School Shootings: What would you do if you were God?

[Unknown Soldier]

I'm a recent convert to Christianity. My reason to accept the existence of God is based on my need to have an example of a good person. Without such an example, the phrase good person has little to do with the real world. So I see God as the "benchmark" of what a good person is which is to say our goodness is measured by comparing it to God's goodness. If we act like God, then we are good, and if we act contrary to God, then we are evil.

This position of mine was challenged recently by the news of nineteen children and two adults murdered by a gunman in their school. Obviously, God didn't stop the gunman from murdering his victims. If God is good, then he was good or at least not evil for allowing the murders to happen even though he could have stopped them. So if I get back to my previous reasoning, to have the goodness of God I would also fail to save the murder victims even if I could have saved them. I would be a "good person"! On the other hand, if I saved them, then I'd be acting contrary to God and be "evil."

So if any of you were God, then would you have saved the children and adults who were murdered? If so, then how can you act contrary to God yet be a good person? If you were God and allowed the murders, then why did you allow the murders? In what way is twenty-one murdered people good?

 

[Ontos]

Define "good"

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Define "good"

In the context of the OP to be good is to be like God. That's why I described God as the benchmark of what a good person is. A good person is like God, and an evil person is unlike God.

So what would you have done during the school shootings if you were God?

 

[Ontos]

In the context of the OP to be good is to be like God. That's why I described God as the benchmark of what a good person is. A good person is like God, and an evil person is unlike God.

I didn't ask what it is "to be good", I ask you to define good.

What is the definition of "good" you are using?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I didn't ask what it is "to be good", I ask you to define good.

What is the definition of "good" you are using?

Obviously from what I said "good" is "like God," a simple logical deduction. Why do you ask?

 

[Ontos]

Obviously from what I said "good" is "like God," a simple logical deduction. Why do you ask?

This doesn't define anything

Here - do any of these work for defining "good", if so; which one?

Definition of GOOD

of a favorable character or tendency; bountiful, fertile; handsome, attractive… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

good

1. very satisfactory, enjoyable, pleasant, or interesting: 2. used when saying…

dictionary.cambridge.org

Good Definition & Meaning | Britannica Dictionary

GOOD meaning: 1 : of high quality; 2 : of somewhat high but not excellent quality

www.britannica.com

 

[Stephen]

This is the basic question of "Why does God allow suffering?"

John Hick said it better than I can, so I'll quote him:

“We can imagine a paradise in which no one can ever come to any harm. Instead of having its own fixed structure, the world would be plastic to human wishes. Or perhaps the world would have a fixed structure, and hence the possibility of damage and pain, but a structure that is whenever necessary suspended or adjusted by special divine action to avoid human pain. Thus, for example, in such a miraculously pain-free world, one who falls accidentally from a high building would presumably float unharmed to the ground; bullets would become insubstantial when fired at a human body; poison would cease to be poison; water to drown, and so on. We can at least begin to imagine such a world, but… a world in which there can be no pain or suffering would also be one without moral choices and hence no possibility of moral growth and development. For in a situation in which no one can ever suffer injury or be liable to pain or suffering, no distinction would exist between right and wrong action. No action would be morally wrong, because no actions could ever have harmful consequences; likewise, no action would be morally right in contrast to wrong. Whatever the values of such a world, its structure would not serve the purpose of allowing its inhabitants to develop from self regarding animality to self giving love.”​

How would you ever know what Good is, unless you really know what Evil is? In order to be like God, knowing Good and Evil is a necessary step.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

This doesn't define anything

Here - do any of these work for defining "good", if so; which one?

I already said that good is "like God." If it helps, I'm referring to the God of the Bible and Christian theology. That which is like Yahweh/Jesus is by my definition good. So just think of what Yahweh and Jesus are like, and then you know what I mean by good. Examples of God's goodness include his leading the Hebrews out of Egypt, and his sending his Son to die for our sins.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

This is the basic question of "Why does God allow suffering?"

