The Fate of the Pleaser

[Purple Knight]

Question for Debate: What is the spiritual fate of the Pleaser described below?

Some person has no idea what is spiritually true and isn't. He has no idea which god or gods are real and which are not. So he lays out every commandment of every religion in front of him and only discards ones he absolutely cannot follow because it stops him from following too many other ones. Now it just so happens that in doing this, he has lived his life within the bounds of righteousness according to your religion, except for one thing, the First Commandment... perhaps. Now, he never knew what gods were real, so when asked if he had any other gods but God, and when he answered honestly, he said no, he hadn't, because he wasn't sure any of them existed. He had no way to know. So he says, he didn't. But he didn't have God either. In order to obey every moral edict he possibly could, he didn't affirmatively believe any of it, he just followed every law. When asked if he accepts Jesus, he says yes, I always accepted that if Jesus was real and died on the cross to pay for my sins I ought to accept him, I just didn't know if he did or not.

[Purple Knight]

How is it reasonable or just that a person who does not have innate knowledge of good and bad can never become good?

It's not justice in any sense. However, everything I observe supports that someone who genuinely doesn't know right from wrong can never become good, and neither can someone evil become good.

"Good" is a relative thing. If someone doesn't know good innately and he listens to God, he can become as good as it is possible in this system of things.

No he can't, because, not knowing what is good, he has no idea which god to listen to. Take yourself outside your knowledge of right and wrong for a moment. I realise, it's like trying to pretend you can't read. It's nigh impossible. Look at these words as if you couldn't read them. Well, you can read them.

But you're making an error because this is such a big ask. The error is that because you know right from wrong enough to pick out which god is good, you think, without really thinking about it, that must be obvious to others as well. It isn't. It's almost impossible to ask this understanding of someone who does know right from wrong, but I ask anyway: Imagine you don't know. Imagine you have no idea which moral edicts ought to be followed and which are false.

[onewithhim]

How is it reasonable or just that a person who does not have innate knowledge of good and bad can never become good?

It's not justice in any sense. However, everything I observe supports that someone who genuinely doesn't know right from wrong can never become good, and neither can someone evil become good.

"Good" is a relative thing. If someone doesn't know good innately and he listens to God, he can become as good as it is possible in this system of things.

No he can't, because, not knowing what is good, he has no idea which god to listen to. Take yourself outside your knowledge of right and wrong for a moment. I realise, it's like trying to pretend you can't read. It's nigh impossible. Look at these words as if you couldn't read them. Well, you can read them.

But you're making an error because this is such a big ask. The error is that because you know right from wrong enough to pick out which god is good, you think, without really thinking about it, that must be obvious to others as well. It isn't. It's almost impossible to ask this understanding of someone who does know right from wrong, but I ask anyway: Imagine you don't know. Imagine you have no idea which moral edicts ought to be followed and which are false.

I said that if someone doesn't know good INNATELY, that is---he was born perfect and sinless--he can still become good by listening to God as to what is good or bad and not making up his own mind about these things. Jehovah has given us the opportunity to LEARN what is good and bad in His eyes, and once we learn this we can achieve righteousness just like Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah and others. (Hebrews 11)

[HarlanGeorge]

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #3]

But that isn't what Yahweh wanted from Job.. he was a righteous, God-fearing man who devoted his life to Yahweh. But he required more from Job and to uncover it, he stripped away everything Job had till he was a broken man. " I repent, in ashes and dust."

Full of physical pain from his boils, and emotional pain from the loss of his family Job was staring God, in the form of whirling wind theophany, in the "face". So he repented for questioning God and accepted that he will never understand why God acts as he does, but he will never question him again.

God was after one thing, and that was a relationship with Job. A relationship of loyalty and unquestioning devotion. Once Job understood this his suffering ended and he was rewarded and lived the rest of his life in goodness and peace.

What happened to the ten children? They are still dead. Thanks God!

[Purple Knight]

I said that if someone doesn't know good INNATELY, that is---he was born perfect and sinless--he can still become good by listening to God as to what is good or bad and not making up his own mind about these things.

Okay, so let's take this and back up. Can he become good by listening to Lucifer?

[2timothy316]

This person wants to do what is right according to who? According to who's morals?

