Good in the name of Good

Post Reply New Topic

Is it good or bad?

Sounds sort of goody goody.You should only do good to reap rewards,and lots of them. JK
And sometimes it's good to be bad.

path to hell paved with good intentions and all that

What I am saying is, why do people want to do good in the name of God, Allah or Jesus instead of doing it in the name of Good? Wouldn't it be more honest to just say, "I am doing this because it's good and it will be a benefit instead of a burden."
People are inclined to do something good because a book tells them it is what they should do, not because they figure it out on their own.
Doing good in the name of a book is good.
Doing good in the name of good is either ignored or not thought of as the same way. It is not altogether bad. People respect good acts more when others say it's the Christian thing to do. Why can't it just be the human?

People should do what is Good becouse it is Good. Good is an entity whose essence is the source of good traits in things. People should serve the Good. Any good religions use is to better enable people to advance the good.
In the religion of Diyiniacy, its adhearants worship Diyin, the god of Good; meaning that god is a servant of the Good. The Diyinians take guidance from scriptures, mainly a book called the Tekhst, which is our equivalent of the bible; though with the Teksht it tells stories of the theological, moral, and metaphysical truths of the religion, it also instructs its readers on how to be good reasoners so that they can verify the truth of its claims and properly aply its principles to life.

Lol, apparently people do do good in the name of good - otherwise you wouldn't be able to relate the concept to begin with in order to ask.

Anyone who needs to be threatened by an imaginary being to do good, isn't good, in my opinion.

Religions provide a universal definition of good. Outside of any made up moral system/religion with no factual basis, good is entirely subjective and there is no reason to adhere to it for it's own sake. One who decides they should be good for it's own sake would be doing good by their definition of good.

Usually what they do is good in the name of God though, or whatever the word is for God in their language.

Right, but I haven't seen any atheists with 'What would Richard Dawkins do?' charms, nor have I seen agnostic, spiritual, or most other people aside from the devout A-3 (three Abrahamics). I mean.... perhaps some Hindus do good for Krishna or Brahma, I don't know, I'm just not sure it's quite that ubiquitous.

A lot of evil has been done in the name of God.They thought they were doing the Lord's work when they burned those accused of witchcraft and homosexuality at the stake.They also thought the Crusades were good.The Taliban thinks it's good to stone women who may have committed adultery.

So many people do not have an innate sense of what is truly good and what isn't.

Or does their innate sense get overruled by "what they are told"? Perhaps they don't listen to their innate sense, don't even know what it would be, because it has been drilled into them to think a certain way.

I'm not convinced that anybody does...