omnibenevolent

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
magnifier661

magnifier661

B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
59,328
Likes
5,588
Points
113
Crowtbot asked me this question in another thread, but I believe my answer needs to be in its own thread.

So he asked what is omnibenevolent?

And with some thought I started asking myself this question. What makes God good?

One can use silly cliche like "forbid to lie", or other various human traits that we used to try to make sense of everything. But what does that matter? Why does a lion care less about how you felt when he's tearing your flesh from your skin to feed himself?!

What does any of this really matter?! Why would the sun care that it's ray beams life blood to our planet to feed the trillions, maybe infinite amount of life; yet it does?

So then it hit me.

Gods sacrifice to mankind...

The creator of all the heavens and earth, everything and anything couldn't create us to live a sinless life and give us "free will". That he would sacrifice the powers that make him omniscience or omnipotent so that man could have "free will". And that free will that maybe 99.9% would freely love God no matter what trials, tortures or harm that sin puts before him and still won't have that person stop and believe and love in God.

And what if 99.9% didn't believe in him or falls victim to sin, torment or harm; he's be willing to bet the entire existence of him, the universe and everything for that 0.1% that say "I love you as much as you love me".

That's omnibevelant. That is true love. That is true good. That is God

Then
 
Seriously think for a moment... What if God must endure all your pain, your suffering, your harm to seek the truth? That God must give up his powers to be God, so you would have the free will to decide for yourself.

If God is in you, then what you feel is what God feels.

Is it worth it? Would you go through hell to know true love?
 
Now multiply that to infinity. There as much infinite pain, suffering and torment that must take place from good for 1 free will "I love you". And since God is in us, he endure all. He endures our arrogance, hate, sin or evil as if he was bound by your free will.

And being perfect, imagine how hard that is to endure? And scale it down to something as small as your own child. You knowing what's right for your kids, yet understand they have free will to go against everything good in your mind. Yet we still have kids. That's why we get married. That's why we have pain. The moment someone says back "I love you" it's worth it all
 
Last edited:
free will means that god does not control man whatsoever right? powerless to influence their will?

but doesnt god perform miracles, to save people from horrible things occasionally?
 
3RA1N1AC said:
free will means that god does not control man whatsoever right? powerless to influence their will?

but doesnt god perform miracles, to save people from horrible things occasionally?
Click to expand...

This is an interesting question.

I had always thought in the same vein about miracles, healing and what not. In a fairly recent occurrence I was doing a bit of reading and discovered for myself that most of the time when Jesus preformed miracles, it was to prove a greater point, and many times he was more concerned with healing a people rather than a person.
 
3RA1N1AC said:
free will means that god does not control man whatsoever right? powerless to influence their will?

but doesnt god perform miracles, to save people from horrible things occasionally?
Click to expand...

If man decided to open the flood gates of every possible evil and every possible good the moment Adam and Eve decided to eat from the tree of knowledge, then that event released any possibility of happening.

Meaning Satan had ultimate power of influence, while God had that same influence.

But I'm not going to pretend that I do know all the answers. I don't think anyone does. I'm just trying to but a philosophical beginning. When we are absent from sin the moment we become one with God, the events that happened to get to that point really shouldn't matter.
 
DaLincolnJones said:
This is an interesting question.

I had always thought in the same vein about miracles, healing and what not. In a fairly recent occurrence I was doing a bit of reading and discovered for myself that most of the time when Jesus preformed miracles, it was to prove a greater point, and many times he was more concerned with healing a people rather than a person.
Click to expand...

And that all his miracles could only be performed to those that believe in him.
 
This shit is deep man I'm not sure I can wrap my head around it, but I'm happy that you're happy!
 
Life is what you make of it. That is on you.
 
magnifier661 said:
Weird that you would put it here.

If he urinated on the Bible, you would assume he exposed himself. Isn't "indecent exposure" against the law?
Click to expand...

He was charged with "unlawful symbol burning."

"Someone" is not omnibenevolent.

The ACLU guy is right (read the article). The guy is entitled to his 1st amendment right of free speech.
 
Denny Crane said:
He was charged with "unlawful symbol burning."

"Someone" is not omnibenevolent.

The ACLU guy is right (read the article). The guy is entitled to his 1st amendment right of free speech.
Click to expand...

You are right. That someone is man
 
The dark lord actually exists!
 
Denny Crane said:
The dark lord actually exists!
Click to expand...

Normally I would love to have a back and forth debate with you, but your method makes little to no sense.

The concept of Omnibevelant God has no relation to a man arrested for burning a cross. God didn't force the man to burn the cross, not did he force the police to arrest that very same man.

There is absolutely no relevance whatsoever.

But if your point was to derail the thread, then you have done it with precision.
 
magnifier661 said:
And with some thought I started asking myself this question. What makes God good?
Click to expand...


I'm more interested in what you think it means that God IS good (Omni-good), not what you think is a good action on his part by your personal judgment, which is all you are describing.

Does God even have the capacity for "bad" actions?
 
crowTrobot said:
I'm more interested in what you think it means that God IS good (Omni-good), not what you think is a good action on his part by your personal judgment, which is all you are describing.

