‘a good god would not give laws and wisdoms that create or promote evil’...

[Amorphos]

A simple little ethic, you would think.

‘a good god would not give laws and wisdoms that create or promote evil’ therefore any interpretation of a good gods laws that result in harm, are not truthful interpretations of a good god. Or, if they are truthful interpretations of your god, then you believe in an evil deity.

Strange how this most simple of truths has not been recognised by so many throughout the ages and presently.

[Strelok]

Depends on how you define "good" and "evil".

[Phier]

A simple little ethic, you would think.

‘a good god would not give laws and wisdoms that create or promote evil’ therefore any interpretation of a good gods laws that result in harm, are not truthful interpretations of a good god. Or, if they are truthful interpretations of your god, then you believe in an evil deity.

Strange how this most simple of truths has not been recognised by so many throughout the ages and presently.

Life is fleeting, and a trial. Evil is only that which turns you away from God. If you were not to be tested than there would be no reason for life and we would simply be born in paradise.

[Amorphos]

Depends on how you define "good" and "evil".

Not bringing harm upon others. Sure there are liminal aspects to notions that are essentially arbitrary, not killing is obvious though.

Life is fleeting, and a trial. Evil is only that which turns you away from God. If you were not to be tested than there would be no reason for life and we would simply be born in paradise

True, but to do evil in gods name is still evil, weather or not we learn from satan or the comparative, is secondary to the good god’s wisdoms.

[Strelok]

Not bringing harm upon others. Sure there are liminal aspects to notions that are essentially arbitrary, not killing is obvious though.

Then you have your specific standard. Now, in the context of a God existing, he/she/it would probably have a completely different standard.

[Amorphos]

Then you have your specific standard. Now, in the context of a God existing, he/she/it would probably have a completely different standard.

Which is either good or evil or a blend of both. If we consider god to be good, then by any definition killing is not good, it may be necessary in war, but it is not a good deed and thus must only be considered in earthly terms, and not as resultant of a good god.

As far as I know all current religions agree that killing is not good.


'god' btw can here be used as a metaphor for the adaption of goddness. yes first we agree a standard of good, then we can safely say that any act aside from it is bad and hence not of the source of good.

[Strelok]

Which is either good or evil or a blend of both. If we consider god to be good, then by any definition killing is not good

By your view on morality (and mine, too), killing is not "good". Killing not being good isn't necessarily a universal truth. We can consider things to be "good or evil" according to our subjective (and relative) standards. The point is, such a being could still be an ultimate objective source of "good", but it just does not match with our specific moral standards.

So, for example, for the sake of discussion, let us presume a God exists and this being is omnipotent, omniscient and claims to be omnibenevolent. This being has a much higher comprehension level of us and has a certain standard of ethics. If such a beings actions match with their own standard of ethics, for example Action A is good and they do Action A, they are still doing something "good" according to that standard, whilst it might be "bad" according to our standards.

[Taiji]

Quetzalcoatl, can good gods tell lies or make mistakes?

[Amorphos]

Quetzalcoatl, can good gods tell lies or make mistakes?

Haha trust you to throw a spanner in the works. Pagan ones can for sure, but an infinite deity couldn’t as that would be limiting [and infinity is already there - so to say], …not that you can have an infinite deity but lets pretend you can for the ethic.

[Taiji]

So does the nature of the god change when we change our minds?

[Achilla]

So does the nature of the god change when we change our minds?

You could as well ask what's the point of trying to imagine the unimaginable

It doesn't matter whether you believe or not, and in case of the former what delusion you believe in.

It's beyond you, and useless.

What we refer to as 'God' is our own creation, our own fantasy.

It's limited, biased, imperfect.

Claiming that there are objective rules, based upon subjective creation, is self-contradictory - we are too limited to even understand them, should they lie in front of us.

In another words, millions of people were put to painful death just because some 'blessed' madmans thought they had a monopoly on the concept of God or Justice.

Your question is a good one, because it doesn't have an answer.

Here are some more questions without an answer:

- Does God exist?
- If he/she/it exists, what is it?
- What's the purpose of life?
- Who am I?

[Amorphos]

So does the nature of the god change when we change our minds?

I don’t see why it would, does your mind change when someone else changes theirs? Such transient natures are purely on the surface I would think.

[Taiji]

OK then, I think we need to know god's duties, intentions, the actions taken, and the results of those actions, before we can determine if his actions are good or bad by our own standards. Am I missing something?... Hmmm probably...

[Amorphos]

OK then, I think we need to know god's duties, intentions, the actions taken, and the results of those actions, before we can determine if his actions are good or bad by our own standards. Am I missing something?... Hmmm probably...

Not at all, we do need to know that, but we cannot know that, so all we can determine is that if we say x is ‘evil’, then someone e.g. a prophet from a given religion, tells us to do x, then he is telling us to do evil. As I presume they don’t do that ~ or at least that’s the argument people would give, then if we interpret what someone says god says to do as meaning we should do x, then we are going against the good god.

As an example, if a suicide bomber interprets the Koran as saying’ ‘we should blow people up’ then we either say that the Koran is evil or that the suicide bomber is evil.