No, that's not the question which I posted in the OP. I'm actually asking questions about the meaning of "good" as it applies to the Christian God. What do Christians mean when they say God is good? If we are good, then we should be like God who allows tragedies. If we allow tragedies that we could have prevented, would we then be like God? If we do succeed in preventing tragedies, are we unlike God and therefore not good?

 

[Stephen]

No, that's not the question which I posted in the OP. I'm actually asking questions about the meaning of "good" as it applies to the Christian God. What do Christians mean when they say God is good? If we are good, then we should be like God who allows tragedies. If we allow tragedies that we could have prevented, would we then be like God? If we do succeed in preventing tragedies, are we unlike God and therefore not good?

You multitude of questions was just repackaging same question.

The answer remains the same. Good as a moral concept has no meaning without a moral framework. If you think the 19 dead people is "evil", how did you arrive at that? If you think human life is superior to the bacterial life that will thrive on those dead bodies, then why do you think so? Did you arrive at the idea that those people being killed was evil by an arbitrary standard, or by an authority that said so?

God is good because he teaches you that there is such a thing as you. You aren't merely a somewhat ordered amalgamation of chemicals on a planet orbiting a yellow sun and the blob of chemicals will decay into the dust with no noticeable effect on the universe, but rather you are something higher and to be valued, just like those dead people. And he has burdened you with moral responsibility that has values. And further, if he made all of the moral choices for you or anybody else, then you or they would never have a chance to be like God.

(and perhaps you could have read the rest of the post you quoted)



The answer to your question is that if I was God, I would have more information available to me than I do now.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The answer to your question is that if I was God, I would have more information available to me than I do now.

Then you are saying that if you had enough information, then you would have allowed the shootings even if you could have stopped them. What information could make you come to that conclusion?

The answer remains the same. Good as a moral concept has no meaning without a moral framework. If you think the 19 dead people is "evil", how did you arrive at that? If you think human life is superior to the bacterial life that will thrive on those dead bodies, then why do you think so? Did you arrive at the idea that those people being killed was evil by an arbitrary standard, or by an authority that said so?

I'm asking you these questions, and I never judged the shooting as evil. As a Christian, how do you decide that God is good rather than evil? If God values us, then would it be good for him to protect us from harm?

God is good because he teaches you that there is such a thing as you.

I really didn't need to be taught that I exist.

You aren't merely a somewhat ordered amalgamation of chemicals on a planet orbiting a yellow sun and the blob of chemicals will decay into the dust with no noticeable effect on the universe, but rather you are something higher and to be valued, just like those dead people. And he has burdened you with moral responsibility that has values. And further, if he made all of the moral choices for you or anybody else, then you or they would never have a chance to be like God.

Normally if we value something, we maintain it. I know I do. So how can we say that God values us when he allows great harm to come to us?

I'm still waiting for your definition of good as it applies to God. When you say that God is good, what does that mean? Is that "good" loving, kind, and/or merciful?

As a Christian, I feel that if I call something like that evil, then I'd be facing the issue of God being "good" in a way that we don't understand as good. This issue is important because we must impute meaning to our theology, and to use words we cannot define is not meaningful.

 

[Gary Mac]

I'm a recent convert to Christianity. My reason to accept the existence of God is based on my need to have an example of a good person. Without such an example, the phrase good person has little to do with the real world. So I see God as the "benchmark" of what a good person is which is to say our goodness is measured by comparing it to God's goodness. If we act like God, then we are good, and if we act contrary to God, then we are evil.

This position of mine was challenged recently by the news of nineteen children and two adults murdered by a gunman in their school. Obviously, God didn't stop the gunman from murdering his victims. If God is good, then he was good or at least not evil for allowing the murders to happen even though he could have stopped them. So if I get back to my previous reasoning, to have the goodness of God I would also fail to save the murder victims even if I could have saved them. I would be a "good person"! On the other hand, if I saved them, then I'd be acting contrary to God and be "evil."

