Deity: omnigoodness or omnipotence?

[Operacast]

The proposition that God is goodness works, but only if one dispenses with the notion that God is interventionist/omnipotent. If God is indeed the latter, then too much horror happens on Earth to sustain the notion that God is goodness. So if one ends up ditching instead the notion that God is interventionist/omnipotent in order to maintain God as all goodness, then much in the OT can no longer apply. So one ditches certain aspects of the OT instead, which means that the God in the OT can only be viable when not intervening physically. Once God is no longer interventionist, the model for God in the OT is shown to be questionable. If one holds strictly to a God-is-goodness formulation, then the only valid creedal texts left are those which show God as goodness but not as a physical actor on Earth. That throws out the OT for starters.

We're left with (at least) two conclusions as a result: A) God as goodness is self-consistent, but only if B) one adopts a God model from a creed like Buddhism or Confucianism, etc, a creed of some kind where God exists but is not a physical actor. We're left with an ultimate question:

Which creed's texts do not show God as a physical actor on Earth but do show God as a distinct presence in human conscience, hence fulfilling a sole function as Goodness?

Cheers,

Operacast

 

[Etu Malku]

You'll want to look into Gnosticism for this answer

 

[wil]

If one is deemed good, is omnipotence required to be paired with intervention?

I milk a cow, I decide to create colonies of bacteria and hence yogurt...

I decide to eat the colonies of lifeforms that I nurtured and created...

good? bad?

 

[TruthSatnaam]

God is Truth(we are currently living in illusion)..

He sat for many ages to discover this, and once He did, He created a system that runs according to Truth that gives us the oppertunity to discover the same in a fraction of the time He did. This is the love that bought us into being..

The Truth is that All is truth. The reason we are stuck in illusion is that we have not embraced and practiced this fact.

Truth is Fearless, All Loving, beyond time, beyond image/form- beyond the 6 senses. It is inifinite and All powerful- it is All Pervading.

It is a psychology that once He discovered, He practiced, experienced and so Became- He lives it to this day.

The psychology is humble and simple- it is Nothing .

Truth=Nothing- it is a frequency beyond what those living in illusion can comprehend...

The laws of karma are a part of the Truth format- we sow what we reap- whether the karmas extend from previous lifetimes or not. Suffering- as harsh as it may seem to one living in logic(maya/illusion) is Always deserved, as is worldly happiness- and Divine bliss.

When we stop attaching ourselves to illusion(worldly/false happiness and pain(pleasure and pain)) and live in Truth(by applying it to our natural daily lives) - we begin to live in and beyond the Balance.

By living in the balance, we begin to delete the negative karmas instead of creating new ones(by attaching ourselves to worldly pleasures and comitting sins).

As we delete, we learn- we discover more and more of truth and go deeper into it- Living the Truth in each moment until the negative karmas are all deleted and we are truly set free...

Instead of living in the logic of the mind and endless pondering- why not actually begin to Live and discover the Truth- To Experience it?

Open your heart- live beyond the shackles of your mind by living Truth without expectations and wants and all will become clear to you..

God bless you

 

[radarmark]

"Good and bad, I defined these terms quite clear, no doubt, somehow. But I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now." Zimmy Zimmerman

All Religions, once stripped of the notion of a "God of Childhood" (thank you Watts) can be expressed as you indicated (imho). The one religion which is the foundation of them all is a good place to start.

 

[Joedjr]

We're left with (at least) two conclusions as a result: A) God as goodness is self-consistent, but only if B) one adopts a God model from a creed like Buddhism or Confucianism, etc, a creed of some kind where God exists but is not a physical actor. We're left with an ultimate question:

Which creed's texts do not show God as a physical actor on Earth but do show God as a distinct presence in human conscience, hence fulfilling a sole function as Goodness?
Operacast

All Religions, once stripped of the notion of a "God of Childhood" (thank you Watts) can be expressed as you indicated (imho). The one religion which is the foundation of them all is a good place to start.

I'm at a loss, which religion would that be? Or is that no religion, but something like quiet inner voice.

 

[radarmark]

The inward light that is the H!ly Spirit.

 

[Joedjr]

The inward light that is the H!ly Spirit.

Please correct me if I am wrong, Holy Spirit is a Christian new testament term. For me to understand a little more, I have to ask, your use of the Holy Spirit is it for anyone of any background and of any time current or historical?

 

[Etu Malku]

Please correct me if I am wrong, Holy Spirit is a Christian new testament term. For me to understand a little more, I have to ask, your use of the Holy Spirit is it for anyone of any background and of any time current or historical?

