God and evil

[Maryjane]

What the covalent bond of hydrogen and oxygen atoms have to do with the justification of evil is beyond me,

It's not apparent to me either. I feel your frustration.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: freefallife I hope you can see how this doesn't justify the existance of evil in the first place.

This is becoming boring.

I just proved the following with the analogy...

That pleasure and suffering are matters of perspective.
Therefore making less pain in the world will only change our perception of what is suffering and what is pleasure. It's not like a number scale of positive to negative. It is like trying to define what is hot and cold.

On the good and evil argument, something similar can be said.

So, if he only threw only 1 loud party a year (say on his birthday) he would be considered somewhat below average and therefore evil?

No, and as such we have my argument that good and evil are perspectives. They are on a spectrum.

The above would be like saying, all I need is that one party a year to appreciate silence. Then if that happened then you would say, Well he could cut down on the number of people, then make the music only somewhat loud.
Then you find yourself wondering why the neighbor can stop going to the bathroom when you are in the house because of that flushing noise.

And, again, that doesn't explain why there is so MUCH suffering.

It's only so much by our standards. It's only so much, because the worst that has happened is about as bad as we can imagine. We rarely can imagine evil that has not happened before. (excluding end of the world ideas). It is only so much by our standards. Such standards have changed in the past and they will again in the future.

If we are all guilty of original sin, then why not simply have an angel sharply slap all of us accross the face each morning as we wake up? There you go. We would all suffer equally...we would know what pain was. Problem solved. There is no reason for the death of innocent children.

Not my argument freefall. (I'll cut you some slack though. Your arguing against, like, nine people at once.)

Perception is my argument. The original sin's punishment is being able to think. That's painful enough.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: WW This is becoming boring. I just proved the following with the analogy... That pleasure and suffering are matters of perspective. Therefore making less pain in the world will only change our perception of what is suffering and what is pleasure. It's not like a number scale of positive to negative. It is like trying to define what is hot and cold. On the good and evil argument, something similar can be said.

Your analogy fails because there is no need for a sliding scale of good or bad. It is claimed in the bible (somewhere) that once you're in heaven, you will not experience any suffering and you will eternal happiness, if I'm not mistaken. If this is the case, then God could make a reality that equals Heaven right from the get go. Which begs the question.... provide the justification for why he didn't just put us all in heaven before we could sin in the first place. Yet for some reason, thiests think this is an entity worthy of our worship. The Tri-omni god in the bible CAN'T exist if evil (suffering) exists.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: freefallife So, now your changing your analogy from the singular atom, to an entire molocule? Concession noted. Moving on. What the covalent bond of hydrogen and oxygen atoms have to do with the justification of evil is beyond me, but let me see if I understand this correctly. You state that everything has a state of ballance. You are therefore asserting that there is just as much evil in the world as there is good. Is that your position? You state that everything has a state of opposition. I have already pointed out numerous things of which there is no opposite. What is the opposite of banana??

It looks that the Universe is tough enough to take and/or handle anything within.
Nobel for the Universe.

Quote by: freefallife <sigh>...And as I stated, this is a topic by which I am challenging YOUR beliefs. My beliefs or lack thereof are irrelevant.

How about challenging and/or excersizing some logic ?
Is that irrelevant as well ?

As to your credo that labels this thread :
It seems that you - as some other guys - pauperize your grey-cells with centuries-old stereotypes, with a reference to the Bible. Those times are gone, so there is a way of thinking on that subject, accordingly and respectively. (If you are trying to resurrect Dark Ages, then point it out.)
Therefore, God vs Evil and/or God and Evil subject(s) is the issue for Psychology and Sociology related fields.
If you have a dilemma with understanding and/or comprehending the text within the Bible then submit such request, and (I believe) Volcanvo members would provide some alternative and/or reasonable determinations, solutions, answers, etc. to you.

