If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.
If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
Evil exists.
If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil.
Therefore, God doesn't exist.  

source

[smiley=evil.gif]

Sappho wrote on May 5^th, 2011 at 6:43am:

If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore, God doesn't exist.   source [smiley=evil.gif]

God doesn't exist ???

Alternatively, because God is omnipotent, God is responsible for [allowing] the evil in men's hearts.



Proverbs 15:28
The heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the wicked poureth out evil things.


Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
10  I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.








All of our choices, have consequences.

Its not rocket science.

We are supposed to [God expects us to be] be smart enough to eventually figure that out.

Evil exists in the world, because most men refuse to accept responsibly for the consequences of their own choices.





We are all spiritual beings.

"We had thought that we were human beings making a spiritual journey; it may be truer to say that we are spiritual beings making a human journey."
Teilhard de Chardin

Yadda wrote on May 5^th, 2011 at 8:49am:

God doesn't exist ??? Alternatively, because God is omnipotent, God is responsible for [allowing] the evil in men's hearts.

And yet... If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.

Sappho wrote on May 6^th, 2011 at 1:16am:

Yadda wrote on May 5th, 2011 at 8:49am: God doesn't exist ??? Alternatively, because God is omnipotent, God is responsible for [allowing] the evil in men's hearts. And yet... If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.

And yet, we humans are not automatons.


Dictionary;
automaton = =
1 a moving mechanical device made in imitation of a human being.
2 a machine which performs a function according to a set of coded instructions.


In this life, God shows us a good path, but God does not compel us.

If we were always compelled in all of our actions, we would be creatures with little or no understanding.

That is not God's intention or wish for us [i.e. that we should be creatures with little or no understanding].

In life, it is our experiences and our mistakes, which shape us.




"It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."
Professor Dumbledore to Harry.
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - J K Rowling




+++

In human beings, God is reproducing himself.

The process is in progress, and is NOT yet completed.



Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:...

Psalms 5:4
For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee.
5  The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.
6  Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

Psalms 37:1
Fret not thyself because of evildoers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity.
2  For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb.

Proverbs 24:19
Fret not thyself because of evil men, neither be thou envious at the wicked;
20  For there shall be no reward to the evil man; the candle of the wicked shall be put out.

Proverbs 8:32
Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways.
33  Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not.
34  Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors.
35  For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the LORD.
36  But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.


+++


Matthew 13:24
Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25  But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26  But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
27  So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28  He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29  But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30  Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Matthew 13:36
Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
37  He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38  The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
39  The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
40  As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.


Its not rocket science.

Yadda wrote on May 6^th, 2011 at 10:55am:

Sappho wrote on May 6th, 2011 at 1:16am: Yadda wrote on May 5th, 2011 at 8:49am: God doesn't exist ??? Alternatively, because God is omnipotent, God is responsible for [allowing] the evil in men's hearts. And yet... If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. And yet, we humans are not automatons. Dictionary; automaton = = 1 a moving mechanical device made in imitation of a human being. 2 a machine which performs a function according to a set of coded instructions. In this life, God shows us a good path, but God does not compel us. If we were always compelled in all of our actions, we would be creatures with little or no understanding. That is not God's intention or wish for us [i.e. that we should be creatures with little or no understanding]. In life, it is our experiences and our mistakes, which shape us.

You are confusing the concept of mistakes with the concept of evil. More than that, you are assuming that evil is caused by humans only. In both cases you are wrong.

Take for example a young couple in the late 20s and much in love. They have committed no acts of evil. They marry, get pregnant and give birth to a profoundly intellectually disabled child which will burden them their whole life... is a burden to them as we speak.

Now, your god knew this would happen, had the power to stop this from happening, had the morally desire to stop this happening... and did nothing.

There is no mistake in creating a human that will never experience their humanity or their free will... rather it is evil. It is not human evil. There is nothing they could have done to stop this because they lacked knowledge, until it was too late.

So why would your god allow this evil to occur?  

So nature is evil?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 9:29am:

So nature is evil?

If god created the natural world, and theists believe that god did create the natural world, then equally god created the evil resulting from the natural world.

Is nature evil?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 9:53am:

Is nature evil?

Is it evil for an all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect god to allow earthquakes and tsunami's of the kind that rocked Japan?

Is it evil for that same god to allow the tornado's that have rocked midwest USA?

Is it evil for that same god to allow cyclones of the kind that destroyed New Orleans?

I am not saying then that nature is evil. I am saying consistently that if god exists he uses nature, or allows nature to be used by other gods, to pursue evil acts.

Quote:

I am not saying then that nature is evil.

You are not saying it isn't evil either. Do you think nature is evil? Or can you only apply your tortured logic to religion?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 10:38am:

Quote: I am not saying then that nature is evil. You are not saying it isn't evil either. Do you think nature is evil? Or can you only apply your tortured logic to religion?

This is a stupid question because I never said that nature was evil. You are engaging a straw man Freediver... and conveniently ignoring what is being said.

No... I don't think nature is evil. I think that if god exists he uses nature for evil, or allows other gods to do that.

Quote:

You are engaging a straw man Freediver...

How so?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 10:50am:

Quote: You are engaging a straw man Freediver... How so?

By engaging in a line of questioning that has nothing to do with The Problem of Evil. It is the Problem of Evil that is at question and not whether Nature is Evil.

So a line of questioning can be a strawman, even if it only extends to a single question?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 10:57am:

So a line of questioning can be a strawman, even if it only extends to a single question?

Yes... if it does not address the question under analysis... if it draws the debate away from the question under analysis... It is a straw man.

Freediver, why did you raise the question about whether Nature is Evil? What has that question got to do with the Problem of Evil as expressed in the first post?

I don't think you know what a strawman is, but I won't ask you as that would obviously be a strawman.

Sappho wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 11:01am:

Freediver, why did you raise the question about whether Nature is Evil? What has that question got to do with the Problem of Evil as expressed in the first post?

Are you going to answer the questions?

It was prompted by this statement from you:


Quote:

Take for example a young couple in the late 20s and much in love. They have committed no acts of evil. They marry, get pregnant and give birth to a profoundly intellectually disabled child which will burden them their whole life... is a burden to them as we speak.

I wanted to see where your logic got you if you attributed it to nature rather than God.

Also, suppose you got together a sufficiently large network of computers, created some genetic algorithms to mimic evolution, and let them run for so long that you ended up creating some form of consciousness. Would you be evil if you did not constantly interfere to make sure that not a single conscious entity suffered some kind of torment?

Would your creations be able to fathom your situation?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 11:14am:

It was prompted by this statement from you: Quote: Take for example a young couple in the late 20s and much in love. They have committed no acts of evil. They marry, get pregnant and give birth to a profoundly intellectually disabled child which will burden them their whole life... is a burden to them as we speak. I wanted to see where your logic got you if you attributed it to nature rather than God.

But I did not attribute evil to nature, nor had I any intention of attributing evil to nature... so why raise it as an issue when the issue never existed? Why did you persist in exploring the idea of Nature being Evil when I had made it clear that that was not at issue, more than once?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 11:16am:

Also, suppose you got together a sufficiently large network of computers, created some genetic algorithms to mimic evolution, and let them run for so long that you ended up creating some form of consciousness. Would you be evil if you did not constantly interfere to make sure that not a single conscious entity suffered some kind of torment? Would your creations be able to fathom your situation?

I can't answer this question until I understand what it has to do with a god that is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect.

Are you suggesting that the creator of the program is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect?

Sappho wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 11:19am:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:14am: It was prompted by this statement from you: Quote: Take for example a young couple in the late 20s and much in love. They have committed no acts of evil. They marry, get pregnant and give birth to a profoundly intellectually disabled child which will burden them their whole life... is a burden to them as we speak. I wanted to see where your logic got you if you attributed it to nature rather than God. But I did not attribute evil to nature, nor had I any intention of attributing evil to nature... so why raise it as an issue when the issue never existed? Why did you persist in exploring the idea of Nature being Evil when I had made it clear that that was not at issue, more than once?

I meant if you attributed your example to nature, not your interpretation of it as evil.


Quote:

Why did you persist in exploring the idea of Nature being Evil

I'm not. I just asked a simple question.


Quote:

I can't answer this question until I understand what it has to do with a god that is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect. Are you suggesting that the creator of the program is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect?

No. I am suggesting it is you.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 12:57pm:

Sappho wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: I can't answer this question until I understand what it has to do with a god that is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect. Are you suggesting that the creator of the program is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect? No. I am suggesting it is you.

I am not all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect, therefore, The Problem of Evil does not apply. This thread is about The Problem of Evil

What is the point of your questions then since they clearly don't address The Problem of Evil?

Sappho wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 1:41pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 12:57pm: Sappho wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: I can't answer this question until I understand what it has to do with a god that is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect. Are you suggesting that the creator of the program is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect? No. I am suggesting it is you. I am not all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect, therefore, The Problem of Evil does not apply. This thread is about The Problem of Evil What is your point of your questions then since they clearly don't address The Problem of Evil?

And that's really the point to the problem of evil... It's impossible to reconcile the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent and omni-benevolent being and the existence of evil... In a universe governed by such a being, evil existing (let alone prevailing) must necessarily be impossible.

In a world where evil exists god can be any 2, not all 3, but only insofar as we believe that misfortunes or outrages that happen to humans are necessarily evil.

Or alternatively, if you could prove with absolute certainty that god didn't exist, then god wouldn't exist. If you could prove with absolute certainty that god DID exist, then god wouldn't exist.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 12:57pm:

Sappho wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: But I did not attribute evil to nature, nor had I any intention of attributing evil to nature... so why raise it as an issue when the issue never existed? Why did you persist in exploring the idea of Nature being Evil when I had made it clear that that was not at issue, more than once? I meant if you attributed your example to nature, not your interpretation of it as evil.

I have not interpreted nature to be Evil. I have never implied that nature is Evil. I have pointed this out too many times now. It is only you who have suggested that I have done that and give us no evidence to back up that suggestion.

Otherwise, are you suggesting that nature exists irrespective of god? Are you suggesting that god did not create nature? Are you suggesting that he has no power over nature?

Sappho wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 1:41pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 12:57pm: Sappho wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: I can't answer this question until I understand what it has to do with a god that is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect. Are you suggesting that the creator of the program is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect? No. I am suggesting it is you. I am not all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect, therefore, The Problem of Evil does not apply. This thread is about The Problem of Evil What is the point of your questions then since they clearly don't address The Problem of Evil?

Sorry, I thought you were saying in your opening post that if God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.

Sappho wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 2:24pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 12:57pm: Sappho wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: But I did not attribute evil to nature, nor had I any intention of attributing evil to nature... so why raise it as an issue when the issue never existed? Why did you persist in exploring the idea of Nature being Evil when I had made it clear that that was not at issue, more than once? I meant if you attributed your example to nature, not your interpretation of it as evil. I have not interpreted nature to be Evil. I have never implied that nature is Evil. I have pointed this out too many times now. It is only you who have suggested that I have done that and give us no evidence to back up that suggestion.

I merely asked the question.


Quote:

Otherwise, are you suggesting that nature exists irrespective of god? Are you suggesting that god did not create nature? Are you suggesting that he has no power over nature?

Nature exists irrespective of what you believe regarding God.

Will we go through this every time I ask a simple question?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 4:24pm:

Sappho wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 1:41pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 12:57pm: Sappho wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:19am: I can't answer this question until I understand what it has to do with a god that is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect. Are you suggesting that the creator of the program is all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect? No. I am suggesting it is you. I am not all knowing, all powerful and morally perfect, therefore, The Problem of Evil does not apply. This thread is about The Problem of Evil What is the point of your questions then since they clearly don't address The Problem of Evil? Sorry, I thought you were saying in your opening post that if God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.

Why don't you ask an honest question rather than pursue your usual exploitation of the unintended?

The unintended consequences are often the most significant.

Sappho wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 9:05am:

Yadda wrote on May 6th, 2011 at 10:55am: Sappho wrote on May 6th, 2011 at 1:16am: Yadda wrote on May 5th, 2011 at 8:49am: God doesn't exist ??? Alternatively, because God is omnipotent, God is responsible for [allowing] the evil in men's hearts. And yet... If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. And yet, we humans are not automatons. Dictionary; automaton = = 1 a moving mechanical device made in imitation of a human being. 2 a machine which performs a function according to a set of coded instructions. In this life, God shows us a good path, but God does not compel us. If we were always compelled in all of our actions, we would be creatures with little or no understanding. That is not God's intention or wish for us [i.e. that we should be creatures with little or no understanding]. In life, it is our experiences and our mistakes, which shape us. You are confusing the concept of mistakes with the concept of evil. More than that, you are assuming that evil is caused by humans only. In both cases you are wrong. Take for example a young couple in the late 20s and much in love. They have committed no acts of evil. They marry, get pregnant and give birth to a profoundly intellectually disabled child which will burden them their whole life... is a burden to them as we speak. Now, your god knew this would happen, had the power to stop this from happening, had the morally desire to stop this happening... and did nothing. There is no mistake in creating a human that will never experience their humanity or their free will... rather it is evil. It is not human evil. There is nothing they could have done to stop this because they lacked knowledge, until it was too late. So why would your god allow this evil to occur?

Anyway... let's get this back to the topic. Yadda at least is trying to defend his god and we should give him that opportunity instead of getting bogged down in off topic discussions.

If a part in a crane is worn, and the part fails, the crane topples over and kills people, is that part evil?

- Or perhaps it's the person who was supposed to have maintained the crane.

That person was actually taken off the job because of financial constraints. Was the accountant evil?

The company is going broke because of competing foreign interests, and the accountant thought he was doing the right thing by rationalising the maintenance program. Maybe it was the foreign interest where the evil lay?...but then, maybe not.

Is an eagle attacking a kitten evil?

muso wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 10:17pm:

If a part in a crane is worn, and the part fails, the crane topples over and kills people, is that part evil? - Or perhaps it's the person who was supposed to have maintained the crane. That person was actually taken off the job because of financial constraints. Was the accountant evil? The company is going broke because of competing foreign interests, and the accountant thought he was doing the right thing by rationalising the maintenance program. Maybe it was the foreign interest where the evil lay?...but then, maybe not. Is an eagle attacking a kitten evil?

