Good and Evil

[Greta]

Continued from the Science and God thread.

[ QUOTE ]
Al_Havemann said:
Good and Evil. Interesting question. It would appear that both would be necessary.

Can Good even be determined without Evil?.

If Satan were to assume the chair of God, wouldn't he have to assume the attributes of the office as well?.

Realize, this is philosophic question - should we initiate a new category?.

Al


[/ QUOTE ]

 

[JerryM]

I hope I can comment on Nick's comment re the dry bones of Ezekiel.
Nick,
You may know that the picture is of the restoration of Israel. Adam Clarke said it better than I so here is his comment.

"Under the emblem of the open valley being thickly strewed with very dry bones is represented the hopeless state of the Jews when dispersed throughout the provinces of the Chaldean empire. But God, contrary to every human probability, restores these bones to life, thereby prefiguring the restoration of that people from the Babylonish captivity, and their resettlement in the land of their forefathers, Eze_37:1-14. The prophet then makes an easy and elegant transition to the blessedness of the people of God under the Gospel dispensation, in the plenitude of its manifestation, when the genuine converts to Christianity, the spiritual Israel, shall be no longer under the domination of heathen and anti-christian rulers, but shall be collected together into one visible kingdom, and constitute but one flock under one Shepherd, Eze_37:15-28."

Jerry

 

[Kiessling]

There are no absolute or objective values for good and evil.
All this is man-made and easy terms for a moral codex of a given society.
bernhard

 

[JerryM]

Al,
["Can Good even be determined without Evil?."]

Yes, because God is good, and evil is that which is not in accordance with His holiness, commands and precepts.
Evil does not determine what is good, but the opposite.
Obedience to Him is good, disobedience is evil.

Adam had goodness and knew what was good. God gave him a command. Adam disobeyed that command, and then knew what tragedy evil could and bring. He did not need to do evil to know what was good.

I think it is true, that doing evil and experiencing or observing its adverse consequences, makes one more aware of the benefits of good, and the tragedy of evil.

Unfortunately, our fallen nature does not automatically tell us how bad sin is, or the tragic consequences which will occur. We tend to misunderstand how God looks at any and all sins, and to think that some are not very bad. Accordingly, we might think that murder is bad, but sexual sins between two single and consenting people are not bad. Or we might think that to sass our parents is really not very bad. God does not look at it that way.
Any disobedience to Him, is sin that must ultimately have adverse consequences.
He has built in some consequences of evil, and we see some of those consequences in our society. School shootings for example.

Jerry

 

[Kiessling]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, because God is good, and evil is that which is not in accordance with His holiness, commands and precepts.
Evil does not determine what is good, but the opposite.
Obedience to Him is good, disobedience is evil.

[/ QUOTE ]

... the perfect example of the relative value of good and evil.
Ask other religions, societies or philosophers, and you'll get an abundance of different answers.

For me, there is no good and evil at all. I am pursuing reason.

bernhard

 

[brightnorm]

[ QUOTE ]
JerryM said:
...Yes, because God is good, and evil is that which is not in accordance with His holiness, commands and precepts.
Evil does not determine what is good, but the opposite.
Obedience to Him is good, disobedience is evil...

[/ QUOTE ]

Jerry,

God is omnipotent. Why can't he simply eliminate evil, remove Man's propensity for evil and annihilate the Devil? This is one part of Christianity that's hard to understand. An omnipotent and benevolent God could create a heaven on earth right now if he so chose, he could structure and mold anything and everything to his satisfaction. Even the most erudite biblical scholars know that there are seemingly contradictary aspects of God's actions that we will never understand. Those contradictions are bridged by faith for the devout but become inevitable sticking points for others, in addition to the question of Bible veracity in the first place. The self-referential nature of Bible "defense" contributes to the difficulty.

The devout see these questions and challenges as the pathetic efforts of those who are unenlightened and doomed. But many of those "unenlightened" ones are on a quest that is just as sincere, dedicated and committed as any devout religionist's. The very existence of evil seems to contradict God's omnipotence, benevolence and raises questions about "his" very nature.

