Good

[TortoiseDream]

Suppose God exists.

Now let's say God says something is good. Is it good because God said so, or good because God knows what is good?

 

[Ian A.]

This is called the Euthyphro Dilemma. Dr. Craig gives the Christian perspective here:

YouTube - Euthyphro Dilemma

 

[TortoiseDream]

that's all you guys have to say about this?

 

[Kludge]

that's all you guys have to say about this?

God is perfectly good and perfectly good is God. Because humans are imperfect, God has given his word and you are to take it on faith.... or not. You could rebel and claim morality to be what you say it is, but that would be evil. That said, how do we really know what God claims to be moral? We have to take the senses and interpretations of man (whether yourself, your pastor, or one of the apostles, who, in the New Testament, didn't even write down what they sensed until many years after it happened) on faith, and that faith in imperfect man could lead to all sorts of problems, but so could faith in the wrong god, I guess.

God knows what is good and it is good because God says it is. Man has no basis on which to claim what is and is not moral, unless they are also claiming to be perfect; God.

 

[amonasro]

Suppose God exists.

Now let's say God says something is good. Is it good because God said so, or good because God knows what is good?

If God exists, then it's reasonable to assume that he created us.

If he created us, what makes you think that he did so to his own standards? In other words, are we operating on the same mental level as God? If something is "good" in God's eyes, how can we assume that we understand it in the same way and he does?

 

[TortoiseDream]

God is perfectly good and perfectly good is God. Because humans are imperfect, God has given his word and you are to take it on faith.... or not. You could rebel and claim morality to be what you say it is, but that would be evil. That said, how do we really know what God claims to be moral? We have to take the senses and interpretations of man (whether yourself, your pastor, or one of the apostles, who, in the New Testament, didn't even write down what they sensed until many years after it happened) on faith, and that faith in imperfect man could lead to all sorts of problems, but so could faith in the wrong god, I guess.

God knows what is good and it is good because God says it is. Man has no basis on which to claim what is and is not moral, unless they are also claiming to be perfect; God.

So you're saying it's both; why?

If God exists, then it's reasonable to assume that he created us.

If he created us, what makes you think that he did so to his own standards? In other words, are we operating on the same mental level as God? If something is "good" in God's eyes, how can we assume that we understand it in the same way and he does?

I think you're missing the point. I'm asking is God the source of goodness, or a guide to goodness that is independent of God.

 

[Ian A.]

is God the source of goodness, or a guide to goodness that is independent of God.

He IS the goodness. God would not create a world that conflicted with his nature, so essentially God IS good. I really think Dr. Craig explained it just fine. :o

 

[ClayTrainor]

He IS the goodness. God would not create a world that conflicted with his nature, so essentially God IS good. I really think Dr. Craig explained it just fine. :o

So God is a male? is there a "she" lord somewhere?

Also, God is a horrible designer, and created a lot of shitty incomplete lives. Some children spend their entire lives with cancer, and suffer nearly every day! Thanks God for Good, and cancer stricken children!

YouTube - Neil deGrasse Tyson-Intelligent Design? Stupid Design

"Anything you don't understand, you attribute to God. God for you is where you sweep away all the mysteries of the world, all the challenges to our intelligence. You simply turn your mind off and say God did it." - Carl Sagan

 

[Sheepdog11]

He IS the goodness. God would not create a world that conflicted with his nature, so essentially God IS good. I really think Dr. Craig explained it just fine. :o

This simply means that the word "good" is redefined as "God's nature". In other words, when we say that God is good, we are merely saying that God is God; the term "good" becomes useless and irrelevant.

So we can say that "goodness" is simply God's nature, but then it becomes a descriptive term for what God is, rather than a meaningful description of moral contrasts. All you could ever conclude is that God is God, and perhaps Satan is Satan, and that Satan is not God. Making any further judgments would be implying some other definition of good.

Furthermore, where did God get His nature? If God gave Himself His nature, then He is still simply deciding what is good and what is not good. If God's nature exists due to other means, then God is not responsible for goodness. Dr. Craig's answer doesn't solve the Euthyphro Dilemma, it simply re-organizes it.

 

[Ian A.]

So God is a male? is there a "she" lord somewhere?

No.

Also, God is a horrible designer,

How is the existence of stillborn babies, or other horrible deformities EXCLUDE the existence of a god? It doesn't really.

This is the slippery slope that inevitably leads to questions like, why do we have diseases? Why did the Titanic sink? Why do I have this damn mole on my ass? This all eventually leads to the question of why is their evil and suffering in the world?


The question that needs to be asked: what made you think God intended the world to be perfect? Or what makes you think God should have made the world 1% better than now? I say there are MANY reasons why evil and suffering MUST exist if there was a loving God.

where did God get His nature?

God is. His nature is. Besides, if you found evidence of intelligent design, such as spearheads at an archaeological dig--you would conclude that it was designed. You wouldn't need to explain who designed the designer!

 

[ClayTrainor]

No.



How is the existence of stillborn babies, or other horrible deformities EXCLUDE the existence of a god? It doesn't really.

Never said it did. You understand that i'm not an atheist, right?