Yes, we only assign a valency of evil to those acts that adversely affect humans (and sometimes animals)... And then only ones we like or with whom we can (at least in principle) empathise.... That's why a comet colliding with Jupiter is not an act of evil... It is instead an awe inspiring event.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 2:10pm:

And that's really the point to the problem of evil... It's impossible to reconcile the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent and omni-benevolent being and the existence of evil... In a universe governed by such a being, evil existing (let alone prevailing) must necessarily be impossible. In a world where evil exists god can be any 2, not all 3, but only insofar as we believe that misfortunes or outrages that happen to humans are necessarily evil.

Maybe God merely wants us to reveal how we will react to challenges.

That, is what the bible says is the purpose in our experiencing hardships in our life.

I have no reason to doubt that explanation.



+++

And we are not all, exactly the same.

Take two siblings.

They can often have very differing characters, even though they have grown up alongside each other, even though in many cases they have both been loved and nurtured to the same degree by their parents.

Why so [the differing characters] ?

Because they each have a different personality [an individual 'guiding' spirit], and we all do.



The Problem of Evil....

Why is one person 'good' ?

And his brother, 'evil' ???

When they both, have had the same 'opportunities' in life ???



+++


Isaiah 1:2
Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth: for the LORD hath spoken, I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me.

Jeremiah 4:22
For my people is foolish, they have not known me; they are sottish children, and they have none understanding: they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.

muso wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 10:17pm:

If a part in a crane is worn, and the part fails, the crane topples over and kills people, is that part evil? - Or perhaps it's the person who was supposed to have maintained the crane. That person was actually taken off the job because of financial constraints. Was the accountant evil? The company is going broke because of competing foreign interests, and the accountant thought he was doing the right thing by rationalising the maintenance program. Maybe it was the foreign interest where the evil lay?...but then, maybe not.

We all make choices, influenced by our character.

Yes ?

And sometimes we make poor choices in life.

I sincerely believe that we will all make some, indeed many, poor choices.

IMO, each choice, though its consequences can sometimes be grievous to ourselves and others, is really a type of karmic feedback loop.

Even when we make poor choices, we can still 'profit' from them, karmic-ly.

Poor choices are 'opportunities', to improve ourselves [spiritually, imo].


+++

Proverbs 9:6
Forsake the foolish, and live; and go in the way of understanding.
7  He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot.
8  Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.
9  Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser: teach a just man, and he will increase in learning.
10  The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.








muso wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 10:17pm:

Is an eagle attacking a kitten evil?

My cat 'enjoys' killing all kinds fauna and vermin.

But i forgive her, because in killing, she is merely following [is compelled by] her nature.

Ruthlessly killing prey, is what she was 'made' for.


....and i'm just glad that i'm not the size of a mouse, or even a rabbit.      ::)

muso wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 10:17pm:

If a part in a crane is worn, and the part fails, the crane topples over and kills people, is that part evil? - Or perhaps it's the person who was supposed to have maintained the crane. That person was actually taken off the job because of financial constraints. Was the accountant evil? The company is going broke because of competing foreign interests, and the accountant thought he was doing the right thing by rationalising the maintenance program. Maybe it was the foreign interest where the evil lay?...but then, maybe not. Is an eagle attacking a kitten evil?

I had no idea that the understanding of evil, and even the ability to track down that understanding of evil was so lacking in the members of this forum. Clearly, I assumed too much.

So... let's demystify evil, so that the debate on the Problem of Evil can continue.

Evil is defined as an intentional act of immorality which causes suffering and/or harm. So evil has three qualities... it must be intended... it must be immoral... it must have negative consequences of harm and/or suffering.

This narrows the focus of evil upon those with the capacity to understand morality and immorality at the time of the action. If you lack that ability to understand morality/immorality and intend an act which causes harm... you are not evil... most likely you are an animal hunting or a human who is mentally impaired either through age, genetics or insanity.

If a child of three shoots his brother dead... it is not evil because the child is mentally impaired due to age.
If a schizophrenic woman in the midst of an episode goes on a shooting spree... it is not evil because the woman is mentally impaired due to temporary insanity.
If a profoundly down syndrome man strangles another in a fit of rage... it is not evil because the man is mentally impaired due to genetics.  

Sappho wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 6:29am:

Evil is defined as an intentional act of immorality which cause suffering and harm. So evil has three qualities... it must be intended... it must be immoral... it must have negative consequences of harm and/or suffering.

I just like to start with the basics.

OK, so for example, war is evil because it's intentional, it kills people  and it's immoral (who gets to decide that bit?)

So would this be an example of evil?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z14iuazhuTQ&feature=related

muso wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 8:00am:

So would this be an example of evil?

Yes, a smug, self-satisfied nutjob blithely turning her children into indoctrinated fools. Yes, there's an element of evil in that.

Sappho wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 6:29am:

Evil is defined as an intentional act of immorality which cause suffering and harm. So evil has three qualities... it must be intended... it must be immoral... it must have negative consequences of harm and/or suffering.

It must be intended to cause suffering, I'm assuming.

I give a junkie $100.

I give a junkie $100 and ask him to use it for food.

I give a junkie $100 and ask him to use it for food, whilst believing he will use it to buy more drugs.

I give a junkie $100 and ask him to use it for food, whilst believing he will use it to buy more drugs and hoping he does.

Which is evil? How many of the above are evil acts?

Is the road to hell paved with good intentions?

Yadda wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 2:46am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 2:10pm: And that's really the point to the problem of evil... It's impossible to reconcile the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent and omni-benevolent being and the existence of evil... In a universe governed by such a being, evil existing (let alone prevailing) must necessarily be impossible. In a world where evil exists god can be any 2, not all 3, but only insofar as we believe that misfortunes or outrages that happen to humans are necessarily evil. Maybe God merely wants us to reveal how we will react to challenges.

Well then, your 'god' is sadistic. As your 'god' is omniscient he is aware of the negative and harmful effects of imposing the challenge on the one he knows will fail... He directs a human towards the path to hell.

Sappho wrote on May 5^th, 2011 at 6:43am:

If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore, God doesn't exist.   source [smiley=evil.gif]

Sappho, would you really want to live in a world where evil was impossible?

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 9:36am:

Sappho wrote on May 5th, 2011 at 6:43am: If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore, God doesn't exist.   source [smiley=evil.gif] Sappho, would you really want to live in a world where evil was impossible?

lol... That's a funny question to ask an atheist. You should a theist. Theists have an idea of a world without evil and they look forward to it... some call it paradise on Earth... some say it will come when the redeemer comes... others call it heaven... and other still call it Nirvana. (not an exhaustive list)

What kind of god would deny his creation their deep desire for a world without evil... if not an evil god?

Yadda wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 2:46am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 2:10pm: And that's really the point to the problem of evil... It's impossible to reconcile the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent and omni-benevolent being and the existence of evil... In a universe governed by such a being, evil existing (let alone prevailing) must necessarily be impossible. In a world where evil exists god can be any 2, not all 3, but only insofar as we believe that misfortunes or outrages that happen to humans are necessarily evil. Maybe God merely wants us to reveal how we will react to challenges. That, is what the bible says is the purpose in our experiencing hardships in our life. I have no reason to doubt that explanation.

To be challenged is not the same thing as suffering and harm resulting from evil.

Most challenges are acceptable and respectable challenges with not a hint of evil entailed.

So your point doesn't actually address The Problem of Evil. But it does show that we can have free will and be challenged in that without the need of evil existing.

Sappho wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 10:08am:

To be challenged is not the same thing as suffering and harm resulting from evil. Most challenges are acceptable and respectable challenges with not a hint of evil entailed. So your point doesn't actually address The Problem of Evil. But it does show that we can have free will and be challenged in that without the need of evil existing.

There is however, in the Abrahamic tradition, the Book of Job... Where god agrees to a wager with Satan who insists that if god inflicts suffering on the righteous Job, he will turn away from god.

And those inflicted sufferings are great and unquestionably evil in their intended sadism. (Although the poetry (in the rendered King James version of the Hebrew) of god's reconciliation with Job is majestic).

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 10:12am:

Sappho wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 10:08am: To be challenged is not the same thing as suffering and harm resulting from evil. Most challenges are acceptable and respectable challenges with not a hint of evil entailed. So your point doesn't actually address The Problem of Evil. But it does show that we can have free will and be challenged in that without the need of evil existing. There is however, in the Abrahamic tradition, the Book of Job... Where god agrees to a wager with Satan who insists that if god inflicts suffering on the righteous Job, he will turn away from god. And those inflicted sufferings are great and unquestionably evil in their intended sadism.

Poor Job... he suffered so greatly because of a bet between god and satin. God won the bet... but then, he knew he would. God is all knowing.

What satin and god did to Job is a classic example of Evil afflicting the innocent.

Sappho wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 10:16am:

Poor Job... he suffered so greatly because of a bet between god and satin. God won the bet... but then, he knew he would. God is all knowing. What satin and god did to Job is a classic example of Evil afflicting the innocent.

And it's clear that god absolves himself from evil intent when he answers Job by reminding Job that he, god, is all-knowing and all-powerful. In other words, in the Abrahamic traditions, the believer must accept that god may commit sadistic acts without being evil.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 10:28am:

Sappho wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 10:16am: Poor Job... he suffered so greatly because of a bet between god and satin. God won the bet... but then, he knew he would. God is all knowing. What satin and god did to Job is a classic example of Evil afflicting the innocent. And it's clear that god absolves himself from evil intent when he answers Job by reminding Job that he, god, is all-knowing and all-powerful. In other words, in the Abrahamic traditions, the believer must accept that god may commit sadistic acts without being evil.

So god is not morally perfect?

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 9:36am:

Sappho, would you really want to live in a world where evil was impossible?

This could be heaven and this could be hell  ;D

Sappho wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 10:35am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 10:28am: Sappho wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 10:16am: Poor Job... he suffered so greatly because of a bet between god and satin. God won the bet... but then, he knew he would. God is all knowing. What satin and god did to Job is a classic example of Evil afflicting the innocent. And it's clear that god absolves himself from evil intent when he answers Job by reminding Job that he, god, is all-knowing and all-powerful. In other words, in the Abrahamic traditions, the believer must accept that god may commit sadistic acts without being evil. So god is not morally perfect?

Not the Abrahamic god in my book (but then neither are the gods of the Hindu and Greek pantheons). However, for the Jew, Christian and Muslim, the question cannot be asked, because god cannot commit acts of evil... The sufferings that befall the individual or group, to the believer, are always earned/deserved. This is true also of Buddhism, where the existence of a god is generally not posited. Sufferings there are the result of one's karma, regardless of whether the sufferer can consciously remember the act that earned the suffering.

With believers, when it comes to explaining away their suffering, it always involves a neurotic obsession with not being abandoned by a deity or a pseudo-deific principle. Suffering, to the believer caught in this neurotic maelstrom, is shameful... The believer is like a child chastised by a parent, who must now face his peers and siblings, humiliated,  and be driven by his determination to prove to himself and the world that he is still loved by those great givers of life, sustenance and comfort, his parents.

One mans star of bethlehem is another mans sun gone super nova.

Sappho wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 9:56am:

freediver wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 9:36am: Sappho wrote on May 5th, 2011 at 6:43am: If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore, God doesn't exist.   source [smiley=evil.gif] Sappho, would you really want to live in a world where evil was impossible? lol... That's a funny question to ask an atheist. You should a theist. Theists have an idea of a world without evil and they look forward to it... some call it paradise on Earth... some say it will come when the redeemer comes... others call it heaven... and other still call it Nirvana. (not an exhaustive list) What kind of god would deny his creation their deep desire for a world without evil... if not an evil god?

I think if evil was impossible you would have a lot of trouble identifying anything good, beyond the mundane. There would be something less human about us.

Many religions teach that God does not deny his creation a perfect world, they just have to knowingly choose it. If you didn't consciously make this choice, how would you even know you were in heaven rather than just an incredibly boring place?

Even if we presuppose for a second God and evil existed, evils continuance is needed to justify God's 'good'. Good and evil, like good and bad in the real world, work in a dialectical relation. You can't have one without the other because each need the other to compare and contrast itself against. For example, something is 'good' because it has such and such effect and avoids these other 'evil' such and such effects. Something is 'evil' because it has such and such effects and avoids 'good' such and such effects. It's a simple game of comparing effects and placing more value the good and little value on the evil.

So, God needs evil people just as much as he needs good people. They both are required to justify his morality.

Time 1
God 0

Freediver and Time are so close to the solution to this logical conundrum that I'll just tell you all.

Theologians would argue that we cannot know what good is, how good god is or how valuable good is without placing it in contrast with evil.

I find it a completely unacceptable solution... but it is a solution to the problem of evil nonetheless.

Sappho wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 9:08pm:

Freediver and Time are so close to the solution to this logical conundrum that I'll just tell you all. Theologians would argue that we cannot know what good is, how good god is or how valuable good is without placing it in contrast with evil. I find it a completely unacceptable solution... but it is a solution to the problem of evil nonetheless.

Course it's unacceptable!  In a world where we cannot discern change obviates the notion of the existence of heaven and hell... And by that - the annihilation of good and evil... A state unacceptable to theists.

But it doesn't obviate the feeling on earth (to those that feel it) that evil has been done.

So... No solution.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 10:49am:

Sappho wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 10:35am: So god is not morally perfect? Not the Abrahamic god in my book (but then neither are the gods of the Hindu and Greek pantheons). However, for the Jew, Christian and Muslim, the question cannot be asked,...

Sure it is asked, philosophically, by any thinking 'believer'.

Many of us could claim to have had instances of enlightenment [e.g. in meditation], but we [mankind] do not have the means, the wherewithal, the capacity, to understand what we may understand as the 'divine'.

We are essentially distracted by our interactions with the things, in this world.

I don't believe that it is possible to exist within this fleshly body, and from moment to moment, to comprehend more than brief glimpses of reality [beyond our own 'reality'].






NorthOfNorth wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 10:49am:

.....because god cannot commit acts of evil... The sufferings that befall the individual or group, to the believer, are always earned/deserved. This is true also of Buddhism, where the existence of a god is generally not posited. Sufferings there are the result of one's karma, regardless of whether the sufferer can consciously remember the act that earned the suffering.

I believe that.

