Good people and bad people

[NeuroTypical]

Elder Oaks rocks:

“Judge Not” and Judging by Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

His take on things: We aren't equipped to tell one way or the other whether someone is 'bad' or 'good' (as those terms apply to where we end up in the eternities). We only judge situations, and then only when appropriate.

It's worth reading the talk.

[Vort]

I am of the belief that there are no good or bad people, only people who do good and bad things.

What are your thoughts?

The scriptures can't seem to make up their mind on the matter.

Christ taught that there are none good but God. We are also taught that this life is a probationary period, and thus judgment of good or bad should be reserved for God at final judgement.

Yet, in Luke 6:45 Christ teaches - "A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil..."

Acts 11 - "For he was a good man..." referring to Barnabas.

There are endless contradictions (seeming contradictions) on the matter.

There are wicked people. There are evil people. I could call these "bad".

There are righteous people. There are honest and upright people. I could call these "good".

In any meaningful sense, of course there are good and bad people.

[All_Apologies]

I feel there are no good people in the sense that ALL fall short of the glory of God.

But, I also feel that we can become good through the atonement of Christ when we repent.

[Guest]

I feel there are no good people in the sense that ALL fall short of the glory of God.

But, I also feel that we can become good through the atonement of Christ when we repent.

In my view, you don't have to be Christian to be good. The Dalai Lama, for instance, is very good... light of Christ and all that...

[Traveler]

I believe there are good and bad people. However, I believe that for me the important notion is involved in understanding what the actual difference is between good and bad.

Let me begin with bad. Bad is self inductance. It begins with the attitude of I want, I desire, I deserve, I need. It is the service of self.

Good is the opposite of bad. Good is discipline and self sacrifice. It begins with the attitude of what is right, what is best, how can I help.

The marvelous thing about the Gospel of Jesus Christ is that through discipline (becoming a disciple) a bad person can become good. The sad thing about temptation is that a good person can become bad.

Thus I believe it is not so much about where one has been in life as it is about where they are going and how they are going about it.

The Traveler

[NeuroTypical]

When I discuss such matters with my children, we figure that bad guys are those who intend to willfully cause you harm for no good reason. When we judge someone a 'bad guy' here, we're saying nothing about the state of someone's soul. We're just using the title as a way to understand who to avoid.

[Seminarysnoozer]

I am of the belief that there are no good or bad people, only people who do good and bad things.

What are your thoughts?

The scriptures can't seem to make up their mind on the matter.

Christ taught that there are none good but God. We are also taught that this life is a probationary period, and thus judgment of good or bad should be reserved for God at final judgement.

Yet, in Luke 6:45 Christ teaches - "A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil..."

Acts 11 - "For he was a good man..." referring to Barnabas.

There are endless contradictions (seeming contradictions) on the matter.

You have to define and separate several things before you can have such a discussion. We have to define what aspect of a person is their spirit self versus their physical body make up as we are dual beings. That step alone is why it is impossible for us to judge, because we see the outside man, the carnal physical nature of a man and cannot see their spiritual make up (how they were before this life). God takes all of that into account, the probationary stewardship and their underlying spiritual nature. We know that we were all good before coming here because we all kept the first estate. We have to treat everyone as if they still have a chance to repent and return to that pre-mortal innocence via repentance and Christ' atonement.

How much of probationary stewardship personality and traits stay with us is up to God? For example, if someone is given a temporary stewardship of a genetic propensity for alcoholism then we do not know how difficult that challenge is for that person maybe compared to someone else' propensity to eat chocolate or love red meat, etc. Or maybe another person is given a temporary strong amygdala and is quick to be angry and maybe even violent. Is that their spiritual self or their temporary carnal stewardship? Likewise, if someone is given a temporary physical stewardship of great intelligence and is the leading expert in some scientific field, is that their spiritual self or their temporary carnal nature - Satan would love for people to think it was their own self and try to take credit for all the good they do. Where much is given much is expected. The reverse must also be true - where little is given less is expected. The issue is that we cannot judge who has been given more or less as we only see the outside and at best maybe a slight glimpse of people's spiritual self from time to time.

[candyprpl]

I also like Elder Dallin H Oaks talk on judging -- very wise counsel.

