Origin of damnation-worthy 'evil'

[orgaelin]

This question is primarily aimed Inquisitor, the man currently making himself so well known as the Westernised version of Osama Bin Laden.

I want to know, insofar as anyone is able to tell, when a person becomes 'evil' to a degree that would deserve damnation, or at least Inquisitors disapproval; I'm not sure which is worse.

For example, if a baby is born, I personally presume it is born good, regardless of what future acts it might commit.

What if a boy is born, and does nothing but good his whole life, and he is truly a shining example of purety in God's eyes... then one day he realises maybe he's gay. Then he decides, yeah, he is gay. He still does all the good stuff that defined him, but he is attracted to men because of a defect in his brain which is nothing to do with any choice he has ever made.

Inquisitor: is he evil, or a victim of bad luck?

I should predict your answer... since I know you think everyone who has a large mole is a witch and thus deserves damnation, I guess that means you're very likely to say the gay guy is evil.

But if the gay guy is evil, what is about his behaviour that makes him evil? I mean, surely evil can only be defined through action? What if you get a man who is evil in his mind, but keep him tied up his whole life so he can't do anything. He'll never have committed a single crime...

Is he saved by us because we prevented him from sinning? Or is he also to be damned?

Inquisitor, your definition of what is evil seems so broad that it must include everyone at some stage in their lives. Where do you draw the line? How do you seperate the evil from the people who made one mistake and regretted it ever after?

Also, maybe this is a misperception on my part, but your faith seems to be based a lot more on the evils of this world than the good of Heaven. And if that is a misperception on my part, I take no responsibility for it. Such a conclusion is merely the result of open observation: you have more to say about evil than you do about God and good.

I wonder if you realise that if you were completely right in all your assertions, only a tiny number of people are ever going to get to heaven?

One final question: is hatred evil?

[Inquisitor]

For example, if a baby is born, I personally presume it is born good, regardless of what future acts it might commit.

orgaelin, life is much more complex than this. We all born with certain psycho dinamics which are genetically determined. So one may be born sadist, murderer etc. However what we born with is not always what we become. E.g. a person born sadist, may become a career criminal ( kill and assualt normal people) or he may become a career cop ( kill and assualt criminals and therefore protecting normal people). The same psycho dinamics, totally different outcomes. So one may be born bad, the more glory he deserves if he manages to overcome his evil nature.

What if a boy is born, and does nothing but good his whole life, and he is truly a shining example of purety in God's eyes... then one day he realises maybe he's gay. Then he decides, yeah, he is gay. He still does all the good stuff that defined him, but he is attracted to men because of a defect in his brain which is nothing to do with any choice he has ever made.

Being born homosexual is not a sin. Acting on this however is. A person who was born homosexual yet abstains from this bahaviour is very worthy of salvation and deserves my highest respect. Orthodoxy relies on monasterys to help people who were born bad to save themselves via faith, prayer and hard labour. So in fact a person born homosexual may indeed become a saint.

I should predict your answer... since I know you think everyone who has a large mole is a witch and thus deserves damnation, I guess that means you're very likely to say the gay guy is evil.

I personally would need 3-5 signs before I accept that a person in question is degenerate ( mole is only one sign). No one deserves damnation on the basis of what they were born, only on the basis of what they did with it. As I said above, even this person can be saved. It is hard, but not impossible.

But if the gay guy is evil, what is about his behaviour that makes him evil? I mean, surely evil can only be defined through action? What if you get a man who is evil in his mind, but keep him tied up his whole life so he can't do anything. He'll never have committed a single crime...

Thought is material. So if one abstains from sinful action because he is forced to, not because it's his choice, he doesn't deserve salvation. Because he hasn't made the effort to defeat the devil in him.

Inquisitor, your definition of what is evil seems so broad that it must include everyone at some stage in their lives. Where do you draw the line? How do you seperate the evil from the people who made one mistake and regretted it ever after?

Yes we all are sinners ( though some much more apt to sin ). This is exactly what I meant when I said that life of an Orthodox Christian is a constant battle, battle with the devil in him. Even the most evil person can repent his sins and be saved. Therefore, good is supremacy of soul over body.

