Omnipresence And Evil

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

After discussing a very broad yet complicated topic with a co-worker of mine concerning the nature of evil, I figured that I would start a thread that aims to put "evil" in its place. With that said, I would like to say that I do believe in a perfectly "good" Divine Creator that is omnipresent [and ironically christians do as well] and because this is so, I have come to the conclusion that "evil" doesn't even really exist. The question that I proposed to my catholic co-worker was "If you believe in a perfectly good omnipresent creator, and if evil can not exist in the same place as that creator, then wouldn't that mean that evil would have no place in which to exist?" So evil in essence is purley subjective, and is based on perception. This concept in itself completely destroys the entire concept of christianity's theory of mans sinful endemic nature and thus mans need for redemtion. It would also necessarily mean that the "old testaments" metaphorical depiction of a tree that possesses the knowledge of both good and evil is full of erronious implications. If the christian god is perfectly good, then it may only create that which is good and perfect - so where did the tree of the knowledge of good and EVIL come from? My father, who is a fundamental ignorant says that god has to be just, and that is why evil exists...doesn't make sense does it? How is a god that is perfectly good maintain a just nature by allowing that which is contrary to its nature to exist? I know that this is a rather bland subject, and has probably been covered 10,000 times before, but none-the-less, it is a topic that is at the heart of both theism and atheism so I feel as though it warrants attention again and again. To me, the absence of good and evil in mans conscious is the greater good, because when one falls into either side, they will be in conflict with the other side, and conflict is typically seen as evil, and that conflict I call the greater evil.

Tell me what you think - thanks. Peace.

[Eponymic]

To me, the absence of good and evil in mans conscious is the greater good, because when one falls into either side, they will be in conflict with the other side, and conflict is typically seen as evil, and that conflict I call the greater evil.

Tell me what you think - thanks. Peace.

 

So are you saying that when man goes against his own conscious, that's what you can evil?

Or am I missing your definition here?

[Deva]

With that said, I would like to say that I do believe in a perfectly "good" Divine Creator that is omnipresent [and ironically christians do as well] and because this is so, I have come to the conclusion that "evil" doesn't even really exist.

 

I have a hard time with this one. Christians do believe in a perfectly good God but that doesn't jibe with our experience of the world. Can good exist without evil? I don't think so. Isn't good also subjective?

 

So evil in essence is purley subjective, and is based on perception. This concept in itself completely destroys the entire concept of christianity's theory of mans sinful endemic nature and thus mans need for redemtion.

 

Agreed. In christianity evil is depicted as some universal contagion that suddenly appeared (yet mysteriously is not a quality of God) and due to humans and their "free will", contaminated the whole universe.

 

To me, the absence of good and evil in mans conscious is the greater good, because when one falls into either side, they will be in conflict with the other side, and conflict is typically seen as evil, and that conflict I call the greater evil.

 

I am also having trouble understanding what you mean.

"The absence of good and evil in man's conscious is the greater good." Could you go into this further?

[Scott_In_Michigan]

The idea that good and evil are a matter of perspective can raise some interesting points.

 

Other than supposedly tempting people (in the Bible), what did Satan do that was so bad? Now look at all of the terrible things God did. God wins easily!

 

Here's another thought...

 

Assume for a moment that the Bible is really the "Word of God". When considering that evil and good are relative, does it not seem as thought God is the evil one in the Bible? Would a GOOD God allow his most beloved creation fall into sin? Would a GOOD God create a place of eternal torment in which to store those he feels are not worthy of his heavenly real estate? Would a GOOD God deem his own creation so disgusting that he has to create a "son" to send to live with the filthy humans and then be sacrificed in order to somehow save them from eternal damnation for falling into the very sin that he allowed to exist in the first place? No. At the very least the Christian God is a controlling tyrant.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

With that said, I would like to say that I do believe in a perfectly "good" Divine Creator that is omnipresent [and ironically christians do as well] and because this is so, I have come to the conclusion that "evil" doesn't even really exist.