So if any of you were God, then would you have saved the children and adults who were murdered? If so, then how can you act contrary to God yet be a good person? If you were God and allowed the murders, then why did you allow the murders? In what way is twenty-one murdered people good?

God is Love. The absence of Love goes and shoots people.

 

[Stephen]

Then you are saying that if you had enough information, then you would have allowed the shootings even if you could have stopped them. What information could make you come to that conclusion?

I'm saying that more information may reveal that it may not be God's burden to step into every last evil thing that happens on the earth. May I suggest reading the prior posts in the conversation. The question seems disingenuous in light of things previously stated.

I'm asking you these questions, and I never judged the shooting as evil. As a Christian, how do you decide that God is good rather than evil? If God values us, then would it be good for him to protect us from harm?

You didn't judge these shootings as evil. That is interesting. I look forward to you growing out of your recently cast off atheist roots and be able discern good from evil.

If you think God stepping in and stopping you and everybody else from harm would be good, then may I suggest reading the previous posts in this conversation.

I really didn't need to be taught that I exist.

I'm happy for you.

Normally if we value something, we maintain it. I know I do. So how can we say that God values us when he allows great harm to come to us?

Normally, if you are the in charge of a large project, you delegate taking care of maintenance tasks at the lowest levels to others. If you personally are expecting God to be on call and stop harm from coming upon you, on what basis do you think God is responsible to you to perform such a function?

I'm still waiting for your definition of good as it applies to God. When you say that God is good, what does that mean? Is that "good" loving, kind, and/or merciful?

Yes. As it relates to this incident, what do you imagine God's role is in being loving, kind, or merciful?

As a Christian, I feel that if I call something like that evil, then I'd be facing the issue of God being "good" in a way that we don't understand as good. This issue is important because we must impute meaning to our theology, and to use words we cannot define is not meaningful.

I am at a loss as to how the goodness of God is related to the evil actions of this person. Why would you think his Evil or Goodness is in any impacted by the actions of a mentally deranged human?

 

[Ontos]

I already said that good is "like God." If it helps, I'm referring to the God of the Bible and Christian theology. That which is like Yahweh/Jesus is by my definition good. So just think of what Yahweh and Jesus are like, and then you know what I mean by good. Examples of God's goodness include his leading the Hebrews out of Egypt, and his sending his Son to die for our sins.

It doesn't help at all...

If someone said "This is a 'good' pancake", following your logic that statement is equivalent to saying "This is a 'like God leading the Hebrews out of Egypt' pancake" - which doesn't help to explain what good is let alone a good pancake.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'm saying that more information may reveal that it may not be God's burden to step into every last evil thing that happens on the earth.

What evil things will God not bother to intervene in, or is it impossible to say?

May I suggest reading the prior posts in the conversation. The question seems disingenuous in light of things previously stated.

Your previous posts did not include responses that I feel adequately address my questions.

You didn't judge these shootings as evil. That is interesting.

I didn't say that the shootings are evil. Like I explained from the OP, that which God does cannot be evil. So until I can iron-out this issue of God not saving the victims of that shooting, I will suspend my judgment regarding them as evil.

I look forward to you growing out of your recently cast off atheist roots and be able discern good from evil.

How do you distinguish good from evil? Do you go by what the Bible says?

If you think God stepping in and stopping you and everybody else from harm would be good, then may I suggest reading the previous posts in this conversation.

One possibility I've thought of is that God knows that one of those children would grow up to murder more people than were killed in the shooting. Would you say that's possible?

Normally, if you are the in charge of a large project, you delegate taking care of maintenance tasks at the lowest levels to others. If you personally are expecting God to be on call and stop harm from coming upon you, on what basis do you think God is responsible to you to perform such a function?

Again, you're not answering my questions. How can we say that God values us when he allows great harm to come to us? I don't see any explanation in what you're saying here. Plus, you should not respond to a question by asking questions. But to answer your question, we normally expect good people to be responsible for their kids protecting them from harm. God does not appear to be good in that sense, and I'm left wondering in what sense he is good.