Since you reject God, what is the reason even to raise that subject ?
What makes you think that guys are so infantile and/or naive that they can not decode the real subject for this thread ? because you did Not post it, in that Exact form and/or style, precisely ??? (If "yes", then that is good explanation for kids, and/or alike.)
Onomastics becomes irrelevant, as long as the sense of expression(s) remains the same and/or points at/to such determinations.
Yet you are demanding some answers on God vs Evil ?
That is really piteous.

Nevertheless, I have already answered your question(s).
This is neither my business the way you may comprehend a submitted material nor the method you may attempt to analyze it, not to mention determinations, findings, etc.
Complaints ? To yourself.

P.S.
Try to build bridges, instead of creating gaps. Guys would be more greatful for your efforts, instead and indeed, since nobody needs to share others view, especially.

[Maryjane]

Rainbow...

Just because your lips are moving doesn't mean you are saying antything. I fail to see your logic. What do atoms have to do with evil or god? I'm sure there are theist in this debate that are scratching their heads because they don't understand what you are trying to convey either. (otherwise they would have jumped on your band wagon by now)

[JLrep]

Quote by: ItsDarts Can we assume you do not believe in evolution, even though many christians do? Even the pope says that evolution is to be believed but it was god who sparked it. If this is the case, then there is no Adam and Eve and hence, no original sin as described in the bible. So how do you reconcile this with your argument?

You would be correct in that assumption. It's not something that requires reconciliation.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Maryjane Rainbow... Just because your lips are moving doesn't mean you are saying antything. I fail to see your logic. What do atoms have to do with evil or god? I'm sure there are theist in this debate that are scratching their heads because they don't understand what you are trying to convey either. (otherwise they would have jumped on your band wagon by now)

An atom is made/built of :
- protons ; positive
- electrons ; negative
- neutrons ; neutral
Atoms create matter - under specific condition(s).
The Universe - we are part of - is based on state of opposition (read : force-applied vs counter-force).
(That is what fudnamental notions of Science teach us.)

Put all these alements together and you have the answer to my parallel :
- God vs Evil
- Proton vs Electron

I am certain that guys would understand this time.

P.S.
What happens to Neutron ?
Gravity is the answer.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: JLrep You would be correct in that assumption. It's not something that requires reconciliation.

Except for the facts that 1.) creation story has ZERO evidence, 2.) contradicts its self between Gen 1 & Gen 2 and 3.) Oh yeah, has ZERO evidence. You believe this without any logical proof or empirical evidence, or in otherwords, faith. Where as evolution has mountains of evidence, helps explain everything we know about biology, and without evolution theory, everything we know about biology is wrong, which it is not. Mind if I enquire what sect of christianity you belong too?

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: Rainbow An atom is made/built of : - protons ; positive - electrons ; negative - neutrons ; neutral Atoms create matter - under specific condition(s). The Universe - we are part of - is based on state of opposition (read : force-applied vs counter-force). (That is what fudnamental notions of Science teach us.) Put all these alements together and you have the answer to my parallel : - God vs Evil - Proton vs Electron I am certain that guys would understand this time. P.S. What happens to Neutron ? Gravity is the answer.

Your analogy fails miserably.....

If an atom is ionized, or has no electrons, it can't form chemical bonds with other atoms. This is because electrons are required for those bonds, and they aren't present because the atom has become "ionized". One of the places this happens to an atom is in a star. It also fails for another reason. You are equivocating matter with non-matter, not a fair analogy. They are categorically two separate things/concepts.

[JLrep]

Quote by: ItsDarts Except for the facts that 1.) creation story has ZERO evidence, 2.) contradicts its self between Gen 1 & Gen 2 and 3.) Oh yeah, has ZERO evidence. You believe this without any logical proof or empirical evidence, or in otherwords, faith. Where as evolution has mountains of evidence, helps explain everything we know about biology, and without evolution theory, everything we know about biology is wrong, which it is not. Mind if I enquire what sect of christianity you belong too?