 

I have a hard time with this one. Christians do believe in a perfectly good God but that doesn't jibe with our experience of the world. Can good exist without evil? I don't think so. Isn't good also subjective?

 

 

So evil in essence is purley subjective, and is based on perception. This concept in itself completely destroys the entire concept of christianity's theory of mans sinful endemic nature and thus mans need for redemtion.

 

Agreed. In christianity evil is depicted as some universal contagion that suddenly appeared (yet mysteriously is not a quality of God) and due to humans and their "free will", contaminated the whole universe.

 

To me, the absence of good and evil in mans conscious is the greater good, because when one falls into either side, they will be in conflict with the other side, and conflict is typically seen as evil, and that conflict I call the greater evil.

 

I am also having trouble understanding what you mean.

"The absence of good and evil in man's conscious is the greater good." Could you go into this further?

 

--To me, perfect goodness [the greater good] is "perfect peace profound" which is the absence of conflict, but it is the humanistic perception of good and evil that causes conflict. Can good exist without evil? Sure it can so long as it is not the human perception of what good is. Goodness is only subjective when it applys to human perception - but when you look at the objective reality, you see that the objective reality is not concerned with our perception of good or evil, and once again this absence of good and evil is perfectly peaceful. That is why I beleive that creation is still perfect in its nature. The reason why the concept of a perfectly good Creator dones't jive with our experience in life is because it is natural that we see things as good or evil, and as long as this is so, there will be conflict. A wise man once said that the middle road is the road least traveled, and it is that road that is free from conflict - the middle road is the one path that is not concerned with the human perception of good or evil. When we die, we are released from our perceptions, and as such we return to perfect peace - when we die, we return to the objective reality which is not concerned with humans perception of good and evil. So in life, if we reject our own perceptions as universal truth we take a step in the direction of perfect peace.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

The idea that good and evil are a matter of perspective can raise some interesting points.

 

Other than supposedly tempting people (in the Bible), what did Satan do that was so bad? Now look at all of the terrible things God did. God wins easily!

 

Here's another thought...

 

Assume for a moment that the Bible is really the "Word of God". When considering that evil and good are relative, does it not seem as thought God is the evil one in the Bible? Would a GOOD God allow his most beloved creation fall into sin? Would a GOOD God create a place of eternal torment in which to store those he feels are not worthy of his heavenly real estate? Would a GOOD God deem his own creation so disgusting that he has to create a "son" to send to live with the filthy humans and then be sacrificed in order to somehow save them from eternal damnation for falling into the very sin that he allowed to exist in the first place? No. At the very least the Christian God is a controlling tyrant.

 

You think along the lines of a gnostic. In case you aren't familiar with gnosticism, let me tell you that they believe that the old testament god of the bible is really an evil tyrant, and that Y'shua is a messenger from the true god of peace [and in some forms, they beleive that Y'shua is a spectral manifestation of that peaceful god]. I myself am not a gnostic, but I do agree with some of their philosophy. I believ that the human perception of good and evil is not to be trusted, because no mans perception of either good or evil is universal truth. So with that said, the truth must be something other than the conflicting nature of mans perceptions. That is why I think that any doctrine that proposes a code of right and wrong/good and evil is suspect.

[Deva]

That is why I beleive that creation is still perfect in its nature. The reason why the concept of a perfectly good Creator dones't jive with our experience in life is because it is natural that we see things as good or evil, and as long as this is so, there will be conflict. A wise man once said that the middle road is the road least traveled, and it is that road that is free from conflict - the middle road is the one path that is not concerned with the human perception of good or evil. When we die, we are released from our perceptions, and as such we return to perfect peace - when we die, we return to the objective reality which is not concerned with humans perception of good and evil. So in life, if we reject our own perceptions as universal truth we take a step in the direction of perfect peace.

 

 

Thank you for the clarifying. Yes, one of the doctrines I was not able to accept in Christianity was that nature was at one time "good" and then it became contaminated by "sin." Yes, as long as we see things as good or evil there will be conflict.

 

There is really no reason to think that nature is not "perfect" as it is. It is our human, subjective views that lead us to believe otherwise.

