The fact that truth belongs to no one, whereas a good is always personal, is the drama of human life… All literature and novels in essence are about this, because the cause of jealousy is there, the fear of losing ones’ good, whereas with truth that isn’t the case, we don’t have the same drama, truth belongs to no one, therefore no one can take it from us, and that’s probably why we are not so much on a quest for it, given that we cannot possess truth…
Which begets the following question: is God truth or is God my good?
I ask this because if God was only truth, we wouldn’t be quarrelling, as sometimes happens, as if we wanted to possess it!
Well, look at what God exist for. Man’s good. Jesus wants to wipe clean the sins of the believer so that the believer will enter Heaven and live happily ever after. Because that is the ultimate Good it happens to be deified and becomes the Truth.
I would agree if man is always taken as the same. Who will argue about the truth of two + two equaling four? Arguments only begin with things still speculative regardless of facts such as in economics.
The good then supplies us meaning so if money provides us meaning, it becomes our God. So I agree that God is relative for us as we are and a subjective creation.
However if the good of man is taken as relative, the situation changes. Christianity for example asserts man as fallen from good into chaos. This fall was a change in man’s “being”. The purpose of Christianity is to return to the inner unity of the good from our normal chaotic changes of inner states that define our being which is not the good.
At this stage the truth that explains our situation hinting at the way out of it is higher than our non-good. Its purpose is to lead to the good. Naturally though, the literal mind primarily responsible for denying the good interprets this truth as the good. Then people fight over whose truth is better and religious cults, hostility, and wars result.
But the goal is not the truth but the good that it leads to. Through re-birth for example the living truth is no longer necessary since the good has been acquired. Now the good is higher than truth. The good and truth are now united.
In the gospels for example as I’ve learned, When Jesus is used it refers to the good. When Christ is used, it refers to the living truth. Jesus Christ is used together twice and both times in the book of John. It is the unification of the good and truth.
So the process moves from our normal subjective conceptions of good normal for the fallen state to the discovery of higher knowledge inspiring an inner remembrance of a greater good latent within man’s potential. At this point higher knowledge is still higher than good since we keep forgetting and distorting it and must begin understanding anew. Once the good, objectively understood, has been acquired, higher knowledge is secondary and good is higher than truth.
Would anyone dispute the following:
Not all that is true (actual) is good? But all that is good, must, as a prerequisite, be true? If it isn’t true, it is, at best, irrelevant. At worst illusory.
The good is a subset of the true, not the other way around. Therefore, one being a prerequisite of the other, there shouldn’t be any conflict between the two.
The difference is between objective and subjective good. The objective good for man in the esoteric sense is in relation to consciousness. This means that what denies consciousness is evil in comparison. A subjective good that enchants us may be in direct opposition to this objective good of awareness.
I’m emphasizing the distinction between the subjective and objective good.
Before anything, in my view, truth is the good of intelligence and truth is adequacy between intelligence and reality…
For Nick: I’ve heard of the good being placed above the being (like Plato), which many Christians apparently do…
To get back to my initial angle, didn’t Christ say something like “Who made me judge between youâ€â€¦which indicates that love does not judge men “between themâ€, or more precisely mercy…that is not to say mercy does not judge, but it does not judge collectively, even less Joe Blo in comparaison to John Smith, it judges individually.
Thus, from a Christian viewpoint, God is « my » good but no one can take him from me because he is also truth? No? I said something stupid?
Ok, ok, I will shut up, for once I tried myself at theology… ! )
gods goal is to destroy satan the very first thing he created before earth
and that time the dude was a so called angel god is not good is his mission
is to destroy a tempter… the only sin to go aginst is killing thats it…
so if god kills is it still good and what is his price and punishment?
)