Can god be good?

[Medicine*Woman]

Jenyar,

That's interesting that you think of that God-given ability to know good from evil to be of the same kind like the ability to recognize love.
I'll go by my standard and say the recognition of good/evil is there, and it is fundamental, and it is originally there as a means to achieve (social) stability. As everything, this ability too can get clouded.


That's a spin, that thing with conscience. I bet they invented that, because they didn't know the term social stability. Or because it was too neutral.


Huh, yes ... "because the greatest trick that the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist."


That's because people like to be irrational and unreasonable and refuse to think in terms of social stability and such.


Yes, if you believe in forgiveness. Many Christians I know don't believe in forgiveness. Or, they take it so lightly, that it is mind-boggling: go and do something, who cares, you can repent and everything will be ok. The institute of forgiveness breeded out into an institute that entices and allows to sin. Hah! Some see this bastardization, but then don't seem to come further, and hence the guilt. Anyhow, it is good they feel guilty. It's the next best thing to accountability.

*************
M*W: Forgiveness is the only thing that will progress your soul. This has nothing to do with Christianity or Islam or Protestantism. Forgiveness is what evolves the soul of humanity.

 

[Hastein]

The old testament is evidence enough that the first conception of a monotheistic god was a purely oppressive god. This coincides directly with the militant proletarian mentality of the Jews. They needed a god of absolute vengefullness and hatred who had to punish mankind for being anything greater than a slave. They had to, after all, drag down their Egyptian and Roman masters. Satan was originally conceived of as a companion of god, not his adversary. Satan had to trick man in order to bring entertainment to Yahweh.

You can draw parallels between Yahweh and the other middle eastern gods of the time in terms of wanton cruelty and thirst for power, but there is a key difference: Baal and Ishtar were companion deities who would offer their services to mankind in exchange for some sacrifice. Yahweh was not a companion, but a master god who made all mankind his slaves.

The violence of the pagan gods is revealed in the power of nature and its destructive forces, but these were thing to be revered. Yahweh and Jehova devised a new kind of torture: abstinence and chastity. This was the refutation of life itself, where flesh is made sinful and free thought is made demonic possession. The gods of all early societies on all continents represented various aspects of the universe, including all the things so hated by the Judeo-Christian ideology. The hopelessness of middle eastern life should give you a good idea of the kind of mentallity that would lead to these religious creeds: "Work hard in this desert life and you will be rewarded." Utter insanity.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

*************
M*W: Forgiveness is the only thing that will progress your soul. This has nothing to do with Christianity or Islam or Protestantism. Forgiveness is what evolves the soul of humanity.

*************
M*W: Forgiveness. It's the only virtue that will help your soul to evolve. Forgiveness. That's all there is.

 

[Jenyar]

That's a spin, that thing with conscience. I bet they invented that, because they didn't know the term social stability. Or because it was too neutral.

You seem to use "social stability" as a catch-word for everything. But your conscience comes first, stability comes second. When you lie to your mother (assuming you feel some responsibility towards her) you will feel guilty. That doesn't have much to do with maintaining the stability of the relationship as with you knowing that lying to her was wrong. Think of an instance where being honest would actually damage the stability - does that mean you won't feel guilty?

I do agree with you that a stable relationship with those around you is the end result (that's the same thing we want with God - a healthy relationship), but conscience is just one of the "checks" - not a substitute.

Yes, if you believe in forgiveness. Many Christians I know don't believe in forgiveness. Or, they take it so lightly, that it is mind-boggling: go and do something, who cares, you can repent and everything will be ok. The institute of forgiveness breeded out into an institute that entices and allows to sin. Hah! Some see this bastardization, but then don't seem to come further, and hence the guilt. Anyhow, it is good they feel guilty. It's the next best thing to accountability.

Then they have no business calling themselves Christians. If forgiveness leads to sin, it has been undone. It's only if we forgive that we may be forgiven ourselves - anything else is hypocrisy. But that's not all.