Brightnorm

 

[Charles Bradshaw]

I was wondering why the other topic got locked. Glad it wasn't due to 'demons' and 'true believers' flaming each other.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin07.gif

 

[McGizmo]

One man's ceiling is another man's floor. I think in some examples, black and white or yes and no or good and bad might successfully be used as a binary, on or off, statement of assesment. More often than not though, I think a question of balance or gray area is more appropriate. I still think a notion of yin and yang makes more sense in many considerations as the implication is the need for a balance of a state without attaching a good or bad conotation, as it were. I am probably not making much sense here but beyond the discussion of God and other such absolutes, forcing ones position into a binary response is often too limiting in scope.

Probably a bad example but lets take a wild fire that has been initiated by a young person. On the face of it, one might call it an evil act. One might generalize and call all wild fires evil in nature. However in some circumstances, wild fires can be shown to be beneficial in clearing an area and allowing for new growth.

OK, I think I have failed here! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon15.gif I suspect this thread will continue on a religious level and that's cool and I can do us all a favor and stay away. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink2.gif

I would like to monitor a thread regarding the universe, science and any indication that there might be an intelligence behind the creation of the universe and how it might be demonstrated. OK, I'll start that one. Bye bye. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink2.gif

 

[cosco]

I found the thread about God and Science so quickly growing that I gave up reading it. Excuse me if I say something that was said already.

Philosophy speaks about some universal categories like "being", "true", "beauty", "goodnes" and it sees them as God's atributes. There is a principle: "everything what exists is good and true and beauty" Or: "The more something exist the better it is" God exists absolutely (opposite of having existence from something else - from relation to something). Therefore he is absolute existence, true, beauty, good.

So where is the room for evil? Philosophers see the evil as privacy of beeing (something should exist but it is not there). Like this: Man has to have two arms. If he get one hand cut off he suffers from the privacy of the hand. There should be one but there is "emptiness" instead. The evil is the emptiness. You can say: "Evil is that what does not exist". It should but it does not. This is not just a play. You certainly can say: "Man has to have wings" But he has not because he was not supposed to. Lack of wings is not evil but lack of arm is. This is all about physical evil.

But there is also moral or spiritual evil - the lack of respect for example. You are supposed to have respect to people or to God and if you do not have it, the reason why is you was ripped off from it or by yourself or by someone else.

This is the case of satan. He is not the opposite of God. He ripped himself off from the reverence to God. It does not hurt the absolute being at all and this makes the relative being (which satan is) very furious. Because he hurts only himself he tries to hurt everbody else just to demonstrate God has no power. So he continues hurting himself when hurting other creatures (like angels or humans). This is going to be vitious circle with all the tragedy we all can experience. But still God is pure existence without any possibility to get stolen even a tiny part of it by anybody. The eternal uncomfort of devil and his "friends" (he has no friends) comes from this endless circle.

Because we have bodies and not only souls, we experience satan's tries of ripoffs on physical part (illneses and worse) as well as on spiritual part (lack of moral generally).

Now I hope the length of this post wont discourage you from reading it. Sorry for my grammar/spelling. English is still not my mothertongue. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[JerryM]

McGizmo,

There are absolutes of morals.
Where is the good in rape.?

Man is unable to reach absolute morality by himself. The only one who has the moral authority, and wisdom is the God who created us.

All the philosophical discussions do not change that. They generally just results in foolishness.

Jerry

 

[JerryM]

Brightnorm,
["God is omnipotent. Why can't he simply eliminate evil, remove Man's propensity for evil and annihilate the Devil?"]

He can and will in His time. Our timetable is not His. In this age He desires that all repent and be saved, and He is giving man that chance by the spreading of the gospel of Christ. When one is saved God gives him the ability to reject evil. He does that by making him a new creation, and putting the Holy Spirit within him.

But He will not always show such mercy and grace, and the final result will be as shown in Revelation chapter 20 when all evil and evil doers will be cast into the Lake of Fire.

Although there might be many questions as to why God does or does not do various things, the most important question to any person is, "What are you going to do with the Gospel of Christ?" Will you reject it and spend eternity in Hell, or will you accept God's offer of forgiveness and spend eternity in Heaven? Those are the only two choices which determine your eternal future.

An individual might learn many things about God and the Bible and the religions of the world. He might be a world renowned scholar. But after all that, the same truth is still there.
You must be born again to see the Kingdom of Heaven.

