Is God Really Good?

[Theweirdtophat]

It depends if that the God in the bible WAS the real God of the universe. Some Gnostics think that specific God is bad and people mistook it for the real god that actually sustains tthe universe. Or maybe none of those versions are right and the real God is yet to be experienced. Who knows really.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

All thinking men are atheists –Ernest Hemingway.​

"All thinking men are atheists" - said an atheist.

Wow, what a surprising statement to come from an atheist.

Isaac Newton might disagree though.

As would Maxwell (electromagnetic theory), Faraday (more electromagnetic theory), Lemaitre (came up with the big bang theory), Mendel (father of genetics), the list could go on and on.

 

[Theweirdtophat]

I guess all thinking people are atheists even though the greatest scientists of our time were anything but atheist. And people will say "Well they came from a more religious time. " which is true, but it's not like atheism is a new concept. It's been around for eons. Even George Washington Carver was religious and was a mystic and he came from a time where atheism was becoming more common

That quote is just beyond arrogant.

 

[morphesium]

"All thinking men are atheists" - said an atheist.

Wow, what a surprising statement to come from an atheist.

Isaac Newton might disagree though.

As would Maxwell (electromagnetic theory), Faraday (more electromagnetic theory), Lemaitre (came up with the big bang theory), Mendel (father of genetics), the list could go on and on.

I do agree that Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin (and may include others) were religious, (but they were least religious people of their times), if not they would have been burnt at stake. There were people in those times who were burnt at stake just for believing that Earth is not at the center of the solar system.
Do you think Newton would have proposed theory of gravitation if he was tied to the bible?

Additionaly, they were thinkers of science. if they were thinkers of religion they would have disbelieved it entirely. Lemaitre and Mendel ware priests - but they got the courage to think against their religion. Credit should go for their non-religious thinking.

 

[Father Heathen]

We anthropomorphize the concept of god so that's it's easily understandable and relatable, but what we end up with then are these characters more akin to the superheroes and supervillians from comic books rather than any actual cosmic force or entity. So we imagine god(s) as a person with emotions, ego, and thought processes just like ours. Our perceptions and portrayals of god say more about humans and our cultures than it does about god. Asking if god is good by examining religious lore is like trying to assess Abraham Lincoln's character by watching "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter".

 

[Unification]

If god is both good and bad why does he need satan to represent the bad? If there is no entity doing things to us why did he in biblical times, like we he supposedly created us?

We are our own worst enemy. Satan is the ego mind in every individual, and it's necessary to experience in order for all infinite capabilities of the spectrum of life to be.

All of the bad you refer to is happening in ones mind, within, the destruction and rebuilding of the mind. Problems arise from fundamental, literal, historical intepretations of stories/myths, rather than what they internally mean.

We are beasts and animals ourselves, only we have the cognitive ability to be aware of this and overcome the carnal animal mind and nature. We create hate and devour one another ourselves, psychologically and physically. The last thing we should be worried about are animals attacking and worry about not attacking one another and defeating our animal natures.

 

[Thief]

We anthropomorphize the concept of god so that's it's easily understandable and relatable, but what we end up with then are these characters more akin to the superheroes and supervillians from comic books rather than any actual cosmic force or entity. So we imagine god(s) as a person with emotions, ego, and thought processes just like ours. Our perceptions and portrayals of god say more about humans and our cultures than it does about god. Asking if god is good by examining religious lore is like trying to assess Abraham Lincoln's character by watching "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter".

Science fiction is a good place to find parody.
I like Star Trek....especially when the crew must deal with an 'entity' of immense willful power.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I see the bad in the good and the good in the bad. It's all about perspective, and the difference between you and I is just that, perspective. I see the world differently to you, I see God differently to you, I see the story of Abraham and Isaac differently to you and me explaining what I see isn't going to help you at all. You either see it or you don't because that's how perspective works.

What's your take on the Abraham and Isaac story? I haven't seen any interpretation where God comes off as good.

Let's take as given that God didn't actually want Isaac dead - fair enough. But then why would God have told Abraham to sacrifice his son?

It couldn't be for God's benefit - an all-knowing god would already have known what sort of man Abraham was.

So, presumably, it was for the benefit of Abraham (or some other human). God wanted people to see that the fact Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son was considered by God to be worthy of praise.

The only message I can take from this is that a follower of God should be prepared to set aside his conscience and do seemingly horrific things if he thinks God has asked for them, and that God *will* sometimes ask for seemingly horrific things that he expects you to do.

What other message do you take from the story?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"All thinking men are atheists" - said an atheist.

Wow, what a surprising statement to come from an atheist.

Feel free to throw it on the other side of the balance against all the times an atheist was told "the fool says in his heart 'there is no god'."

Isaac Newton might disagree though.

Maybe, but Isaac Newton was pretty disagreeable in general.

