Evidence for God from Science

There seems to be a lot of confusion among atheists regarding the attributes of God, so I thought I would post "the goodness of God" to dispel some of these myths. This is just the tip of the iceberg...

1. First and foremost, God's laws. Please remember, that God gave us laws NOT to beat us up. He gave us laws so that our lives would be enriched and prolonged.

Deuteronomy 4:40, 10:13

2. God has peaceful and good thoughts toward us and our future, NOT evil thoughts.

Jeremiah 29:11

3. Wars are NOT the invention of God but of man.

James 4:1—2
Romans 3:10-18

4. God is merciful and will NOT destroy us nor abandon us.

Deuteronomy 4:31

5. God wants NO MAN to perish. No one..

2 Peter 3:9
Genesis 45:5,7

6. God takes NO PLEASURE in the death of the wicked.

Ezekiel 33:11 and 18:23, 32

7. God does NOT delight in the death of animals (even though he allowed them to be used in sacrifices).

Isaiah 1:11
Hosea 6:6

8. God is NO respecter of persons.

Acts 10:34
Ephesians 6:9
Romans 2:11

9. God is LOVE.

Psalms 86:5-15
1 John 4:8
Deuteronomy 7:7

10. God does NOT temp man.

James 1:13

11. God is NOT a liar.

Numbers 23:19

12. God is NOT the author of confusion.

1 Corinthians 14:33

13. God wants ALL to be saved.

1 Timothy 2:4

14. God WILL save man from the curse of sin, and there will be no more suffering.

Revelation 21: 4, 22:3

15. God is KIND to the evil and unthankful.

Luke 6:35

16. God didn't want kings and rulers over us. People wanted them.

1 Samuel 8: 6,7

17. God, in the future, won't allow any more wars.

Isaiah 2: 3,4
Psalms 46:9

18. God didn't let David build the temple because he had shed the blood of other men.

1 Chronicles 28:3

19. God has given us the spirit of love. NOT fear.

2 Timothy 1:7

20. God forgives us even when we break His commandments. (That doesn't mean we should keep doing it however)

Daniel 9:9

21. God loved us so much that he gave us His son for us.

John 3:16

22. God WANTS us to be in health.

3 John 2

23. God ultimately WANTS us to be happy.

1 Thessalonians 5:16
Philippians 4:4

24. God WANTS an abundant life for us.

John 10:10

Blessings to you...

So meditate on this..

You'll get no objection here Gman! We can say that God is a source of good. If somebody has only good intentions then we would rightly say that this person is good. We know from the bible that God's intentions are only good. Or how about:

1. Someone with only good intentions can be described as good.
2. God has only good intentions.
3. Therefore God is good.

DannyM wrote:You'll get no objection here Gman! We can say that God is a source of good. If somebody has only good intentions then we would rightly say that this person is good. We know from the bible that God's intentions are only good. Or how about:

1. Someone with only good intentions can be described as good.
2. God has only good intentions.
3. Therefore God is good.

That works for me...

very nice list, but I could of course show "laws" that are contradictory to those, ones where god beats us with a big stick.

Cactus wrote:very nice list, but I could of course show "laws" that are contradictory to those, ones where god beats us with a big stick.

There are consequences for breaking any law... Either imprisonment, heavy fines, or even death. Man made laws or God made, it doesn't matter.. If not then it really isn't much of a law. I guess you could resort to hand slapping, or finger pointing, but don't be surprised if you find that same person doing it again..

God's laws are good, in a sense that when we follow them it will bring forth fruit, not only for he person practicing it, but for others as well..

2. God has peaceful and good thoughts toward us and our future, NOT evil thoughts.

Jeremiah 29:11

I'm sick of this verse being taken out of context.

I don't know about you, but I am glad that I get to return in seventy years from my exile from Jerusalem to Babylon (Jeremiah 29:10, NIV).

Being brought back from captivity; He will gather us, from all the nations and places where He banished us to, and bring us back from where we were exiled (Jeremiah 29:14, NIV).