 

Have you studied Buddhism?

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

Have you studied Buddhism?

 

I have not studied buddhism under any teacher - not in this incarnation anyhow. But none-the-less it all makes perfect sense. I beleive that All we are is the result of what we have thought, the mind is everything; what we think, we become and that nature as an expression of Divine Will has imprinted upon the mind of man the idea of the Creator. We are all one, but the trivial complexities that man brings upon himself blinds him from this truth, and that blindness is painful. Would you like to hear about the elements and mans parallels to them? [body = Earth, Mind = Water, Fire = Will, and Air = Spirit]

[Deva]

I have not studied buddhism under any teacher - not in this incarnation anyhow. But none-the-less it all makes perfect sense. I beleive that All we are is the result of what we have thought, the mind is everything; what we think, we become and that nature as an expression of Divine Will has imprinted upon the mind of man the idea of the Creator. We are all one, but the trivial complexities that man brings upon himself blinds him from this truth, and that blindness is painful. Would you like to hear about the elements and mans parallels to them? [body = Earth, Mind = Water, Fire = Will, and Air = Spirit]

 

Great answer Stephen. If I have understood you correctly, our views pretty much correspond. I am just not exactly sure what you mean by "divine will" and "creator". The word "will" is kind of dicey for me. If you mean that consciousness "creates" the world anew every moment, we agree.

 

I have also not studied under any living teachers in this incarnation but have read many books and viewed many tapes not only of Buddhism but Advaita Vedanta Hinduism and the teachings of J. Krishnamurti. They basically say the same thing - we are the "divine". I think they make sense and that the mind (or should we say consciousness?) is all and we are the all.

 

I understand the elements as used in astrological interpretation, otherwise I don't know any other correspondence - yes, please tell me what meaning you find in them.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

The following entry is one that I posted in another section of this forum, and I am just transferring it because it perectly exemplifies the core components of my beliefs - I left out the portion about memes, but perhaps that will be more appropriate in a later reply.

The major examples of mans parallel nature to the classical elements is evident in his four forms, or aspects. The four forms of man rely on each other to sustain life, much the same way as the four elements need to remain in balance on earth in order for human life to be maintained. The four forms of man are: [This may seem a bit archaic, and I am not the best at explaining my ideas via written media, but I will try my best to prove relavence in this post.]

 

1] Physical body. which is a parallel to the element of earth. The body, is the lowest form of man, but is essential as a stepping stone into the great beyond. If one considers the element of earth as a container for the other elements [water, fire and air] it is easy to see how the internal functionality of the body is similar in nature - we are made mostly of water, we possess solid structure, we cosume matter to produce heat [much the same way a flame consumes a log - the log becomes decayed to ashen furtilizer], and of course we rely on oxygen for numerous metabolic functions [oxidation processess etc.] Intersting how science categorizes a calorie as a unit of energy...to be burned none-the-less.

 

2] The Mind. The mind is like the element of water. Concider the fluid nature of consciousness from one moment to next - the tidal flow of thought, in and out all influenced by external forces much the same as the gravity of the moon effects the tide. The mind is lucid like pure water - its clear, transparent thoughts easily understood. Take into concideration the scientific discovery of a deep sub-current in the ocean that behaves different than the current of the oceans surface - there is an ocean under the ocean much the same way there is "surface consciousness" with its own waves and currents [similitude to EEG lingo intended - brain waves/current], and a sub-conscious with its own currents and waves. Have you ever seen some of the nightmarish creatures of the deep? Things out of a bad dream, but some are amazing and beautiful too. A mind that is idle is like a stagnant pond - lifeless, until an opportunistic parasite breeds therein and takes hold - polluting the mind with disease much the same way the milaria carrying mosquito breeds in the dank still waters. Is it any wander that the brain relies on fluid in order to function properly?

