OT is effectively an account of what happens to a people who cycle between remembering and forgetting God. It serves as a historical parable so to speak.

View attachment 302295



The sun shines on the good and the bad. It rains on the good and the bad. God uses it all.

Being stuck in Fundyland with your theories on Revelation, you don't get the big picture.

A few good eggs - maybe some patriarchs and prophets - do not make for a righteous nation. In the transition from old to new, St. Paul sums up their history for the Roman Christians:

For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (Rom 1:21-23)​

You couldn't be more off base with your assumptions about me. I'm not a fundamentalist and I don't believe Revelations is about the end of times, I believe it is about the end of the Roman Empire.

I totally agree that God does not love having lipservice paid to him, I just question your ability to discern who does and doesn't.

I believe the original sin is worshiping created things instead of the creator which is driven by pride. Speaking of pride, maybe you should check yours because given your tone it would appear that I have wounded yours.

The original sin is idolatry. Mankind ate the fruit of another, we might say.

Pride? I don't see it.

Idolatry is worshiping the created rather than the creator.

See whatever you want.

 

[ding]

The knowledge of good and evil is dualism, dividing the universe into two parts when it is only one whole. Yet, humans have indeed cut existence in two. That is our power, and our curse.

283 The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers. With Solomon they can say: "It is he who gave me unerring knowledge of what exists, to know the structure of the world and the activity of the elements. . . for wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me."121

284 The great interest accorded to these studies is strongly stimulated by a question of another order, which goes beyond the proper domain of the natural sciences. It is not only a question of knowing when and how the universe arose physically, or when man appeared, but rather of discovering the meaning of such an origin: is the universe governed by chance, blind fate, anonymous necessity, or by a transcendent, intelligent and good Being called "God"? And if the world does come from God's wisdom and goodness, why is there evil? Where does it come from? Who is responsible for it? Is there any liberation from it?

285 Since the beginning the Christian faith has been challenged by responses to the question of origins that differ from its own. Ancient religions and cultures produced many myths concerning origins. Some philosophers have said that everything is God, that the world is God, or that the development of the world is the development of God (Pantheism). Others have said that the world is a necessary emanation arising from God and returning to him. Still others have affirmed the existence of two eternal principles, Good and Evil, Light and Darkness, locked, in permanent conflict (Dualism, Manichaeism). According to some of these conceptions, the world (at least the physical world) is evil, the product of a fall, and is thus to be rejected or left behind (Gnosticism). Some admit that the world was made by God, but as by a watch-maker who, once he has made a watch, abandons it to itself (Deism). Finally, others reject any transcendent origin for the world, but see it as merely the interplay of matter that has always existed (Materialism). All these attempts bear witness to the permanence and universality of the question of origins. This inquiry is distinctively human.

286 Human intelligence is surely already capable of finding a response to the question of origins. The existence of God the Creator can be known with certainty through his works, by the light of human reason,122 even if this knowledge is often obscured and disfigured by error. This is why faith comes to confirm and enlighten reason in the correct understanding of this truth: "By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear."123

 

[there4eyeM]

Again, it was the knowledge of good and evil, not merely 'knowledge'.
Animals have knowledge of what to eat. They have no dualism.

 

[ding]

Again, it was the knowledge of good and evil, not merely 'knowledge'.
Animals have knowledge of what to eat. They have no dualism.

Knowledge of good and evil doesn't make it dualism.

 

[TNHarley]

I like the way the script writer put in in Oh God part 2

Quotes from "Oh, God! Book II"

"God: [answering Tracy's question about why there is so much suffering in the world] I know this sounds like a cop-out, Tracy, but there's nothing I can do about pain and suffering. It's built into the system.

Tracy Richards: Which You invented.

God: Right. But my problem was I could never figure out how to build anything with just one side to it.

Tracy Richards: One side?

God: You ever see a front without a back?

Tracy Richards: No.

God: A top without a bottom?

Tracy Richards: No.

God: An up without a down?

Tracy Richards: No.

God: OK. Then there can't be good without bad, life without death, pleasure without pain. That's the way it is. If I take sad away, happy has to go with it. "

Restrictions on an omnipotent being? Hmmm

 

[TNHarley]

The biblical god is evil. Obviously.
Murdering children for sins of the father? Sounds like something a desert savage would come up with. Hmmmm

 

[ding]

The biblical god is evil. Obviously.
Murdering children for sins of the father? Sounds like something a desert savage would come up with. Hmmmm

You are such a dupe.

 

[there4eyeM]

Dualism: link dualism - Google Search
dualism
noun

1. the division of something conceptually into two opposed or contrasted aspects, or the state of being so divided.

 

[mudwhistle]

The toughest question Religious folks must answer of skeptics is, "Why does God allow this to happen?"

Whether you are talking about human-engineered genocide, natural catastrophes, mass murder, or some other apparent injustice, "God" appears to have permitted it to happen (or commanded it to happen), and Why does God allow it to happen?

On the other side of the coin, we have evil people who are born wealthy, talented, beautiful, handsome, or are wildly successful - sometimes BECAUSE they are evil. They live their entire lives in the lap of luxury and die happy. How does God allow THIS to happen?

The core of the response is in life after death. We are taught to believe that the totality of human existence is not bounded by conception and natural death; that in some vaguely-defined way Evil is punished in the afterlife and Virtue is rewarded. The balancing effect of the "just desserts" of the afterlife excuses the obvious injustices (and this word is insufficient, certainly) of the life that we see.