I am a Lutheran.
Though I'm game to debate belief in evolution vs. Creation, this thread is about contradictions within theistic framework(s), not whether or not those framework(s) are correct. So, are you trying to make a particular point?

[Winter wind]

Quote by: Itsdarts Your analogy fails because there is no need for a sliding scale of good or bad.

All analogy fails because they aren't the truth. I find your lack of definition of good and evil equally unhelpful. The concept of good and evil are complex and may even be non-existent in some interpretations. No, This is less about good and evil and more about pain and pleasure.

Quote by: Itsdarts It is claimed in the bible (somewhere) that once you're in heaven, you will not experience any suffering and you will eternal happiness, if I'm not mistaken. If this is the case, then God could make a reality that equals Heaven right from the get go. Which begs the question.... provide the justification for why he didn't just put us all in heaven before we could sin in the first place. Yet for some reason, thiests think this is an entity worthy of our worship. The Tri-omni god in the bible CAN'T exist if evil (suffering) exists.

The following is a duplicate of a response I gave to Lullaby on the exact same argument. But to start off, Lull argued that since heaven a "evil and pain free zone" existed, why couldn't God create the same logic here on earth. Heaven defies logic, therefore God can defy logic.

This was the smart answer, and I knew it was coming.

However, then my response there is a logic behind it, we just can't understand it because it doesn't follow our logic. Your response is that because God defies all logic therefore God can create something even when it is illogical.

Therefore the logic may exist, but it is beyond what we can comprehend.

Quote by: lull
I have no idea what you just said lol

Me: Don't worry, neither did I. I was just stalling...(jk)

Basically what I meant to say, (I was watching the Colbert Report at the time, sue me if the wording is fuzzy), was that if God defies logic, there may be a logic behind why there is evil in the world, yet it is beyond us.

You said God defies our logic therefore therefore the reason whey there is evil may be beyond our comprehension.

If you still didn't understand, just watch Steven Colbert a few hundred times, then look at it again. It may make more sense.

[Jack]

So are we now to equate the actions of a god and the existence of "evil" to ironic satire? I suppose the Old Testament especially could support that view.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: isherwood So are we now to equate the actions of a god and the existence of "evil" to ironic satire? I suppose the Old Testament especially could support that view.

Perhaps we should find a way to define good and evil.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: JLrep I am a Lutheran. Though I'm game to debate belief in evolution vs. Creation, this thread is about contradictions within theistic framework(s), not whether or not those framework(s) are correct. So, are you trying to make a particular point?

Yes, the point I'm trying to make is that your faith is irrational, thats all. Evolution is true, the only debate amongst scientists are the various mechanisms of evolution. Since evolution is true, original sin can't happen, which invalidates the argument you were trying to make, just before I replied.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: Winter wind All analogy fails because they aren't the truth. I find your lack of definition of good and evil equally unhelpful. The concept of good and evil are complex and may even be non-existent in some interpretations. No, This is less about good and evil and more about pain and pleasure.

Evil was defined in the first or second page of this thread. Its the dictionary definition, "Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful, characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous."

The following is a duplicate of a response I gave to Lullaby on the exact same argument. But to start off, Lull argued that since heaven a "evil and pain free zone" existed, why couldn't God create the same logic here on earth. Heaven defies logic, therefore God can defy logic.

That wasn't a response, it was a cop out without support. Saying god defies logic is not supported in the bible, it is only conjecture on your part. The fact that omni-benevolence contradicts evil (as defined above), this god can't exist or he is not omni-benevolent as described in the bible. If he's not OB, then the bible is wrong.

[/quote]

[Winter wind]

"Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful, characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous."

Then how is good and evil not a spectrum.
more harm = more evil
less harm = less evil.

My definition of evil also extends to potential. IE if someone in front of you is dying and you walk away when you had the potential to save his life, that is also evil. So evil can also be defined as neither adding to pain nor reducing it. So evil also can be lack of enough good.

