Why be good?

[Randy Carson]

I did exactly that. Seven people. Liar.

Yep!  So now we're back to my question, which Randy still hasn't answered: Randy, you want to know why we're "good" (whatever that actually means), but I want to know from you.  Why should you be good?  And where is that line?  Honesty obviously doesn't fall in line with "good" for you...

And I have responded to you previously by saying that I would like to think about this and to read the articles recommended to me by a forum member which I have already printed out. I'm in no hurry. What's the rush?

Edit: actually, I just did the find function myself, and it did come up with 18 for me.  Doesn't change all the other things Randy's lied about or misrepresented, though.

Thank you for that correction.

Maybe, just maybe, I'm sometimes accused of lying when I'm actually not.

---

@Randy:  Why would you expect a group of people whose only commonality is that they don't believe in a god to be in lockstep on the question 'why be good'?  Rejecting divine command 'theory' doesn't obligate us to agree completely on the basis of moral action.  Perhaps we aren't as enamored of the flock/herd metaphor as you believers are.

I don't expect that. I'm pointing out the differences as a little poke in the ribs. Y'all like to mock Christians for their doctrinal differences. Sauce for the goose...

What I am looking for, however, is a coherent explanation. Lots of attempts have been made in this thread. Some actually decent, but still of the mark, IMO.

BUT I plan to do some more reading and less typing on this topic...for now.

---

@Randy Carson

I have already presented information on why the gospels are not eyewitness reports.  However, You still have refused to address the stories of Zeus and the other gods.  There is as much information validating them if not more.

Sure. That's why there are all those Temples to these gods on the street corners of most major cities...because everyone appreciates all that validation. 

---

I'm not into Genesis 1-3 as a literal account personally, but let's say that it was.

Adam and Eve were the only people on the planet at the time. Who would the eyewitnesses have been? 

And when god was creating everything, there were zero people on the planet, and yet, your book gives us an account.

But, like I said, that was a different time, when you could write down any assertion and have it be believed. A convenience not enjoyed by the time of the NT authors. They seemed to need to qualify their stories in their more evolved civilization.

It does give an account, but it is more theological than historical. It is not so important that Adam and Eve ACTUALLY lived in the Garden as it is that we understand from that story that God created the world, etc.

And yes, the authors of the NT were recording history very differently from what Moses was recording in the Pentateuch.