 

3] The Will. Free Will is the fruit of mans soul. It is mans light , and as such is like the element of fire- it is a projection of his innermost being, a necessary light which illuminates the deep recesses of the mind. With no will, there is no warmth, and the mind soon becomes frozen and still - cold like death. The light of the soul travels through the mind, like the rays of the sun casting prismatic beams that dance happily in a pool. The full spectrum of our thoughts cannot be realized without a soul, because without a light there is naught but cold darkness. Unfortunately however, the fire of the soul consumes the body unto death much the same way a fire consumes a log - and when the body can no longer maintain the flame, death occurs. With every beat of the heart, with every passing [willed] thought, the inevitable approaches...Love, and passion are much like fire as well. Without love one grows cold, and passion is the interanal flame that drives us to suceed, the pursue our dreams - but should our love and passion grow out of control, it becomes lust and obsession which are deadly fires that consume our mental faculties which soon become overwhelmed by hatred and loathing - raging fire. We must control these flames, we must practice self restraint and reason.

 

4] The Spirit. In nature, when you mix together the opposite elements of fire and water [masculine-Yang, and feminine-Yin repsectively] you get a gasious state of matter - you get air. With no spirit, there is no breathe - there is no life. To inspire means to breathe in. This is to say that without a mind and will there is no spirit, and without a body to begin ones great journey there is no journey. The spirit represents the highest level of awareness and self actualization - to live in spirit simply means to live in complete balance and harmony, and this is to be as free as the wind.

[Deva]

That is interesting. I can see your definitions of the physical body, mind and spirit.

 

Is it any wander that the brain relies on fluid in order to function properly?

 

Reminds me of what Nisargadatta Maharaj said "fluids come together and the I AM appears."

 

I am re-evaluating at the present time my thoughts on soul. To me Number 3 is the most questionable of your statements. The Buddha said that there is no "self" or I suppose we would use the word soul. That is very hard to realize. It is hard indeed to completely abandon the notion that we are not individual "persons". Yet who we are seems to be very much dependent on the physical body.

 

I think that free will is an illusion because all thought is conditioned. Therefore, it is not "free". There is choice between two alternatives but that choice is determined by a thousand factors.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

You are right when you say that our thoughts are conditioned [and this is evident in saying that all that we are is the result of what have thought, and all that we have thought is the result of what has been imprinted upon the mind by nature...we are products of the elemental nature both physcially and psychologically] but this does not mean that they are not free, the very nature of mans subjective perception is proof of that - we are ultimately in control of how we choose to feel and think, and we alone control our actions. Otherwise, no one would be accountable for themselves...I know that this concept is the result of morality which again is truley subjective, but if our will is controlled by external forces alone, then where did our subjective nature come from? Nature itself is objective, so how can it teach us or condition us to be subjective? That is a contradiction in terms. While our thoughts are conditioned, our will and intentions is ours alone.

[Deva]

You are right when you say that our thoughts are conditioned [and this is evident in saying that all that we are is the result of what have thought, and all that we have thought is the result of what has been imprinted upon the mind by nature...we are products of the elemental nature both physcially and psychologically] but this does not mean that they are not free, the very nature of mans subjective perception is proof of that - we are ultimately in control of how we choose to feel and think, and we alone control our actions.

 

That we are in control of how we choose to feel and think is an illusion. A persuasive one, I will grant you, but an illusion nonetheless.

 

Otherwise, no one would be accountable for themselves...I know that this concept is the result of morality which again is truley subjective

 

I see the implications for morality of my position. Things just happen and there is no "accountability". And you even admit morality is truly subjective. Sobering, isn't it?

 

Nature itself is objective

Is it?

 

Do you consider yourself a Christian?

[hereticzero]

Good and evil, like rewards and punishment, are created by the living to maintain order. What people do is normal for people to do, whether right or wrong. Good and evil are concepts that do not need a religious beginning but a 'moral' attitude in society. Some ideas of goodness, such as the Golden Rule, appear in all cultures. We know instinctively what is evil, such as murder, armed robbery, etc., however, consentual 'crimes' are not evil in all societies. Morals that control consentual activity are given by religion. Consentual 'crime' should not be illegal nor deemed immoral. These occur between two or more consenting persons.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

You are right when you say that our thoughts are conditioned [and this is evident in saying that all that we are is the result of what have thought, and all that we have thought is the result of what has been imprinted upon the mind by nature...we are products of the elemental nature both physcially and psychologically] but this does not mean that they are not free, the very nature of mans subjective perception is proof of that - we are ultimately in control of how we choose to feel and think, and we alone control our actions.