Though, the Bible says that God does create evil.  Isaiah 45:5-7

[But the Bible also says that God does not test us beyond what we can reasonably bear.]

In my own limited perception of what God is, i would say that it is impossible for God to harbour evil within him.

[But i believe that in this creation,...] God has created a 'palate of colours'.

And then, we as individuals all choose which colours to include in our own 'compositions'.



Our suffering here, seems intense to us.

But our suffering here is momentary.

Hebrews 12:6
For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7  If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8  But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
9  Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
10  For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
11  Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.








NorthOfNorth wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 10:49am:

With believers, when it comes to explaining away their suffering, it always involves a neurotic obsession with not being abandoned by a deity or a pseudo-deific principle. Suffering, to the believer caught in this neurotic maelstrom, is shameful... The believer is like a child chastised by a parent, who must now face his peers and siblings, humiliated,  and be driven by his determination to prove to himself and the world that he is still loved by those great givers of life, sustenance and comfort, his parents.

"...when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:"
Galatians 4:1-7

helian,

You may claim that people who have 'spiritual experiences' are probably neurotic.

But isn't it just a tad arrogant of atheists to imagine that they [exclusively?] have a 'handle' on reality, based on mankind's present ['scientific'] knowledge and comprehension, based on the input their own senses ???

i.e.
Isn't grasping so tightly onto such a 'perception' arrogant, given that the actual 'reality' is, that we actually know so little about ourselves, and so little about the 'environment' that we find ourselves in ???




helian,

Are you a normal, rational person ???

Are you sure ???

Look at us, men [and women] driven by our desires, and our passions, and our hormones.

In my estimation, we [mankind] have proved ourselves to be highly irrational ['stressed'] creatures.



What is 'normal' ???

You are ???

Personally, i would say that we are all 'common'.

i.e.
We [mankind] all share these same circumstances.

But are you arguing, that there are many normal and rational people among us [among mankind] ???     ;D   ;D   ;D

And people like yourself of course, would be a good 'representation' of what is, a 'normal' human being ???       ;D




Q.
What do we [mankind] really know, about our 'circumstances' ???

A.
The truth is, almost nothing.





Yadda the 'neuron'.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 9:46pm:

Sappho wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 9:08pm: Freediver and Time are so close to the solution to this logical conundrum that I'll just tell you all. Theologians would argue that we cannot know what good is, how good god is or how valuable good is without placing it in contrast with evil. I find it a completely unacceptable solution... but it is a solution to the problem of evil nonetheless. Course it's unacceptable!  In a world where we cannot discern change obviates the notion of the existence of heaven and hell... And by that - the annihilation of good and evil... A state unacceptable to theists. But it doesn't obviate the feeling on earth (to those that feel it) that evil has been done. So... No solution.

That would work if heaven and hell were a part of the logical paradox, but they are not.

Here is another way to look at the Problem of Evil as expressed by David Hume....


Quote:

"Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?" "[God's] power we allow [is] infinite: Whatever he wills is executed: But neither man nor any other animal are happy: Therefore he does not will their happiness. His wisdom is infinite: He is never mistaken in choosing the means to any end: But the course of nature tends not to human or animal felicity: Therefore it is not established for that purpose. Through the whole compass of human knowledge, there are no inferences more certain and infallible than these. In what respect, then, do his benevolence and mercy resemble the benevolence and mercy of men?"

Hume shows why I believe the theological solution is profoundly inadequate... even if it does have logical merit in providing a solution to the logical paradox.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 7:40pm:

Even if we presuppose for a second God and evil existed, evils continuance is needed to justify God's 'good'. Good and evil, like good and bad in the real world, work in a dialectical relation. You can't have one without the other because each need the other to compare and contrast itself against. For example, something is 'good' because it has such and such effect and avoids these other 'evil' such and such effects. Something is 'evil' because it has such and such effects and avoids 'good' such and such effects. It's a simple game of comparing effects and placing more value the good and little value on the evil. So, God needs evil people just as much as he needs good people. They both are required to justify his morality. Time 1 God 0

Yes you can.

And [or, but ??? ], not in close proximity to each other.



I believe that in our world [within this 'reality'], both good and evil can find 'expression'.

This 'reality' is a 'construct' [err, ...a 'creation' even], where that 'expression', of both good and evil, is possible.
[...i believe].





But good and evil cannot co-exist within close proximity [i believe].

It is like, light and, darkness.

If something of the darkness were to approach light, it would be 'burned' up by the light.

If something of the light approached the darkness, it would be absorbed, 'corrupted', by the darkness.



'The light' is in the centre, the darkness surrounds the light, but is unable to overcome it.

At the centre of the light, is a 'presence', which we know as 'God'.




I want to live in the light.

I know what is in the darkness.

I do not want to live there!



That is my choice.

Yadda wrote on May 9^th, 2011 at 9:32am:

I want to live in the light. I know what is in the darkness. I do not want to live there! That is my choice.

http://www.thisisjuststupid.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sc4-darth-vader-art-300x266.jpg

muso wrote on May 9^th, 2011 at 1:58pm:

Yadda wrote on May 9th, 2011 at 9:32am: I want to live in the light. I know what is in the darkness. I do not want to live there! That is my choice. http://www.thisisjuststupid.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sc4-darth-vader-art-300x266.jpg

http://www.thisisjuststupid.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sc4-darth-vader-art-300x266.jpg



LOL


May the force be with you muso.     ;D

Sappho wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 9:08pm:

Freediver and Time are so close to the solution to this logical conundrum that I'll just tell you all. Theologians would argue that we cannot know what good is, how good god is or how valuable good is without placing it in contrast with evil. I find it a completely unacceptable solution... but it is a solution to the problem of evil nonetheless.

So you knew the answer from the beginning?

I would add a some more bits:

Where would you draw the line between good and evil, and what would the unintended consequences be? For example, would we be more complacents about the Hanson's in this world without the Hitlers?

Also, I would question your assumptions about omnipotence. In the example I put to you earlier, you would be omnipotent from the perspective of your creation, and would at least have access to all knowledge and would thus be 'all-knowing'. But you would not sit there and personally intervene and it is questionable whether you would be able to, even if you wanted to. If your creations demanded it of you, you would probably smite them for being so arrogant.

The question, and Hume's response seem to only allow for omnipotence and impotence - a false dichotomy. What about potence? The analogy I put to you can only be fathomed because we have a familiar analogy - computers. Prior to computers, what analogy would people have had? A real universe as a model of a universe? I am not aware of any religion that claims the nature of God's power, or even the nature of God, to be fathomable by humans. Likewise, would your creation be able to fathom you without computers?

The same thing can be said of nature. Nature is only capable of great beauty because of the ugliness and suffering it is allowed. Without that, earth would just be covered with a layer of pleasant looking green slime. You can almost use the words God and nature/evolution interchangeably in these discussions. In fact this is one reason why I say evolution is not a scientitific theory - because it can lead to the same sort of intellectual laziness as saying 'God did it' as an explanation.

This forum can be likewise viewed as a creation. It is only by allowing evil that it is capable of great good. Forum owners who try to disallow what they see as evil run into the same problems. They don't know where to draw the line. They blur the line between good and evil. Their actions often end up looking more like evil than good.

All the great stories, novels, movies, comics etc are about the struggle between good and evil. If you took away the evil, the good would go also. It reminds me of those childrens cartoons that get too 'preachy'. They are boring.


Quote:

I find it a completely unacceptable solution...

Matched only in its vaccuousness by the 'problem' it solves.

freediver wrote on May 9^th, 2011 at 6:11pm:

This forum can be likewise viewed as a creation. It is only by allowing evil that it is capable of great good. Forum owners who try to disallow what they see as evil run into the same problems. They don't know where to draw the line. They blur the line between good and evil. Their actions often end up looking more like evil than good.

So you never ban or moderate, then FD?

If 'evil' must exist "because otherwise we wouldn't know what 'good' is" (and, for the theist, 'we wouldn't know god exists'), should indicate to the theist only that 'god' cannot be omni-benevolent.

Yadda wrote on May 9^th, 2011 at 9:32am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 7:40pm: Even if we presuppose for a second God and evil existed, evils continuance is needed to justify God's 'good'. Good and evil, like good and bad in the real world, work in a dialectical relation. You can't have one without the other because each need the other to compare and contrast itself against. For example, something is 'good' because it has such and such effect and avoids these other 'evil' such and such effects. Something is 'evil' because it has such and such effects and avoids 'good' such and such effects. It's a simple game of comparing effects and placing more value the good and little value on the evil. So, God needs evil people just as much as he needs good people. They both are required to justify his morality. Time 1 God 0 Yes you can. And [or, but ??? ], not in close proximity to each other. I believe that in our world [within this 'reality'], both good and evil can find 'expression'. This 'reality' is a 'construct' [err, ...a 'creation' even], where that 'expression', of both good and evil, is possible. [...i believe]. But good and evil cannot co-exist within close proximity [i believe]. It is like, light and, darkness. If something of the darkness were to approach light, it would be 'burned' up by the light. If something of the light approached the darkness, it would be absorbed, 'corrupted', by the darkness. 'The light' is in the centre, the darkness surrounds the light, but is unable to overcome it. At the centre of the light, is a 'presence', which we know as 'God'. I want to live in the light. I know what is in the darkness. I do not want to live there! That is my choice.

You're still comparing and contrasting them.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

freediver wrote on May 9th, 2011 at 6:11pm: This forum can be likewise viewed as a creation. It is only by allowing evil that it is capable of great good. Forum owners who try to disallow what they see as evil run into the same problems. They don't know where to draw the line. They blur the line between good and evil. Their actions often end up looking more like evil than good. So you never ban or moderate, then FD? If 'evil' must exist "because otherwise we wouldn't know what 'good' is" (and, for the theist, 'we wouldn't know god exists'), should indicate to the theist only that 'god' cannot be omni-benevolent.

helian,

That is an interesting Q. to put to FD.

I would assume that FD would need to remove posts that had content which was 'unlawful'.

But excluding those posts that had 'unlawful' content, is FD saying that all other comment is 'acceptable' ?



Personally, i find myself leaning FD's way.
...for the sake of allowing free and open debate, on any issue.

Personally, i am in favour of any and all biases being expressed in online forums [like OzPol].

And i would suggest that it is healthy to any 'open' society, for 'offensive' biases [and as many as possible!!] to be expressed,
...AND EXPOSED TO THE SCRUTINY OF OTHERS.

In that way, with evidence and argument presented, others [who view, or, make the arguments] can judge for themselves, whether any expressed bias is,
reason-able,
OR,
irrational and/or 'offensive'.




And isn't this then, coming back again, to our perception of what is good [acceptable], and evil [offensive] ?

And in such a process, don't we ourselves, then become the judges of what is 'acceptable' [at least for ourselves].



+++

p.s.

What about comments, posters, who attack 'the messenger' [abusive posts] ?

Are such 'comments' legitimate ?

e.g.
Posts which do not engage in debate, posts which do not argue the merits of the information being presented, but rather only denigrate a person [who is presenting information, or presenting an argument].

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 9:19am:

You're still comparing and contrasting them [good and evil].

Yes i am.

I'm trying to use my discernment, trying to separate one form the other.

Quote:

How do you know that your god is not, in fact, a demonic superpowerful alien who gets off on tormenting and deceiving people, but who merely claims to be good? source

Interesting point that... but rather than refer to aliens, lets ask instead... How do you know that your god is not in fact, a demonic god who merely claims to be good?

After all, it's not as though god denies the existence of other gods, he doesn't. Rather he acknowledges other gods and demands that he be the object of worship and not them.


Quote:

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery you shall have no other gods before me.

So how can a person know if it is not one of the other gods which is the good god, and that The God who claims to be good, isn't deceiving the faithful?

Sappho wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 1:44am:

After all, it's not as though god denies the existence of other gods, he doesn't. Rather he acknowledges other gods and demands that he be the object of worship and not them.

Only Yahweh acknowledges the existence of other gods... The Christian god does not nor Islam's Allah... Hindus acknowledge that god is one. (Most) Buddhist sects do not accept the existence of a god as such (unless oneness in itself and its ultimate nothingness is a god-like presence).

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 7:30am:

Sappho wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 1:44am: After all, it's not as though god denies the existence of other gods, he doesn't. Rather he acknowledges other gods and demands that he be the object of worship and not them. Only Yahweh acknowledges the existence of other gods... The Christian god does not nor Islam's Allah... Hindus acknowledge that god is one. (Most) Buddhist sects do not accept the existence of a god as such (unless oneness in itself and its ultimate nothingness is a god-like presence).

helian,

Yes, in OT scripture Yahweh acknowledges that there 'are' [i.e. that men have worshipped] other 'Gods'.

But, he also states in OT scripture that men have sought imbue [what are merely] idols with the characteristics of (a) God.


e.g.
There are numerous Bible passages which seem to say, that seem to to acknowledge, that there 'are' many Gods...

Psalms 82:1
God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

Psalms 86:8
Among the gods there is none like unto thee, O Lord; neither are there any works like unto thy works.

Psalms 135:5
For I know that the LORD is great, and that our Lord is above all gods.

And there are many more such verses.



But also there are verses like this....

Isaiah 40:18
To whom then will ye liken God? or what likeness will ye compare unto him?
19  The workman melteth a graven image, and the goldsmith spreadeth it over with gold, and casteth silver chains.
20  He that is so impoverished that he hath no oblation chooseth a tree that will not rot; he seeketh unto him a cunning workman to prepare a graven image, that shall not be moved.

Isaiah 44:9
They that make a graven image are all of them vanity; and their delectable things shall not profit; and they are their own witnesses; they see not, nor know; that they may be ashamed.



But in OT scripture God claims that he alone is a, the, God of creation, and he states that there are no Gods beside him.

Deuteronomy 32:39
See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.

Psalms 96:5
For all the gods of the nations are idols: but the LORD made the heavens.

Isaiah 44:6
Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
7  And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them shew unto them.
8  Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

Isaiah 45:5
I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
6  That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
7  I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.


"I make peace, and create evil:" ???

Now there is a contentious statement / admission !     ;D

Sappho wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 1:44am:

Interesting point that... but rather than refer to aliens, lets ask instead... How do you know that your god is not in fact, a demonic god who merely claims to be good?

Sappho,

Well God has 'fooled' me into believing that he is a good and just,   .....er, God.

