Yet, the more that I thought about it, the more I thought about how we know anything in regards to what is good. Now, this is a work in progress and thus might at times lack cogency, but I think that the general problem I have is that I think that the question itself is invalid, that rather one must ask who is good rather than what is good and in doing so we come to Paul rather than Athens, remembering that he said that no one was good – referring to created persons – and that all had fallen short of the glory of God. This being so we must assume that God alone is good and that that is displayed to us in both his speech and his actions; that our knowledge of good and thus evil find reference in what God does and says and what those who are not God do and say. So our knowledge is participatory and revelational rather than rationalistic; in this sense I mean attained by contemplation and speculation.

Some might say that answering the question, “What is good”, would be a rather easy one. That one might say that good is ultimate perfection, allowing for no moral or ethical failure. Yet it seems to me that an answer like that would simply beg the question. Rather I follow a principle of epistemology that I believe is found in the early chapters of the book of Genesis, that creation- or in this conversation, content- precedes communication and identification. And in doing so I think that it follows that we must ask who is good, because behind that I believe lies the answer as to how we can formulate such a question.

So in this first post I am attempting to reformulate the question into a legitimate query. For the question. “What is good”; seems arrogant and autonomously oriented.