In Luciferianism we understand the Holy Spirit as our Dæmon, the Thelemic Guardian Angel, the go between of Material Body and Higher Self.

Similar to the Islamic al-Ruh al-Qudus, "the-Spirit the-Holy", identified with the angel Jibreel (Gabriel) who acts as an agent of divine intervention, but in Luciferianism we don't see divinity as separate from our Self.

 

[radarmark]

EM has it right. For those of us who believe (instead) in the existence of a mental or spiritual plane, al-Ruh al-Qudus or the H!ly Spirit (or.... put in your Religion's mode of Revelation here) is that of the D!vine feeding us direct experience.

 

[TruthSatnaam]

Satnaam(Truth is His name)

Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Lucifer is Satan, (sorry but that is the reality)..but then even Satan is part of God- the entire creation is God- it all runs by Truth. Instead of following Luciferianism, why not just follow the pure and simple Truth?

God(the first Truth discoverer) taught Jesus the Truth directly, he taught Guru Nanak the Truth directly. We take the Truth teachers lessons and apply them to our lives(living by their word- and by living it/practicing it 100% we are surrendering 100% to the TruthTeacher- 99% is still living in duality). In doing this, we are practicing Truth (Bhagti/ loving devotion)..

God is found through the heart(True unconditional Love- stemming from the True acceptance as All being His will) and communicates with us each moment- but the majority have shut Him out. In applying/living/practicing the Truth, we go deeper and deeper- the discoveries and experiences of Jesus and Satgurus(Sat means Truth) become our own- Divine knowledge is communicated to us directly from the Truth Source in our heart.

Truth principles do indeed exist in many religions, although many religions have been corrupted by scholars and others over the years who used too much logic(didn't let the heart speak- Our true heart is God's heart) etc.

Theres True and False- Truth seekers never sell themselves to falsehood- They uphold Truth, whether we are slandered, tortured and even martyred(as Jesus taught). We speak Truth(we don't even tell a white lie), Serve Truth, Deliver Truth, Die Truth.

God bless you

 

[Etu Malku]

Satnaam(Truth is His name)
Lucifer is Satan, (sorry but that is the reality)..but then even Satan is part of God- the entire creation is God- it all runs by Truth. Instead of following Luciferianism, why not just follow the pure and simple Truth?

In Abrahamic lore perhaps Lucifer was the Angel thrown out of Heaven and became Satan, Lord of the Earth, but in other Belief systems this is not the case.

I don't see anything "pure" or "simple" about the Abrahamic belief system, it's actually quite confusing, hypocritical, and controlling IMO.

I direct you to two of my threads regarding this:
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/birth-of-the-devil-15358.html
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/luciferianism-14435.html

 

[Amergin]

In Abrahamic lore perhaps Lucifer was the Angel thrown out of Heaven and became Satan, Lord of the Earth, but in other Belief systems this is not the case.

I don't see anything "pure" or "simple" about the Abrahamic belief system, it's actually quite confusing, hypocritical, and controlling IMO.l

The Abrahamic Gods make no sense. They are delusions wrapped in contradictions. Omnipotence verses omnigoodness is similar to the All Powerful force against the Immovable Object. It is logical bollocks.

The Cathars tried to make sense of it. They used the Bible. The God of the O.T. is clearly evil, cruel, violent, mentally insane, vindictive, and suffering from fits of genocidal rage. That is far from perfection. He might be nearly all powerful but clearly not GOOD at all. The N.T. God named Jesus was all good, kind, compassionate, forgiving, a healer, a mentor, and pure goodness. Clearly, Jesus is incompatible with JHWY/ALLAH/El/Elohim the bad god. It is the closest any thinkers came to making Judeo-Islamic-Christianity even partly rational.

If we define God as the Creator and not the interventionist, it makes more sense. This God does not require consciousness or cognition, no moral code, no emotion, and no regret. This God is the Physics before, during, and following the Big Bang 13.7 Billion Years Ago. What happens to us, our planet, solar system, and galaxy are under the laws of Physics and Math. Matter and Energy behave according to their properties. Their properties define the Law of Nature.

Nature as we observe it is not good or bad, it just is as it appears. Lions do not ever lie down with the lamb. They eat the lamb. Lions were never vegetarians. They have huge canine and other flesh tearing teeth. They cannot metabolise plant material. A Lion cannot lie down with the lamb except when eating it. Meteors and Comets strike our planets killing us, causing 12 major animal extinction events. Evolution does not have a goal. After extinctions, evolution is the observation that natural selection picks those who can adapt to new or changing conditions. Hyenas tear apart a Zebra and eat its abdominal organs while it is still alive and screaming. That is ugly to the Zebra and to me, but good for the Hyenas. That is neither good nor bad. It is Nature's Laws of Physics and branches of chemistry and biology. It has no goal; it just happens as its properties move it.