But then i'm easily fooled.
/sarc off



But seriously....

Read, study, the 5 OT books of Moses.

What will you discover, if you do ???

You will discover that God hates [in the OT he often uses the words 'abhor' and 'abhorreth' to refer to...] wickedness and oppression.

And yes, he is, and will be, ruthless towards those who condone and commit those kinds of crimes.

But God is also revealed [even in his very harsh judgements against persons who are criminals] to be a fair and just God.



BUT, most men do NOT want judgement [against evil doers].

Ask yourself, 'Why not ?'





I cannot convince you, i cannot prove these things to you.

You are REQUIRED to find this out for yourself.

And, God requires that, of us.

God requires that we come to know him.



And that, is how God is clever !!!!

Those who don't know him....
....well,

Q.
WHY, DON'T SOME PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW HIM !!!

I know the answer to that question.

And so does God !!!




That is how God is separating men.


Matthew 25:31
When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32  And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33  And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

Matthew 13:10
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11  He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12  For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13  Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
14  And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
15  For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.




God is very clever, and just.

The wicked are 'self selecting' themselves!     ;D

Yadda wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 10:13am:

Sappho wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 1:44am: Interesting point that... but rather than refer to aliens, lets ask instead... How do you know that your god is not in fact, a demonic god who merely claims to be good? You will discover that God hates [in the OT he often uses the words 'abhor' and 'abhorreth' to refer to...] wickedness and oppression. And yes, he is, and will be, ruthless towards those who condone and commit those kinds of crimes. But God is also revealed [even in his very harsh judgements against persons who are criminals] to be a fair and just God.

So how does this sit with the book of Job?

For those who don't know, God was challenged by Satan who claimed that Job would not be so faithful if his life were not so blessed by God. So God allowed Satan to do what he could to strip Job of his blessings to see if his obedience to and faith in god remained. Job's faith and obedience remained and so God doubly blessed him in return.

Now, if God was so against wickedness and oppression, why on earth did he allow this wicked challenge which resulted in oppression of the kind not seen anywhere else in the bible?  


Quote:

You are REQUIRED to find this out for yourself. And, God requires that, of us. God requires that we come to know him.

Yep been there and done that and found God to be a collection of inconsistencies. More significantly, I cant justify his morality, which in many cases is beyond the call of justice to the point of unnecessarily cruel. (such as Lot's wife or Job).

You do realise that Job is teaching us a lesson too... that if there is doubt, you may test it. And that is what we are doing here... we are looking at scripture and comparing that to the common understanding of God as all knowing, all powerful and all good.

Sappho wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 11:54am:

Yadda wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 10:13am: Sappho wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 1:44am: Interesting point that... but rather than refer to aliens, lets ask instead... How do you know that your god is not in fact, a demonic god who merely claims to be good? You will discover that God hates [in the OT he often uses the words 'abhor' and 'abhorreth' to refer to...] wickedness and oppression. And yes, he is, and will be, ruthless towards those who condone and commit those kinds of crimes. But God is also revealed [even in his very harsh judgements against persons who are criminals] to be a fair and just God. So how does this sit with the book of Job? For those who don't know, God was challenged by Satan who claimed that Job would not be so faithful if his life were not so blessed by God. So God allowed Satan to do what he could to strip Job of his blessings to see if his obedience to and faith in god remained. Job's faith and obedience remained and so God doubly blessed him in return. Now, if God was so against wickedness and oppression, why on earth did he allow this wicked challenge which resulted in oppression of the kind not seen anywhere else in the bible?

Sappho,

The more 'weight' and importance we give to the things of this life, the more 'injustice' and 'unfairness' we will see in God's dealing with us.

Personally, in the big scheme of things, i don't see my body as being [very] important.

I see my body, as a temporary 'house' [...or even, as a 'prison' !].

I will often look at my hand, and i will conceptualise that 'it' is not a part of me, rather i see it as merely 'something' that i can 'direct' and control, in this reality.

Yes, i know that i am 'unhinged', mad.    hehe



The more we care about the things of this world, the less we will understand about God, and the more we will separate ourselves, from him.


What did Jesus say....

John 8:23
And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.

John 18:36
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.



AND,

1 Corinthians 10:1
Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2  And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3  And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
4  And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
5  But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
6  Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.
7  Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.
8  Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.
9  Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.
10  Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer.
11  Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.


James 4:4
Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.



To love this world, and to love, all that it 'offers' us, is foolishness.

But who, have the eyes to see that ????

Do fools ???

Yadda wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 12:25pm:

Sappho wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 11:54am: Yadda wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 10:13am: Sappho wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 1:44am: Interesting point that... but rather than refer to aliens, lets ask instead... How do you know that your god is not in fact, a demonic god who merely claims to be good? You will discover that God hates [in the OT he often uses the words 'abhor' and 'abhorreth' to refer to...] wickedness and oppression. And yes, he is, and will be, ruthless towards those who condone and commit those kinds of crimes. But God is also revealed [even in his very harsh judgements against persons who are criminals] to be a fair and just God. So how does this sit with the book of Job? For those who don't know, God was challenged by Satan who claimed that Job would not be so faithful if his life were not so blessed by God. So God allowed Satan to do what he could to strip Job of his blessings to see if his obedience to and faith in god remained. Job's faith and obedience remained and so God doubly blessed him in return. Now, if God was so against wickedness and oppression, why on earth did he allow this wicked challenge which resulted in oppression of the kind not seen anywhere else in the bible?   Sappho, The more 'weight' and importance we give to the things of this life, the more 'injustice' and 'unfairness' we will see in God's dealing with us. Personally, in the big scheme of things, i don't see my body as being [very] important. I see my body, as a temporary 'house' [...or even, as a 'prison' !]. I will often look at my hand, and i will conceptualise that 'it' is not a part of me, rather i see it as merely 'something' that i can 'direct' and control, in this reality. Yes, i know that i am 'unhinged', mad.    hehe

It was more than the body (and the purse strings for that matter) that were affected Yadda, it was Job's relationships had with his sons that he lost too. They died remember? And he gave back to Job double the sons, but they were not the same sons with which he had meaningful relationships. And then again, Lot lost his wife.

Sappho wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 11:54am:

Yadda wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 10:13am: Sappho wrote on Jul 8th, 2011 at 1:44am: Interesting point that... but rather than refer to aliens, lets ask instead... How do you know that your god is not in fact, a demonic god who merely claims to be good? You will discover that God hates [in the OT he often uses the words 'abhor' and 'abhorreth' to refer to...] wickedness and oppression. And yes, he is, and will be, ruthless towards those who condone and commit those kinds of crimes. But God is also revealed [even in his very harsh judgements against persons who are criminals] to be a fair and just God. So how does this sit with the book of Job?

Ah Job! The great lyrical ode to endurance required to apprehend the sensibility of conviction and courage.

Sappho wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 12:34pm:

It was more than the body (and the purse strings for that matter) that were affected Yadda, it was Job's relationships had with his sons that he lost too. They died remember? And he gave back to Job double the sons, but they were not the same sons with which he had meaningful relationships. And then again, Lot lost his wife.

Job 1:20
Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped,
21  And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.
22  In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.


Psalms 103:14
For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust.
15  As for man, his days are as grass: as a flower of the field, so he flourisheth.
16  For the wind passeth over it, and it is gone; and the place thereof shall know it no more.
17  But the mercy of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children;
18  To such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them.


Psalms 144:3
LORD, what is man, that thou takest knowledge of him! or the son of man, that thou makest account of him!
4  Man is like to vanity: his days are as a shadow that passeth away.


Sappho,

Do you really believe that Job has lost his sons ???   [<----yes, present tense ]

Do you believe that Job and his sons, do not exist, now ???


Matthew 22:31
But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
32  I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.


Yes, Job bore a great deal of loss and pain, in his life.

Is God unjust ???

Psalms 62:8
Trust in him at all times; ye people, pour out your heart before him: God is a refuge for us. Selah.
9  Surely men of low degree are vanity, and men of high degree are a lie: to be laid in the balance, they are altogether lighter than vanity.
10  Trust not in oppression, and become not vain in robbery: if riches increase, set not your heart upon them.
11  God hath spoken once; twice have I heard this; that power belongeth unto God.
12  Also unto thee, O Lord, belongeth mercy: for thou renderest to every man according to his work.


Yes, it is difficult for us to comprehend what is the purpose, of our suffering here.

Isaiah 48:10
Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction.


Ecclesiastes 11:8
But if a man live many years, and rejoice in them all; yet let him remember the days of darkness; for they shall be many. All that cometh is vanity.
9  Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment.


Of the days of men's lives, here in this life, the Preacher says...

Ecclesiastes 3:10
I have seen the travail, which God hath given to the sons of men to be exercised in it.
11  He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.
12  I know that there is no good in them, but for a man to rejoice, and to do good in his life.


This world, this life, is a distraction to us.

And if that is true, it begs the question;

Why doesn't God want us to be aware, of who we really are ???





Do you think that the 60-70 years, which you 'invest' in this life can produce 'anything' of worth ???

The consequences of our choices is all that will remain.

Are, were, your choices, good choices ?



Sure, while we are here we love our families, and we do the best that we can for them.

e.g.
Alexander the Great had a cousin [perhaps], that person fathered 6 children [perhaps].
That man, loved his children and his wife.
That man invested all that he had, in his relationship with his children and his wife.
Where is that man today ?

He is dust [at least, everything 'of' him, which was tangible, is now dust].

Should that man have worried about what he would leave here, within this world ???



And what is the point, my point, in presenting that little scenario ?

My point is that we should not love this world.

Matthew 6:19
Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20  But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21  For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

Matthew 6:33
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.


+++

Daniel 12:10
Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

Is that explanation too simple ???

If you have children, don't you challenge them [as they are growing up], to help them grow?

And doesn't how we [ourselves] respond to hardships and challenges, define who we are ?

Love God.

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.

This is not off topic:


Quote:

You really are very naughty, Sappho.  Why are you so insecure of your position that you delete posts (thrice) which highlight your hypocrisy?  Am I not evil?  Did God not direct these posts of mine....which you have been busy deleting?  Were you also a robot, from birth, programmed to meet me here this night to delete my posts? :)

Your 'on topic' reply would be greatly appreciated, Sappho.

Sappho wrote on May 5^th, 2011 at 6:43am:

If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore, God doesn't exist.   source

The above OP embodies an argument which is of the logically valid form modus tollens (denying the consequent).

In classical logic, modus tollens (or modus tollendo tollens) (Latin for "the way that denies by denying")  has the following argument form:

   If P, then Q.
   Not Q.
   Therefore, not P.

The inherent problem within this argument is that it doesn't take into consideration the fact that the Bible also states that God creates evil.

Don't believe me?? That's fine .. but read this:

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things".

Isaiah 45:7

Aussie wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 10:11pm:

This is not off topic: Quote: You really are very naughty, Sappho.  Why are you so insecure of your position that you delete posts (thrice) which highlight your hypocrisy?  Am I not evil?  Did God not direct these posts of mine....which you have been busy deleting?  Were you also a robot, from birth, programmed to meet me here this night to delete my posts? :) Your 'on topic' reply would be greatly appreciated, Sappho.

Recapping the current discussion between Yadda and Myself.


Quote:

So how can a person know if it is not one of the other gods which is the good god, and that The God who claims to be good, isn't deceiving the faithful?

Now Yadda claims that God is 'revealed' as good within the scripture, so I asked him to show how this can be the case with Job, he then advised that material concerns are not spiritual concerns. I reminded him that Job suffered spiritual losses too in terms of the death of his 10 sons. Yadda then replied that the loss is not eternal loss but a material loss associated with his corporeal and temporary existence on earth. I am yet to respond as I am still considering that point.

Now, you will have to join the dots for me Aussie. What does Fatalism, Determinism, Free Will, my alleged hypocrisy, my alleged insecurity, your deleted posts and your alleged evil nature have to do with the idea that God maybe deceiving His faithful into believing Him to be good?

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 10:40pm:

Sappho wrote on May 5th, 2011 at 6:43am: If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore, God doesn't exist.   source The above OP embodies an argument which is of the logically valid form modus tollens (denying the consequent). In classical logic, modus tollens (or modus tollendo tollens) (Latin for "the way that denies by denying")  has the following argument form:    If P, then Q.    Not Q.    Therefore, not P. The inherent problem within this argument is that it doesn't take into consideration the fact that the Bible also states that God creates evil. Don't believe me?? That's fine .. but read this: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things". Isaiah 45:7

Nice one. Thank you Lisa. But it also means that god is not omnibenevolence as is claimed of him by the faithful. What do you think?

Sappho wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 10:50pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:40pm: Sappho wrote on May 5th, 2011 at 6:43am: If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore, God doesn't exist.   source The above OP embodies an argument which is of the logically valid form modus tollens (denying the consequent). In classical logic, modus tollens (or modus tollendo tollens) (Latin for "the way that denies by denying")  has the following argument form:    If P, then Q.    Not Q.    Therefore, not P. The inherent problem within this argument is that it doesn't take into consideration the fact that the Bible also states that God creates evil. Don't believe me?? That's fine .. but read this: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things". Isaiah 45:7 Nice one. Thank you Lisa. But it also means that god is not omnibenevolence as is claimed of him by the faithful. What do you think?

Well before I answer .. I'd like to know what you think. Or is the above reply  .. basically it?

Oh and I'm quite surprised to note that Sprint (our highly esteemed Moderator on all things Spiritual) hasn't bothered to enter this topic to answer these questions already.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 10:54pm:

Sappho wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:50pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:40pm: Sappho wrote on May 5th, 2011 at 6:43am: If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore, God doesn't exist.   source The above OP embodies an argument which is of the logically valid form modus tollens (denying the consequent). In classical logic, modus tollens (or modus tollendo tollens) (Latin for "the way that denies by denying")  has the following argument form:    If P, then Q.    Not Q.    Therefore, not P. The inherent problem within this argument is that it doesn't take into consideration the fact that the Bible also states that God creates evil. Don't believe me?? That's fine .. but read this: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things". Isaiah 45:7 Nice one. Thank you Lisa. But it also means that god is not omnibenevolence as is claimed of him by the faithful. What do you think? Well before I answer .. I'd like to know what you think. Or is the above reply  .. basically it.

I'm satisfied that God cannot be all good as is claimed of him by the faithful.

