I was wondering, does God have to be a good being? I’ve always assumed that if their is a God, that this would be the case-but I’ve never given much thought to it.
In addition, does the creator of the universe have to be omnipotent, or simply powerful enough to create the universe?
I’d like to clarify that I’m not really seeking the perspective of a particular religion (although I’m more then happy to read answers that include specific religious perspectives, I just don’t want to concentrate on a single religion).
Well, from what Christans tell me, God is judged by nobody. He can be neither good nor bad, he just “IS.” He could be the most twisted, sick, maniacle psychopath there ever was, and since he is “God”, he can do anything and if he wants it to be considered good, it is so.
Of course from my perspective he IS evil.
It seems to me that one could hardly infer a pleasant deity from looking at the universe. On the other hand, since one can’t infer any sort of God that way, making one up with attributes X, Y, and Z isn’t that much of an additional stretch.
There is no evidence of God in the Universe, but this is by Design. God made himself transparent so that we’d freely be able to choose Him and love Him.
Because there is nothing to point to His existence, we believe only out of a will to do so. Why would anyone want to believe in a God that is anything other than good?
Oh, no evidence of God? Nothing to point to his existance?
Here is a big hint: The bible, et al? Duh!
Yeah, we know God exists because the Bible says so, and we know the Bible is true because God says it is. Nothing wrong with that logic.
Well, I didn’t say it was PROOF, I just said it was pointing to his existance. Evidence to some.
After all, how many people would worship a God or gods that there was absolutely no evidence or anything pointing to the possiblity of his /her/it’s existence? Nobody. How many Christains do you think there would be if there was no bible or account of Jesus anywhere? None.
I think God could be anything He wants. Granted I think He’s limited Himself to be the way He is, I don’t think anyone has the right to tell God who He can or can not be. It’s like a piece of clay telling the potter he has to make.
But it’s not very good evidence. I say this not to denigrate, but to point out that objective proof is not what leads people to God. Most Christians I know don’t derive their faith from the Bible as incontrovertible evidence.
Well, first of all, there being no Christians without Jesus is pretty much a truism. There would be no Christians without Jesus by definition, in the same way that there would be no Buddhists without the Buddha. But that’s not to say that there wouldn’t be people who believe in SOME sort of supernatural entity without it necessarily being called Jesus.
As for there being no Christians without the Bible, I disagree. The New Testament was written by Christians. Are you saying they didn’t exist until they wrote down their beliefs?
As for the Old Testament, most historians will tell you that the stories in it most likely started out as oral tradition and were written down later. To say that the Bible preceded the belief is to put the cart before the horse, IMO.
Errr… wouldn’t, by definition, it be the latter?
i.e., to lift this 40-pound rock, does John need infinite strength, or only enough strength to lift the rock?
My point is that an atheist can dismiss any evidence for God that you present. For example:
Well, my whole point is that the Idea of God, according to the christians, doesn’t exist in a vaccum. There is the bible, there is Judiasm, there is the Sumerian Religions, et al. Lots of things pointing to a supposed God.
I’m not arguing the case if it is LIKELY, or PROBABLE, or if there is PROOF, or even if the EVIDENCE is good or bad. I was attacking this statement:
I am simply stating a truism (and yes, I meant it to be a trusim), to disprove this silly assertion. We have a history full of this religion, a book that is claimed to be written by him, or at least by his followers, and a world with a high percent of people that believe in him. Somebody just doesn’t wake up and start believing in some being if there is NOTHING to point to the POSSIBILITY of his existence.
I am sure you know by know, if you are familiar with my posting, that I am an ardent Athiest, or at least have a very strong naturalistic outlook and am an evil, dirty skeptic as well. I am in no way asserting that God exists, or that the bible is great evidence of anything.
Nobody wakes up on morning saying "I will start worshiping R%#jieyin!
Who is R%#jieyin? People would ask?
He is somebody that has nothing pointing to his existance!
But you are pointing to his existance, so you speak a paradox!
Oh…
This one has always bothered me. From our vantage point, it seems there could exist a finitely powerful being who was simply more powerful than we could imagine, which would largely be indistinguishable from an infinitely powerful one.
Not much else to add, but it is always fun to see that you do, in fact, think like other people. At least, when that “you” is me. 
Hmm, I don’t angree with you here, and will side with the poster you quoted.
But I think you are simply misunderstanding the poster’s statement.
He is NOT saying that there is no basis for the belief. Certianly there is a basis. There would need to be. It’s just common sense.
What he IS saying is that that basis does not equate to proof of god’s existance, nay even the possibility for his existance.
The bible is mythology of the ancients written down after a long, verbal history.
Wiccans hold beliefs based on (for the most part) a book written by a man who penned down both some historical mythology, and some other stuff he simply made up.
Likewise, the ancient greeks wrote down mythology based on their understanding (or lack thereof) about the world around them.
Does that mean that zeus and hera exist? Do the ancient greek writings about the gods prove the existance of these beings, or even provide one with a sense that there is a probability that these deities existed?
Not to my mind.
Why would God be “good” ? If you just answered because he made us… that is the same thing as saying abusive parents are “good” too.
I think if god did exist he would be so way more complicated than black or white notions of Good and Bad… that it makes it silly to call him good. You can hope he is good… but how could you understand an omnipotent being that causes destruction and love and works “thru mysterious ways”.
I often use the example of “Q” from Star Trek; there’s no reason that the most powerful being in the cosmos might not be limited, capricious, even malicious.
Worse, a good many of us consider the concepts “omnipotent” and “omniscient” to be logically self-contradictory, and thus difficult to believe in…
Trinopus
Well, the answer would depend on how we’re defining God, and whether or not God has set up an objective (from our perspective) morality.
Let’s take the case of God having set up an objective morality, based on Him/Herself. In that case, whatever God has said is right. So if God says that it is right to eat one’s firstborn child, well then that’s the right thing to do. People could still create their own subjective moralities, but these would have to be wrong since they’re not the morality. I suppose God could still do wrong things. However, if S/He based the morality on His/Her personality, then God would have no reason to do wrong things.
Now, if God has not set up an objective morality, basically saying “Y’all sort it out”, then the things God does would be able to be “good” or “bad” based on whatever subjective reality the person is working with. In this case, there would be no absolute good and bad, only what we decide is “good” and “bad”.
Goodness generally creates rather than destroys. Because God is the ultimate Creator, He must be good. That doesn’t necessarily mean He cares about humans, but He would at least maintain His creation as a whole.
It takes more power to create something than to alter or destroy it. Since God created everything we know about, then he must have power over everything we know about. Therefore, from our perpsective, he is all powerful.
So men are by necessity more evil than women who can create life… hhmm… christianism tends to say the opposite… that women corrupt.
You create vs destroy is actually an interesting point. Dont forget about Sodom and Gommora… Noahs’ Flood and the twelve plagues of Egypt… all destructive stuff.
Men and women create life together; virgin births don’t happen very often. Humans don’t create offspring in the same way that God supposedly created the universe. We don’t design our offspring. Our reproductive capacity is an essential part of being alive.
One could perhaps make the argument that something inherent in God’s nature made the creation of our universe inevitable without any conscious effort on His part, but that is practically saying the same thing as “there is no god”.