I suppose my god is not a conscious human-like being with thinking, emotion, physical intervention, or regret. God is just the metaphor for the Laws of Physics that come from the properties of energy and matter.

Last year I stood below the Matterhorn observing the seeming beauty of the Alps. An American woman tourist turned to me and said, "How can anyone doubt God and look at that mountain?"

I replied, "I see no god up there. I have been up there part ways. I see fault lines separation rocks from Africa sitting on top of European Rocks, and some rocks with Ocean plant and animal fossils. I see the work of Plate Tectonics pushing Africa north into Europe. I see the buckled layers stacked on top of one another. I see ammonites that once lived in the Tethys Ocean before being pushed up by Africa moving north, and deposited in the Alps. It is a fabulous physical process of Nature. However, it needs no Humanoid god or magical explanation. Geology and Geotectonics backed by Palaeontology explain the Alps and the Matterhorn.

Amergin

 

[Operacast]

Evolution does not have a goal. After extinctions, evolution is the observation that natural selection picks those who can adapt to new or changing conditions.

Actually, it's that adaptation process where I might take a second look. To a socialized species like humanity, adaptation often entails conforming one's daily habits to a more empathic behavioral pattern than might otherwise occur. IOW, adaptation often means that one's daily existence is more fruitful if one is considerate of those around one than if one is strictly out for oneself alone. The latter choice can end up being more fraught with danger than considerate behavior towards one fellow creatures.

If we take such considerate behavior as being an intrinsic part of biological adaptation, then the way that that adaptation is expressed in the course of the history of modern civilization -- often through written reflections that have sometimes altered social ethics for the better -- might provide an important insight into what precisely propels behavioral modification in any socialized species in the first place.

What do we find in those very occasional written reflections that have helped prod forward more inclusive social ethics among certain civilizations and cultures? Do those writings suggest no goal or a goal?

Cheers,

Operacast

 

[Etu Malku]

Amergin,

I couldn't have said it better!
What many understand as God is what we call the Objective Universe.
By separating from the Objective Universe and atoning with your Subjective Universe, One can Become a god . . . Apotheosis!

This is truly the teachings of the Morning Star Jesus/Lucifer

Isaiah 14:12
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

In the King James translation, Isaiah 14:12 reads:
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!


Revelation 22:16,
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

 

[Thomas]

The proposition that God is goodness works, but only if one dispenses with the notion that God is interventionist/omnipotent.

Theodicy is a vexing one, and one brought into sharper focus since WWII. As the Lutheran theologian Bonhoeffer asked, where was God at Auschwitz?

However, if you're positing a deist position, then surely you cannot tie 'the good' to 'the divine'? A true non-interventionist position would require 'the good' to be a development of human ethics, surely?

If God is indeed the latter, then too much horror happens on Earth to sustain the notion that God is goodness.

The cause of the 'horror' is invariably man, so I don't see why God should get the blame for that, unless you're willing to surrender the notions of 'freedom' and 'autonomy'?

So if one ends up ditching instead the notion that God is interventionist/omnipotent in order to maintain God as all goodness, then much in the OT can no longer apply.

Oooh no, the OT is a very good indicator of precisely the opposite.

Some of the language might be a shade too anthropological, but actually the relationship between the divine and human order is quite well worked out. The Book of Job, for example, asks the questions you ask, and answers them.

We're left with (at least) two conclusions as a result: A) God as goodness is self-consistent, but only if B) one adopts a God model from a creed like Buddhism or Confucianism, etc, a creed of some kind where God exists but is not a physical actor.

I think there are a number of other possible conclusions.

Suppose, for example, that God is Good, that the world and all within it is created good, and that everything in the garden would be lovely if only we, too, would be good.

This does not require divine intervention to tell us what or how to be 'good'. Humanist systems have admirable ethical systems which would make the world a much better place, almost idyllic, in fact, if only we lived up to them.

But supposing a Transcendent God who is immanently present 'in' and 'to' the created order ... then such a God would be 'active' to, in and through those participating, not in the manner of a puppet master, however.

In the Christian tradition, where this error of thinking of God as a micro-manager often operates on a spectacular scale (as is the tendency of all traditions, man being man), although I do not believe that this tragedy or that illness is visited on people by God as the means towards some unseen end.

