Weird. Why should anyone thank anyone or anything for existing?
I exist. Therefore i must deal with existance. I don't need to offer thanks for existance. But i do offer thanks for my eternal existance with God.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
If the World was Meant to be Good then
- Thread starter PsychoticEpisode
- Start date
Weird. Why should anyone thank anyone or anything for existing?
I exist. Therefore i must deal with existance. I don't need to offer thanks for existance. But i do offer thanks for my eternal existance with God.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
From memory i think we have discussed this like 3 times before. So refer back to earlier threads i am sure you will find my position.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Psychoticepisode
You haven't even provided a definition of how you categorize something to be malevolent/benevolent so the result of whatever you apply it to is meaningless (as far as discussion goes).
:shrug:
For instance, most people would consider it a waste of time (and also food) to experiment whether 2 grains of salt is enough or whether 2kg is enough.
Of course one is free to experiment in such a fashion, but its simply a labour of love. Similarly if one is interested in time wasting pursuits, the material world offers a plethora of options.
If you experience deep seated anxiety about being bereft of the opportunity to perform fruitless activities with a clear conscious, you certainly don't have to worry anytime soon about being dragged bound and gagged to the spiritual world.
You tell me
I think you miss the point
You haven't even provided a definition of how you categorize something to be malevolent/benevolent so the result of whatever you apply it to is meaningless (as far as discussion goes).
:shrug:
I guess if you're simply seeking liberation from a blank computer screen, you've been partially successful.
wars also have a reason for why they are initiated and even categorized as such
Its more along the lines that it is a waste of time.
For instance, most people would consider it a waste of time (and also food) to experiment whether 2 grains of salt is enough or whether 2kg is enough.
Of course one is free to experiment in such a fashion, but its simply a labour of love. Similarly if one is interested in time wasting pursuits, the material world offers a plethora of options.
If you experience deep seated anxiety about being bereft of the opportunity to perform fruitless activities with a clear conscious, you certainly don't have to worry anytime soon about being dragged bound and gagged to the spiritual world.
inasmuch as an incoherent discussion is bad, yes.
Its not clear how pinpointing the structure of a discussion to be "bad" provides the means to determine how the speaker views the world as particularly/potentially good or bad
I'm simply paraphrasing your suggestions at the moment.
You tell me
You said a good world would open doors, I'm simply doing exactly what you do to me. Although for you to say what you said, implied that you know what good is. So why all this circumventing? You know exactly what I'm talking about.
I did?
Actually I haven't ventured anything as to what I think constitutes a good (or even bad) world.
I am simply trying to make sense of your argument.
Of course I know what good means.
The problem is not that however.
To repeat,
You haven't even provided a definition of how you categorize something to be malevolent/benevolent so the result of whatever you apply it to is meaningless (as far as discussion goes).
For instance if I say "god is good" or "the world is bad", and don't provide any framework for why I categorize them as such, there's not much scope for further discussion.
:shrug:
When God says it's good then it's (definition please).
Why ask me for the definition? Let's ask God, He coined the word so He should know. If God said everything's good then according to you there's not much scope for further discussion. How can I or anyone be expected to know what God's version of good is?
I mean I like it, so how come we can't do that for everything God said?
I don't, at least not in general. I'm not even always sure what I like or don't like.
So what is good?
What is bad?
1. I didn't say thank anything for existing but for having knowledge.
2. I suppose you should be answering this given the christian idea in thanking beings that don't need it, yet demand ransoms.
3. My statement was that if you're going to give thanks, surely the provider of knowledge of good and evil should be included. If you say no, why not?
We didn't know that bacteria or earth's magnetic field were "good" for us, let's say a hundred years ago. On top of it, what we call "good world, life or universe" is something that satisfy human understanding: Because in reality, world, life and universe have their own agenda and they don't give a shit about what is good for humans. So together:
a) We don't know what is really "good" for us -we just assume according to given information;
b) Nothing in the nature specifically works for our "good" -although some events may turn out as good coincidences once we interpreted them as such.
"Good" is something we imagine; it is a dreamworld. Number of humans multiplied by number of dreams squared possible moods and situations is equal to definition of "good" (as well as "bad"). Some of these understandings can agree upon certain common "good" (for instance, eliminating the diseases) or "bad" situations (for instance, not eliminating the diseases).
If this "God" do not satisfy human needs and expectation, he can not be a source or a reference point for good.
I don't think my detractors are really interested in my definition of good. The reason being that only God knows what is good for us. As to what God's definition of good is, doesn't matter since we cannot probe His mind and even if we could there would be no way of understanding it. This is the standard theist 'out' clause. Ironically theists understand everything there is to know about God when God's will is questioned.
So if God says it's good then it's good. Thus the world we live in is as good as it gets. It simply can't get any better. I'm not really concerned about what 'good' means, I simply would like to know what 'good' God is referring to. Good rocks? Oceans? Creatures? What good did He accomplish? Of course the only answer is everything is good.
My point is that if everything is good then there should be no evil here, none whatsoever. I can only assume that what we think is evil is one colossal mistake. If we don't know what good is then we don't know what evil is. If I refer to the Old Testament, then we do possess that knowledge, at a price nonetheless. So I'm in a bit of a quandary.
If we cannot know the mind of God and what is good then having knowledge of what's good and evil is a false premise. If we all have the knowledge of G & E then why are people asking me for it?
I say No.
Why. Because the knowledge of Good and evil was an option that He wanted rejected. God did not provide it as you state.
Yes He did give the option. And having that option demonstrated that he has created real free willed beings. I am thankful that God made me a free willed being. But i can never thank God for the rejection of His for us when we opted to obtain the knowledge of Good and evil.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Psychoticepisode
For instance if a person says that a dentist is good, it probably means for the purpose of dealing with cavities in the least painful fashion.
IOW if I don't have a clue of outcome and purpose, the statement "good dentist" is meaningless.
For some reason, atheists are reluctant to apply it though
:shrug:
And once again, for some reason, atheists are reluctant to apply it
Given the nature of your OP, I would have expected it to be answered in your intro.
Because you are trying to draw some connection between god, this world and the nature of good and evil, and ourselves stuck in the middle ... all the time while avoiding discussion of utility and purpose
Except the question good for what?
For instance if a person says that a dentist is good, it probably means for the purpose of dealing with cavities in the least painful fashion.
IOW if I don't have a clue of outcome and purpose, the statement "good dentist" is meaningless.
theory - > application - > conclusion tends to be the standard epistemological model for all knowable claims.
For some reason, atheists are reluctant to apply it though
:shrug:
Once again, the standard epistemological for dealing with problems at the application level is to go back to theory.
And once again, for some reason, atheists are reluctant to apply it
Bullshit. You'd be more inclined to visit a good dentist than one labelled bad.
God said the Earth and everything else was good. Either the whole thing was good if you like imperfection or it's all good because it's perfect down to the last detail. I wonder why He didn't announce His creation as perfect? Why only good? I don't even like that word coming out of the mouth of God...it's not very convincing.
Wow, we agree.
If there is good to be derived from times of imperfection...
You're not convinced we know all there is to know are you?
About God or anything else? For God it is very simple, what we know about God from the time He was introduced will not be improved upon even if humanity exists for another 10 billion years. For anything else there is plenty to be learned...I am convinced of that.
Reduced to even lower than one sentence replies. Down to one word now.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Too complex?
Perhaps more helps?
What shall we try?
Ah!
Thankless wretch.
All Praise The Ancient Of Daze