I still struggle with whether people are born 'bad' or just choose to do 'bad' things. In my personal experiences I have had people do 'bad' things to me, I mean very bad things. Before joining the Church and learning about Heavenly Father's traits and the plan of salvation I leaned towards the thought that there were 'bad' people in this world. Now I lean more towards the thought that people in this probationary period may choose to do 'bad' things. I try not to give a final judgment on people, for that is only for God to do but when it comes to my safety, either physical or spiritual I think I must judge somewhat -- try and use righteous judgment. It's not always easy and I pray that Holy Spirit will guide me in doing such judgment.

I also came across a 2010 conference talk given by Gregory A. Schwitzer Of The Second Qurum of the Seventy - "Developing Good Judgment and Not Judging Others"

"Good judgment is needed not only in understanding people but also in facing decisions that often lead us to or away form our Heavenly Father."

And more recently our beloved Prophet, Thomas S. Monson said, "We must develop the capacity to see men not as they are at present but as they may become."

I don't know that this adds to the conversation but it is thoughts that came to me as I read the posts.

[Marlin1]

One does not need to know a person's whole history to know that a person is good or bad. As said previously, it doesn't take a genius or and infallible mind to recognize someone who is good, and someone who is bad. Our actions define us.

Are you sure this is the reason Christ did not consider himself good? A person's probation doesn't need to be complete in order to be considered good.

No person, no intelligent person, would call the Lord evil, even in this life. He was perfect. Thus he was good.

I am not even sure how you are justifying Ted Bundy evil (not all), and then in the same sentence President Monson good (not all).

It is really simple matter. Ted Bundy, evil, it doesn't matter what little good he accomplished. President Monson, good, and what little evil he has done is covered through the atonement.

If the fruits of a person is good, we have the ability to judge, and say they are good. In some cases, we say the act was good, but it doesn't negate a person is good, or a person is evil.

Christ said that he was not good. You have to believe what he said or you are making him a liar - we know that can't be true. My explanation is the only one that makes sense to me, I admit that I may be wrong. The argument that he was just avoiding pride and vanity doesn't hold salt. If he was just avoiding pride and vanity, he wouldn't have included all of humanity in saying that "none are good." There would have been no pride or vanity in him simply accepting the compliment graciously. He wouldn't have lied (or spoken an untruth) to avoid vanity.

As far as I know, only those who deny the Holy Ghost are truly evil, with no light in them. That is lower than even Ted Bundy. How blind is it to label a person with the same label reserved for those who are lower than even Ted Bundy?

It may seem easy to label murderers bad, yet the anti-nephi-lehi's were once murderers. It may seem easy to label prophets good, yet David committed murder.

Good and bad are far too wide stroked and premature. The degrees of glory are as varied as the stars. Why do we limit ourselves to good and bad? It is so ludicrous and hurtful in my mind. Why the compulsion to label? We can avoid evil without labeling people. Can you truly understand God's mercy while labeling someone as bad? That is the same label that is reserved for Lucifer himself.

Satan and his kingdom = bad

God and his kingdom = good

Man = still in testing mode

Edited October 29, 2012 by Marlin1

[Marlin1]

I also like Elder Dallin H Oaks talk on judging -- very wise counsel.

I still struggle with whether people are born 'bad' or just choose to do 'bad' things. In my personal experiences I have had people do 'bad' things to me, I mean very bad things. Before joining the Church and learning about Heavenly Father's traits and the plan of salvation I leaned towards the thought that there were 'bad' people in this world. Now I lean more towards the thought that people in this probationary period may choose to do 'bad' things. I try not to give a final judgment on people, for that is only for God to do but when it comes to my safety, either physical or spiritual I think I must judge somewhat -- try and use righteous judgment. It's not always easy and I pray that Holy Spirit will guide me in doing such judgment.

I also came across a 2010 conference talk given by Gregory A. Schwitzer Of The Second Qurum of the Seventy - "Developing Good Judgment and Not Judging Others"

"Good judgment is needed not only in understanding people but also in facing decisions that often lead us to or away form our Heavenly Father."

And more recently our beloved Prophet, Thomas S. Monson said, "We must develop the capacity to see men not as they are at present but as they may become."

I don't know that this adds to the conversation but it is thoughts that came to me as I read the posts.