He may have plans to prosper us, but let's not forget his plans to bring us back from exile as well!Stick that on a doormat and welcome me into your house with it. What a promise.

Now in all seriousness,
"Very peaceful and good thoughts toward us" is not substantiated by Jeremiah 29:11. That verse is part of a letter meant for the "surviving elders among the exiles and to the priests, the prophets and all the other people Nebuchadnezzar had carried into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon" (Jeremiah 29:1, NIV). We are none of them. Pulling the "figurative language" card doesn't quite fit, either.

Rather, John 10:10 is more relevant, considering we are the "they" mentioned in this verse.

openminded wrote: I'm sick of this verse being taken out of context.

I don't know about you, but I am glad that I get to return in seventy years from my exile from Jerusalem to Babylon (Jeremiah 29:10, NIV).

Being brought back from captivity; He will gather us, from all the nations and places where He banished us to, and bring us back from where we were exiled (Jeremiah 29:14, NIV).

He may have plans to prosper us, but let's not forget his plans to bring us back from exile as well!Stick that on a doormat and welcome me into your house with it. What a promise.

Now in all seriousness,
"Very peaceful and good thoughts toward us" is not substantiated by Jeremiah 29:11. That verse is part of a letter meant for the "surviving elders among the exiles and to the priests, the prophets and all the other people Nebuchadnezzar had carried into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon" (Jeremiah 29:1, NIV). We are none of them. Pulling the "figurative language" card doesn't quite fit, either.

Rather, John 10:10 is more relevant, considering we are the "they" mentioned in this verse.

I'm not sure if I follow you.. If we are talking about context, then beliefs taken anywhere out of the Old Testament wouldn't apply to us as well..

I'm not sure if I follow you.. If we are talking about context, then beliefs taken anywhere out of the Old Testament wouldn't apply to us as well..

Most of the Old Testament doesn't apply to us. It's mostly writings of the religious life of ancient Israel. They very much apply to God, which indirectly applies to us sometimes, but a lot of the OT doesn't to a large extent (Psalms, Proverbs, and others such as Lamentations being the obvious exceptions). They also describe God, which is extremely useful to know (coming from the Mormon playing field, you can imagine how much I love books such as Isaiah from the OT).

We no longer have to live by the hundreds of laws laid out by the OT, we were never the ones who experienced the flood, the plights of Israel, the exodus, etc.
We especially weren't exiled to various nations only to return in seventy years, and any plan of returning to our original land (Jerusalem?) is not a plan that's meant for we non-exiled people.

I don't mean to impede, I just wish to consider the historical context before applying a verse to my life (it'd be disastrous if we didn't apply historical context to the Law of Moses).

Is John 10:10 not relevant enough?

openminded wrote:Most of the Old Testament doesn't apply to us. It's mostly writings of the religious life of ancient Israel. They very much apply to God, which indirectly applies to us sometimes, but a lot of the OT doesn't to a large extent (Psalms, Proverbs, and others such as Lamentations being the obvious exceptions). They also describe God, which is extremely useful to know (coming from the Mormon playing field, you can imagine how much I love books such as Isaiah from the OT).

We no longer have to live by the hundreds of laws laid out by the OT, we were never the ones who experienced the flood, the plights of Israel, the exodus, etc.
We especially weren't exiled to various nations only to return in seventy years, and any plan of returning to our original land (Jerusalem?) is not a plan that's meant for we non-exiled people.

I don't mean to impede, I just wish to consider the historical context before applying a verse to my life (it'd be disastrous if we didn't apply historical context to the Law of Moses).

Yes and no.. Yes in a sense that it was part of the OT and that certain aspects don't apply to us today.. No in sense that we can learn from it and apply it to our lives.. Also, certain laws of the OT still apply today.

openminded wrote:Is John 10:10 not relevant enough?

No.. Because if you are talking about context, Jesus was addressing the Jews..

So tell me.. You think that God wishes harm to his people?

No.. Because if you are talking about context, Jesus was addressing the Jews..

And eventually, we become a part of His flock (John 10:16), inheriting the same benefits as the people he addressed.

