Is Jesus Good? Is Satan Evil?

[Simon_Peter]

Here are some facts:

We as humans are imperfect
We have limited perception
We have limited knowledge

What I don’t know is this:

Is Satan, Evil?
Is Jesus, Good?

I need to understand the meaning of ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’. So when I talk about Good and Evil, I understand what it is. Until I know these two things, I will not know if Jesus is Good, or if Satan is bad.

[Sjoerd]

You can't claim that whenever you influence others with your morals that this is under the aegis of society's morals. You would try to prevent a suicide bomber from killing people no matter what the laws of your country are. You would try to stop your friend from drinking 40 beers a day even while this is not illegal. You may even go straightly against the laws of your country in acting upon your own morality, including influencing others, for example participating in a demonstration forbidden by the police. People follow their internal moral compass, for themselves and also for dealing with others.

Are these concerns, really "moral" concerns? Elephants protect their young. Some animals protect other members of the community from perceivable threats. They don't have suicide bombers or alcoholism yet. Why is this behavior on animals, other than humans, not categorized as an "internal moral compass"?

...

Bundling evolution with religion and culture like that doesn't make much sense to me, since there's every indication both religion and culture are a product of evolution. Yours could be an argumentum ad ignorantiam unless you're knowledgeable of applied evolutionary theory on the issue of "morality". I know there's theories to go around, but I'm not versed on them myself.

Yes, these are moral concerns. Trying to save your friend from alcoholism isn't on par with an elephant protecting her young. I will clarify this in a moment.

Argumentum ad ignorantiam has nothing to do with the matter at hand. In case you want to know, I am a trained biologist, and I have taken courses on animal behaviour and read some books on the subject as well.
"De aap en de filosoof" (the ape and the philosopher) by professor Frans de Waal is one I would recommend, although I don't know if it has been translated into English yet.

In general, theories in animal behaviour state that for morality, it is required that the animal can imagine himself in the position of another, having knowledge on what another knows and what another wants or needs.
This level of cognition has been demonstrated in humans and only a few other species. It is present in the example of the alcoholic friend, but not required for a primitive mother instinct.

In any case, regardless of their origin, one can observe that some morals drive us towards actions that attempt to correct other people's behaviour.
One can also observe that morals differ between individuals and that therefore, some morals are different between society and an individual.
These two sets of morals overlap. I have already supported this with examples.

In fact, an evolutionary, memetic view of morals would argue for the fact that morals are "aggressive" and try to supplant other, conflicting morals to promote their own fitness.
Being a Romanticist, I prefer to say that each moral has its own will to power, but that is only a different terminology for the same thing.

[JoeyKnothead]

In any case, my original point was that you can't blame God for forcing morals upon us, nor can you claim that God is the only one who has the right to do so, because we are forcing morals upon others all the time. I think that the point has been made now.

Point made. Made well. I agree.

[Confused]

Ok I'm pretty sure I understand what you all are saying. And I agree to some extent. Nobody should force their own morals on someone else. So the real issue here then, to keep up the debate, is why it is bad in your opinion that God has set up moral standards that he wants to be kept. I define good as what God says good is, and the same with evil.

If no one should force their own morals onto someone else, why is it ok for God to do it?

And I am unsure exactly what you mean by saying you define good as what God says is good, etc.... God seems to change His mind a lot about what is good and what is not. The OT is full of things that were good and contradictions to those as well. But then I guess God decided that what was good during the period of the OT wasn't really good anymore, so He sent His Son to die to change what is good and what is bad, hence the NT. Is this right?

Not exactly. In the old testament, the way of cleansing yourself of sin was by killing a goat or lamb whenever you sinned. Either that didn't work for us humans anymore, or something else happened, but God changed it so that we only need to believe that Jesus died for our sins to be washed away. There was nothing wrong with the old way of doing things, unless you strongly disagree with killing animals, which I also don't really like, but the new way is better (and easier)

Ah, but in the OT, one wasn't directed to "turn the other cheek either", but instead, they were directed "an eye for an eye". Why such a drastic change. And does this make the old way evil now? Is is sinful now to follow the dictations of the OT? If so, then is not the God who enacted such dictations as evil as the dictations are?

Seems to me that Satan has at least remained consistent. Meanwhile, God changes on a whim and the rules not only change with Him, but become even more vague as He changes them.

[onefaith]

That has nothing to do with God's way of cleansing man of sin.

[Goat]

That has nothing to do with God's way of cleansing man of sin.

I think you totally misunderstand how the Jewish faith views sin, and how it is
atoned for. Even in the temple period, sacrifices were not the best way to atone for sins at all. There are many passages in the Jewish scripture that show that blood sacrifice was not the only way or even the best way to atone for sins.

[onefaith]

I'm not Jewish. What do you believe is or was the best way?

[Goat]

I'm not Jewish. What do you believe is or was the best way?

The best way is to take responsibility for your own actions, and learn from your mistakes. It is the actions that count. The Jewish way of looking at atonement is to try to reinforce the change in behavior, but the important part is realizing your error, and trying to correct your behavior.

All else is window dressing.

[onefaith]

I'm not Jewish. What do you believe is or was the best way?

The best way is to take responsibility for your own actions, and learn from your mistakes. It is the actions that count. The Jewish way of looking at atonement is to try to reinforce the change in behavior, but the important part is realizing your error, and trying to correct your behavior.

All else is window dressing.

I agree. That is part of the Christian faith too, you have to realize your mistake or take responsibility for it, and try to not do it again. But what Christians believe is that the sin is still there, kind of just sitting there in your past, and as long as a person has sinned, they are a sinner. I'm one too, I'm not saying Christians don't sin. But we believe Jesus came to get rid of our sins. We still have to try not to sin again, but we don't have to worry too much about it because Jesus took them all away, even future sins.

[Goat]

I'm not Jewish. What do you believe is or was the best way?

The best way is to take responsibility for your own actions, and learn from your mistakes. It is the actions that count. The Jewish way of looking at atonement is to try to reinforce the change in behavior, but the important part is realizing your error, and trying to correct your behavior.

All else is window dressing.

I agree. That is part of the Christian faith too, you have to realize your mistake or take responsibility for it, and try to not do it again. But what Christians believe is that the sin is still there, kind of just sitting there in your past, and as long as a person has sinned, they are a sinner. I'm one too, I'm not saying Christians don't sin. But we believe Jesus came to get rid of our sins. We still have to try not to sin again, but we don't have to worry too much about it because Jesus took them all away, even future sins.

Far too many Christians don't change their behavior, and they use the excuse that since the 'confess Jesus as the lord and savior' that they have some kind of 'get out of hell' card. I am not saying this is what the religion teaches, but so many believe that to take the easy way out. That is one issue I have with the way a very vocal minority of Christian practice their religion.

[onefaith]

I'm not gonna lie, I make mistakes all the time. I am trying not to though. All Christians make mistakes in their daily lives. I can see why it would bug you that some don't change their behavior. I think trying is more important than completely succeeding though.