I think it adds a lot. Thank you!

As far as protecting ourselves goes, you are right, we do need to use our judgment. I don't believe, however, that judging someone protects us any more than judging hurtful and harmful behavior. We can avoid someone without labeling them good or bad.

Edited October 29, 2012 by Marlin1

[Guest SquidMom]

I think you should go talk to a corrections officer. Maybe walk a mile in their shoes. You might end up with the same opinion you have now, but you'll be much wiser about the issue.

Thank you, loudmouth! I was a correctional officer for 2 yrs at a male facility, 70% sex offenders, 40% of those against children. I firmly believe there are definately bad people. However, keeping with the srcipture

"I lord will forgive who I choose to forgive, but of you it is requied to forgive all men"

I do believe that it is up to God to decide who is really BAD. Even the worst offenders of law and morality have the opportunity to change and find redemption. Good thing to keep in ind in that environment.

[Guest SquidMom]

I'm sorry. I can't type.

[Anddenex]

Christ said that he was not good. You have to believe what he said or you are making him a liar - we know that can't be true. It's the only explanation that makes sense to me. The argument that he was just avoiding pride and vanity doesn't hold salt.

Key emphasis within this response, "makes sense to me." I do believe what Christ said, he isn't a liar. I disagree, that your "makes sense to me" is the only reason why the Lord said what he said.

Then, it is assumed, by yourself, that anything outside of your bubble doesn't hold any salt.

If he was just avoiding pride and vanity, he wouldn't have included all of humanity saying "none are good." There would have been no pride or vanity in him simply accepting the compliment graciously. He wouldn't have lied (or spoken an untruth) to avoid vanity.

Note, I never said "he was just avoiding pride or vanity", I opened it up to other possibilities which you are unwilling to review, since it is not within your bubble of thought.

I actually love the words of C.S. Lewis within "Screwtape Letters" who once shared, how do you get a humble man to sin. Tell him that he is humble.

How do you get a good man to sin. Tell him that he is good. Thus pride and vanity can enter into the heart.

Great book, and great thoughts. Thus yes, the Lord could have responded the way he did, to avoid sin.

As far as I know, only those who deny the Holy Ghost are truly evil, with no light in them. That is lower than even Ted Bundy. How blind is it to label a person with the same label reserved for those who are lower than even Ted Bundy?

I will respond to this with an additional question, "How naive is it to think Ted Bundy wasn't evil?"

It is only blind to not accept what is. Ted Bundy was evil. The idea of other people being more evil, as you have said, those who have no light, doesn't negate other people being evil.

It may seem easy to label murderers bad, yet the anti-nephi-lehi's were once murderers. It may seem easy to label prophets good, yet David committed murder.

They were wicked, evil, people before they received the gospel. This is fully explained in the Book of Mormon.

Traveler gives an excellent explanation to this statement.

Good and bad are far too wide stroked and premature. The degrees of glory are as varied as the stars. Why do we limit ourselves to good and bad? It is so ludicrous and hurtful in my mind. Why the compulsion to label? We can avoid evil without labeling people. Can you truly understand God's mercy while labeling someone as bad? That is the same label that is reserved for Lucifer himself.

This is only within your current understanding. Labeling people good and bad is not a limit, it is a judgement with regard to a person's actions.

It really isn't a compulsion, it is a matter of truth. Certain people are evil, and certain people are really good.

Yes, a person can easily understand God's mercy and grace while labeling someone as bad, or evil. The Anti-Nephi-Lehis were bad before they received the gospel. They were good after they received the gospel, even more so than the Nephites.

I will now share the words of a Prophet, that it appears you would say has a limited view, and a compulsion to label, and is blind: The Atonement and the Journey of Mortality

The grand objective of the Savior’s gospel was summarized succinctly by President David O. McKay (1873–1970): “The purpose of the gospel is … to make bad men good and good men better, and to change human nature.”1 Thus, the journey of mortality is to progress from bad to good to better and to experience the mighty change of heart—to have our fallen natures changed (see Mosiah 5:2).

It would appear President David O. McKay, and Elder Bednar would agree, that there are bad men in our world, the gospel helps them to become good (Anti-Nephi-Lehi's), and the gospel helps good men to become better.