I'm saying God is fairly incompetent, inconsistent and rather cruel, if he's in charge of these creations as well as my own.

This is the slippery slope that inevitably leads to questions like, why do we have diseases?

Diseases are micro forms of life, that embed themselves in and consume larger organisms.

Why did the Titanic sink?

It hit an iceberg.

Why do I have this damn mole on my ass?

imperfect nature.

This all eventually leads to the question of why is their evil and suffering in the world?

Because of lack of respect for the individual rights of man.

The question that needs to be asked: what made you think God intended the world to be perfect?

Never said he did, i'm just saying the world is imperfect, and you must give god credit for the imperfections as well. god is as responsible for children suffering with cancer for their entire lives, as he is for every enjoyable life. You must give him credit for hate if you're going to give him credit for love. I personally think the natural explanation of these things, makes a lot more sense, but i don't reject that there could be a much bigger form of life, that we are a part of.

Or what makes you think God should have made the world 1% better than now?

better is subjective.

I say there are MANY reasons why evil and suffering MUST exist if there was a loving God.

Therefore an evil god must exist as well. Either that, or God himself is responsible for creating evil.

God is. His nature is.

Existence is, it's nature is.

Besides, if you found evidence of intelligent design, such as spearheads at an archaeological dig--you would conclude that it was designed.

Arrowheads are natural.

If i found an ancient sword, i would assume it was just a pointy metal stick made by an ape and used as some kind of tool. I don't need God to explain that an ape created that sword, and i don't need god to explain that genetic memory are responsible for that apes existence and evolution.

You wouldn't need to explain who designed the designer!

The designer was likely a mammal that was born after his parents mated, and passed on their genetic memory. Not because a supernatural lord "certainly" created everything

All the materials used for the ancient tool were natural, and assembled by a natural form of life, not a supernatural creator

Every single aspect of your body is natural, not supernatural.

 

[TortoiseDream]

He IS the goodness. God would not create a world that conflicted with his nature, so essentially God IS good. I really think Dr. Craig explained it just fine. :o

But that's just an answer to the question, not an explanation, not an argument. I know your side, now why do you think it's so?

To Clay:

I think everything in its imperfections is actually perfect.

And also, to all:

If God is the absolute good, then anything compared to him is infinitely farther away from him in his goodness. So that makes man absolutely bad, correct?

 

[ClayTrainor]

I think everything in its imperfections is actually perfect.

provocative

 

[PaulineDisciple]

If God is the absolute good, then anything compared to him is infinitely farther away from him in his goodness. So that makes man absolutely bad, correct?

No, it just means God is the standard (measuring rod) for good. So to the extent that man reflects this utimate good, he is not as bad as he can possibly be.

 

[PaulineDisciple]

I think everything in its imperfections is actually perfect.

This is either a contradictory statement or you're equivocating on the word "perfect".

 

[BenIsForRon]

Suppose God exists.

Now let's say God says something is good. Is it good because God said so, or good because God knows what is good?

I think its because God knows what is good, even though that is a gross simplification, since we're talking about the Alpha/Omega. Consider this quote from Genesis (I'd like to get Ian A's thoughts on this):

1:3 - And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
1:4 - And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

God saw that the light was good, not that he made the light good. I'm not a Christian, just a Deist, but it's some food for thought nonetheless.

 

[TortoiseDream]

No, it just means God is the standard (measuring rod) for good. So to the extent that man reflects this utimate good, he is not as bad as he can possibly be.

But no matter what a man does, he is infinitely farther away from God in His goodness. So by that token, it's impossible to become worse or better.

This is either a contradictory statement or you're equivocating on the word "perfect".

I'm saying that what some might call "imperfections" are the true perfections.

I think its because God knows what is good, even though that is a gross simplification, since we're talking about the Alpha/Omega. Consider this quote from Genesis (I'd like to get Ian A's thoughts on this):




God saw that the light was good, not that he made the light good. I'm not a Christian, just a Deist, but it's some food for thought nonetheless.

But that then implies a goodness exists independent of God. What is that goodness?

I think one might reply that this cannot be so because God is the source of good. However, that's just refuting the argument by stating the other opinion that can be taken, it's not a rebuttal. It's an assumption about God, namely that He is the source of good.

Is God the source of good? Why? And not just because the Bible says so.

 

[BenIsForRon]

The thread was not about the definition of goodness. You talked about in your initial post as if we all shared a common understanding of the concept. That's probably true to a certain degree... like kittens, they're good.

 

[TortoiseDream]

The thread was not about the definition of goodness. You talked about in your initial post as if we all shared a common understanding of the concept. That's probably true to a certain degree... like kittens, they're good.

No, that's precisely what the thread is about. What else could it be? Even if you disagree, then I'll start a thread called "what is goodness". We're just talking, it doesn't have to be so rigid.

 

[Theocrat]

God is Good, and Good is God

Suppose God exists.

Now let's say God says something is good. Is it good because God said so, or good because God knows what is good?

That's a great question. The answer is what God says to be good is good because it reflects His own character and nature. God is good, and therefore, He is the ultimate standard for defining and determining what "good" actually is. The alternative or denial of that truth leads to the eradication of what "good" is itself.