Yes.

Thank you for a straight answer! Now I know that you see good as loving, kind, and/or merciful. If God is good, then he is loving, kind, and/or merciful.

As it relates to this incident, what do you imagine God's role is in being loving, kind, or merciful?

That's what I don't know for sure, and that's why I started this thread hoping that Christians would help me with the vexing issue of goodness in a God who allows tragedies. What kind of goodness allows people to be murdered? If God is good as we normally understand good to be, then God cannot allow tragedies to happen.

I am at a loss as to how the goodness of God is related to the evil actions of this person.

Normally we see the failure to prevent evil as evil in its own right assuming the evil could be prevented. For example, if a lifeguard does nothing to prevent a person from drowning, then we see that lifeguard as evil and may punish him for negligence. We Christians don't apply that kind of standard to God seeing him as good no matter what evil he allows to happen.

Why would you think his Evil or Goodness is in any impacted by the actions of a mentally deranged human?

Simple: He allowed a person to do evil, and that allowance as I've just explained is what we normally judge as evil. If we Christians are so inconsistent in the way we use words like good and evil, then we end up with muddled theology, and we open our faith to ridicule.

 

[Stephen]

What evil things will God not bother to intervene in, or is it impossible to say?

I didn't say that the shootings are evil. Like I explained from the OP, that which God does cannot be evil. So until I can iron-out this issue of God not saving the victims of that shooting, I will suspend my judgment regarding them as evil.

One possibility I've thought of is that God knows that one of those children would grow up to murder more people than were killed in the shooting. Would you say that's possible?

Again, you're not answering my questions. How can we say that God values us when he allows great harm to come to us? I don't see any explanation in what you're saying here. Plus, you should not respond to a question by asking questions. But to answer your question, we normally expect good people to be responsible for their kids protecting them from harm. God does not appear to be good in that sense, and I'm left wondering in what sense he is good.

Normally we see the failure to prevent evil as evil in its own right assuming the evil could be prevented. For example, if a lifeguard does nothing to prevent a person from drowning, then we see that lifeguard as evil and may punish him for negligence. We Christians don't apply that kind of standard to God seeing him as good no matter what evil he allows to happen.

Simple: He allowed a person to do evil, and that allowance as I've just explained is what we normally judge as evil. If we Christians are so inconsistent in the way we use words like good and evil, then we end up with muddled theology, and we open our faith to ridicule.

To be clear in your line of reasoning: You believe that because God allowed humans to make choices, and some of those humans choose to do evil, therefore God is evil because he didn't immediately intervene and deny humans each and every evil choice.

For God to be good in this line of reasoning, Humans have be denied authentic free will as each of their decisions need to be run by somebody else for a goodness test before implementation of must be stopped before any evil takes place (as was previously stated).

The theology you are projecting on Jews and Christians here is a caricature of what an Ashiest thinks of them rather than anything authentic.

 

[Gary Mac]

I'm a recent convert to Christianity. My reason to accept the existence of God is based on my need to have an example of a good person. Without such an example, the phrase good person has little to do with the real world. So I see God as the "benchmark" of what a good person is which is to say our goodness is measured by comparing it to God's goodness. If we act like God, then we are good, and if we act contrary to God, then we are evil.

This position of mine was challenged recently by the news of nineteen children and two adults murdered by a gunman in their school. Obviously, God didn't stop the gunman from murdering his victims. If God is good, then he was good or at least not evil for allowing the murders to happen even though he could have stopped them. So if I get back to my previous reasoning, to have the goodness of God I would also fail to save the murder victims even if I could have saved them. I would be a "good person"! On the other hand, if I saved them, then I'd be acting contrary to God and be "evil."

So if any of you were God, then would you have saved the children and adults who were murdered? If so, then how can you act contrary to God yet be a good person? If you were God and allowed the murders, then why did you allow the murders? In what way is twenty-one murdered people good?