Whoever is correct about right and wrong in the first place. For the purposes of the scenario that's your god. Your god has it all correct. This person doesn't know that, though, so he simply collects all moral edicts and only discards those he has to, following all he possibly can.

Why does this person want to do the right thing?

Because it's right. No other reason.

By trying to do the right thing God reveals Himself to this person, would this person then be open to doing the right thing for God? I only ask because if this person ONLY wants to the right thing and don't want Jehovah God to be any part of it, their efforts to do the right thing will be in vain. Without the strength of the Almighty's help, doing the right thing isn't sustainable. The 2 greatest laws are "You must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength." and "You must love your fellow man as yourself. On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets.”" (Matthew 22:37-40) Doing what is right hangs on just these two commandments. You can't do one and not the other and be doing what is right.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #3]

But that isn't what Yahweh wanted from Job.. he was a righteous, God-fearing man who devoted his life to Yahweh. But he required more from Job and to uncover it, he stripped away everything Job had till he was a broken man. " I repent, in ashes and dust."

Who stripped everything away? The only thing Jehovah took away from Job was His protective hedge from Job. It was Satan who made the challenge that Job would curse God to His face if Job lost everything good in his life. Then proceed to attack Job and his family. But Job valued his integrity more than what he had.

Full of physical pain from his boils, and emotional pain from the loss of his family Job was staring God, in the form of whirling wind theophany, in the "face". So he repented for questioning God and accepted that he will never understand why God acts as he does, but he will never question him again.

That wasn't the point of Job's turmoil though. Job 2:4, 5 is clear why. "But Satan answered Jehovah: “Skin for skin. A man will give everything that he has for his life. But, for a change, stretch out your hand and strike his bone and flesh, and he will surely curse you to your very face.” The point was not to get Job to never question God again. The point was that a man will curse God if his health fails him.

God was after one thing, and that was a relationship with Job. A relationship of loyalty and unquestioning devotion. Once Job understood this his suffering ended and he was rewarded and lived the rest of his life in goodness and peace.

The Bible is clear how God saw Job, "And Jehovah said to Satan: “Have you taken note of my servant Job? There is no one like him on the earth. He is an upright man of integrity, fearing God and shunning what is bad. He is still holding firmly to his integrity." (Job 2:3)

Jehovah gave him his reward after Job prayed for his companions, who had said some pretty nasty things about Jehovah and Job. (Job 42:10) Which is in harmony with Matthew 6:14, "For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you."

What happened to the ten children? They are still dead. Thanks God!

For that matter Job is dead and so are all of the children he had after his tribulation. Yet they will not stay dead forever. They will all live again.

"O that in the Grave* you would conceal me,
That you would hide me until your anger passes by,
That you would set a time limit for me and remember me!
If a man dies, can he live again?
I will wait all the days of my compulsory service
Until my relief comes.
You will call, and I will answer you.
You will long* for the work of your hands.
(Job 14:13-15)

Compare Acts 24:15, "And I have hope toward God, which hope these men also look forward to, that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous."

Death is not the end of one's life. It's just sleep that one can only be awaken from by Jehovah's power. (John 11:11)

Thank you Jehovah indeed!

[1213]

... innate knowledge of right and wrong can never become good. Everything I have ever observed about good and evil confirm this. It's innate and can't be changed. Good people will always have righteous motivation, so any act is allowed. Evil people will never have righteous motivation so no act is allowed.

I believe it can be changed. It may be rare, but by teaching person to understand why something is wrong, I believe there can happen the “change of heart” and person can be “born-anew”.

...unless one is born of water and spirit, he can't enter into the Kingdom of God! That which is born of the flesh is flesh. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Don't marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born anew.'
John 3:3-7

...as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God's children, to those who believe in his name: who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13

It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.
John 6:63

"For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel. After those days," says the Lord; "I will put my laws into their mind, I will also write them on their heart. I will be to them a God, And they will be to me a people. They will not teach every man his fellow citizen, Every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' For all will know me, From the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness. I will remember their sins and lawless deeds no more."
Hebrews 8:10-12 (Jeremiah 31:31-34)

[HarlanGeorge]

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #17]

Let's gain some common footing so as to keep this debate on this theocidy moving forward fairly. My critique of Job is based on the account told in the Hebrew Bible or the Tanakh wrote in what is most accurately assumed to be between the 4-7th Century BCE. The story of Job is arguably the oldest parable in the Hebrew Bible and since its inception, there have been many later translations that seem to have lost some of their original meaning.