I do believe that shit happens, but that does not mean we are abandoned by God ... I believe that God walks with us, not for us, but this will never be accessible to us, as long as we regard our world and our neighbour as being there for us.

Indeed, one could argue that the problems and horrors derive from our notion of our own omnipotence, or rather grandiose notions of our own self-importance, rather than finding fault with God?

God bless,

Thomas

 

[wil]

Where was G!d at Auschwitz? The omnipresent was in their midst.

Omnipotence....can G!d make a boulder so big he can't lift it?

Seems similar to the Omnipotence or Goodness question...

Gotta take away the anthropomorphising...

G!d isn't good.... G!d is Goodness

G!d isn't loving... G!d is love

G!d is principle, all potential....

The formless we make into form.

It is all upto us as to how we perceive. Where was G!d in Auschwitz? Ask Viktor...

We stumbled on in the darkness, over big stones and through large puddles, along the one road leading from the camp. The accompanying guards kept shouting at us and driving us with the butts of their rifles. Anyone with very sore feet supported himself on his neighbor's arm. Hardly a word was spoken; the icy wind did not encourage talk. Hiding his mouth behind his upturned collar, the man marching next to me whispered suddenly: "If our wives could see us now! I do hope they are better off in their camps and don't know what is happening to us." That brought thoughts of my own wife to mind. And as we stumbled on for miles, slipping on icy spots, supporting each other time and again, dragging one another up and onward, nothing was said, but we both knew: each of us was thinking of his wife. Occasionally I looked at the sky, where the stars were fading and the pink light of the morning was beginning to spread behind a dark bank of clouds. But my mind clung to my wife's image, imagining it with an uncanny acuteness. I heard her answering me, saw her smile, her frank and encouraging look. Real or not, her look was then more luminous than the sun which was beginning to rise.

A thought transfixed me: for the first time in my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many thinkers. The truth – that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire. Then I grasped the meaning of the greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief have to impart: The salvation of man is through love and in love. I understood how a man who has nothing left in this world still may know bliss, be it only for a brief moment, in the contemplation of his beloved. In a position of utter desolation, when man cannot express himself in positive action, when his only achievement may consist in enduring his sufferings in the right way—an honorable way—in such a position man can, through loving contemplation of the image he carries of his beloved, achieve fulfillment. For the first time in my life I was able to understand the meaning of the words, "The angels are lost in perpetual contemplation of an infinite glory."

 

[Thomas]

Hi EM —

In Abrahamic lore perhaps Lucifer was the Angel thrown out of Heaven and became Satan, Lord of the Earth, but in other Belief systems this is not the case.

The Old Testament treats of the issue mythopoeically, the reference is to the King of Babylon who set himself up as a god. The moral of the story is evident, the morning star shines quite brightly, until the sun rises ...

The Christian Fathers however look for a different hermeneutic key, or rather looked to the metaphysical principles behind the mythopoeic.

But remember also that the Day Star is used in the New Testament to refer to Christ:
"And we have the more firm prophetical word: whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts" 2 Peter 1:19
The Greek is phosphoros rather than Lucifer ('light-bearer') ... but the point is an astronomical reference can have a number of contextual meanings, even within the same text.

So rather than assume one is wrong, because 'it's not the case', it might be that the cases are quite different, and each has to be interpreted according to its own system.

The question refers back to your original question:
If God is good, why would man do other than the will of God?

God bless,

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Where was G!d at Auschwitz? The omnipresent was in their midst.

Quite. I suggest there's more to the question than a glib answer ... put another way ... where was man at Auschwitz?

Omnipotence....can G!d make a boulder so big he can't lift it?

The question is irrational and illogical ... and irrelevant.

G!d isn't good.... G!d is Goodness

Are you sure? 'Goodness' is a quality of something, is it not?

G!d isn't loving... G!d is love

According to my Scriptures, yes.

G!d is principle, all potential....

I'd say that's another mode of anthropomorphism.

I'd also say that God is beyond principle, the arch anarchos, the Principle without Principle;

Definitely not 'potential', in that God is what God is, God does not possess 'potentiality' as God cannot be more than God is.

God bless,

Thomas

 

[Etu Malku]

. . . and each has to be interpreted according to its own system.

Hi Thomas, I would have to agree with you here.

If God is good, why would man do other than the will of God?

Firstly, Good & Evil are subjective terms and rely on culture, time period, and society. My Good may not be Your Good.

Those of us on Luciferian Path believe it is necessary to embrace both Light & Dark, and to separate from the Objective Universe (God) in order to know our True Higher Self, all towards Apotheosis (becoming a god).