Is God good?

Is God good?

Yes, of course. If anything is good, God is good. In fact the word “god” is an abbreviation for “G –o-o-d-n-e-s-s.” {This contraction has evolved through the years.}

Is love good?

Yes, usually. Love is a good thing …and thus is an example of goodness.

Is God love?
Yes, love is one of God’s properties, since God, by definition, is the value of all high positive values, rolled into one. And God is the meaning of the universe. Just as our lives can have a meaning, so can the Universe.

Does God want us to love one another?

……No more needs to be said.

END NOTES: (We have a project to aim for: :putting this love into practice. That is what we are to do.)

As we express this love, we recognize that we are all Brothers and Sisters, members of the human family. We will develop an attitude of solidarity with our Brothers and Sisters.
And as we express love some beautiful side-effects result. When threatened, or we face danger, we are not afraid. For love drives out fear. And we feel lucky; for giving love is a rewarding experience. We feel good as we are expressing it.

{Avoiding theodicy issues, my personal Precious God while all-good, is neither all-powerful nor all-knowing. God is my ever-present help, for which I am very, very grateful. Goodness, when organized and mobilized, when put into action, is powerful enough! God knows only of goodness; thus does not know of evil or badness. I love my Precious God but can never love God as much as God loves me.}

Any questions?

Comments welcome… preferably constructive and relevant comments.

I’ve got something similar.

A percent of reality is God-stuff.
The rest is mostly nature-stuff.

Some people relocate to the inside of God
after they pass on. Which is more safe and pleasant than haven.
Helping humans or animals with anything,
is all that this God would ask for in exchange for his power and presence.
He needs a lot of help to improve things for lower beings.

You might want to fact check that.

Just did. Politifact says its the truth. :wink:

“God” goes back to the Germanic *guda (“god”), which in turn goes back to the Indo-Germanic *ghau (“to call”) and originally meant “the being which is called (by magic word)”.

Thank you, Kathrina.
I stand corrected.

I’m glad you mentioned “magic” since there is a mystery to it. That mystery is: How does it listen to prayers and praise? It doesn’t seem to have ears, or any material form. How does god read my thoughts? For god certainly does!
It (or he or she - if we personify it) provides me with blessings all day (and all night) long. God serves as the subject/object of my gratitude. I find myself thanking God whenever anything goes right, and whenever I notice an abundance. I conclude that “there are no shortages.”

And how does God listen to zillions of prayers simultaneously?? And how does God answer my prayers, providing comfort and healing? There is much mystery, much that requires explaining. Yet I am perfectly-willing to accept all the blessings, all the good, without having it explained. I’d be a fool not to.

I will continue to thank God for health, and life, and above-all Love.

Thanks for being friendly (that’s rare here).

Just for further information:

Our ancestors were heathens.

Christianity came to Europe with Saint Paul, and it took many centuries, in some areas even a millennium, for it to finally take hold.

And thus there is no one god, but many gods -
and thanking ones god, one may be extra grateful in realizing this.

We have been led to believe that all prayers are heard by the same god. This is simply not true; magic has a lot to do with taste.

Gods have natures, as do humans. It is true that a god may represent the highest a human consciousness is able to attain - thereby rendering it seemingly for all personal intents and purposes ‘objective’, but it is in fact irrelevant to one person what the other persons god commands, unless that other person uses violence or trickery to make the first subject to it, as has been done in the case of Christianity, where only clergymen were allowed to even read the supposedly holy book.

There is never a human between a human and his god. There are runes, though, and dance-forms, and even herbs - Man - Nature - God.

Here, it appears, in making preposterous claims of this sort without a shred of evidence, he is either emulating or mocking ecmandu.

Let’s decide. :sunglasses:

Greeting, Kathrina

I am wondering how you define “heathens” here? Is this only from a Christian [or 'Cross-tian"] perspective?

My tribe’s ancestors, for at least the last 5000 years, believed - and most of them are willing to argue for this position - that there is only one God.

