Sunday, August 22, 2010

Why do christians call their god, "good"?

The following is a post by JRM:

Pvblivs said...


     "'You cannot rebel against the United States as a citizen (or, as a citizen in another [c]ountry, in rebellion to ones [c]ountry [of] citizenship), and go unpunished, whether you like it or not.'
     "Funny you should say that. Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, and others were English citizens subject to the British crown. They rebelled against that crown and went unpunished. (Granted, if the British troops had won, they would have been hanged.) I bring this up to make two points. One, rebellion is sometimes appropriate. Two, it is punished only if it fails."
     True Pvblivs, but you are speaking of a revolution that involved many, many people fighting alongside Washington, Jefferson, etc. And certainly, if the British had won, they would have been punished. Satan has started a rebellion, and has many "angels" (we would probably call them demons) working along side him. And people who remain in rebellion against God, whether they recognize or admit that they are working along side of him or not, are. Yeshua said that we are either for Him, or against Him. Many people don't like that black and white, cut and dry statement. They like to think that they have nothing to do with the situation, and they are not necessarily for Him, nor are they against Him.
     If the United States were at war on our own turf, each citizen would have to make clear who they were fighting with, and for. If anyone who was a citizen were found to be giving aid or comfort to the enemy, they would be punished. If the battle were near your home, in the streets so-to-speak, and you did not either take up a weapon, or give aid to US military or citizens - actually refused to give aid, you would be considered hostile to the US - a traitor. You would be punished.
     There is a battle in the unseen (unseen does not mean non-existent) - and God will have the victory. In this instance, using your analogy, the "British" WILL BE hanging "Washington" and "Jefferson", if you catch my drift.
     Yes, rebellion against a tyrant, or against evil is good. So ALL rebellion is not bad. But rebellion against what IS good, holy, just, and righteous IS bad.

     Now, it looks to me that JRM does not say his god is "good, holy, just, and righteous" because he believes it. He says it because he is afraid of being punished as a "traitor." This god, if he exists, is a tyrant. And his followers follow only out of fear. Would any christian say his god was good if he weren't afraid of being thrown into some hell if he said he was evil?


JRM said...

No Pblivs, I don't say that God is "good" because I am afraid of Him (though, I do fear Him, it's the beginning of wisdom). I say that He is good because He IS good, holy, righteous, just, etc. Whether you agree or not is your perogative. The accuser (hasatan) knows God is good, holy, righteous, etc... he just doesn't submit to Him. Satan wants to usurp Him.

Do you want to usurp Him, or just deny Him?

Pvblivs said...

     "The accuser (hasatan) knows God is good, holy, righteous, etc... he just doesn't submit to Him."
     In all fairness, have you ever allowed him to defend himself? Understand, the story just does not pass the smell test. According to your claim fully one third of the angels of heaven supported the rebellion. It's difficult enough to get anyone to take the risk for a cause he sees as just. For example, in the American revolution, many people stayed loyal to the crown, not because they thought the crown was just, but because they were afraid of what would happen to them if they supported the revolt and it failed. For so many angels to support such a rebellion (assuming the story has any merit) they must have thought that it was worth the risk. It just does not make any sense that they could have believed your god to be good, holy, righteous, or anything like that.
     "I don't say that God is "good" because I am afraid of Him...."
     Really? Are you trying to tell me that you think that you could call him a vile, corrupt, egotistical, contemptible, petty tyrant and not be punished for it? If you think that you would be punished for that, I cannot conceive of any way that you could be sincere in your declaration that he is "good, holy, righteous, just, etc."
     "Whether you agree or not is your perogative."
     No, that I determine the description you give of your god (when you describe his alleged actions rather than flatter him with sweet nothings) is wicked and depraved is my judgement. To say it my perogative implies that I could will myself to believe that monstrosity, good and holy. I cannot.

     Allow me to give you this excerpt from "Displaced Person."

     "The revolt didn't succeed?" I suggested.
     "No." He looked at the circles as if he could see them. "It proved too weak and too early. It was crushed. Then came the purge." His glowing eyes surveyed the sentinel trees. "I organized that opposition. I still think it was justified. But I dare not go back."

     I recommend reading the whole story, if you can find it. I have a copy in a book entitled 100 Great Fantasy Short Short Stories. But it's out of print. A decent further-shortened rendering can be found here if you're interested.

Lenoxus said...

Apparently, we are to interpret the rebellious angels as being card-carrying villains.

Outside of fiction, the concept is absurd; even Hitler didn't think he was battling the forces of good.