Then there is this; How can a person know if it is not one of the other gods which is the good god, and that The God who claims to be good, isn't deceiving the faithful?

Having read - just now- in the process of writing and then losing a post to this topic -
the King James - Holy Bible Illustrated -
- printed --  Cambridge University Press - Fetter Lane, London, F,,C.4 -  very old -

I'd like to refer you to Exodus Chapters 19 and 20.  Fascinating descriptions - -  much more so to people today - than perhaps to the people who first read this particular Bible.
It actually has a series of Maps of the Holy Land - and the latest is

'MODERN PALESTINE' - showing the PHYSICAL FEATURES,  edited by ... etetc etc


So read it.

19 - Mt Sinai - God appears to Moses and hands down the Law.
And warnings and instructions to Moses about caring for the people of Israel whilst He is near.!

And - check out chapter 20. Particularly 20.18 - 20.25.

Evil???    Seems all your churches statues and icons are FORBIDDEN by the Lord. As YOUR person pollutes the temples you create.  IE  you, we - are EVIL.  

IF YOU REALLY MUST speak in these theistic terms, if you really MUST go to Church -  YOU are Evil.

Comments??

Sappho wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 11:01pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:54pm: Sappho wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:50pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:40pm: The above OP embodies an argument which is of the logically valid form modus tollens (denying the consequent). In classical logic, modus tollens (or modus tollendo tollens) (Latin for "the way that denies by denying")  has the following argument form:    If P, then Q.    Not Q.    Therefore, not P. The inherent problem within this argument is that it doesn't take into consideration the fact that the Bible also states that God creates evil. Don't believe me?? That's fine .. but read this: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things". Isaiah 45:7 Nice one. Thank you Lisa. But it also means that god is not omnibenevolence as is claimed of him by the faithful. What do you think? Well before I answer .. I'd like to know what you think. Or is the above reply  .. basically it. I'm satisfied that God cannot be all good as is claimed of him by the faithful.

Oooow, ooooooow, i want to have a go at this 'problem'.      ;D

The problem of the presence of evil and good, and the question of, God, is he the author of both evil and good ?

I will have a go at this.

Its coming.







Sappho wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 11:01pm:

Then there is this; How can a person know 1/ if it is not one of the other gods which is the good god, and 2/ that The God who claims to be good, isn't deceiving the faithful?

Obviously, i can not know, i could never know, if [the entity i know as...] God [in fact] was intentionally fooling me, intentionally deceiving me.

But i can't believe that would be, or is true.

He has given me no reason to believe such a circumstance is the fact.

Quite the opposite, he has given me reason to believe that he loves me.

I can't explain it further.

I can't prove it.



Except perhaps [explain it] like this....

You KNOW that 2 + 2 = 4

I KNOW that God loves me.

On a particular occasion, he has given me reason to believe that that is true.

What - no comment?  No one??

Rather blather on about how you KNOW god loves you, you just do!!!!!can't prove it (of course).. BUT,....
can't believe otherwise.  Dearie Me!!  Madre Dios !! Saints Preserve Us!

So - you've never actually thought about the Commandments? - perhaps I should say.... read them???
No view on Moses' words to do with the proper worship of the Lord?
As TOLD TO HIM by the Lord thy GOD??


20.23   Ye shall not make with me gods of silver, neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold.

20.24  An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.

20.25  And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it.

I personally think WOW !!  when I read THIS! Now I know why I have an aversion to Churches, or organised religion of any kind.!!

Finally-  

20.26  Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar,  that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.

Food for thouight!!!!!!

Sappho wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 11:01pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:54pm: Sappho wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:50pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 10th, 2011 at 10:40pm: The above OP embodies an argument which is of the logically valid form modus tollens (denying the consequent). In classical logic, modus tollens (or modus tollendo tollens) (Latin for "the way that denies by denying")  has the following argument form:    If P, then Q.    Not Q.    Therefore, not P. The inherent problem within this argument is that it doesn't take into consideration the fact that the Bible also states that God creates evil. Don't believe me?? That's fine .. but read this: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things". Isaiah 45:7 Nice one. Thank you Lisa. But it also means that god is not omnibenevolence as is claimed of him by the faithful. What do you think? Well before I answer .. I'd like to know what you think. Or is the above reply  .. basically it. I'm satisfied that God cannot be all good as is claimed of him by the faithful.

I can't [at this time] satisfactorily bring into words what i want to say about this apparent contradiction [i.e. God and evil].

My experience [at this time] is that it is impossible for my carnal mind, to adequately express what i want to say.

But i will say this;

In my own limited perception of what God is, i know [from my own experience] that the essence of what God is, has a purity which must absolutely exclude the presence of evil.

And yet, in this [our] 'reality' here, it is clear that both good and evil are able, to exist together, and, to exist in close proximity to each other.

And, in this 'reality', both good and evil seem to be [easily] able to find 'expression', in us [being 'expressed' in our choices, and then, being 'expressed' in the all too apparent consequences of our choices].

Is that last point significant ???





I said some other stuff concerning this problem of the existence good and evil...

"Netanyahu's speech to Congress"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1306323641/13#13

"The Problem of Evil"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1304541795/31#31

"The Problem of Evil"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1304541795/55#55


+++

Psalms 5:4
For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee.
5  The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

Romans 8:8
So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9  But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Isaiah 48:10
Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction.

Numbers 16:5
...the LORD will shew who are his, and who is holy;...even him whom he hath chosen will he cause to come near unto him.

Psalms 37:1
Fret not thyself because of evildoers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity.
2  For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb.

Proverbs 24:19
Fret not thyself because of evil men, neither be thou envious at the wicked;
20  For there shall be no reward to the evil man; the candle of the wicked shall be put out.

Emma wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 1:11am:

So - you've never actually thought about the Commandments? - perhaps I should say.... read them??? No view on Moses' words to do with the proper worship of the Lord? As TOLD TO HIM by the Lord thy GOD?? 20.23   Ye shall not make with me gods of silver, neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold. 20.24  An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee. 20.25  And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it. I personally think WOW !!  when I read THIS! Now I know why I have an aversion to Churches, or organised religion of any kind.!!

jalane,

What is your point ?

Is it, that men do not know how to worship God, properly ???

I have no difficulty in conceding, that that is true.

That truth, is a consistent message throughout the Bible.

We, mankind, just don't seem to 'get' God, and his righteousness.



Matthew 12:7
But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.


Which refers to....

Hosea 6:6
For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
7  But they like men have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me.


And elsewhere....

Jeremiah 9:1
Oh that my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people!
2  Oh that I had in the wilderness a lodging place of wayfaring men; that I might leave my people, and go from them! for they be all adulterers, an assembly of treacherous men.
3  And they bend their tongues like their bow for lies: but they are not valiant for the truth upon the earth; for they proceed from evil to evil, and they know not me, saith the LORD.
4  Take ye heed every one of his neighbour, and trust ye not in any brother: for every brother will utterly supplant, and every neighbour will walk with slanders.
5  And they will deceive every one his neighbour, and will not speak the truth: they have taught their tongue to speak lies, and weary themselves to commit iniquity.
6  Thine habitation is in the midst of deceit; through deceit they refuse to know me, saith the LORD.


John 4:22
Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.
23  But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24  God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Yadda, why do you not see that your own doG cannot be best pleased with your own evil obsession with Islam/Muslims!?

Surely, your doG would want you to put your faith towards an infinitely more positive vocation!?

Equitist wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 9:33am:

Yadda, why do you not see that your own doG cannot be best pleased with your own evil obsession with Islam/Muslims!? Surely, your doG would want you to put your faith towards an infinitely more positive vocation!?

Oh unequal one,

The scripture of my faith declares that 'God is not the author of confusion, but of peace,'...

1 Corinthians 14:33
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.


But, you are correct, it is true, that i am a critic of ISLAM.




It is also true that it is absolutely impossible for ISLAM to produce a harmonious, just, and stable society.

And it is also true that, much of recorded ISLAMIC history [recording that moslems were the most benevolent masters of other peoples, and that those periods of ISLAMIC dominance of other peoples were always virtuous and benevolent], has been manufactured, 'confected', so as to conceal the depraved tyranny, which is always hiding behind the veil of ISLAMIC lies.

In today's world, only a liar would deny, that ISLAM has a clear history of always seeking to erase every thought, every honest expression of man, which is critical of ISLAM.

And when i ask you to give an example of a good, and just, benevolent Sharia society, a virtuous society based in ISLAMIC law today, you can not give such an example.

Not in all of the ISLAMIC world, is there even one example, of such a virtuous society.

And ISLAM's own foundation texts [the Koran and the Hadith], are a witness against every moslem lie.

History itself is a witness against every moslem lie.

Google;
armenian genocide ottoman


The truth is, that there is no society in the world today [which is 'rightfully guided' by ISLAM], which is just and peaceful, and prosperous.

In fact, the opposite is true.

All societies in the world today, which claim to be ISLAMIC and Sharia guided, are nests of oppression, depravity, violence, injustice, and human poverty.




As to your assertion that my 'doG' would not approve of my criticism of ISLAM...

Psalms 15:1
LORD, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill?
2  He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart.
3  He that backbiteth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his neighbour, nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbour.
4  In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the LORD. He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.

AHHH  --- EQ -- why did you raise the '  I  ' word? :-X

AAAAAHHUUM               - YADDA- ??    
      perhaps not a relevant post?? :-?

Yours  I mean.!

And Yes -  if you believe in the Bible, from which I drew my quote, then you would have to agree,... wouldn't you.?
Churches and Temples constructed by humans are declared corrupt in only the second Book of the Bible.

Later priests have obviously worked pretty hard to turn THAT one around.  

Maybe that's why we only know 10 Commandments??

When I say We,  I don't mean me.!!!  Gasp!!  ::)

Emma wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 10:36pm:

And Yes -  if you believe in the Bible, from which I drew my quote, then you would have to agree,... wouldn't you.?

I am not a Hebrew.

The laws in the 1st 5 books of Moses applied to Hebrews.

The Hebrews entered into a covenant with God, to obey his laws.

....It is recorded [in the books of Moses] that after being redeemed from bondage in Egypt, the Hebrew people entered into a covenant with their holy God.

Dictionary;
covenant = =
1 a solemn agreement.
2 [theology] an agreement held to be the basis of a relationship of commitment with God.

The agreement [consent] of the people, was recorded;

"...And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him.
And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do...."
Exodus 19:5-8

Are you a Hebrew jalane ?

Do God's laws apply to you ?





"I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people."

Leviticus 20:26
And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the LORD am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine.


Deuteronomy 7:6
For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.
7  The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people:

Deuteronomy 14:2
For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.

Deuteronomy 32:8
When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
9  For the LORD'S portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.








Emma wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 10:36pm:

Churches and Temples constructed by humans are declared corrupt in only the second Book of the Bible. Later priests have obviously worked pretty hard to turn THAT one around.   Maybe that's why we only know 10 Commandments?? When I say We,  I don't mean me.!!!  Gasp!!  ::)

jalane,

You should read the Gospels of Jesus.

I think that you would be interested in what he, Jesus, said about organised religion.


"....And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
"...But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in."
Matthew 23:1-13

One's prose does not require the kernel
of ultimate truth,

For your spiel to be unspeakable.

But if it's profound,
truth or lies,

There will always be those

who will believe.

Yadda wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:25am:

Emma wrote on Jul 11th, 2011 at 10:36pm: And Yes -  if you believe in the Bible, from which I drew my quote, then you would have to agree,... wouldn't you.? I am not a Hebrew. The laws in the 1st 5 books of Moses applied to Hebrews. The Hebrews entered into a covenant with God, to obey his laws. ....It is recorded [in the books of Moses] that after being redeemed from bondage in Egypt, the Hebrew people entered into a covenant with their holy God. Dictionary; covenant = = 1 a solemn agreement. 2 [theology] an agreement held to be the basis of a relationship of commitment with God. The agreement [consent] of the people, was recorded; "...And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him. And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do...." Exodus 19:5-8 Are you a Hebrew jalane ? Do God's laws apply to you ? "I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people." Leviticus 20:26 And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the LORD am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine. Deuteronomy 7:6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. 7  The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: Deuteronomy 14:2 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth. Deuteronomy 32:8 When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. 9  For the LORD'S portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance. Emma wrote on Jul 11th, 2011 at 10:36pm: Churches and Temples constructed by humans are declared corrupt in only the second Book of the Bible. Later priests have obviously worked pretty hard to turn THAT one around.   Maybe that's why we only know 10 Commandments?? When I say We,  I don't mean me.!!!  Gasp!!  ::) jalane, You should read the Gospels of Jesus. I think that you would be interested in what he, Jesus, said about organised religion. "....And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." "...But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in." Matthew 23:1-13

Interesting comments Yadda.

I am atheist - pls note the small a. I find humans both fascinating and infuriating.
The first five Books of the Bible only apply to..Hebrews?

I choose not to make assumptions about posters from their nom de plume...And so you say you are not a Hebrew...Despite your suggestive pseudonym....fine by me ...

and no I am not of that ethnic persuasion. Of course Jewish people come from many races, ... as do Christians, Moslems, and Buddhists.  
I fail to see how the one does not constitute the All.  And yet - our history, and for example - the history of the Jewish faith,  show so clearly that religious influence definitely has both Good and Evil outcomes.

It cannot be otherwise - if we do believe we are part of a greater whole - there MUST be a balance.

Translation???   People are people are people. Up to them to see further than their upbringing. :)

Emma wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:20pm:

I choose not to make assumptions about posters from their nom de plume... And so you say you are not a Hebrew...Despite your suggestive pseudonym ....fine by me ...

jalane,

I have said this previously on OzPol, but i will repeat it again, just for you;

I am not Jewish, and i have no knowledge of any Jewish heritage in my family.


+++

Further, regards organised religion;

If you believe that the Book of Revelation, is the "The Revelation of Jesus Christ," then in that book....

Jesus said...
"...thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."
Revelation 2:6
Revelation 2:15

Nicolaitans???

What does that word, Nicolaitans, refer to ?

'Nicolaitan', refers to those who [Nico] 'rule over' or 'conquer', and [the laity] 'the people'.

Jesus in Revelation, and, in the Gospels, said that he hated those hypocrites, who use the authority of 'religion' [turning religion into a 'beastly', false, worldly 'spirituality'], so as to rule over men.