 

That we are in control of how we choose to feel and think is an illusion. A persuasive one, I will grant you, but an illusion nonetheless.

 

Otherwise, no one would be accountable for themselves...I know that this concept is the result of morality which again is truley subjective

 

I see the implications for morality of my position. Things just happen and there is no "accountability". And you even admit morality is truly subjective. Sobering, isn't it?

 

Nature itself is objective

Is it?

 

Do you consider yourself a Christian?

 

I am not a christian, but I do beleive in an objective reality. there is a common ground that binds us together, but our perception of it is unique from individual to individual. I think that the goal is to find the harmony between the two. Saying that free will is an illusion is like saying that the common ground that we all share is an illusion. You say that things just happen, so you think that we have no control of our actions or thoughts, emotions and memory, when to recall what we will? Your concept also implies pre-destination - this is hard determinism, personally I am a bit more of a soft determinist in my views. So do you think that the mind is a physical thing then? Personally I think that the mind itself is not-physcial, but is connected to the body through the brain and that the brain waves are the result of our will, rather than the mind being defined by the waves themselves as the result of physical stimulae.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

@DevaLight:

 

What determines how you act then? Does some external force control your movements, or do you? When you are hungry what decides for you what you should eat, or what tastes the best to you? Are these things the result of some external supernatural force that commands you? That sounds quite peculiar to me.

[Legion]

I am not a christian, but I do beleive in an objective reality. there is a common ground that binds us together, but our perception of it is unique from individual to individual. I think that the goal is to find the harmony between the two. Saying that free will is an illusion is like saying that the common ground that we all share is an illusion. You say that things just happen, so you think that we have no control of our actions or thoughts, emotions and memory, when to recall what we will? Your concept also implies pre-destination - this is hard determinism, personally I am a bit more of a soft determinist in my views. So do you think that the mind is a physical thing then? Personally I think that the mind itself is not-physcial, but is connected to the body through the brain and that the brain waves are the result of our will, rather than the mind being defined by the waves themselves as the result of physical stimulae.

I told myself while looking over this thread that I would not join in. But hey, I scored as being 75% spiritual atheist on the last rinky-dink test I took. So I almost feel qualified!

 

I also believe in an objective reality. I have a certain faith that causality permeates the universe. But I also suspect that I will only understand a little of it. Especially seeing as I have a subconscious of which I am almost entirely unaware, and it is a part of me! How much more so then of my environment? So I suspect that my awareness is largely subjective.

 

I have not thought extensively about freewill. I suspect that if someone understood me well, then in principle they might know how and why I choose the way I do. Most of my decisions are probably committed to habit anyway. I just don’t know about the freewill thing yet.

 

When I think of the mind now I almost invariably also think of the brain and body. I can’t escape the awareness that we are first organisms, and then thinking animals. One of my favorite biologists has said, “Mind is to brain as life is to organism.†If true then perhaps for me to understand the mind I will first have to understand the relationship between life and organism.

 

Just a few thoughts.

[Deva]

@DevaLight:

 

What determines how you act then? Does some external force control your movements, or do you? When you are hungry what decides for you what you should eat, or what tastes the best to you? Are these things the result of some external supernatural force that commands you? That sounds quite peculiar to me.

 

It means that there is a life being lived out but "you" are not doing it. I don't bring in the supernatural.

 

Somehow I knew morality was going to be the topic of this thread.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

@DevaLight:

 

What determines how you act then? Does some external force control your movements, or do you? When you are hungry what decides for you what you should eat, or what tastes the best to you? Are these things the result of some external supernatural force that commands you? That sounds quite peculiar to me.