Point being is that is we can argue this point effectively against clerics, then such people would have no backing morally, and probably wouldn’t go around blowing people up [if they thought they were going against their religion].

So I am pinning the buggers against the wall and forcing them to state what they mean one way or the other, iether their religion is evil or they are and they disobey it. Take your choices!

[Wolfgang von Zweibrücken]

There is no truly universal secular morality. You say killing is evil. Therefore, if God tells you to kill someone, He is evil, because He told you to do something evil. But is killing evil? Would it be evil to kill someone who was trying to kill you? Would it be evil to kill one man in order to save the lives of millions?

The problem with your theory is that you assume that good exists separate from God. The only way for God to not be good is if He does not define "good" - but if He created the universe, and therefore created good and evil, He is the only entity capable of defining either and both good and evil.

If God exists, there is no definition of good besides His. Since your premise assumes the existance of God, it cannot avoid this.

[Taiji]

Not at all, we do need to know that, but we cannot know that, so all we can determine is that if we say x is ‘evil’, then someone e.g. a prophet from a given religion, tells us to do x, then he is telling us to do evil. As I presume they don’t do that ~ or at least that’s the argument people would give, then if we interpret what someone says god says to do as meaning we should do x, then we are going against the good god.

As an example, if a suicide bomber interprets the Koran as saying’ ‘we should blow people up’ then we either say that the Koran is evil or that the suicide bomber is evil.

Point being is that is we can argue this point effectively against clerics, then such people would have no backing morally, and probably wouldn’t go around blowing people up [if they thought they were going against their religion].

So I am pinning the buggers against the wall and forcing them to state what they mean one way or the other, iether their religion is evil or they are and they disobey it. Take your choices!

Although I applaud your intent I see one tiny problem. They won't care what sense you make if you aren't making them feel as happy as their religion does.

... Maybe if you prescibed a mild sedative while you tried to wean them off it ...

Thank goodness there's no evidence for it whatsoever.

Amen.

[Amorphos]

Wolfgang von Zweibrücken

There is no truly universal secular morality. You say killing is evil. Therefore, if God tells you to kill someone, He is evil, because He told you to do something evil. But is killing evil? Would it be evil to kill someone who was trying to kill you? Would it be evil to kill one man in order to save the lives of millions?

We could say that yes all killing is evil and that there are different levels of evil, indeed that sometimes it is necessary for humans to kill as you say. This doesn’t mean it is necessary for god to kill or to believe in killing as he is all good so can stand to one side and not intervene. The way I see it, god doesn’t kill people, never has and never will, there are no instances of god being effectual in any worldly thing; god doesn’t do anything in the world, even if he created it.

See below*

In short the evil is always in the evil doers hands, not gods.

The problem with your theory is that you assume that good exists separate from God. The only way for God to not be good is if He does not define "good" - but if He created the universe, and therefore created good and evil, He is the only entity capable of defining either and both good and evil.

No i didnt assume that at all, I am saying good does only exist in god, therefore he would be incapable of doing evil. He did not create, or cannot create evil. Evil is the response to good, just as entropy comes after creation/manifestation. hence we cannot do evil in his name.


Fiyenyaa

This view of god really puts forward the idea that we should lay prostrate at the feet of any horrendous madman who happens to hold power over us. If we don't agree, still your tongue lest it be cut out

*We humans can do evil if it is deemed necessary as a concequence of evil, but we cannot say that we are doing good when it is clear we are doing evil. Equally we cannot say that a good god would tell us to do evil, he is only good and cannot even suggest evil or that means he is not all good!

Taiji

... Maybe if you prescibed a mild sedative while you tried to wean them off it ...

Well ya, but at least I can say they are not doing in the name of good.

[Mythre]

A simple little ethic, you would think.

‘a good god would not give laws and wisdoms that create or promote evil’ therefore any interpretation of a good gods laws that result in harm, are not truthful interpretations of a good god. Or, if they are truthful interpretations of your god, then you believe in an evil deity.

Strange how this most simple of truths has not been recognised by so many throughout the ages and presently.

This is a ludicrous point, philosophic tail chasing.

You are saying that if God sets down a Righteous set of laws, and man twists them, GOD is the evil one? You have got to be kidding me.

You forget Free Will which is the cornerstone of any Theistic Argument. You must tackle free will in order to take down a Theistic argument... and I dare you to try.

Name one Biblical Commandment that is "evil"

[Monarchist]

If God exists, there is no definition of good besides His. Since your premise assumes the existance of God, it cannot avoid this.

This is entirely my point. Atheists who mock God and laugh at Him for defying their ideas of good and evil don't seem to get the point. God did not merely follow ideas of Good and Evil; He actually invented them, purposefully. Why should it be otherwise, seeing that He created all EXISTENCE beyond even the confines of the Cosmos?

This is a ludicrous point, philosophic tail chasing.

You are saying that if God sets down a Righteous set of laws, and man twists them, GOD is the evil one? You have got to be kidding me.

You forget Free Will which is the cornerstone of any Theistic Argument. You must tackle free will in order to take down a Theistic argument... and I dare you to try.