Most will continue to pursue the answers to why God does or does not do.....
But they will not obey Him and will die and go to Hell. It does not have to be that way, but each person makes his choice.

Jerry

 

[JerryM]

Cosco,

Here is a passage that addresses the wisdom of philosophy, and man's wisdom.
Corinthians 1:17 ¶For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

A lot of folks could profit from that passage.

Jerry

 

[jayflash]

I wonder if I prefer the audio of some 33&1/3 vinyl LP's because there is more information in the grooves beyond the signal existing in only "on" or "off" states? Some well recorded LP's sound more real and alive than many CD's.

Life mirrors analog more than digital reproductions. Much of what is considered to be right, wrong, moral or not is OPINION and exists in the vast grey area between absolutes.

Yes, JerryM, rape, theft, violence in general, we can agree is wrong. I don't think Don was referencing those acts. Those examples equal the ones and zeros of the digital domain. It's the areas of sex, drugs, gambling, and rock & roll that occupy the greys of the analog medium of which we are part.

 

[JerryM]

jayflash,
{"It's the areas of sex, drugs, gambling, and rock & roll that occupy the greys of the analog medium of which we are part."]

There is nothing grey about those things. If you were to read the Bible carefully you would see that all those things are sinful.

Jerry

 

[Nitro]

Scientists now believe that space is not continuous. In other words, on a really small level, objects jump along like your mouse jumps along your monitor. It just looks as though it is moving smoothly. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thinking.gif

Could the universe really be inside a giant computer? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif

 

[Nitro]

And who is running it?

 

[jayflash]

Maybe you're right Nitro, after all, most of us have ten digits. That shoots my analog analogy to heck.

Jerry, I love your conviction. I won't argue this further because we did this @ God & Science. FWIW, I too have what I believe are deep, spiritual, beliefs, that you would appreciate. In many ways we hold similar ideals to be sacred.

 

[NoShadow]

JerryM didn't mean to infer that sex was sinful....only the abuse of what God meant to be for our good and enrichment.

 

[SomeBloke]

Gambling and rock&roll are "sinful"? I imagine that this must be some specific subset of what gambling means, since just living life is a gamble. Every time you walk down the street, drive a car, just about any action you take involves some risk and therefore is a gamble to some extent. As for rock&roll, I've never really understood how music itself can be good or bad - only an individuals' interpretation can really be defined in this way, I think.
Although, I've heard some music which few would argue the point about - ouch /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

With regards to good and evil, I also believe it is almost impossible to define them as absolutes. The best I can think of is, hurting things is bad, helping things is good. Anything else I think about seems to come down to a subset of that.

But there are so many levels and variations in between -Helping to hurt something? Hurting something to help it (ie, cutting off a gangrenous toe to save someone's life). For every "absolute" example of "good" and "evil", there are probably hundreds of examples which cannot be categorised so easily .

 

[Empath]

I started writing, but eventually got to thinking "I've already written this before, I think". Sure enough. Okay, second go around.

The way the story goes is that a choice was offered along with a lie enticing the breaking of a rule given. The story given by a tempter said the fruit of a particular tree had special powers to open the eyes of the one that would eat it, enabling them the ability to differentiate between "good" and "evil". The one tempted had been advised that eating it would bring death. Whether by the defiant act or by the characteristics of the fruit not being clear, the tempter could direct attention to the fruit itself rather than the act, as the "risk". A bit of misdirection challenging the argument of death with a claim that such "death warnings" were selfishly made to keep us ignorant, and a claim that the fruit offered an ability beyond our nature worked. So successful was the "lie" that generations upon generations would repeat, believe, and promote it. Today people still think they can somehow determine good from evil, yet they have nothing more to go on than their likes and dislikes. By consensus, and popular opinion they define their likes and dislikes beyond simple individual preferences as "established" evil or good. Through laws, creeds, systems, "inspired writings" and dogmatic tomes we establish our definitions of good and evil.

The story of "you will not die" remains the most heavily entrenched belief, as nearly all religions and many philosophical reasonings offer continuing life, even continuity of life beyond physical death.

My words, for those that like them are "good".
My words, for those that don't are "evil".
My opinion? I prefer not to form one. I'm not qualified.
I only know what I like and dislike.