Also, certain laws of the OT still apply today.

Galatians 3:13 must've led me in the wrong direction. Either that, or I'm talking about the necessity of the Law for salvation rather than your topic.

So tell me.. You think that God wishes harm to his people?

According to many stories in the OT, he only does so when they rebel. Of course, we could say punishment isn't true harm.
In fact, I'll take the Hebrews 12:6 route and go ahead and call punishment a good thing (in the sense that it's a sign that He accepts us as His children).

Sorry for the rambling. No, I don't think God wishes harm to his people. I see how Jeremiah 29:11 is evidence of this, but I disagree that those words were spoken to us directly like so many people make of it. In fact, looking back into your quote, I think I read to much into how you used this verse.

openminded wrote: And eventually, we become a part of His flock (John 10:16), inheriting the same benefits as the people he addressed.

How do you know He is talking about gentiles?

openminded wrote:Galatians 3:13 must've led me in the wrong direction. Either that, or I'm talking about the necessity of the Law for salvation rather than your topic.

I have no clue where you are taking this.. Honoring your parents doesn't apply to us today? Coveting your neighbors things?

openminded wrote:According to many stories in the OT, he only does so when they rebel. Of course, we could say punishment isn't true harm.
In fact, I'll take the Hebrews 12:6 route and go ahead and call punishment a good thing (in the sense that it's a sign that He accepts us as His children).

Sorry for the rambling. No, I don't think God wishes harm to his people. I see how Jeremiah 29:11 is evidence of this, but I disagree that those words were spoken to us directly like so many people make of it.

Let me put it this way.. How does Jeremiah 29:11 and John 10:10 contradict each other? You think they do because who it was addressed to at the time it was said? So cancel Jeremiah 29:11 because that is OT teaching?

I have no clue where you are taking this.. Honoring your parents doesn't apply to us today? Coveting your neighbors things?

I thought I was on the wrong page. I meant when it comes to being saved. Those things apply to our moral background, definitely, but our salvation is only on the line if we don't believe (Galatians 3:22).

Let me put it this way.. How does Jeremiah 29:11 and John 10:10 contradict each other? You think they do because who it was addressed to at the time it was said? So cancel Jeremiah 29:11 because that is OT teaching?

I don't see them as contradictory. I see one as evidence of how God treated those who were put under exile by Nebuchadnezzar, I see the other as Christ addressing His flock.

How do you know He is talking about gentiles?

Instead of just saying that was a scholarly-backed statement that you likely agree with in the first place
Let's take a look:
John 10:16 (RSV) - "And i have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd."

First flock: Jews. Other sheep: non-Jews (Gentiles? of course, they could be Nephites ). The final one flock: Jews and non-Jews.

Main characteristic of being in the flock:
Saved - John 10:9

1) Ephesians 2:12 - the Gentiles were once separated, "excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise." But, through the blood of Christ, they have been brought near (Ephesians 2:13)

2) Ephesians 3:6. "..Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise of Jesus Christ."

One flock, one body; sharing the promise of Jesus Christ, the promise being eternal life.

Also, Romans 9:25/Hosea 2:23.

I forget what FAIR's argument against this is. Do you have one?

openminded wrote:
I forget what FAIR's argument against this is. Do you have one?

Again, I have no clue what your point is or what you are trying to convey.. I'm not even addressing Mormonism here..

Take care..

Underneath each quote, I address that particular quote.

You asked me why John 10:16 refers to Gentiles.

The only group I'm aware of that holds a different view than Jesus referring to the Gentiles in John 10:16 is the LDS.

I guess I was confused as to why you'd ask me that. It's an extremely common and well-supported belief that John 10:16 refers to Gentiles, especially among..well..Christians.
And since it does refer to Gentiles (or do you interpret it differently?), the promise made in John 10:10 applies to us.

Since only LDS would refute that John 10:16 refers to Gentiles, I kind of figured you were just joking with me. So I brought up FAIR because that's the only organization besides FARMS that I could see coming up with any legitimate argument that refutes the view that John 10:16 refers to Gentiles.