Hebrews 10:26
If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment...​

Guilt is not the next best thing to accountability - it's the fear of accountability. If you really think you're accountable, then shouldn't you change what you're doing? The guilt can be forgiven, but the accountability remains. Don't be fooled by Christians who don't understand what they're doing. As I said before: it's better that you know and do what is right.

"What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" - Rom. 6:1

 

[water]

Medicine Woman,

I guess we can call it forgiveness -- but forgiveness by whom? If anything, then one should be able to forgive oneself.

Also, when you say, "It's the only virtue that will help your soul to evolve." -- then you must also mean by this that one learns from one's mistakes. Only so you are able to evolve in any conscious manner.

 

[water]

Jenyar,

You seem to use "social stability" as a catch-word for everything. But your conscience comes first, stability comes second.

Stability needs to be seen on all levels: my conscience is also a product of this strive for stability.

Then they have no business calling themselves Christians. If forgiveness leads to sin, it has been undone. It's only if we forgive that we may be forgiven ourselves - anything else is hypocrisy. But that's not all.

I dare you to tell *them* that!!

People can always say "I'm only human, humans make mistakes. Nobody's perfect." This includes using the institute of forgiveness as I described before.
"Nobody's perfect" is a mighty tool. It can be used to explain and justify anything, and I mean ANYTHING.

 

[Jenyar]

Rosa

Stability needs to be seen on all levels: my conscience is also a product of this strive for stability.

But you can't say the strive for stability comes from the strive for stability. Who decides what is best for stability? Is it an instinct, or does it require that we judge our actions?

I dare you to tell *them* that!!

Well someone should!

People can always say "I'm only human, humans make mistakes. Nobody's perfect." This includes using the institute of forgiveness as I described before.
"Nobody's perfect" is a mighty tool. It can be used to explain and justify anything, and I mean ANYTHING.

And that's why we need forgiveness. Because I know I'm not perfect, I must be tolerant of other people's imperfections. But perfection is not the issue here. Imperfection is a fact, but it's never an excuse! It's one thing to make a mistake and say you're sorry, it's quite another to do something wrong and blame it on being human! Forgiveness is just another example of what "being human" really means, and that's exactly why the Bible holds us to it. In fact, it says that it's a step on the road to perfection!

 

[SnakeLord]

Think of an instance where being honest would actually damage the stability - does that mean you won't feel guilty?

Well, I told an old girlfriend once that she was fat. I was being truthful - but telling the truth did more damage and would make a person feel more guilty than telling a lie.

There are always moments when deception and lying are actually more beneficial for everyone than being honest, so would this now be defined as good or bad?

That's a typical problem with most religious people, in that they view everything in black and white. Things do not work like that, and there are many shades of what is good and what isn't - there are also times when something that is good, can actually be bad, and something that's bad can actually be good.

It reminds me of those who lobby against drugs - not realising that under different circumstances drugs can save lives and help make someone 'better'.

That's one of the inherent stupidities of the 'tree of knowledge of good and evil' story. good and evil encompasses so many things, that without knowledge of either Adam and Eve could never have functioned properly. In this instance the serpent did mankind a favour.

That's the problem with looking at things in black and white - which is what you seem to be doing.

 

[Jenyar]

Well, I told an old girlfriend once that she was fat. I was being truthful - but telling the truth did more damage and would make a person feel more guilty than telling a lie.

There are always moments when deception and lying are actually more beneficial for everyone than being honest, so would this now be defined as good or bad?

But you had to ask for her forgiveness anyway, didn't you? So the end result was the same, the relationship was restored. Lying to her might not make you feel guilty, or her feel bad, but it would say something about the strength and health of your relationship...

 

[Lemming3k]

Well, I told an old girlfriend once that she was fat. I was being truthful - but telling the truth did more damage and would make a person feel more guilty than telling a lie.

I've never felt guilty after telling the truth, only lies, the whole point of truth is to get something out in the open so the other person knows how you feel, why go on lying about something when you can tell the truth and sort it out?

There are always moments when deception and lying are actually more beneficial for everyone than being honest, so would this now be defined as good or bad?

That depends, deception is only beneficial if it is never found out, if it is found out it can make things much worse, lies do more damage in the long run than the truth ever could.