If there is no afterlife, then God, if he does exist, is Evil.

Manifestly.

Jesus kicks butt.

 

[TNHarley]

The biblical god is evil. Obviously.
Murdering children for sins of the father? Sounds like something a desert savage would come up with. Hmmmm

You are such a dupe.

Im not the one to devotes my life to a 6000k year old desert savage system of fear.

 

[ding]

The biblical god is evil. Obviously.
Murdering children for sins of the father? Sounds like something a desert savage would come up with. Hmmmm

You are such a dupe.

Im not the one to devotes my life to a 6000k year old desert savage system of fear.

Neither do I.

But you are the one who could double as Marx and Lenin with your bullshit.

 

[mudwhistle]

The toughest question Religious folks must answer of skeptics is, "Why does God allow this to happen?"

Whether you are talking about human-engineered genocide, natural catastrophes, mass murder, or some other apparent injustice, "God" appears to have permitted it to happen (or commanded it to happen), and Why does God allow it to happen?

On the other side of the coin, we have evil people who are born wealthy, talented, beautiful, handsome, or are wildly successful - sometimes BECAUSE they are evil. They live their entire lives in the lap of luxury and die happy. How does God allow THIS to happen?

The core of the response is in life after death. We are taught to believe that the totality of human existence is not bounded by conception and natural death; that in some vaguely-defined way Evil is punished in the afterlife and Virtue is rewarded. The balancing effect of the "just desserts" of the afterlife excuses the obvious injustices (and this word is insufficient, certainly) of the life that we see.

If there is no afterlife, then God, if he does exist, is Evil.

Manifestly.

Is God evil for creating Satan even though he knew what Satan would do?

The angels had free will. 1/3 chose to rebel. God knew they would. And look at the havoc they bring every day.

What’s Gods options?

1. A perfect world where no one can do evil because they’re mindless robots.

2. A world filled with choices and contrasts.

God chose #2.

There never was a perfect world.....even Adam and Eve were imperfect.
Creating a world without free-will is the height of evil.

 

[alang1216]

Sure. Free will isn't about what one will be or desire to be. Free will is about the choices one makes. I can't choose to be an NBA player, but I can make choices to do the things that might make me an NBA player.

If you genes have not made you tall, I think your chances are nil. Would if be fair to then judge you based on if you get picked for the NBA or not?

Again... free will isn't about you getting what you desire. Free will is about making choices.

For instance, let's say you are sexually attracted to the same sex. You may wish or desire to not be sexually attracted to the same sex. So there is no free will involved in your desire per se, but your choice to have sex with the same sex would be a choice and would involve free will.

So it is your actions alone that determine your fate, not anything you believe or think or feel. That doesn't sound like the NT to me.

It's the choices you make. That is 100% NT.

The Greek word for repent is "metanoia." Metanoia means to change your mind. Our thoughts, the flow of consciousness which determines our behaviors, can change. Metanoia has to do with moral activity, but goes beyond that. Jesus was teaching that we could change our mind about how we treat people. We don’t have to be unforgiving and cynical. We can change our mind about being negative. We can think positive thoughts and walk in faith instead of doubt. We can change our minds about sin. Rather than being caught in the strongholds of consistent habits of lust or selfishness, for example, we can experience freedom and selflessness. Jesus would not have told us to change unless it was possible and attainable. The Bible is full of words that speak about change. Repentance, metamorphosis, transformation, conversion, resurrection, rebirth, renewal, regeneration, healing and transfiguration.

If I'm a wonderful person but don't believe in Jesus, will I still get into heaven?

 

[TNHarley]

The biblical god is evil. Obviously.
Murdering children for sins of the father? Sounds like something a desert savage would come up with. Hmmmm

You are such a dupe.

Im not the one to devotes my life to a 6000k year old desert savage system of fear.

Neither do I.

But you are the one who could double as Marx and Lenin with your bullshit.

Yes you are. And wtf? How stupid

 

[ding]

Sure. Free will isn't about what one will be or desire to be. Free will is about the choices one makes. I can't choose to be an NBA player, but I can make choices to do the things that might make me an NBA player.

If you genes have not made you tall, I think your chances are nil. Would if be fair to then judge you based on if you get picked for the NBA or not?

Again... free will isn't about you getting what you desire. Free will is about making choices.

For instance, let's say you are sexually attracted to the same sex. You may wish or desire to not be sexually attracted to the same sex. So there is no free will involved in your desire per se, but your choice to have sex with the same sex would be a choice and would involve free will.

So it is your actions alone that determine your fate, not anything you believe or think or feel. That doesn't sound like the NT to me.

It's the choices you make. That is 100% NT.

The Greek word for repent is "metanoia." Metanoia means to change your mind. Our thoughts, the flow of consciousness which determines our behaviors, can change. Metanoia has to do with moral activity, but goes beyond that. Jesus was teaching that we could change our mind about how we treat people. We don’t have to be unforgiving and cynical. We can change our mind about being negative. We can think positive thoughts and walk in faith instead of doubt. We can change our minds about sin. Rather than being caught in the strongholds of consistent habits of lust or selfishness, for example, we can experience freedom and selflessness. Jesus would not have told us to change unless it was possible and attainable. The Bible is full of words that speak about change. Repentance, metamorphosis, transformation, conversion, resurrection, rebirth, renewal, regeneration, healing and transfiguration.

If I'm a wonderful person but don't believe in Jesus, will I still get into heaven?

I have no idea. I believe that no one knows their fate or the fate of others. That's a catholic belief by the way.