Christians, Prove Your God Is Good

[Thumpalumpacus]

A country does not turn to North Korean nuclear scientists for help building a power reactor. They can't seem to even power their own citizens. But they know how to make nukes.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard
http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...12209.html

Spiegel is like a German Time magazine.

You're aware that Syria is another entirely different nation than Iran, right?

[watchamadoodle]

Hmm. Still don't know what you mean by the word "good", but I appreciate your attempt at describing a position of the Catholic tradition. If there are personalized notions of "goodness", what is yours? What is it about a thing, an act, whatever, that when you observe it or consider it, you make the judgment that it is good. WHAT is it? What do you actually DISCUSS in order to unify your personalized notions for collective actions?

I did give you a list of examples of things that I consider good (kindness to animals, etc.)

I might also define good as a way of comparing outcomes of actions. Here is a link to decision theory ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_theory ).

I'm not sure what kind of definition you are looking for.

I think you might be arguing that we can't discuss whether the hypothetical Christian God is good without an objective definition of good? If so, I disagree. In a democracy, we are able to utilize subjective definitions of good.

[Thumpalumpacus]

In terms of morality, good would be synonymous with virtuous. Me, I'd think of something as good if it added to the general weal, made life more comfortable or pleasant, or upheld values I hold dear, such as honor and integrity.

[Nope]

Ignorant, could you answer my question? Other people have given thei definition of goodness. What is yours? Also, you never responded to your opinion on Drich's comments about genocide

---

So, what do you think about Drich's statements, Ignorant? Do you agree with them? Do you believe that under some circumstances genocide is acceptable? Do you think that sex between consenting unmarried adults is worse than drowning a large portion of humanity?

Slightly off topics, but thank you to the Christians who have answered this thread. I like to debate but the discussion is boring if we all agree with one another.

These were my questions to you, Ignorant.

I realize it can be easy to overlook a few questions in a thread.

[Godscreated]

[quote='Nope' pid='881534' dateline='1424568786']

That begs the question is God 'good' given what popular culture deems to be acceptable behavior?

Could you expand on this a bit, Drich? Perhaps you could give an example of what is considered moral according to your god that isn't also considered good by the popular culture.

Pop culture is always been about being with in the bounds of the lessor of two evils.. That is why we all eventually devolve into a nazi/ISIS type of self righteousness.

Maybe I am wrong but isn't pop culture things like music, tv shows and movies?

I do not believe in god and so far I have no desire to hurt anyone. Do you have proof that without god we would turn into genocidal maniacs?

Actually, bible god drowned most of humanity once and has promised to return to destroy most of humankind again. Are there corcumstances where you believe genocide is moral, Drich? How can you judge the Nazis as evil when, according to the bible, your god has done worse?

Nope, what I've seen on this forum is people who do not believe in God yet desire to argue against God always place human emotion and values on Him. Don't you think the argument might be a bit more coherent if we used the Bibles description of who God is? Isn't this the the way arguments are supposed to be structured? Later in this thread you asked if other Christians believe in genocide, well this one doesn't, not by man and by what the Bible says about God it's not genocide. So no genocide is not acceptable.

GC

[Norman Humann]

Don't you think the argument might be a bit more coherent if we used the Bibles description of who God is? Isn't this the the way arguments are supposed to be structured?

[watchamadoodle]

And just FYI, Catholic teaching regarding ethics and morality begins anthropologically, i.e. it begins with goodness in human beings and the things they observe and do and encounter.

@Ignorant, while addressing @Nope's questions, can you explain what you mentioned above?

[Chad32]

Actions speak louder than words. The bible goes on and on about how great yahweh is, and how much he loves us, but the most common way he interacts with most people is killing them, sending people to kill them, or threatening to do so.

[dyresand]

Actions speak louder than words. The bible goes on and on about how great yahweh is, and how much he loves us, but the most common way he interacts with most people is killing them, sending people to kill them, or threatening to do so.

It talks about how great his love is but its not shown in application because well... he never showed any love to begin with with the people he was interacting with. Not only god did with his creation choose a group of people he was playing favorites and swapping sides and telling people to kill one another god isn't all loving at all. god of the bible is a tyrannical dictator in magical sky north korea.

[Godscreated]

Don't you think the argument might be a bit more coherent if we used the Bibles description of who God is? Isn't this the the way arguments are supposed to be structured?

No, God is who He says He is, He used the Bible to tell us. The Bible has nothing to do with who God is, period.
Here's circular reasoning, you argue evolution from books, because someone wrote it and said it's true, yet you and I both know there's no proof for evolution, unless you are claiming to have lived long enough to observe it.

GC