Satan and his kingdom = bad

God and his kingdom = good

Man = still in testing mode

Thus, I can now ask you some questions with regard to these words:

Are there people on this earth who would say they are part of the kingdom of Satan? If so, then by your words, they would be "bad."

Are there people on this earth who belong to God and his kingdom? If so, then there are those who are good.

The city of Enoch, while still in probation had become so good that the Lord received them unto himself. These were good people. These were people who made good decisions, such that their actions easily defined them as good.

Edited October 29, 2012 by Anddenex

[Traveler]

Key emphasis within this response, "makes sense to me." I do believe what Christ said, he isn't a liar. I disagree, that your "makes sense to me" is the only reason why the Lord said what he said.

...

Christ did say he was good. However, there was something that changed between the time he pointed to the Father as good in the sense that none is good except the Father. Therefore, it is important to note what changed to make the second statement valid.

The Traveler

[Anddenex]

Christ did say he was good. However, there was something that changed between the time he pointed to the Father as good in the sense that none is good except the Father. Therefore, it is important to note what changed to make the second statement valid.

The Traveler

I would agree Traveler.

[Marlin1]

"How do you get a good man to sin. Tell him that he is good."

Thanks for the quote. That's what I've been saying the whole time. There is danger in labeling people good or bad, people just might believe it! The good don't need grace, the bad don't want it.

In regards to Bundy - Is there any glory in evil? I don't think that Ted ever had the Holy Ghost to be able to deny it. Even he will be saved to a degree of glory. The D&C states that the Telestial Kingdom is reserved for murderers. Therefore he is not evil by definition, because there is no glory in evil. I know that may leave a bad taste in your mouth, but it just goes to show our understanding of God's mercy. I know I probably won't be popular for this belief, but that's ok.

If someone tells me they are part of the kingdom of Satan, I would ask him when he had his calling and election made sure. They don't know the meaning of being bad!

"Bad men" is a figure of speech that Mckay was using to refer to men that do bad things. It's like saying "be good" it really means do good things. We cannot change our being, we can only change our doing. God changes our being, not us. If you claim that Mckay was being literal, how do you explain Oaks' talk when he said not to judge people as good or bad?

Let me ask you this, what good comes from labeling people good or bad?

[NeuroTypical]

Let me ask you this, what good comes from labeling people good or bad?

Some good would come in a self-defense situation where a kid or someone would need to use violence.

[Vort]

In regards to Bundy - Is there any glory in evil? I don't think that Ted ever had the Holy Ghost to be able to deny it. Even he will be saved to a degree of glory. The D&C states that the Telestial Kingdom is reserved for murderers. Therefore he is not evil by definition, because there is no glory in evil.

Non sequitur. That a murderer may, eventually, after a thousand years of torment for his wrongdoings, finally shed his evil to be able to accept some minimal degree of glory does not therefore suggest he is not evil now.

If someone tells me they are part of the kingdom of Satan, I would ask him when he had his calling and election made sure. They don't know the meaning of being bad!

Uh...if his calling and election are made sure, then he can't be a part of the kingdom of Satan.

You don't have to have had God revealed to you in the flesh before you're capable of doing very, very evil things and knowing they are evil. Somehow, this myth has gained currency among Latter-day Saints. Not sure why; it's manifestly false.

Let me ask you this, what good comes from labeling people good or bad?

A better understanding of good and bad, perhaps? Even if there is no benefit, that does not mean the act itself is false or even unjustified, only useless.

Edited October 29, 2012 by Vort

[Seminarysnoozer]

"How do you get a good man to sin. Tell him that he is good."

Thanks for the quote. That's what I've been saying the whole time. There is danger in labeling people good or bad, people just might believe it! The good don't need grace, the bad don't want it.

In regards to Bundy - Is there any glory in evil? I don't think that Ted ever had the Holy Ghost to be able to deny it. Even he will be saved to a degree of glory. The D&C states that the Telestial Kingdom is reserved for murderers. Therefore he is not evil by definition, because there is no glory in evil. I know that may leave a bad taste in your mouth, but it just goes to show our understanding of God's mercy. I know I probably won't be popular for this belief, but that's ok.