And one prominent rabbi published a best-selling book explaining at length that G-d {eluhenu, melech olom} is not all-powerful, and that is why bad things can happen to good people. I would add that, for example, if in some way they have attempted to violate nature’s laws they will pay a price for it: they will suffer, or die prematurely.

Incidentally, Ethics, in the new paradigm, recommends that we get away from tribalism. It notes that the latest findings in Genetic science informs us that we are 99.9 percent alike. Let’s appreciate and celebrate our diversity, keeping in mind that we are all one species…much more alike than different.
We are pre-wired to seek our own benefit, but are very confused as to what is in our best interest, and as to how to seek that benefit.

The reason I jumped to the conclusion I did, in the original post, regarding the etymology of the word “god,” is that I observe that while some people say “Oh my God!” and others say “Oh my Goodness!”; and they both seem to express certain emotions thereby. At least there seems to me to be an overlap in their meanings. This led me to set up that equivalence. Though I may be wrong. This may not be reason, but rather rationalization.

I wonder how his arguments ended up.

James had quite a bit to say about the nature of God and the meaning of the word “god” - even its origin. And looking over his posts (from here and elsewhere) and references it seems there really is a strong association between good and God.

It isn’t that “God” is the good rather it is that God (by the true meaning of the word) is to be thought of as the source of the good (sought so as to accomplish the good). So the word “good” probably came after the word “God”, not before (although perhaps simultaneously).

It is a valid thought that all wisdom comes from God (wisdom being the beneficial ideas) but it is also valid that all evil comes from God as well - it just depends on how you pray. Pray in a particular way and you receive evil - because even without knowing it, you would be praying for evil - you get what you pray for - so be careful (of course if you don’t know how to pray - you don’t get anything).

What I think it all amounts to to is - regardless of what you want (assumed to be the good) - pray to God for it (which is different than merely begging for it).

Whoever that Rabbi was - he couldn’t have known God (or just wanted to mislead people - wouldn’t be the first time).

Hey Stan

The evidence is in the offence taken by the ugly. :wink:

Nope, that comes closer to meno.

Now, back to your preposterous claims…

I double triple dare you to tie them all together such that value ontology, astrology and the gods become, oh, I don’t know, intelligible?

My tribe’s ancestors have always, for at least the last 200000 years (except the last 1000 to 200 years), believed that there are many gods.

The one god is selected so that he selects his people (at least in Judaism) as “his chosen people”; the many gods are not selected so that they select those who believe in them as “their chosen people”, but because they witness the lives of those who believe in them - for good or for evil.

Define “gods” :smiley:


This is what I said in one of my former posts (see above):

The Germanic word “God” originated from the substantivized second participle of the Indo-Germanic *ghuto-m of the verbal root *gheu- “to call, to invoke”. According to this, the gods would be the beings called (for instance by magic word).

I describe it by referring to history, to mythology, to the history of mythology, and especially to the history of language.

I think that one should take into account how people led their lives at that time. You can only define the word “God” if you say that you are making a scientific or philosophical investigation. Otherwise, you have to stick to the meaning that history gives. Meanings and definitions are not the same. Words have meanings and are not usually defined. Terms or concepts, however, are defined so that they can become words, i.e. acquire meanings.

Well, you only want a definition,i guess, but then you must also say what you want to use this definition for.

Now I am curious about your definition of the term or concept “God”.

I liked this post (although he had others concerning different definitional concerns for God) -

And this one -

The issue I have with James to this regard, is that he defines God as the 1 superiority. James considered himself an expert and so he perceives hierarchy as the law.

Existence is actually stranger than this… we have concepts like infinite regress and strange loops that make it possible for everyone to be God without violating the consent of a single existent.

Is there purpose to this negative zero sum existence ?

Only 2

1.) guard yourself to stay out of the deepest hell realms

2.) put everyone in their individual heaven forever

— the rest of this life has no purpose.

That is clearly not the work of even a slightly benevolent hypothetical creator being. God, if existent, can most accurately be defined as the supreme consent violator.

Every being in all of existence is having their consent currently violated. Doesn’t speak well for such hypothetical being.

If our definitions and perceptions of God could be proven to be non-existent, where would we stand, who would we have to stand on?