A spectrum through and through.

[Winter wind]

That wasn't a response, it was a cop out without support. Saying god defies logic is not supported in the bible, it is only conjecture on your part. The fact that omni-benevolence contradicts evil (as defined above), this god can't exist or he is not omni-benevolent as described in the bible. If he's not OB, then the bible is wrong.

You ate your wheeties this morning.
God is the Alpha and the Omega, anything he says goes.
He created logic, he can undo logic. It's not a conjecture, it's a simple chain of logic.

What if his definition of evil is different then the one presented by "the dictionary"? Also, you already know my stance on the old testament.

(did not mean to post that in two different posts)

[Jack]

He created logic, he can undo logic. It's not a conjecture, it's a simple chain of logic.

A chain of logical reasoning cannot contain that which claims to be outside of logic. The idea of a being that can defy logic is, by definition, illogical.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: Winter wind Then how is good and evil not a spectrum. more harm = more evil less harm = less evil. My definition of evil also extends to potential. IE if someone in front of you is dying and you walk away when you had the potential to save his life, that is also evil. So evil can also be defined as neither adding to pain nor reducing it. So evil also can be lack of enough good. A spectrum through and through.

Unfortunately for you, the bolded part certainly applies to your god as he has the power to prevent it, yet doesn't. He's been given the attribute of being Omni-benevolent, but still does nothing to prevent the evil described in the dictionary definition. But wait, I know how you'll answer... God is a sovereign entity who can choose to do what ever he likes and no matter what it is he chooses, it must be considered good and just because he is ruler of all.

If its necessary to have a spectrum, then try to think of the worst evil (suffering) that you can think of. ONce you acheived what you consider the worst possible evil, remove that evil and all evil upto lets say, sitting in a recliner typing on a computer to now be the worst possible evil and anything better than that is considered good. Sounds like Heaven, doesn't it? So right now, I could be experiencing the worst possible evil if there was a god who is powerful enough, loving enough, to make it so.

We could even extend suffering to stuff that would be our own fault. If I ride a bike like a crazy person, then fall off and hurt myself, that could be the worst possbile suffering. This would leave room for learning not to do stupid stuff. Its the things like disease, natural disasters, famine, flood, etc, that we have no control over that your god could prevent. This is why the thread was started. What justification is there for this kind of suffering?

[JLrep]

Quote by: Isherwood I know this belief isn't unique within Christianity, but whenever I encounter it I feel so sad for those who accept it as reality. What must it do to a person's outlook on life to believe that even newborns are sinful and condemned to everlasting torture if they should die before being baptized, and that all of humanity is responsible for the mythical actions of the original couple? Yet every day I stand next to people with this mindset. They must feel such resentment for having been born into this "horrible" world.

Come, now. If we start feeling sorry for each other, I think we will very soon be in a downward spiral.

Quote by: Isherwood However, to take on the creation story, the idea of original sin does address the actions of Adam and Eve. But the decision to visit the punishment for their actions on future generations was god's alone. Their actions didn't necessitate a sinful nature being passed along. It was the Biblical god's choice that it be so. For this, he is responsible, not the humans.

You have it backwards. Sin isn't something that came from Adam and Eve's disobedience; Adam and Eve's disobedience came from their sin. That disobedience is not foreign to us. It's something we all committed. No, we didn't all eat from the tree, but we all decided to trust in ourselves instead of God. It was (is) a plural act.

Quote by: ItsDarts Yes, the point I'm trying to make is that your faith is irrational, thats all. Evolution is true, the only debate amongst scientists are the various mechanisms of evolution. Since evolution is true, original sin can't happen, which invalidates the argument you were trying to make, just before I replied.

OK. But. I already said, this thread is about a particular imagined contradiction within Christianity itself, not whether Christianity is true and not whether evolution is true.