 

[ether-ore]

What's your take on the Abraham and Isaac story? I haven't seen any interpretation where God comes off as good.

Let's take as given that God didn't actually want Isaac dead - fair enough. But then why would God have told Abraham to sacrifice his son?

It couldn't be for God's benefit - an all-knowing god would already have known what sort of man Abraham was.

So, presumably, it was for the benefit of Abraham (or some other human). God wanted people to see that the fact Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son was considered by God to be worthy of praise.

The only message I can take from this is that a follower of God should be prepared to set aside his conscience and do seemingly horrific things if he thinks God has asked for them, and that God *will* sometimes ask for seemingly horrific things that he expects you to do.

What other message do you take from the story?

The Abraham and Isaac story is (I believe, & aside from being a test) a teaching moment for both Abraham and Isaac. Through demonstration, God gave both Abraham and and Issac a visceral understanding of what it meant to Himself and His son, Jesus Christ to provide the atonement for mankind. God the Father sacrificed His Son and our Savior, Jesus Christ, for the sins of the world.

At one point in the story, Isaac asks Abraham: "... but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?" I happen to believe that at that moment of inquiry, Isaac understood that he was to be the sacrifice... and... that he went voluntarily. There is no mention of a struggle in the text where Isaac resisted being sacrificed. Likewise, Jesus Christ volunteered to be a sacrifice for our sins to appease the demands of justice for our sake on condition of repentance.

The whole episode gives us an emotional conception of what it meant to our Heavenly Father to sacrifice His only begotten son in the flesh to us, on a personal level. But whereas Isaac was not sacrificed, Jesus Christ actually suffered the pains and torture of death and hell on our behalf and He did it out of love for us.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

I do agree that Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin (and may include others) were religious, (but they were least religious people of their times), if not they would have been burnt at stake. There were people in those times who were burnt at stake just for believing that Earth is not at the center of the solar system.
Do you think Newton would have proposed theory of gravitation if he was tied to the bible?

Additionaly, they were thinkers of science. if they were thinkers of religion they would have disbelieved it entirely. Lemaitre and Mendel ware priests - but they got the courage to think against their religion. Credit should go for their non-religious thinking.

Haha, Newton was not "least religious". He got obsessed with the book of revelation actually and tried for years to figure it out. He had many deep religious convictions that went against the orthodoxy of his time, but was very much committed to them. He also said all he needed was the human thumb to know God existed.

Mendel discovered genetics, and was a Catholic priest! LeMaitre, who came up with the Big Bang theory, was also a catholic priest. They never thought "against" their religion either, this is nonsense. The Church actively encouraged them to go out and discover facts about the world, it was considered virtuous and God-honouring to study His Creation.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The Abraham and Isaac story is (I believe, & aside from being a test) a teaching moment for both Abraham and Isaac. Through demonstration, God gave both Abraham and and Issac a visceral understanding of what it meant to Himself and His son, Jesus Christ to provide the atonement for mankind. God the Father sacrificed His Son and our Savior, Jesus Christ, for the sins of the world.

At one point in the story, Isaac asks Abraham: "... but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?" I happen to believe that at that moment of inquiry, Isaac understood that he was to be the sacrifice... and... that he went voluntarily. There is no mention of a struggle in the text where Isaac resisted being sacrificed. Likewise, Jesus Christ volunteered to be a sacrifice for our sins to appease the demands of justice for our sake on condition of repentance.

The whole episode gives us an emotional conception of what it meant to our Heavenly Father to sacrifice His only begotten son in the flesh to us, on a personal level. But whereas Isaac was not sacrificed, Jesus Christ actually suffered the pains and torture of death and hell on our behalf and He did it out of love for us.

This revisionist interpretation where a Jewish folk story supposedly foreshadows the theology of a religion that didn't even exist at the time sounds... strained, but I'll leave that debate to ourJewish members.

All of the justifications I've ever heard for Abraham come down to two points:

- Abraham was being subordinate to God.
- Abraham didn't actually carry out the sacrifice.

If you're trying to link Christ's sacrifice with Abraham & Isaac, then it seems to me that you're saddling God with all of the moral problems of the Abraham & Isaac, but neither of the common justifications could apply to God sacrificing Christ (since God actually did it, and since God isn't subordinate to anything).

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Haha, Newton was not "least religious". He got obsessed with the book of revelation actually and tried for years to figure it out. He had many deep religious convictions that went against the orthodoxy of his time, but was very much committed to them. He also said all he needed was the human thumb to know God existed.

Mendel discovered genetics, and was a Catholic priest! LeMaitre, who came up with the Big Bang theory, was also a catholic priest. They never thought "against" their religion either, this is nonsense. The Church actively encouraged them to go out and discover facts about the world, it was considered virtuous and God-honouring to study His Creation.

... and the Royal Ontario Museum rotunda (just outside the dinosaur area) has an inscription that says "that all may know His work."