Name one Biblical Commandment that is "evil"

Free Will seems to be rather a fallacious argument to make when God created us and evil, and thus punishes us for following something sacred. Why should God have planted the seeds of evil and of free will in us, and then punish us when we use the latter to commit the former? If God gave us free will, allowed us the possibility of committing evil, and then handed out punitive measures for obeying our God-given tendency toward evil, then God is simply not good at all. You may say "ah, but Satan gave us the tendency toward evil!", but God created Satan! Since God knows all and directs all, He must have allowed Satan to Fall into Hell, build the Pandemonium Fortress, and create evil. This is still on God's shoulders.

God could not possibly have inserted our natural tendency for evil into us, and I daresay He musn't have allowed one of His angels to do it. I say that there is no such thing as human evil; it is human free will in action, bereft of morals. What God tells us is to be done is good, and what God tells us is not to be done is evil. It really is very simple, but human free will sans evil will always tend toward the latter. I think God just left us in our condition of being free, but without evil or good in us. He told us what it was later, and now makes the judgments of the way each of us ends up. We are a species that learns by experience and teaching, not by rote or genetics. God must simply have taught it to us after our Creation, dictating it as He is wont to do.

This view of god really puts forward the idea that we should lay prostrate at the feet of any horrendous madman who happens to hold power over us. If we don't agree, still your tongue lest it be cut out. Think not seditious thoughts, and do not question nor doubt the commands of god.
This is why ethics based upon the whim of an unknowable entity are ridiculous. You are supposed to just follow them without thinking, like something worse than a slave. At least a slave has his mind free - we are eventually to be punished for the slightest thought-crime, according to this theology: and the very fact that we were created is the greatest crime god could commit because merely by doing so, and thus holding us up to his unattainable standards he condemns us to punishment.

Why are they ridiculous, friend Fiyenyaa? Why are you so averse to this idea? You had best still your tongue, lest it really be cut out. There is supreme, absolute calm in that reality. God doesn't care whether you think His commands are good or evil; He created the notions thereof, and thus what He says goes. When the order of Good or Evil comes from beyond the Cosmos itself, that is quite definitive. Just because a bunch of arrogant atheists believe their little personal ideals of good and evil are right doesn't mean God even cares, let alone agrees. Your conscience may be totally wrong; mine may be wrong, but God is constantly right, for He defines right! If God wanted to change the definition of dog to the definition of lamp, we'd go about calling dogs "lamps".

Even if God is a reprehensible celestial dictator, where is your way out? It's really quite simple: there is no recourse for change. How do you communicate between this life and the exit without God? Your beret-hat-wearing résistance movement won't achieve anything, for God controls all the weapons-caches, all the tanks, warehouses, and airbases. You may think "I can steal the key and get to the weapons-stash", but God has eyes on the keys at all times; besides, you are too short to reach His keys. We're stuck with God, who is our eternal father that locked us in a small box like those deformed 6-year-old children who can't read, talk, or act like regular people. It's not an entirely just allusion, for God loves us and gives us this order/discipline for our own safety, so it works for me.

Don't like it all? TOO BAD! Men want control of themselves in their entirety, and God defies that. It's a real slap in the face, isn't it?

Thank goodness there's no evidence for it whatsoever.

There's no evidence for you, either, so SHADDAP!

Don't infract me. It's just a joke.

[Mythre]

Free Will seems to be rather a fallacious argument to make when God created us and evil, and thus punishes us for following something sacred. Why should God have planted the seeds of evil and of free will in us, and then punish us when we use the latter to commit the former? If God gave us free will, allowed us the possibility of committing evil, and then handed out punitive measures for obeying our God-given tendency toward evil, then God is simply not good at all. You may say "ah, but Satan gave us the tendency toward evil!", but God created Satan! Since God knows all and directs all, He must have allowed Satan to Fall into Hell, build the Pandemonium Fortress, and create evil. This is still on God's shoulders.

God could not possibly have inserted our natural tendency for evil into us, and I daresay He musn't have allowed one of His angels to do it. I say that there is no such thing as human evil; it is human free will in action, bereft of morals. What God tells us is to be done is good, and what God tells us is not to be done is evil. It really is very simple, but human free will sans evil will always tend toward the latter. I think God just left us in our condition of being free, but without evil or good in us. He told us what it was later, and now makes the judgments of the way each of us ends up. We are a species that learns by experience and teaching, not by rote or genetics. God must simply have taught it to us after our Creation, dictating it as He is wont to do.


.

Here I must differ from you, God did not create evil. It is inherit in the definition of God's Goodness and Holiness. Anything that is not God is evil. Thus when Satan decided to seek something out side of God, he sinned, God never needed to create "sin" as we think of it. Sin, by its nature, begets more sin, thus the fall of Man and our continuing decline. Sin corrupts the "Image" we were created with and makes us slaves to said sin until salvation. If good morals could save the world, why were the Puritans not successful in driving sin from their lives?
Free Will is 100% necessary otherwise God MUST HAVE created sin and evil. Just saying.