If someone tells me they are part of the kingdom of Satan, I would ask him when he had his calling and election made sure. They don't know the meaning of being bad!

"Bad men" is a figure of speech that Mckay was using to refer to men that do bad things. It's like saying "be good" it really means do good things. We cannot change our being, we can only change our doing. God changes our being, not us. If you claim that Mckay was being literal, how do you explain Oaks' talk when he said not to judge people as good or bad?

Let me ask you this, what good comes from labeling people good or bad?

I agree with your notion of most all of us are not bad (or good for that matter yet) and that we are in testing mode but also I would add that the designation from bad to good is a spectrum, that especially during this testing period varies from moment to moment. I would say the set up for that undetermined status though is the fact that our body is corrupted and our spirit is pure when we enter this world, that is how we have both components of bad and good. But, luckily my body is not me.

We flip between what aspect of our dual being we follow at any given moment, the spirit or the carnal. If we put no effort into it though, the natural thing to do is follow the carnal aspects of that influence because it is stronger while here. So, the default, do nothing man is bad. For example, we can repent. We can also sanctify ourselves which is a way of stabilizing that variability that the carnal body brings. We can also do things like put off the natural man and that also lessens our chance to do bad things. It is where we place our heart's desire in the end that will determine what level of glory (good) we receive. So, God will judge based in many unseen variables, what level of goodness we merit but in part based on how badly or how good we acted while here.

I heard somewhere that the gospel is to make bad men good and good men better, or something like that. So, it isn't just bad vs, good, you have to also throw in 'better'.

[Anddenex]

"How do you get a good man to sin. Tell him that he is good."

Thanks for the quote. That's what I've been saying the whole time. There is danger in labeling people good or bad, people just might believe it! The good don't need grace, the bad don't want it.

Is there anything bad is telling someone that he is good? I don't believe there is. I think it is good if a child is told that he is good and believes it.

In regards to Bundy - Is there any glory in evil? I don't think that Ted ever had the Holy Ghost to be able to deny it. Even he will be saved to a degree of glory. The D&C states that the Telestial Kingdom is reserved for murderers. Therefore he is not evil by definition, because there is no glory in evil. I know that may leave a bad taste in your mouth, but it just goes to show our understanding of God's mercy. I know I probably won't be popular for this belief, but that's ok.

I don't have any bad taste in my mouth. I would agree, God's mercy far extends what I thought mercy is capable of.

I would agree there is no glory in evil, or there is no glory within outer-darkness. Yet, I would also say those who are within the Telestial Kingdom were bad in this life. They choose evil, and by choosing evil, their actions define them as evil.

"Bad men" is a figure of speech that Mckay was using to refer to men that do bad things. It's like saying "be good" it really means do good things. We cannot change our being, we can only change our doing. God changes our being, not us. If you claim that Mckay was being literal, how do you explain Oaks' talk when he said not to judge people as good or bad?

Yes, I believe President McKay, and Elder Bednar were being literal. The gospel literally changes bad men to good and good men to better.

I would agree that God changes our being. If we are not bad or good, how then can God change a person from bad to good, and from good to better?

A person must be in one state, bad or good, to be changed to another state. If we are not bad or good, then a change is not able to take place. God can change us because we are in one state or another.

I was attending BYU when Elder Oaks gave this talk, and have thoroughly loved it. I would whole heartily agree that we are not to make final judgments. I would agree we are to make intermediate judgments.

I couldn't find anything in here that specifies we are not to call people good or bad.

Let me ask you this, what good comes from labeling people good or bad?

It really depends on the judgment and if the judgment is sure and true. It also depends on how people respond to their judgment.

I would also say, if our judgment regarding a person is faulty than it actually serves to hurt us.

I would thus answer, it really depends if the intermediate judgement is a righteous judgment.

[Marlin1]

Non sequitur. That a murderer may, eventually, after a thousand years of torment for his wrongdoings, finally shed his evil to be able to accept some minimal degree of glory does not therefore suggest he is not evil now.

For those of you who don't speak Latin, "non sequitur" (I had to go look it up) is a snobby way for saying that I'm illogical). There is no glory in evil (pretty logical). The glory of the Telestial is compared to this world, The Holy Ghost will govern - vast difference from outer darkness.

