- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
What are “good” and “happy”? Do you consider happy all those who consider themselves as such, or is the definition different? Measure in the process or wait for the outcome of life?
Was Genghis Khan happy? Maybe he felt happy, but why not? Was it good? It depends for whom. For yourself and your friends, perhaps yes.
The right to make a good or bad verdict belongs to the person who is above everyone else, if he exists.
Someone equal to you in essence can only say their attitude to you, their opinion. Even if the majority of such equals, the billions of people who have lived on Earth, make a single opinion about you, it remains the opinion of billions, nothing more.
If we turn to the view of the Abrahamic religions, for example, here and there, I'm not sure that you can say good means happy.
Let us recall the story of Job the Long-suffering. Whether it was good — yes. Was he happy? Even after death, with all the righteous who died before Christ, he went to hell, and only then, after the crucifixion and descent into hell, Christ brought him out of hell.
It seems to me that the concept of “happiness” is not in vain carefully avoided in the Bible, at least in the Russian Synodal translation. The word “happiness” appears only three times, and all three times in the book of Job.
In this context,: 15. Horrors rushed upon me; my greatness was blown away like the wind, and my happiness was swept away like a cloud. (Job 30: 15)
The word occurs once more in the book of Jeremiah:
It speaks of pagans, and not in a complimentary way.
There is another word in the Bible, ” blessed.” But this is not a synonym for “happy”. Let us recall the central place of the Gospels, the beatitudes:
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who weep, for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will have mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the sons of God.
Blessed are those who are exiled for righteousness ' sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are you when they will revile you and persecute you, and slander you in every way unrighteously for My sake. (Matthew 5: 3-11)
Apparently, to reflect this incongruity, “weeping” and ” happy “(and this is how the word “blessed” is now translated in the new translation of Glad Tidings) and there is the word “blessed” with an additional meaning. Blessed, it is rather blessed, not abandoned by God, hoping, but not happy in the ordinary sense of the word, which may include satiety, peace, health and well-being of their own and loved ones, which is not promised at all by the commandments.
So both logically and in the Christian cultural context, I cannot agree with this statement.
I do not agree with this statement. First, what does “a good person” mean? For all people, the interpretation of this phrase will be different. The same applies to the phrase “happy person”. Personally, I think that a good person is really not always happy. A lot of people I know are good people, but they're not always happy. I say this if we say that in a global sense, a good person is an active servant of good, rejecting evil in any form. But as for the first part of your expression, I disagree with it( and this is my point of view). I know a couple of people who are happy ( or very good at showing that they are “happy”) but they are not good people.
Perhaps you can draw parallels with some famous people, just think about it.
My conclusion: the expression is only half true, and half false, too. But this IS MY OPINION.