First, the villain of this story, the adversary is not the fallen angel of God that later evolves into our modern understanding of the devil and satan. This story significantly predates that and is referred to as the satan or adversary in the story. The satan is actually a part of God's divine council when the dialogue begins between him and God.

Secondly, let's also agree as most scholars do, that this is not the work of a single author. There is a minimum of two, possibly a third if you consider the later poetic style of Elihu. This parable can clearly be divided into three sections. The prose of the epilogue and prologue are notably a different style than the poetic writing of the middle section.

I will also be referring to God as Yahweh in our discussion to remain consistent with the Hebrew Bibles' label for God.

The issue arises when later translations skew the original story to fit into a particular revised belief system. I am sure you are aware of the many liberties taken by scribes and translators alike that often reflect their own personal biases.

Now that we have those commonalities we can more comfortably proceed.

A rebuttal to your point that the satan was responsible for Job's suffering, I would like to quote what God himself had to say about his, Job2:3
"persist in his integrity, although you incite me against him, to destroy him for no reason." Clearly, this is God's hand he is much to powerful to allow the satan to be given credit for Job's suffering. Which gives all the more meaning to the death of innocent children. We can't use the satan as a scapegoat here, this is all a result of the loving Christian God.

I have three children, and this story affects me on a personal level. If almighty God was inflicting me with suffering despite the fact that he admits that I am one of his most righteous servants, I too would be upset. After killing all of Jobs's ten children, of which he will never see again on this earth and it is questionable if they will have eternal salvation because God does not feel the need to share these details. You and many others still proclaim what a good God you worship. That is something I can't agree on, it barbaric and sadistic.

[2timothy316]

Let's gain some common footing so as to keep this debate on this theocidy moving forward fairly.

Do you agree that the whole Bible, including the Christian Greek Scriptures are part of God's Word? Also do you accept the rules of this forum that the whole Bible including the Greek Scriptures are to be considered authoritative and have the final say for this debate? To wit, "Criticism of sources, authorship, or redaction with the intent to discredit the authority of the canon are more appropriate for the Christianity and Apologetics subforum."

viewtopic.php?f=38&t=11496

[Purple Knight]

By trying to do the right thing God reveals Himself to this person, would this person then be open to doing the right thing for God?

Of course, if God can prove that God's morality is correct. His immediate question is, okay, so you're a very powerful mega-entity. How do I know you are righteous and none of these other things are that contradict what you say? Then, if God proves God's way is right, he does it. All he wants to do is what is right and moral.

Now the hitch is, if God proves God's way is right and then tells this fellow, go kill your wife and child, this fellow immediately does it. He's Abraham without really much remorse. He would kill his loved ones without a second thought, if he knew it was good to do so. He doesn't care what he does, only whether it is moral or not. Arguably this makes him immoral.

But I will tell you when I'm trying to get a gotcha. I'm not a dishonest rat turd like that. And if you answer me, well, of course that makes him immoral! Well then, you have just proved morality is impossible. If doing the moral thing regardless of what it is makes one immoral, morality is impossible. Think about it. Think about it for two bloody seconds. Then say to yourself... Oh.

... innate knowledge of right and wrong can never become good. Everything I have ever observed about good and evil confirm this. It's innate and can't be changed. Good people will always have righteous motivation, so any act is allowed. Evil people will never have righteous motivation so no act is allowed.

I believe it can be changed. It may be rare, but by teaching person to understand why something is wrong, I believe there can happen the “change of heart” and person can be “born-anew”.

The reason I say an evil person can't change is that the evil person, however much he apparently changes, can never divorce himself from the fact that this change arose out of his old self, and his old, evil motivations. So, no matter how apparently good he becomes, it's never for a good reason. The original reason for him changing was evil. You can become evil from good perhaps, but not good from evil. Being good requires all your actions to have good motivations, and you can never divorce yourself from the original evil motivation the original evil person had to become good.

Or do you not need a good motivation for your good acts to count as good? Is it about what you do and not what your motivation is? Perhaps I misunderstand.