Almost every religion of man does this.

Some religions [more than others] going to extreme lengths, to exert their authority over their adherents/devotees.


Matthew 20:25
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:

Popes???

'Papa'?


"....And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
"...But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in."
Matthew 23:1-13


What did Jesus say about how to worship God ?

John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Matthew 6:5
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6  But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.




+++

Again, people who want to know the truth about God, should take some time and try to read the bible.

For anyone unfamiliar with the bible, i would suggest they start by reading the Gospels, OR, the Psalms.

For me, probably the most beautiful book of the Bible, is the book of Psalms.

If you, with a clean and humble heart, search for God, God will reveal himself to you.



Psalms 15:1
LORD, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill?
2  He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart.
3  He that backbiteth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his neighbour, nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbour.
4  In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the LORD. He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.
5  He that putteth not out his money to usury, nor taketh reward against the innocent. He that doeth these things shall never be moved.


Hosea 4:1
Hear the word of the LORD, ye children of Israel: for the LORD hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land, because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land.


Jeremiah 9:3
And they bend their tongues like their bow for lies: but they are not valiant for the truth upon the earth; for they proceed from evil to evil, and they know not me, saith the LORD.
4  Take ye heed every one of his neighbour, and trust ye not in any brother: for every brother will utterly supplant, and every neighbour will walk with slanders.
5  And they will deceive every one his neighbour, and will not speak the truth: they have taught their tongue to speak lies, and weary themselves to commit iniquity.
6  Thine habitation is in the midst of deceit; through deceit they refuse to know me, saith the LORD.



DEAF AND BLIND - lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.

Isaiah 6:9
And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
10  Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.




The 'Knowledge of God' spoken of in Hosea 4:1, is the knowledge of God's righteousness.

But men are following their own prideful 'wisdom'.

In their very wickedness, men imagine that they are wise.

But all that we reveal, is our rebellion against God's righteousness.

Look at the wickedness in this world, today.

A wickedness most prevalent among mankind's highest echelons.

All, coming from man's prideful 'wisdom'.

Yadda ???  
Thanks - but NO THANKS.
When your opening is --

"If you believe that the Book of Revelation, is the "The Revelation of Jesus Christ," then........"    then.. honestly - you have lost me.  I don't believe  .... and so... don't waste your time.!!!


"'jalane,
I have said this previously on OzPol, but i will repeat it again, just for you;
I am not Jewish, and i have no knowledge of any Jewish heritage in my family.'"

Well there you go -  -  but I really couldn't give a continental, what you perceive yourself as.
That's up to YOU.  It matters not to me.:)

Emma wrote on Jul 13^th, 2011 at 10:06pm:

Yadda ???   Thanks - but NO THANKS. When your opening is -- "If you believe that the Book of Revelation, is the "The Revelation of Jesus Christ," then........"    then.. honestly - you have lost me.  I don't believe  .... and so... don't waste your time.!!!

Exactly so.

i.e.
Atheists [ <--- with a capital A] already know, everything which they need to know.

'Life is short, so lets party on.'

"Eat, drink, and be merry. For tomorrow we die!"




As i often say to atheists;

It is your life.

And life is about making our own choices.  [....and in that way, God is just, and clever]

And i know that you [and many like you] do not see [spiritual] redemption as important.

And i know that what you love, is what this world has to offer you.

So, go your own way.

Walk your own path.

Love the world, delight in its unrighteousness.

There is no God.






+++


Proverbs 1:20
Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets:
21  She crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the gates: in the city she uttereth her words, saying,
22  How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
23  Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.



John 14:15
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
16  And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17  Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
....
21  He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Like I said Yadda - I'm a small 'a' atheist, and not a Bible reader. Only relatively recently i received a copy from my Mother - and , with one thought in mind, which wasn't the bits I have quoted. Finding that was just serendipity.  Old testament kicks butt..

Anything beyond the earlier Books  really doesn't interest me.!! And my interest is limited to the wish to understand a little more clearly, why people today, do as they do.

This may not make sense to you, but I can't really explain it in words.
But - you are wrong about me. Your opinion is based on your own fervor.  Please don't quote anymore Bible at me.  I've read a tiny fraction, and that is enough for me.

Jesus Christ does not have a monopoly on 'spirituality'  -  other views DO exist. :)

And

Just have to add -   this demanding of undying love and faith, before that love is returned,  could only come from a male zealot.  A TYPICAL male zealot.  You see them everyday on the news.

Definitely NOT good for the 'health' to believe in that!!!

Emma wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:33pm:

Like I said Yadda - I'm a small 'a' atheist, and not a Bible reader. Only relatively recently i received a copy from my Mother - and , with one thought in mind, which wasn't the bits I have quoted. Finding that was just serendipity.  Old testament kicks butt.. Anything beyond the earlier Books  really doesn't interest me.!! And my interest is limited to the wish to understand a little more clearly, why people today, do as they do. This may not make sense to you, but I can't really explain it in words. But - you are wrong about me. Your opinion is based on your own fervor. Please don't quote anymore Bible at me.  I've read a tiny fraction, and that is enough for me. Jesus Christ does not have a monopoly on 'spirituality'  -  other views DO exist. :)

You are probably correct.

And for that assumption [on my part] i apologise.



Its just that i look at the world of mankind today, and much of it is atheistic [....if not positively SATANIC].

And then, a person says, "I'm a small 'a' atheist".

I make assumptions.

e.g.
Take that new "Crownies" show last night, on ABC.
....like most entertainment today, reflecting a totally atheist, "Me", lifestyle.

Quote:

yadda wrote ....like most entertainment today, reflecting a totally atheist, "Me", lifestyle.

One could argue that the religious puffing up of the ego into eternity is the ultimate "me" lifestyle. To say you want "eternal life" and to "live after death" has to be egotism blown up into gigantic proportions. At least the atheist has the humility to say he won't live on.

Religious zealotry is really disguised egotism. They hide behind slogans like "god", "scripture", "Jesus", "Mohommad", "Jihad" to give the appearance of being a humble servant to a higher authority, yet this is only a mask to hide their domineering nature.

You shouldn't be ashamed, nor should anyone else, for wanting to dominate, Yadda. Embrace God's invention of Power!

Yes Yadda - I too find our world today, generally rather ethically bankrupt, -----and morally too, if you choose a subjective stance on what people do..

And I do agree with Time -  any sort of 'breast-beating' and 'sabre-rattling' are manifestations of the ego.

How sweet it must be for those whose dogma answers all questions and silences all doubt. :(

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 3:02pm:

One could argue that the religious puffing up of the ego into eternity is the ultimate "me" lifestyle. To say you want "eternal life" and to "live after death" has to be egotism blown up into gigantic proportions. At least the atheist has the humility to say he won't live on.

Yes, an astute observation. There also seems to be a discontinuity between evangelical Christianity and the humility of the more traditional Catholic and Anglican religions.

Quote:

Humilita vos ad benedictionem Deo gratias

It seems as though the tele-evangelists have a totally different religion inspired by Mammon. They shout their prayers loudly to all and sundry and deliberately seem to lose just about everything apart from the "born-again" angle.


Quote:

Be careful about not living righteously merely to be seen by people. Otherwise you have no reward with your Father in heaven

(Matthew 6:1).

also:

Quote:

Whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, because they love to pray while standing in synagogues and on street corners so that people can see them. Truly I say to you, they have their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you

(Matthew 6:5-6).

Are pious proclamations on Internet forums a bit like praying on street corners so that people can see them? I don't know. I leave the intricacy of a religion to its adherents.

American evangelical Christianity is a militant perversion of the Christian message lead by charismatic orators (not unlike Adolf Hitler in their firebrand) who have ironically ascended to power and made multiple millions of dollars preaching to their congregations, hatred of their sense of poverty which, they insist, is the result of their disenfranchisement

In that sense, they are not a religious movement as much as they are a crypto-fascist (or perhaps a crypto-communist) one... Their message, "Make war on your own poverty and those who impose it on you".

Emma wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 9:49pm:

Yes Yadda - I too find our world today, generally rather ethically bankrupt, -----and morally too, if you choose a subjective stance on what people do.. And I do agree with Time -  any sort of 'breast-beating' and 'sabre-rattling' are manifestations of the ego. How sweet it must be for those whose dogma answers all questions and silences all doubt. :(

Time, jalane,

I apologise for my 'strident' ego.

Yes, i do have one.




Dear Father,
Please teach my heart your ways.
Please forgive my foolishness, my imaginings, my pride, and my vanity.

muso wrote on Jul 16^th, 2011 at 7:19am:

Are pious proclamations on Internet forums a bit like praying on street corners so that people can see them? I don't know. I leave the intricacy of a religion to its adherents.

Hi muso,

Nice to see you back here.


+++


Yes muso, i am guilty,   ....maybe.      ;)



2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Timothy 4:2
Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
3  For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4  And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Ephesians 5:6
Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
7  Be not ye therefore partakers with them.
8  For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:
9  (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;)
10  Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.
11  And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

1 Thessalonians 5:19
Quench not the Spirit.
20  Despise not prophesyings.
21  Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22  Abstain from all appearance of evil.

2 Corinthians 6:14
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15  And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16  And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17  Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
18  And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

Revelation 18:4
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.



Yadda, the contrite rebuker.     ;)

But maybe, maybe, also justified ?

Quote:

Whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, because they love to pray while standing in synagogues and on street corners so that people can see them. Truly I say to you, they have their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room, close the door, and pray to your Father  in secret. And your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you (Matthew 6:5-6).

Nice one Muso.  That is most apt.! :)

My Mum, was a small-c christian -  I was born, in keeping, as Cof E. Never christened, never attended a church service - my Mum believed one's troth with God was a personal thing,-- she never enforced ideas about religion upon me.  So - I am indeed blessed.!
:)

In the last decade of her life - she lost her belief in God.  It distressed her, but she could no longer believe - after Rwanda.!!!  
The sweetest of hearts - she.!!

Emma wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 9:49pm:

How sweet it must be for those whose dogma answers all questions and silences all doubt. :(

jalane,

Belief in God, is all about dogma, following dogma ?

And if there is a God, God is a God of dogma ???

Is that your opinion of God / religion ???

If there is a God, do you think that God respects those who follow religious 'dogma' ???

And if there is a God, do you think that God desires the worship, of sycophants ???

Is that what you think ?

That if there is a God, that God desires men to crawl before him, on their bellies ??


Dictionary;
sycophant = = a toady; a servile flatterer.

Dictionary;
servile = =
1 excessively willing to serve or please others.
2 of or characteristic of a slave or slaves.


Genesis 17:1
And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.



+++

jalane,

My God does not desire the worship of sycophants, i am certain.

And clearly, many men today, do not understood that Christian admonition;

"Be good,   .....for GOODNESS sake."


Deuteronomy 1:17
Ye shall not respect persons in judgment;...

Deuteronomy 16:19
Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.



'Bowing and scraping' sycophants, do not impress my God,
...the God of Israel.

Psalms 146:8
The LORD openeth the eyes of the blind: the LORD raiseth them that are bowed down: the LORD loveth the righteous:



My God has given to all men a spirit which knows to do good, and to shun evil.

Yet, many men delight in doing evil.


My God, is a God who loves RIGHTEOUSNESS.


Psalms 11:4
The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD'S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men.
5  The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.


+++


It is a favourite tactic of many people today, that when they encounter something compelling [or truthful], but something which nevertheless challenges them [and because it perhaps challenges their worldview], that they will choose to malign, and misrepresent something which has merit [as being of little worth].

And perhaps you have recognised, that that, is the very same tactic which is being used to great effect, today, against the Jewish people.
....by those who have absolutely no regard for what is true.

In some ways, i see that as being very ironic.

And it seems to be in our [mankind's] nature, that we invariably choose to despise and to reject truth, whenever we recognise that truth will not serve our own desire(s), or 'interests'.


+++


Psalms 4:5
Offer the sacrifices of righteousness, and put your trust in the LORD.


Psalms 10:3
For the wicked boasteth of his heart's desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the LORD abhorreth.
4  The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.
5  His ways are always grievous; thy judgments are far above out of his sight: as for all his enemies, he puffeth at them.
6  He hath said in his heart, I shall not be moved: for I shall never be in adversity.


Psalms 40:4
Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust, and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies.


Malachi 3:13
Your words have been stout against me, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, What have we spoken so much against thee?
14  Ye have said, It is vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept his ordinance, and that we have walked mournfully before the LORD of hosts?
15  And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered.
16  Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.
17  And they shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.
18  Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not.

Yadda wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:25am:

Emma wrote on Jul 11th, 2011 at 10:36pm: And Yes -  if you believe in the Bible, from which I drew my quote, then you would have to agree,... wouldn't you.? I am not a Hebrew. The laws in the 1st 5 books of Moses applied to Hebrews. The Hebrews entered into a covenant with God, to obey his laws. ....It is recorded [in the books of Moses] that after being redeemed from bondage in Egypt, the Hebrew people entered into a covenant with their holy God. Dictionary; covenant = = 1 a solemn agreement. 2 [theology] an agreement held to be the basis of a relationship of commitment with God. The agreement [consent] of the people, was recorded; "...And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him. And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do...." Exodus 19:5-8 Are you a Hebrew jalane ? Do God's laws apply to you ?

Yadda, doesn't your interpretation mean that no members of any  christian religion or church are bound by the 10 Commandments??

And that any christians who quote Leviticus to reject homosexuality are declaring themselves hebrew??

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2011 at 9:12pm:

Yadda, doesn't your interpretation mean that no members of any  christian religion or church are bound by the 10 Commandments?? And that any christians who quote Leviticus to reject homosexuality are declaring themselves hebrew??

gizmo,

I choose to obey those O.T. laws, as best i can [see Romans 7:14-23], BECAUSE I SHOULD.

BUT, i am not Jewish.
i.e. I do not view myself as being 'compelled' by THAT covenant, which the Children of Israel agreed to.

BUT, but, i am 'compelled' to [try to] act righteously, otherwise God will [rightly] regard me as just another [self serving] wicked person.


+++

I am a student of the Bible.

How i view those O.T. laws, is that those laws revealed through Moses, teach man how to approach righteousness.

And imo, those O.T. laws do teach man ethical behaviour.