Religious anti-intellectualism ebbs and flows, but it is a real thing.

 

[Akivah]

Myself I wouldn't wast my time arguing about god in any way, I just feel silly arguing over something that is not real.

I agree that it is mostly a waste of time to argue with people about G-d. On internet sites, people have their minds made up about G-d. I've never seen anyone changing their personal philosophy based on web postings. If people do change their minds, it seems to me because they did research and searches on their own time, more of a personal educational quest.

 

[Akivah]

Science fiction is a good place to find parody.
I like Star Trek....especially when the crew must deal with an 'entity' of immense willful power.

You know, on every one of these Star Trek god-like episodes, the god ultimately fails because he tries to control the crew. Hmmm....maybe our G-d is on the right track by allowing us free-will.

 

[Thana]

What's your take on the Abraham and Isaac story? I haven't seen any interpretation where God comes off as good.

Let's take as given that God didn't actually want Isaac dead - fair enough. But then why would God have told Abraham to sacrifice his son?

It couldn't be for God's benefit - an all-knowing god would already have known what sort of man Abraham was.

So, presumably, it was for the benefit of Abraham (or some other human). God wanted people to see that the fact Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son was considered by God to be worthy of praise.

The only message I can take from this is that a follower of God should be prepared to set aside his conscience and do seemingly horrific things if he thinks God has asked for them, and that God *will* sometimes ask for seemingly horrific things that he expects you to do.

What other message do you take from the story?

It all depends, I suppose, on how you see death. Death is generally considered a bad thing, when a child dies we all go 'that's so sad' when not everyone thinks of death that way. Death is not evil, it's the opposite really.

But I digress, About the story of Abraham I've always found it beautiful. That Abraham so trusted God, so loved God, that He'd obey Him even in killing his own son because He knew that God had a plan and so was steadfast. Honestly I'm kind of jealous.

Abraham's story isn't about a test, or about murder or about anything else. It's about faith. Atleast, that's how I see it. God showed Abraham himself, something not very many of us get to see. Who we really are, How far we're really willing to go, how much faith and love and truth we really have in us. It was a great honor, imo.

 

[Akivah]

What's your take on the Abraham and Isaac story? I haven't seen any interpretation where God comes off as good.

Let's take as given that God didn't actually want Isaac dead - fair enough. But then why would God have told Abraham to sacrifice his son?

It couldn't be for God's benefit - an all-knowing god would already have known what sort of man Abraham was.

So, presumably, it was for the benefit of Abraham (or some other human). God wanted people to see that the fact Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son was considered by God to be worthy of praise.

What other message do you take from the story?

Obviously the test was for Abraham's benefit and education. Abraham was born into a society in which human sacrifice to gods was commonplace. The "Binding of Isaac" story was a lesson to Abraham that G-d forbid human sacrifice. G-d provided a ram to be sacrificed instead. G-d taught all of us that any sort of human sacrifice is forbidden. I'd say that's a good thing.

 

[ether-ore]

This revisionist interpretation where a Jewish folk story supposedly foreshadows the theology of a religion that didn't even exist at the time sounds... strained, but I'll leave that debate to ourJewish members.

All of the justifications I've ever heard for Abraham come down to two points:

- Abraham was being subordinate to God.
- Abraham didn't actually carry out the sacrifice.

If you're trying to link Christ's sacrifice with Abraham & Isaac, then it seems to me that you're saddling God with all of the moral problems of the Abraham & Isaac, but neither of the common justifications could apply to God sacrificing Christ (since God actually did it, and since God isn't subordinate to anything).

I'm sure it sounds revisionist to you. To me it involves modern revelation which I in no way revised. But setting that aside and concerning your claim that Christian theology did not exist at the time; I say that Christianity existed from before the world was; that Jesus Christ was foreordained to be the savior of the world.

Perhaps you remember the story of Cain and Able and how they brought sacrifices. Cain brought vegetables, whereas Able brought the prescribed and proper sacrifice which represented the future sacrifice of the Lamb of God. Able's sacrifice was the same which was revealed again later to Moses which in turn foreshadowed the great and last sacrifice of Jesus Christ. That motif of animal sacrifice as a type of Christ's sacrifice is all through scripture. The point being that Christianity as signified by sacrifice was know since the time of Adam.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Obviously the test was for Abraham's benefit and education. Abraham was born into a society in which human sacrifice to gods was commonplace. The "Binding of Isaac" story was a lesson to Abraham that G-d forbid human sacrifice. G-d provided a ram to be sacrificed instead. G-d taught all of us that any sort of human sacrifice is forbidden. I'd say that's a good thing.

Wait... you think that a story where God commands human sacrifice is meant to express that God forbids human sacrifice?

 

[BenTheBeliever]

yes God is good. I know a lot of people don't think he is but all my life I have seen the goodness of God.