Also, maybe this is a misperception on my part, but your faith seems to be based a lot more on the evils of this world than the good of Heaven. And if that is a misperception on my part, I take no responsibility for it. Such a conclusion is merely the result of open observation: you have more to say about evil than you do about God and good.

God is perfect, however humans are not. Our mind is ill suited to understanding of what God is. However we can understand what God is not. Jesus intentionally gave us very limited information about nature of God and heaven. He made it clear however how we should act in order to be worthy of being with God. The most important part is to fight evil, firstly in yourself. This is why I speak about evil more than I speak about good.

I wonder if you realise that if you were completely right in all your assertions, only a tiny number of people are ever going to get to heaven?

I do realise it. Christianity is not recruitment, it is selection.

One final question: is hatred evil?

God is love.
1 Jn 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.

Therefore hatred is of devil not of God.
Yet Jesus himself did what would concidered to be hatred today.
Mt 21:12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

How can this be explained? Let's try and apply laws of maths to it. Assume that good is always a positive number ( + n ) and evil is always negative number ( - n ). Then:
when evil attacks good, this is evil, - n x + n = - n2
when good accepts and tolerates evil, this is evil, + n x - n = - n2
when evil attacks evil, this is good, - n x - n = + n2

Therefore hatred of evil is good. No Orthodox Church does not preach hatred, but neither does it preach tolerance of evil. So one's Christian conscience is a guide.

[Suburbanite]

I don't understand the question. You're acting like good and evil and bad and right and wrong are more than just words... they aren't.

[voyager]

It sounds as thouh Inquisitor has read Agustines "Confessions". Everything on earth is evil and we must not do anything that is human in order to be saved.

Oops ... sorry inquisitor you don't like the catholocs.

[castille]

Originally posted by Inquisitor, We all born with certain psycho dinamics which are genetically determined.

You must've been born with the "ignorant evil Christian" gene.

Being born homosexual is not a sin. Acting on this however is.

I agree. Being born Christian is not a sin. Acting on this however is.

I personally would need 3-5 signs before I accept that a person in question is degenerate ( mole is only one sign).

Me too. One of the signs is being Christian. In fact, if a person is Christian I take it as all 3 signs of evil

Therefore hatred of evil is good.

"Evil is whatever I say is evil." -Adolf Hitler

[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by Suburbanite, I don't understand the question. You're acting like good and evil and bad and right and wrong are more than just words... they aren't.

The statements of a post-modernist. Relativism is rampant in decayed Western European/American culture.

Since evil is just a word, the assault on the World Trade Center is not worthy of moral comment, just another happening. Forced child prostitution, "Who cares? Wrong is just a word..." right Suburbanite?

Civilization is losing its way if these are the considered words of the college-educated.

[tusaki]

Morality and culture is all relative. Being inside a certain culture makes some things more or less 'evil'. The examples you state are gross oversimplifications of what suburbanite tried to say. Besides a true 'black' area, there is a HUGE 'grey' area where different people will claim different things. And do you know the boundaries? I think the worst possible sin is to condemn other people to hell. The bible is a guide, maybe. But it is still 'only' a book, with stories ready for interpretation by anyone. Are you condemned because you eat cow-meat (Hinduism)? or pig-meat (Islam)? or because you have sex before marriage (Christianity/Islam)? or because you are gay? It's not as 'black & white' as any single religion will make it appear.

[Samildanach]

I don't really consider evil a word to be used in the real world. Evil to me has always personified something like the devil or something mythical. I don't think you could even class human beings as evil, we kill and be killed etc which are merely evil acts but evil, true evil is persistent. I don't believe that evil acts necessarily define humans beings as evil. For someone to be classed as truely evil he would have to go out of his way to create pain and misery on the largest scale he possibly could and make it his sole goal in life for his entire life. Even GW and Osama who have probably caused the greatest amount of deaths in the last few years can't really be defined as evil. Take hitler for example, evil? Not really...again, responsible for a great deal of deaths but he probably was doing what he thought was right for Germany and for humanity. If it wasn't for his methods I would say creating a superior human being was a worthy goal and one I'm sure will be revisited sooner or later once genetic science allows easy reliable gene therapy, his only problem was he wanted to see it in his lifetime and he concentrated on physical appearance rather than breeding out defects. So to sum up evil is not really a concept to be applied to humans IMO.