And, [i believe that] that was their purpose.

To my understanding, God's laws [those O.T. laws] were divided into two two very specific groups of laws, and were 'targeted' against two very specific groups of 'miscreants',
1/ [all] common criminals,
2/ and covenant breakers [among God's covenant people].

And some of the sanctions against criminals and covenant breakers [among God's covenant people] were VERY harsh?

Yes.

I know that many, many, people today, may 'violently' disagree with some aspects of OT Bibles laws.

I can understand such a 'perspective'.

Q.
How can i reconcile a loving God, with such harsh judgements ???

A.
I do not want to live in a criminal society / community.
i.e. I do not want to live in a society which tolerates criminality, and injustice, and violence.
To achieve a crime free community, imo it is clear, that criminals must be brought to account for the consequences of their own choices.
And, i am fully in accord with such a paradigm.

Deuteronomy 19:19
.....so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.


+++

As for such laws [those harsh, 'constrictive' O.T. laws] being supported, or endorsed by some Christians today,
....in the gospels, Jesus taught us, to respect those laws, those O.T. laws.

Jesus said....

John 14:15
If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Who's commandments ???
see Matthew 19:16-19

FACT;
Jesus was a Torah law teacher.

It is clear that the man Jesus, was Jewish, and that he was Torah observant,
i.e. as a man, Jesus considered himself bound by the laws of Moses.

e.g.
Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for not obeying the law [given by God] in not putting certain criminals [according to God's law] to death.

Matthew 15:3
But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
4  For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
5  But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
6  And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
7  Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8  This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9  But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.


Jesus also said;

Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18  For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19  Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


Which commandments ???

"Thou shalt do no murder,
Thou shalt not commit adultery,
Thou shalt not steal,
Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Honour thy father and thy mother."
Matthew 19:16-19

All of those commandments, above, were quoted by Jesus, directly from the book(s) of the law, the Torah,
Exodus 20:12-16
Deuteronomy 5:16-20




What is the purpose of God's laws ???

Why do we need to respect God's laws ???

Matthew 7:12
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

"Be good,   .....for GOODNESS sake."
I'd agree with that -- such is what my mother taught me.

Well Yadda, call me wicked, call me whatever you like -  just don't call me at home. :)

I do not think I was denigrating anyone or thing.  I did post an Old testament quote.
And agreed with another's post.  
I expressed MY position - a small-a atheist.  You are free to choose-  as am I.



It is a favourite tactic of many people today, that when they encounter something compelling [or truthful], but something which nevertheless challenges them [and because it perhaps challenges their worldview], that they will choose to malign, and misrepresent something which has merit [as being of little worth].

And perhaps you have recognised, that that, is the very same tactic which is being used to great effect, today, against the Jewish people.
....by those who have absolutely no regard for what is true.

Just enough already - I don't think Bible passages actually have much input to this thread.  BAD THINGS exist - (Evil if you prefer)- everywhere - not just where Christians are there to perceive it.

Yadda wrote on Jul 16^th, 2011 at 5:23pm:

Hi muso, Nice to see you back here. +++ Yes muso, i am guilty,   ....maybe.      ;)

Nice. The humilitas in you comes out from time to time. You're not a bad Bible thumper sometimes  ;D

"Nice. The humilitas in you comes out from time to time. You're not a bad Bible thumper sometimes  "  - Muso.

This is true Muso -- thank you Yadda -  what you wrote was both appropriate , and interesting.  
These quotes - from Matthew -  the first Book of the New Testament - I see, ... as you have presented them do point towards some answers for me about some various nebulous Ideas I have had about the nature of us.   (Phew)
In fact, about the nature of those of us, such as myself, who were raised in a culture dominated by Christianity.

It is interesting - 'cos Jesus  (whom by the way I do not deny existed...) says these things in the very first BOOK of the New Testament.  According to...Matthew.

So- excellent..   :) Food for thought!

I just don't accept he was the son of God, obviously, 'cos I don't believe there is God. :)

Funny how the "small a atheists" always seek the big T theists for a sense of superiority.

Its the coward "small a atheists" idea of dialectic.

And visa versa.

Funny how the "small a atheists" always seek the big T theists for a sense of superiority.

Its the coward "small a atheists" idea of dialectic.

And visa versa

OOOOh thats deep -  :)

Is Yadda a superior Big T ?
And I a cowardly small  a ?

and you scorn the dialectic discussion  occurring?
--------------------- ::) :P
Really Helian - who cares about your negativity? Not I. Are you saying discussing this with Yadda makes me feel superior?

Clarity always helps any discussion. Care to elucidate??

I like to make enigmatic statements, that few follow,  but I have tried not to, on this forum.  Of course, I don't always succeed. :)

   FYI  -

I know evil exists --- I've seen it, ......experienced and survived it, ......- and it has nothing to do with the BIBLE, or any other religious tract.  Sorry about that.  Thats the facts JAK

It is ALL about people -   .... most foul.! >:(

Words on paper can never show the innocent,  true evil.!!

One must experience it to believe it in their selves -  not argue about it as some academic idea.!!!

The Bible does serve as a warning, I see, but few understand that.

'Evil' is a religious concept. Nobody is born evil as they would have you believe. The lesson is that if you are with us you are good. Only by recognising the possibility of 'going to the bad' can you be on guard against it. The things religion teaches as being the most evil are amongst the most harmless, homosexuality, promiscuity, eating bacon. The greatest bad is the result of what religion teaches as the 'right path', give up your soverignty and play follow the leader, yay even unto the depths of a hell we've made.

Emma wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 12:43am:

Clarity always helps any discussion. Care to elucidate??

I'd say an atheist discussing theological truths with a "Theist" is as pointless as speaking Greek to a chimp.


Emma wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 12:43am:

I like to make enigmatic statements, that few follow,

Then why ask for clarification?

Reveleth thou in thine empty enigmata.

Grey wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 1:07am:

'Evil' is a religious concept. Nobody is born evil as they would have you believe.

Yet some are born with neurological pathologies that manifest as 'evil.

Emma wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 12:55am:

The Bible does serve as a warning, I see, but few understand that.

A warning about what? Mistaking a rambling myth for truth?

muso wrote on Jul 17^th, 2011 at 11:08am:

Yadda wrote on Jul 16th, 2011 at 5:23pm: Hi muso, Nice to see you back here. +++ Yes muso, i am guilty,   ....maybe.      ;) Nice. The humilitas in you comes out from time to time. You're not a bad Bible thumper sometimes  ;D

Thank you muso, for that concession.      ;)

Emma wrote on Jul 17^th, 2011 at 7:08pm:

"Nice. The humilitas in you comes out from time to time. You're not a bad Bible thumper sometimes  "  - Muso. This is true Muso -- thank you Yadda -  what you wrote was both appropriate , and interesting.   These quotes - from Matthew -  the first Book of the New Testament - I see, ... as you have presented them do point towards some answers for me about some various nebulous Ideas I have had about the nature of us.   (Phew) In fact, about the nature of those of us, such as myself, who were raised in a culture dominated by Christianity. It is interesting - 'cos Jesus  (whom by the way I do not deny existed...) says these things in the very first BOOK of the New Testament.  According to...Matthew. So- excellent..   :) Food for thought! I just don't accept he was the son of God, obviously, 'cos I don't believe there is God. :)

I have no doubt that the Bible has some valuable words of wisdom, as do the vast majority of other holy books. Like you, I don't despise religion. In fact, I rather like it.

Watched the final Harry Potter on the weekend:


Quote:

Harry Potter: Is all this real or is it just happening inside my head? Albus Dumbledore: Of course it is happening in your head, Harry

Wow! even J K Rowling has theology  ;D

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 7:46am:

Grey wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 1:07am: 'Evil' is a religious concept. Nobody is born evil as they would have you believe. Yet some are born with neurological pathologies that manifest as 'evil.

What's the difference between a malfunctioning brain that results in a murder and a malfunctioning piece of machinery that results in somebody getting killed?

Which, if any are evil?

What is the most appropriate action with the malfunctioning brain scenario, and how can we differentiate between a "neural short circuit" and actual evil?

What about a person who has taken drugs at a party out of curiosity, and while under the influence, he commits an 'evil' deed, but when he is no longer under the influence of the drugs, he is appalled by his action?  Where does the evil come in? Is it the drugs, the person offering the drugs or the malfunctioning brain?

What about if you have ever been so affected by drugs or alcohol to be no longer accountable for your actions, and in a situation where you could have strangled an innocent bystander because you thought they were a daemon?

Is it evil to get yourself into that kind of situation where you are no longer accountable for your actions?

muso wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 10:08am:

I have no doubt that the Bible has some valuable words of wisdom, as do the vast majority of other holy books. Like you, I don't despise religion. In fact, I rather like it. Watched the final Harry Potter on the weekend: Quote: Harry Potter: Is all this real or is it just happening inside my head? Albus Dumbledore: Of course it is happening in your head, Harry Wow! even J K Rowling has theology  ;D

I haven't seen it yet.

Not a high priority.        ;)


But your words reminded me of a [good 'psychic'] scene, in a Scfi TV series...





Quote:

RIVER I know you have questions. MAL That would be why I just asked them. RIVER But there isn't a lot of time, captain. I need you to trust me. MAL Am I dreaming? RIVER We all are.

Firefly - Objects in Space
Joss Whedon

muso wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 10:23am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:46am: Grey wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 1:07am: 'Evil' is a religious concept. Nobody is born evil as they would have you believe. Yet some are born with neurological pathologies that manifest as 'evil. What's the difference between a malfunctioning brain that results in a murder and a malfunctioning piece of machinery that results in somebody getting killed? Which, if any are evil? What is the most appropriate action with the malfunctioning brain scenario, and how can we differentiate between a "neural short circuit" and actual evil? What about a person who has taken drugs at a party out of curiosity, and while under the influence, he commits an 'evil' deed, but when he is no longer under the influence of the drugs, he is appalled by his action?  Where does the evil come in? Is it the drugs, the person offering the drugs or the malfunctioning brain? What about if you have ever been so affected by drugs or alcohol to be no longer accountable for your actions, and in a situation where you could have strangled an innocent bystander because you thought they were a daemon? Is it evil to get yourself into that kind of situation where you are no longer accountable for your actions?

IMO, we are [spiritual] 'children', learning something here.


+++


Demons are real.

They are spirits.

And they [many 10's or even 100's] can have an influence over us, especially if we 'open' ourselves to them, if we 'open' ourselves to their 'persuasions'.

I believe that mostly, God [initially at least] protects us from the influence of demons, in this 'reality'.

And i believe that God will actively [spiritually] protect us from the influence of demons, whenever we directly ask him to, and if we are also actively trying to shun, to resist [what is] evil [around us].

But i also believe that God will 'abandon' those souls, who actively seek [or actively choose] those influences which are un-Godly, and he will abandon those souls who [themselves] abandon all discernment between good and evil.



God does not want to lose any soul, not one, to the demonic.

But he will not 'compel' people, to abandon those evil [spiritual] influences [which they choose].

Quote:

Helian - Yet some are born with neurological pathologies that manifest as 'evil.

If it is so, which I suspect it would be impossible to prove, it would be so rare as to be unworthy of consideration in support of the religious concept 'evil'. Psychopathological disorders are, to all intents and purposes, always a consequence of environmental factors; further, even the best of us have the capacity to do bad things.

Quote:

Yadda - Demons are real. They are spirits.

Yadda was not born this way, it's the result of a 'belief system'.

muso wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 10:23am:

Is it evil to get yourself into that kind of situation where you are no longer accountable for your actions?

Is it an act of wickedness, for us to abandon any discernment, between what is good, and what is evil ???

Duh!




Google;
changes in heart transplant recipients that parallel the personalities of their donors



Google;
heart transplant recipients report strange changes





+++

We ourselves, are the 'gatekeepers' of our hearts.

We choose which spirits we allow [invite] into our hearts.

And nobody [and no spirit] can compel us, to join with those spirits.

And no spirit can compel us to do what is evil.

No body compels us, to choose the evil.

When we choose the evil, it is because we ourselves choose it.

Grey wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 12:09pm:

Quote: Yadda - Demons are real. They are spirits. Yadda was not born this way, it's the result of a 'belief system'.

The spirit of God taught me these things.

Can you believe that ?       ;)




+++


Romans 8:8
So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9  But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.


1 Corinthians 2:9
But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10  But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11  For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12  Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13  Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14  But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Yadda wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 12:35pm:

The spirit of God taught me these things. Can you believe that ?       ;)

Psalms 25:12
What man is he that feareth the LORD? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.        ;)

Yadda wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 12:14pm:

muso wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 10:23am: Is it evil to get yourself into that kind of situation where you are no longer accountable for your actions? Is it an act of wickedness, for us to abandon any discernment, between what is good, and what is evil ??? Duh!

It's certainly irresponsible to put yourself  in a situation where you don't know right from wrong.  No argument there. My point was largely rhetorical.



Quote:

Google; changes in heart transplant recipients that parallel the personalities of their donors Google; heart transplant recipients report strange changes

It's a pretty major operation. What you feel about it depends to a great extent on your belief system.




Quote:

+++ We ourselves, are the 'gatekeepers' of our hearts. We choose which spirits we allow [invite] into our hearts. And nobody [and no spirit] can compel us, to join with those spirits. And no spirit can compel us to do what is evil. No body compels us, to choose the evil. When we choose the evil, it is because we ourselves choose it.

I would say that we are largely masters of our own destiny.  I don't believe in spirits, but I do believe in notions. If you get the wrong notion it can lead you far astray.

For example, you can get the notion that a group of human beings are evil just because of their religion. That's a notion that will lead you astray and lead to to many erroneous conclusions. (dare I mention Hitler?)



The "spirit of God" taught me that. (my common sense)

Again - of course it's happening inside your head.  ;)

My friend, there are many paths up the Mountain, but the view of the moon from the top is the same.   ;)

My friend, there are many paths up the Mountain, but the view of the moon from the top is the same.  - Muso.  
Indeed. :)

Yet some are born with neurological pathologies that manifest as 'evil. - Helian.
I agree  H.
People act  - and  other people view that act from their very own perspective/experience.