Does God even have the capacity for "bad" actions?
Click to expand...

That is a question that is not philosophical. If you can't use your "personal conviction", not judgement as you described, then what shall we use? I believe someone giving "ultimate sacrifice" is a pretty good argument of good.

I'm curious what you think is good, since it seems you aren't satisfied with my philosophical reasoning.
 
Or let's put it another way.

Do you think "personal sacrifice: giving up something for something else" is good?

Now add "ultimate sacrafice: giving up something you don't need to give up, but choose to for the greater good for something that is selfless" could support "omni"
 
magnifier661 said:
That is a question that is not philosophical. If you can't use your "personal conviction", not judgement as you described, then what shall we use? I believe someone giving "ultimate sacrifice" is a pretty good argument of good.
Click to expand...

Cool, but most theologian apologists mean something different by Omnibenevolent - to them it's a reference to a fundamental aspect of God's nature, not a description of a particular action on his part.

I'm curious what you think is good, since it seems you aren't satisfied with my philosophical reasoning.
Click to expand...

I don't think good, or evil, are meaningful concepts in any objective sense.
 
crowTrobot said:
Cool, but most theologian apologists mean something different by Omnibenevolent - to them it's a reference to a fundamental aspect of God's nature, not a description of a particular action on his part.
Click to expand...

I'm not most theologian apologists.



I don't think good, or evil, are meaningful concepts in any objective sense.
Click to expand...

Are you okay with Hitler massacring millions of Jews? Are you okay with the Catholic Church, during the age of the crusades, killing thousands of "non-believers"? Are you okay with Stalin, using Marxism as a justification to murder millions of "believers"? Are you okay with "right wing extremist" go out "gay bashing" because they think homosexuality is an abomination?

I may not be understanding you, but it seems you are fine with those events happening because evil actions do not exist.
 
crowTrobot said:
Not objectively. It can be subjectively good - or bad.
Click to expand...

I think this is where you and I are at ends. Because if we are having a philosophical discussion, then "subjective reasoning" is all we have. Unless you can give me an example of the concept of "good" can be described "objectively" with consciousness.
 
magnifier661 said:
Are you okay with Hitler massacring millions of Jews? Are you okay with the Catholic Church, during the age of the crusades, killing thousands of "non-believers"? Are you okay with Stalin, using Marxism as a justification to murder millions of "believers"? Are you okay with "right wing extremist" go out "gay bashing" because they think homosexuality is an abomination?

I may not be understanding you, but it seems you are fine with those events happening because evil actions do not exist.
Click to expand...


False dichotomy. I think those are undesirable and subjectively very bad things, but I don't not think they are "evil" in any objective sense. I don't know what the latter means.


Are you OK with the Jews massacring Canaanite women and children?
 
crowTrobot said:
False dichotomy. I think those are undesirable and subjectively very bad things, but I don't not think they are "evil" in any objective sense. I don't know what the latter means.
Click to expand...

So then you and I agree there is good or bad right? So the concept of these massacres being bad is absolutely "subjective", using your argument towards my reasoning "ultimate sacrifice" being good.

I think it would be better if we stop using a double standard here.


Are you OK with the Jews massacring Canaanite women and children?
Click to expand...

No I am extremely angry that woman and children had to die because of the actions of Adam and Eve.
 
Benevolent.

At midnight the Lord struck down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sat on his throne to the firstborn of the prisoner who was in the dungeon, and all the firstborn of the livestock. 30 Pharaoh arose in the night, he and all his officials and all the Egyptians; and there was a loud cry in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead [lit: “a dead male something”]. 31 Then he summoned Moses and Aaron in the night, and said, “Rise up, go away from my people, both you and the Israelites! Go, worship the Lord, as you said. 32 Take your flocks and your herds, as you said, and be gone. And bring a blessing on me too!”
 
magnifier661 said:
If man decided to open the flood gates of every possible evil and every possible good the moment Adam and Eve decided to eat from the tree of knowledge, then that event released any possibility of happening.
Click to expand...

That sounds similar to "At one point in history, white people in the US owned slaves. Therefore all white people are forever evil in the US." It seems like a god could choose when necessary to intervene without destroying free will. Like Spiderman says "everybody gets one."
 
Denny Crane said:
Benevolent.

At midnight the Lord struck down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sat on his throne to the firstborn of the prisoner who was in the dungeon, and all the firstborn of the livestock. 30 Pharaoh arose in the night, he and all his officials and all the Egyptians; and there was a loud cry in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead [lit: “a dead male something”]. 31 Then he summoned Moses and Aaron in the night, and said, “Rise up, go away from my people, both you and the Israelites! Go, worship the Lord, as you said. 32 Take your flocks and your herds, as you said, and be gone. And bring a blessing on me too!”
Click to expand...

And? Remember when you had a debate on another thread about capital punishment not being a punishment of fear? You said it was just the byproduct of law.

Denny Crane said:
The death penalty isn't meant to deter anyone. It's simply the penalty befitting certain crimes.
Click to expand...

The crime of sin is Death. It is simply the penalty befitting the crime.

And using bits and pieces of the gospel doesn't tell the entire tale.

Whatever the case, the double standard needs no place here
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top