God would have stopped this guy if the guy had been of God. God is Love and man is the temple of Him.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

It doesn't help at all...

If someone said "This is a 'good' pancake", following your logic that statement is equivalent to saying "This is a 'like God leading the Hebrews out of Egypt' pancake" - which doesn't help to explain what good is let alone a good pancake.

Uh, no--I'm speaking of good in a moral sense. Pancakes are neither moral nor immoral and hence have no moral comparison to God. The Exodus was a moral act on the the part of God freeing slaves from bondage. If you free slaves from bondage, then you are like God by doing so, and since you're like God, then you would be good.

 

[1Thess521]

I'm a recent convert to Christianity. My reason to accept the existence of God is based on my need to have an example of a good person. Without such an example, the phrase good person has little to do with the real world. So I see God as the "benchmark" of what a good person is which is to say our goodness is measured by comparing it to God's goodness. If we act like God, then we are good, and if we act contrary to God, then we are evil.

This position of mine was challenged recently by the news of nineteen children and two adults murdered by a gunman in their school. Obviously, God didn't stop the gunman from murdering his victims. If God is good, then he was good or at least not evil for allowing the murders to happen even though he could have stopped them. So if I get back to my previous reasoning, to have the goodness of God I would also fail to save the murder victims even if I could have saved them. I would be a "good person"! On the other hand, if I saved them, then I'd be acting contrary to God and be "evil."

So if any of you were God, then would you have saved the children and adults who were murdered? If so, then how can you act contrary to God yet be a good person? If you were God and allowed the murders, then why did you allow the murders? In what way is twenty-one murdered people good?

Why does God allow evil? | GotQuestions.org

Why does God allow evil? Why does God not prevent evil from occurring?

www.gotquestions.org

 

[Unknown Soldier]

To be clear in your line of reasoning: You believe that because God allowed humans to make choices, and some of those humans choose to do evil, therefore God is evil because he didn't immediately intervene and deny humans each and every evil choice.

That's not what I'm arguing. What I'm saying is that we Christians cannot say God is evil because He is by faith defined as good no matter what He does or does not do. So God is good even though he allows evil. People, by contrast, are evil if they allow evil, so there is an obvious inconsistency in the way we define good and evil.

For God to be good in this line of reasoning, Humans have be denied authentic free will as each of their decisions need to be run by somebody else for a goodness test before implementation of must be stopped before any evil takes place (as was previously stated).

We humans deny or try to deny the free acts of others to do evil all the time because we see that denial as good. To allow people to freely choose evil we see as bad, yet if God allows such freedom, we contradict ourselves saying that that freedom is good.

The theology you are projecting on Jews and Christians here is a caricature of what an Ashiest thinks of them rather than anything authentic.

It looks like I'm not going to get answers to my questions, so I will post the answers myself.

What evil things will God not bother to intervene in, or is it impossible to say?
Christians don't know what evil God will or will not intervene in. There's little apparent difference in the situations he has and has not intervened in. For example, God freed the Hebrew slaves, but he never freed the African slaves in America.

How do you distinguish good from evil? Do you go by what the Bible says?
Again, in the context of Christian theology, God cannot do evil but only good. We call any and every act of his "good." Evil, then, is any act that is unlike what God does. We can know what God does and therefore what is good by reading the Bible. Anything God is said to have done in the Bible's stories is good.

...God knows that one of those children would grow up to murder more people than were killed in the shooting. Would you say that's possible?
If God knows the future, then yes, he can tell if any child will grow up to be a murderer. If he kills that child prior to that child maturing, then God has prevented murders.

How can we say that God values us when he allows great harm to come to us?
In the normal understanding of the verb value, harm done to what is valued is disallowed. By contrast, God can value a person yet allow harm to come to them, a discrepancy in the meaning of the word, "value."

What kind of goodness allows people to be murdered?
God's goodness allows people to be murdered which conflicts with the notion of goodness we normally use.