If it is so, which I suspect it would be impossible to prove, it would be so rare as to be unworthy of consideration in support of the religious concept 'evil'. Psychopathological disorders are, to all intents and purposes, always a consequence of environmental factors; further, even the best of us have the capacity to do bad things. - Grey


'The Problem of Evil ' does NOT come down to just a religious interpretation.  The word - evil - where ever it comes from, - is an  all - purpose word. It serves to cover many HUMAN acts.  No need for a Devil, or spirits.
Certainly there have been/are - many circumstances in the world  where the evil that men do - is rampant, obvious and unrestrained.!! For us evil walks in the form of a man.

Grey - these disorders  are not so rare as you might think.!   It has been estimated - more or less- that up to 20% of people are psycho -/socio-paths.  Often found in high power types..

Psychopathological disorders are, to all intents and purposes, always a consequence of environmental factors; further, even the best of us have the capacity to do bad things.

Certainly - one of the few things I do actually believe is that anyone of us is capable of anything - given the trigger.

The search for the nature of evil need go no further than human motivations.

Environment is undeniably a major factor, perhaps the most important,  BUT not the only one.  There is always the question of genes, and the propensity that the 'evil' continues into later progeny.

Perhaps it has something to do with the universal idea of entropy -
hmm not sure if thats the word I want.

I really DON'T believe that WE are totally in control of our psyche - our Id.
Maybe some are --  but it seems to me, from observation, that humans really have no clear idea of the 'repercussions' - or consequences - of their actions.  

We are truly still just barbaric children.

muso wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 10:23am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:46am: Grey wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 1:07am: 'Evil' is a religious concept. Nobody is born evil as they would have you believe. Yet some are born with neurological pathologies that manifest as 'evil. What's the difference between a malfunctioning brain that results in a murder and a malfunctioning piece of machinery that results in somebody getting killed? Which, if any are evil?

Dunno... Would make for a good reality show.. "Marvin Bulch wakes from a coma and bashes a nurse to death with his bedpan... Did he go bad in the dark? Is he evil? You decide next, on 'When The Brain Dead Attack'.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 6:47am:

muso wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 10:23am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:46am: Grey wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 1:07am: 'Evil' is a religious concept. Nobody is born evil as they would have you believe. Yet some are born with neurological pathologies that manifest as 'evil. What's the difference between a malfunctioning brain that results in a murder and a malfunctioning piece of machinery that results in somebody getting killed? Which, if any are evil? Dunno... Would make for a good reality show.. "Marvin Bulch wakes from a coma and bashes a nurse to death with his bedpan... Did he go bad in the dark? Is he evil? You decide next, on 'When The Brain Dead Attack'.

It all comes down to the definition of human constructs.

Emma wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 1:40am:

The search for the nature of evil need go no further than human motivations. Environment is undeniably a major factor, perhaps the most important,  BUT not the only one.  There is always the question of genes, and the propensity that the 'evil' continues into later progeny. Perhaps it has something to do with the universal idea of entropy - hmm not sure if thats the word I want. I really DON'T believe that WE are totally in control of our psyche - our Id. Maybe some are --  but it seems to me, from observation, that humans really have no clear idea of the 'repercussions' - or consequences - of their actions.   We are truly still just barbaric children.

Evil can also be considered as anthropogenic. If a snake bites your new kitten, you'd tend to think of the snake as evil. Alternatively, the kitten was about to kill the snake, so maybe its intention was evil.

In truth neither are evil. While we as humans have the facility to commit evil deeds, who can know what the final or intermediate consequences will be.  Remember the Ancient Chinese story of the farmer who finds a fine wild stallion?

This is good fortune... (who can tell?)

The Romans conquered huge parts of Europe, committing atrocities everywhere they went, killing and stealing from people.  The positive result was a system of civil standards and laws throughout Europe that were to persist even to this day.

muso wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 10:39am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 19th, 2011 at 6:47am: muso wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 10:23am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:46am: Grey wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 1:07am: 'Evil' is a religious concept. Nobody is born evil as they would have you believe. Yet some are born with neurological pathologies that manifest as 'evil. What's the difference between a malfunctioning brain that results in a murder and a malfunctioning piece of machinery that results in somebody getting killed? Which, if any are evil? Dunno... Would make for a good reality show.. "Marvin Bulch wakes from a coma and bashes a nurse to death with his bedpan... Did he go bad in the dark? Is he evil? You decide next, on 'When The Brain Dead Attack'. It all comes down to the definition of human constructs.

Personally, I go with neither being evil..

Quote:

Grey - these disorders  are not so rare as you might think.!   It has been estimated - more or less- that up to 20% of people are psycho -/socio-paths.  Often found in high power types..

I was not saying that socio/psychopathology was rare, just that it was caused by programming a fault, rather than by faulty wiring.

'Evil' IS a religious word, it has connotations of demonic possession that isn't present in words like 'bad' or 'wrong'.


Quote:

Muso - In truth neither are evil

Hypothetical - 'Jane' when a young child was brutally treated by her mother and raped by her father. Jane grew up to be a champion of the rights of children. By her work and action she significantly lowered the number of children who experience incest and physical abuse.

It doesn't make incest and brutality good things but. ;)

Just can't agree with you Grey.

Evil is an all-purpose word -  the dictionary I just looked at doesn't mention anything to do with religion , or demonic possession.

After Evil tho, and following Evil doer - Eye - minded  etc - is
EVIL ONE - n. The Devil  - preceded by the.

Non-religious people use the word. I know it is a word that I use reluctantly, for the very reason that many people automatically link it to a religious concept. It is a term that encompasses all the bad that humans do.

And, just another note - your easy presumptions of others reactions to given circumstances eg  the snake after the kitty -  are erroneous, generalistic and frankly wrong. Some might see  'evil'   but most would think eeek save the kitty from danger.

As for the abused daughter rising to protect the innocent -  THAT would truly be a rare example. NOT UNKNOWN - just rare.  Obviously Jane was  tougher than the average girl.
Not helpful at all I'm afraid.

And this 'programming a fault rather than ..faulty wiring' re psychos is also highly suspect.
You are saying unequivocally that no one is born with the inherent desire to be bad.   How then does so much evil happen? Because of the Devil???   PUHlease!!!  Cop-out if ever there was one.

Not real sure what your point is -  except evil is only related to a religious perception of wrong-doing,  which - well ...just isn't so. :-?

Grey wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 6:15pm:

Hypothetical - 'Jane' when a young child was brutally treated by her mother and raped by her father. Jane grew up to be a champion of the rights of children. By her work and action she significantly lowered the number of children who experience incest and physical abuse. It doesn't make incest and brutality good things but. ;)

I don't disagree with you.  Have you read the old Chinese parable of the farmer with the horse?  (Lao Tzu)


Quote:

The Question of Good versus Evil: In medieval China there once lived an old farmer, who had a weak, ailing horse for ploughing his field. One day, the sickly horse ran away to the hills. The farmer's neighbors offered their sympathy to him: "Such rotten luck!" they exclaimed. "Bad luck? Good luck? Who knows?" mused the farmer. A week later, the old horse returned, bringing with it a herd of wild horses from the hills. This time, the neighbors swarmed around the farmer and congratulated him on his good luck. His reply however was the same: "Good luck? Bad luck? Who can tell?" Sometime later, while trying to tame one of the wild horses, the farmer's only son fell off its back and broke his leg. Everyone thought this was bad luck. "Bad luck? Good luck? I don't know," said the farmer. A few weeks later, the king's army marched into the village and conscripted every able-bodied young man living there. The farmer' s son, who was laid up with a broken leg was let off, for he was thought to be of no use to them. Now what was this? Good luck or bad luck? Who can tell?

The Daoist concept is similar in a way to the Buddhist concept of Karma (only from a Western perspective! )

I've heard it said that we all have our windows on the world.  From our perspective, an act may be seen as good or bad, but not necessarily from other perspectives.

There need not be anything mystical about karma - It's basically cause and effect theory.

Quote:

The Daoist concept is similar in a way to the Buddhist concept of Karma

Is it? The concept of 'luck' is basic to superstition. The concept of good/bad judges actions. I don't have much time for moral relativism. Chucking acid over school girls may seem like a good thing to Talibs, but that's because they're twisted f'cks. I refuse the notion that regarding women as lesser people than men is good or acceptable anywhere. Which is to say that anywhere would be vastly improved by emancipation.

Jalane, the d-evil take you, you contradict yourself in your own rantings.  ;D

Grey wrote on Jul 20^th, 2011 at 11:29am:

Quote: The Daoist concept is similar in a way to the Buddhist concept of Karma Is it? The concept of 'luck' is basic to superstition. The concept of good/bad judges actions. I don't have much time for moral relativism. Chucking acid over school girls may seem like a good thing to Talibs, but that's because they're twisted f'cks. I refuse the notion that regarding women as lesser people than men is good or acceptable anywhere. Which is to say that anywhere would be vastly improved by emancipation. Jalane, the d-evil take you, you contradict yourself in your own rantings.  ;D

I didn't notice the word luck in that translation. Luck is not central to that story anyway.  "Is that a good thing or a bad thing" might be a better way of expressing it.  Each event in that parable had consequences of some kind. It's the cause and effect relationship I was emphasising - not luck. Another way of expressing 'luck' more rigorously is in terms of 'risk' or 'probable consequences'. Any given event has a certain probability of occurring. The probable consequences of that event could be good or bad.  

I think there are some things that are obviously wrong. You gave some examples of that. Throwing acid on school girls is not ok in Afghan society either. That's why the perpetrator was prosecuted.

However Christians and Muslims alike tend to take too much of a monochrome perspective.  

[

Quote:

I didn't notice the word luck in that translation. Luck is not central to that story anyway.

I think it is  :) Ahhh the ripples on the pond may prove stronger than the stone and the buuterflies wings beating in the blue mountains may cause an earthquake in Guatamala.... but before we get too carried away Grasshopper, with contemplating the oneness, let's consider that the Buddha was a fat princely bastard lecturing very skinny people  ;D


Quote:

"Is that a good thing or a bad thing" might be a better way of expressing it.  Each event in that parable had consequences of some kind. It's the cause and effect relationship I was emphasising - not luck. Another way of expressing 'luck' more rigorously is in terms of 'risk' or 'probable consequences'. Any given event has a certain probability of occurring. The probable consequences of that event could be good or bad.

 

Probable consequences, yes let's consider that. The young fella probably wouldn't have a broken leg, if he'd taken the training of the horse a bit slower and gentler. The young fellas wouldn't have been rounded up if the emperor hadn't gotten involved in a war. They're direct consequences. Bad things compound themselves and so do good ones. The acid throwing, which has happened more than once and involved more than one perpetrator, was a consequence of Islam not keeping up with modernity. It was a deliberate act to install fear in young women so that they would stop going to school. That it was THAT girl that took the brunt was bad luck, that THAT boy was spared being rounded up for war was good luck.

I've never quite cottoned on to the EAST/WEST dichotomy, surely North and South makes more sense? Anyway Asians might be less sanguine about the causes of catastrophe if they didn't have quite so many. Europe is a lot more stable than Asia, both geographically and politically. Oh sure there was the Holocaust I know and more, but compared to the genocides of Asia...  


Quote:

However Christians and Muslims alike tend to take too much of a monochrome perspective.

There's a lot to be said for the black and white view of events, there's a time to be sanguine for sure and also a time to be angry. I had a good look at Buddhism, Taoism too. I looked closely because I could see a lot of good philosophy there, I keep it 'in mind', but ultimately I'm too worldly for that.

How so Grey??

My rant is  self-contradictory??
Appreciate a response with more content - 'I see no contradiction. :-?

Muso - how does Taoism have a western viewpoint??

Emma wrote on Jul 20^th, 2011 at 8:05pm:

How so Grey?? My rant is  self-contradictory?? Appreciate a response with more content - 'I see no contradiction. :-?

Quote:

the dictionary I just looked at doesn't mention anything to do with religion

The devil is of religion, you clod  :)


Quote:

I know it is a word that I use reluctantly, for the very reason that many people automatically link it to a religious concept.

For somebody who's reluctant to use it, because people (rightly) link it to religion, you seem to use it a lot AND waste everybodies time defending it.


Quote:

your easy presumptions of others reactions to given circumstances eg  the snake after the kitty

Snake, kitty me HUH?


Quote:

You are saying unequivocally that no one is born with the inherent desire to be bad.

Very nearly unequivocally yes. All babies are innocents, in this Jesus and I are in agreement.  


Quote:

How then does so much evil happen?

Ffs, this you are quite capable of working out for yourself.

dear me Grey - no need to get upset and be rude.tsk tsk .

The Topic is Evil - not the Devil.
I am saying that 'evil'  or  (IN OTHER WORDS) 'nasty stuff' exists without the need for reference to a superstitious belief.
Show me where it says evil is exclusively valid only in relation to religious principle.  Perhaps, that was the genesis of the concept/word?  The Bible?? .... well?   I doubt it..... Just another reality borrowed by various religions to further their credibility??

Perhaps it has 'evolved' as a word to encompass non-sectarian considerations.
I'm not asking you, I'm expressing my response. Tough if you find it dense.


For somebody who's reluctant to use it, because people (rightly) link it to religion, you seem to use it a lot AND waste everybodies time defending it. - Grey

That is both incorrect- -  and deliberately inflammatory.  But you know - I don't care ---.

 Taoist/Daoist if you want to be modern and phonetic, - philosophy would hear what you said, and shrug  -considering it unimportant - a simple example of loss ,  ...  for unnecessary disturbance, and ........YOUR problem.!!! :).  

Maybe the Kitty / Snake thing wasn't you - who knows who cares - I stand by what I said.
Babies ARE innocent - no doubt. I don't buy in to the anti-christ child blah blah.

But 'nuture' CANNOT be the only cause of socio-psycho behaviour.  Happens in the BEST of families don't you know.! ::) :P

Some people are wired wrong. That is plain as your BIG NOSE! ;D

[quote  The devil is of religion, you clod  :)

Ah ha  -  so - the devil is only significant to those who hold to religion. Only exists BECAUSE of religion.

The rest of us - ie  non-religious -need have no consideration for the Devil, because the concept of Devil doesn't exist.,.!   How enlightening.!! ;) :-?

WELL I've always known that -  but perhaps you haven't.  I can only assume that you are a student of Jesus Christ.!
Show a little TOLERANCE -you needn't feel uncomfortable cos I don't agree. Go with it - man. Be a good Christian.