 

It means that there is a life being lived out but "you" are not doing it. I don't bring in the supernatural.

 

Somehow I knew morality was going to be the topic of this thread.

 

You mean that you aren't living your life? Interesting. Who is living it for you then?

[Deva]

You say that things just happen, so you think that we have no control of our actions or thoughts, emotions and memory, when to recall what we will?

 

Come now, in your own personal experience, how much control do you have of your thoughts, emotions and memory?

 

Your concept also implies pre-destination - this is hard determinism, personally I am a bit more of a soft determinist in my views.

 

I prefer the word "destiny" to "pre-destination," but if you insist - yes, hard determinism. Possibly not applicable to the whole of the universe (I have been told there are mathematical difficulties) but on an "individual" level - yes.

 

So do you think that the mind is a physical thing then? No

 

the brain waves are the result of our will

- That is questionable.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

Not having control, or exhibiting your own will through intention reminds me of the fundie perspective of external "forces" controlling or determining ones behavior, i.e. possession which is nothing more than a clinical psychotic episode. I'm still trying to figure out what you mean by life being lived out, but having no control over it - what external force or entity is making the decisions for you? My father is a die-hard fundamental baptist, and he loves to blame evil on satan and every time he does, I chuckle inside because it seems to me that its easier to point the finger at someone or something else for whatever goes right or wrong which to me is irresponsible to say the least. If a person performs an action, then they simply must acknowledge the consequences whatever they may be. We do after all live in a cause and effect universe don't we? Doesn't physics teach us that?

[Deva]

Not having control, or exhibiting your own will through intention reminds me of the fundie perspective of external "forces" controlling or determining ones behavior, i.e. possession which is nothing more than a clinical psychotic episode. I'm still trying to figure out what you mean by life being lived out, but having no control over it - what external force or entity is making the decisions for you? My father is a die-hard fundamental baptist, and he loves to blame evil on satan and every time he does, I chuckle inside because it seems to me that its easier to point the finger at someone or something else for whatever goes right or wrong which to me is irresponsible to say the least. If a person performs an action, then they simply must acknowledge the consequences whatever they may be. We do after all live in a cause and effect universe don't we? Doesn't physics teach us that?

 

Seems to me you have now abandoned your more reasonable tone which you had earlier in this thread and are now making the accusation (by implication) that I have a "fundie perspective". Not the first I have heard this and I am sure won't be the last. Think what you like. It has nothing to do with demon possession. I told you that I don't bring in the supernatural.

 

Cause and effect - I don't think science has a complete understanding of it.

[Legion]

Cause and effect - I don't think science has a complete understanding of it.

I am a lover of the natural sciences and I would have to say that I by and large agree with this Deva.

[Stephen_Richard_Webb]

You say that things just happen, so you think that we have no control of our actions or thoughts, emotions and memory, when to recall what we will?

 

Come now, in your own personal experience, how much control do you have of your thoughts, emotions and memory?

 

Your concept also implies pre-destination - this is hard determinism, personally I am a bit more of a soft determinist in my views.

 

I prefer the word "destiny" to "pre-destination," but if you insist - yes, hard determinism. Possibly not applicable to the whole of the universe (I have been told there are mathematical difficulties) but on an "individual" level - yes.

 

So do you think that the mind is a physical thing then? No

 

the brain waves are the result of our will

- That is questionable.

 

 

Actually, I can recall information anytime I need to utilize it to solve problems, or I can choose to not solve the problem, that is freewill to make choices. Application of knowledge to solve problems is one example of a focused will. I have plenty of control of my thoughts and emotions - when I am sad, and I want to feel happy, I will it, and it is so. Self-empowerment is a powerful gift and has a great many uses.

[Legion]

I have plenty of control of my thoughts and emotions - when I am sad, and I want to feel happy, I will it, and it is so.

Stephen I believe that Deva has taken leave of this conversation. But I wanted to say that if what you say here is true then I am impressed. I don't have that degree of control over myself. I have been sad and no effort would pull me out. I have been happy where nothing could dampen my spirits.