Does 'Goddidit' constitute an explanation?

[sk8Joyful]

Evidence of being cured is irrelevant to determining what the agent of causation was.

Try again.

In those cancering instances, where the "agent" of causation, was the individual (as often is the case) her or himself, the individuals themselves are the evidence.

Thank you.

 

[Cabal]

In those cancering instances, where the "agent" of causation, was the individual (as often is the case) her or himself, the individuals themselves are the evidence.

People tend not to give themselves cancer and if they were to, they tend to not self heal.

Anyway, this is dancing around the real issue - the tendency of some to give God credit for anything good that happens but are keen to blame anything else when something bad happens.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

By God's standard, yes.

"All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away." - Isa 64:6.
Holy Spirit(s).

So, in real terms, there is not one single good person out of a possible 4.6 billion people alive today?

 

[Doveaman]

So are you 100% Good 100% of the time?

By God's standard, yes.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

By God's standard, yes.

But some people are more good than others? I mean, you'd rather have Gandhi living next door to you than, say, Stalin, right?

 

[Doveaman]

So, in real terms, there is not one single good person out of a possible 4.6 billion people alive today?

Nope.

Unless you are on Holy Spirit(s).

 

[Doveaman]

But some people are more good than others? I mean, you'd rather have Gandhi living next door to you than, say, Stalin, right?

Of course!

But by God's standard, they are both the same.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Nope.

Unless you are on Holy Spirit(s).

And as no one is good, and you yourself said you are either good or evil, everyone including you and me is 100% evil?

 

[Cabal]

And as no one is good, and you yourself said you are either good or evil, everyone including you and me is 100% evil?

A wonderfully consistent philosophy, isn't it....

 

[Doveaman]

If good and evil are defined by actions, in what regard is light "good" then?

By its actions.

If Light does not act good we will all be groping in the dark.

Thank God for Light!

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Of course!

But by God's standard, they are both the same.

But some are more good than others?

 

[SithDoughnut]

A wonderfully consistent philosophy, isn't it....

It gets better, because if you assume that you have to be good to get into heaven (which I presume most Christians do), and you can never be good, then we're all going to hell.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

By its actions.

If Light does not act good we will all be groping in the dark.

Thank God for Light!

Actually, you should thank Tesla or Edison for light.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Actually, you should thank Tesla or Edison for light.

Or the sun. Let's all go back to sun worship, that was simple.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Or the sun. Let's all go back to sun worship, that was simple.

Ah, yes... Son, er, sun worship.

 

[Doveaman]

Anyway, back on the subject of the garden, God lied. He told them that the moment they ate of the fruit they'd die. They didn't.

I think He said 'day', not "moment".

There is no definition of "good" and "evil" in the garden, especially so because the two humans were purposely denied the knowledge of good and evil. They couldn't have known it was wrong.

If they had obeyed God - Good.

Because they disobeyed God - Evil.

Obedience - Good.

Disobedience - Evil.

They were warned.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

I think He said 'day', not "moment".
If they had obeyed God - Good.

Because they disobeyed God - Evil.

Obedience - Good.

Disobedience - Evil.

They were warned.

"Don't say I didn't warn ya'."

 

[Doveaman]

Please stop evading the point.

You said that what God does is good, what Satan does is evil. What about the times when Satan was doing good? The mere fact that Satan was able to change his place on the scale renders it useless given how absolutist you're being.

If you could respond this time, that would be great :wave;

When he was good he was Lucifer.

When he became evil he was Satan.

When he was good he did what God did.

When he became evil he does what Satan does.

Before he became evil there was no evil.

He is the father of evil. This is why he defines evil.

When he was Lucifer he was good, but his goodness was not absolute. This is why he could become evil.

Only God's goodness is absolute. God does not change.

When Lucifer became evil Satan his evil was absolute, because evil Satan does not change.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

When he was good he was Lucifer.

When he became evil he was Satan.

When he was good he did what God did.

When he became evil he does what Satan does.

Before he became evil there was no evil.

He is the father of evil. This is why he defines evil.

When he was Lucifer he was good, but his goodness was not absolute. This is why he could become evil.

Only God's goodness is absolute. God does not change.

When Lucifer became evil Satan his evil was absolute. Satan does not change.

Where does satan live?

 

[pgp_protector]

When he was good he was Lucifer.

When he became evil he was Satan.

When he was good he did what God did.

When he became evil he does what Satan does.

Before he became evil there was no evil.

He is the father of evil. This is why he defines evil.

When he was Lucifer he was good, but his goodness was not absolute. This is why he could become evil.

Only God's goodness is absolute. God does not change.

When Lucifer became evil Satan his evil was absolute. Satan does not change.

When Satin obeyed God by not killing Job, was he doing good or evil by following God's instructions?