• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Who Invented the Good God - and Why?

Heyo

Veteran Member
If we look at ancient god concepts, most are indifferent towards human affairs, and the first heno-/monotheistic gods were morally ambiguous, at best. Gods were entities to fear.
But with, or around the time of, Christianity, god turned more into a beneficial being, ultimately deemed to be omni benevolent.

Does anybody have a hypothesis how and why that happened?
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Knowledge of good and evil is learned and is not innate. For example, who knew about the good and evil of pronouns, before it was taught in schools, using the bullying fear of damnation, by Liberal educators? All of a sudden a new good and evil was defined for young people, as an indoctrination exercise. Luckily, parents neutralized this induction of conditioned good and evil, by manipulative people, who did not have the best long term interests of the children in mind. It was more for their political gang recruitment; contaminate minds while young.

Such people as these are not new. They go back to ancient times. Wise people, way back when, saw a need to differentiate genuine good, that was beneficial to all, from the more subjective goods, used for manipulation and control. Jesus, for example, isn't big on pronouns, verbs, nouns and adjective, as though that all you need to do, to get into heaven and avoid hell. But for the pronouns educators, that was their line in the sand to get into Liberal heaven and avoid Liberal hell. It is quite primitive but potentially effective for brain washing.

Psychologically, it was understood, back in the day, it was healthier to show children positive ways; love one another, while also explaining with common sense logic, while showing examples of positive outcomes. The alternative, was to force conformity, to something, you do not have to justify, or explain, or even allow anyone to ask questions, without fear or guilt. How dare you deviate from the magic pronouns? The gods of the pronouns will dam you, if you do not just do it or else. That is not new. Hitler taught that way; superior race.

In schools, the change to the positive teaching method, we are all humans, caused the bullies to have less leverage. Students can now ask questions and learn, all without fear and guilt. of Liberal damnation by the teachers. The bullies are now afraid, but they need not be, if they follow the good that is beneficial to all. and not just the "good" designed for only their gang recruitment.

Even with a positive God example available, some still wish to remain retro bullies, using subjective dual standards of good and evil, that always favor themselves and always condemns the other. One President who took classified files has to go to trial, while the other President, on the side of dual standards does not. They have two versions of good and evil, and not one good for all. Atheists appears to be trying to advance, while making the mistakes of the past, since they are not allowed to learn the genuine past; fear of Atheist damnation if they open their minds.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
But with, or around the time of, Christianity, god turned more into a beneficial being, ultimately deemed to be omni benevolent.
Does anybody have a hypothesis how and why that happened?
Perhaps pagans.
Is Christian God a beneficial being, ultimately deemed to be omni benevolent?
Does Bible says so? Does not he have an eternal hell for people like us (you included)?
 
If we look at ancient god concepts, most are indifferent towards human affairs, and the first heno-/monotheistic gods were morally ambiguous, at best. Gods were entities to fear.
But with, or around the time of, Christianity, god turned more into a beneficial being, ultimately deemed to be omni benevolent.

Does anybody have a hypothesis how and why that happened?

Offshoot of Zoroastrian belief that good (Ahura Mazda) would triumph over evil (Angra Mainyu).

An eschatology where good triumphs over evil with a progressive notion of time (rather than cyclical) is the optimistic worldview later promoted by Christianity and its secular humanistic offshoots, as well as Islam.

My guess is that such salvation narratives won out over the classical tragic view of humanity because they were more emotionally appealing to more people.
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
If we look at ancient god concepts, most are indifferent towards human affairs, and the first heno-/monotheistic gods were morally ambiguous, at best. Gods were entities to fear.
But with, or around the time of, Christianity, god turned more into a beneficial being, ultimately deemed to be omni benevolent.

Does anybody have a hypothesis how and why that happened?
I believe this was a product of the forming of cites where people became increasing disconnected with greater than human world. When all of your interactions are with other humans and you are not having to negotiate with none human entities. In this setting a god transforming into a human "just like us" becomes a powerful god to negotiate and primarily human world. It is the easier to imagine there is a good and evil based on how people treat you. A god as the form of human is not helpful at all in living within the greater than human world where good and evil have no meaning. That is why the gods and goddesses in cultures still connected and negotiating with the greater than human world had deities that were complex and not all "good" in human standards. That does not make any sense in the greater cosmos which is both creative and destructive. The big mistake that I see from having god as human is that god presented itself as male. Would have been better if god had come as a man and woman equally important.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
If we look at ancient god concepts, most are indifferent towards human affairs, and the first heno-/monotheistic gods were morally ambiguous, at best.
I have no reason to presume that this is true. The "god concepts" available to us are available to us because of the recordings of a relatively sophisticated and empowered priesthood with a scribal infrastructure, or by virtue of an imperfect oral history.

It also occurs to me that I typically find myself viewing religion through a Western lens. I'd be curious to know what those familiar with Dharmic religions think about your claim.

Knowledge of good and evil is learned and is not innate.
Neither is brevity.

The big mistake that I see from having god as human is that god presented itself as male. Would have been better if god had come as a man and woman equally important.
Don't let Hera hear you talk like that.
 
Top