Uh...if his calling and election are made sure, then he can't be a part of the kingdom of Satan.

Uh...yes he can. Calling and election made sure = baptism of fire. You can't deny the Holy Ghost except that your calling and election has been made sure.

A better understanding of good and bad, perhaps? Even if there is no benefit, that does not mean the act itself is false or even unjustified, only useless.

You don't have to label people to learn from them. If to label others as good or bad is useless, why not be useful and stop it!

Edited October 29, 2012 by Marlin1

[Marlin1]

Anddenex, that's a good question. You said - "I would agree that God changes our being. If we are not bad or good, how then can God change a person from bad to good, and from good to better?"

We are not in a state of bad or good, we are in a state of probation.

Probation is a test of character. To place titles of "good" or "bad" is premature.

The savior through His atonement, made this probationary state possible. Without it, justice would lay claim on us, and truly, we could rightfully call ourselves "bad" in that case. Christ's atonement changed our state from "bad" to "lost" from "conviction" to "probation," and from "damned" to "preparatory." To judge ourselves or others is to neglect the purpose of the atonement.

Labeling someone as good or bad is a judgment of being and is not an intermediate judgment. Judging their behavior is an intermediate judgment.

Edited October 29, 2012 by Marlin1

[Vort]

For those of you who don't speak Latin, "non sequitur" (I had to go look it up) is a snobby way for saying that I'm illogical).

I'm pretty sure everyone already knows what non sequitur means. There is nothing "snobby" about it. And it does not mean merely that you are "illogical"; rather, it identifies the nature of your illogic -- namely, that your conclusion doesn't follow from your premises.

Uh...yes he can. Calling and election made sure = baptism of fire. You can't deny the Holy Ghost except that your calling and election has been made sure.

Can you provide any scriptural evidence for this seeming contradiction in terms?

You don't have to label people to learn from them. If to label others as good or bad is useless, why not be useful and stop it!

But that's not the issue at hand. Rather, I was responding to your assertion that "[a murderer who receives telestial glory] is not evil by definition, because there is no glory in evil." That the murderer may eventually be cleansed of evil enough to receive some amount of glory does not imply or even suggest that therefore that murderer is not evil now.

[Marlin1]

That the murderer may eventually be cleansed of evil enough to receive some amount of glory does not imply or even suggest that therefore that murderer is not evil now.

By your reasoning we can conclude than that we all are evil, as we all must be cleansed from sin in order to obtain glory. So, if you wan't to be technical, you would be incorrect to call anyone good except that they are sinless. Sounds pretty gloomy to me.

Again, Christ's atonement freed us from the judgment of our beings until the end.

[candyprpl]

Anddenex, that's a good question. You said - "I would agree that God changes our being. If we are not bad or good, how then can God change a person from bad to good, and from good to better?"

We are not in a state of bad or good, we are in a state of probation.

Probation is a test of character. To place titles of "good" or "bad" is premature.

The savior through His atonement, made this probationary state possible. Without it, justice would lay claim on us, and truly, we could rightfully call ourselves "bad" in that case. Christ's atonement changed our state from "bad" to "lost" from "conviction" to "probation," and from "damned" to "preparatory." To judge ourselves or others is to neglect the purpose of the atonement.

Labeling someone as good or bad is a judgment of being and is not an intermediate judgment. Judging their behavior is an intermediate judgment.

I have a very simplistic thought when it comes to labeling.

When I was very young, a person did the unthinkable to me -- as I grew up my thoughts told me that I was the bad person because in my youthful thinking and fear of telling anyone what had happened to me I labeled myself 'bad'. I thought then that only bad things happen to bad people.

It didn't even occur to me to label the person who had harmed me as 'bad'.

This kind of thinking was so harmful in my development. Because of my labeling myself as 'bad' I made some horrible choices in my life. When things became so bad in my life and I had to seek professional counseling, the counselor said to me with such unbelief in his voice, "You don't just think that your a bad person, but evil." Yes, I did.

My conversion process healed my thinking and gave me the wonderful opportunity of forgiving those who had so harmed me. That's why I don't like to label anyone as 'bad'. I wasn't a 'bad' person. Who knows what kind of life someone else has had that has led them to do bad things or be harmful towards someone else. Only God knows.:)