 

[SnakeLord]

But you had to ask for her forgiveness anyway, didn't you?

No, I didn't. I'm not the kind of guy who asks for forgiveness. However, the point remains. In this instance truthfulness and honesty has been used and yet would leave a person feeling the need to ask for forgiveness- which would show in this scenario that honesty is the wrong course of action.

Much like if someone has a close relative dying - most prefer to go in to see them with a brave face rather than go in crying and say "you're about to die." It's deception, it's lying- and yet in many circumstances such as this, it is the more appropriate method. (the above example applies more to atheists/non believers)

So the end result was the same, the relationship was restored.

From the looks of it, you have really little understanding of human nature. The majority of people - we could even go so far as to say everyone - has some form of 'personal complex' - be it a big bum, small willy, big nose, thin hair, smelly armpits or whatever. To be honest when it comes down to someones complex, truth can be seriously damaging to them. You can just sit there and watch them wither away and die from a simple statement.

I was once having this argument with this woman. Eventually I turned round and said "fix your nose". Just three words, and this woman crumbled into the dust. Just after that she went and got a nose operation. All you need to do is find someone's complex and you own them.

You round it all up in good black and white fashion by saying "the end result is the same", but you're very wrong. The end result can be disasterous based upon this factor alone, and simply being honest with a person can result in serious anguish and stress. The majority of women have slight weight/bum complexes and as such being honest to them with this isn't the wisest of moves.

There is a whole lot more than 'being honest' in a relationship of any kind.

to her might not make you feel guilty, or her feel bad, but it would say something about the strength and health of your relationship...

Again I can only say you don't really understand human nature at all. I think you should spend some time paying more attention to other people - what they really want and how they really feel... inside.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Medicine Woman,

I guess we can call it forgiveness -- but forgiveness by whom? If anything, then one should be able to forgive oneself.

Also, when you say, "It's the only virtue that will help your soul to evolve." -- then you must also mean by this that one learns from one's mistakes. Only so you are able to evolve in any conscious manner.

*************
M*W: Before one can truly forgive another, one must truly forgive oneself. One consciously learns from one's mistakes, but the eternal soul evolves with from forgiveness.

 

[Jenyar]

There is a whole lot more than 'being honest' in a relationship of any kind.

Without a doubt. There's something like tact as well. But the main issue is to establish a healthy, non-destructive relationship. Deception breaks trust, and without trust a relationship is on very shaky ground. That's the real issue. The better you understand human nature the better you'll be able to deal with difficult situations, but being honest has never been a bad policy.

 

[SnakeLord]

Deception breaks trust, and without trust a relationship is on very shaky ground. That's the real issue.

I think you're missing what I'm saying. In such circumstance as described above, being a tad deceptive is the "healthy" position to take. Honestly would you be bothered if your wife started getting a little on the plump side? Surely, one would question the state of your relationship if her gaining a few pounds bothered you, but then if she were to ask you whether you think she's fat, the best option would be to "lie" and say no. In doing so you ensure her happiness - which is a big part of a relationship.

My point has simply been to show that things are not as black and white as 'good/bad'. Every different issue could require a completely different stance - some that under one circumstance would seem 'bad', but under another are 'good'.

Better to lie to your wife and keep her happy than tell her the truth and upset her...

Or as it says in the bible, (Psalms):

"Better to live on the corner of the roof than share a home with a quarrelsome wife."

 

[water]

SnakeLord,
>>Much like if someone has a close relative dying - most prefer to go in to see them with a brave face rather than go in crying and say "you're about to die." It's deception, it's lying- and yet in many circumstances such as this, it is the more appropriate method.

When my grandma was dying last December, I saw this whole thing. But my grandma, although religious, wasn't much into that kind of politeness.
She knew she was about to die, she was ready for it. And she made it very clear to us. We didn't speak about her death to her, but it was she with her approach and attitude that set the standards.

I guess that in the end such things are a matter of character.

If someone has a complex, and you are polite and tactful about that issue, then you are in a way feeding their complex, helping it to persist or even get worse.