There Is No Good Or Evil, Only Choices And Consequences.

[Sconnor]

I will freely admit there have been times where I have got it completely wrong with God, but I also admit that was way back when I was still a new christian. I feel that I have certainly grown more mature since then, and I know now what is my own delusional thoughts and Gods still small voice in me. What about all the times the christian gets it right?

 

I think its a journey of growing in your relationship with God.

 

Craaaaazy!

 

I've said before and I'll say it again, you can't have a relationship with your god-man because he is NOT there.

 

The only "relationship" you have with this god-character is the one you insanely fabricated by idiosyncratically interpreting the supposed word of god; the superstitious, spurious words of scripture, and erroneously attributing feelings to your god-character. You are pretending to have a "relationship" with a fictional character out of a book, that only exists in the confines of your deluded imagination.

 

It would be exactly like a person who immerses themselves in books about Hercules or (Harry Potter for that matter), and then claim they are on a journey of growing with Hercules/Harry and having a relationship with them.

 

Both you and OC and the examples I gave above are bat-shit crazy!

 

--S.

[Dagan]

Relationship? Journey? Pardon me while I barf.

 

Why is it that, when confronted with tough questions, Christians refer to the "Footprints" poem?

[skepticalme]

Good and evil are not objective properties. These are simply terms we have coined to describe choices/actions in relation to what our own would have been under similar circumstances. The actions/choices you agree with are "good" and the ones you disagree with are "evil". This is evidenced by the fact that nobody ever thinks that they are the bad guy. The only exception to this would be if someone disagreed with all the choices they were presented with(choosing the lesser of two evils). But nobody ever thinks of themselves as the antagonist, because we are all driven by the same moral imperative; to eliminate threats. Whether it be a parent protecting their children or a dictator engaged in genocide nearly all human behavior seems to revolve around this principle. Why do people steal? Because they see poverty or a lack of wealth as a threat to themselves. Why do people kill? Because they saw another person as a threat to themselves in some fasion. The scenarios get more complex from there because people are complex. Don't misunderstand, I'm not defending these people, they certainly use poor reasoning when they considered these actions and many have psychological disorders that impair there reasoning, but in nearly all scenarios people don't believe what they are doing is wrong unless they are choosing between two evils.

[Vigile]

I will freely admit there have been times where I have got it completely wrong with God, but I also admit that was way back when I was still a new christian. I feel that I have certainly grown more mature since then, and I know now what is my own delusional thoughts and Gods still small voice in me. What about all the times the christian gets it right?

 

I think its a journey of growing in your relationship with God.

 

How could you possibly measure whether you were right or wrong on this subject? By what standards do you measure it?

[Vigile]

I think its a journey of growing in your relationship with God.

Amen.

 

I'm all for free speech but I wish they would ban this word on this site (tongue planted firmly in cheek here). It makes me puke in my mouth the way you use it so piously here.

[ContraBardus]

You know, everyone always goes on about 'definitions' in these threads.

 

Why not just use the dictionary? I mean, that's kind of what it's for, right?

 

Miriam Webster:

 

evil

Pronunciation: \ˈē-vəl

 

1 a : morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked <an evil impulse> b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct <a person of evil reputation>

2 a archaic : inferior b : causing discomfort or repulsion : offensive <an evil odor> c : disagreeable <woke late and in an evil temper>

3 a : causing harm : pernicious <the evil institution of slavery> b : marked by misfortune : unlucky

 

So, does 'Evil' exist?

 

Yes, Evil 'exists', but only if you speak English, and definitely not as a force or being, but as an idea that has a definition that is agreed upon by those who speak English.

 

Though, if not, you might believe in a similar idea, like say:

In Albanian, I keq.

In Arabic, شر.

In Bulgarian, Зъл.

In Chinese, 邪恶的.

In German, Böse.

In Hebrew, רשע.

In French, Mauvais.

In Spanish, Malvado.

In Italian, Malvagità.

In Greek, Κακό.

In Japanese, 悪.

 

While they might have similar definitions, none of these words means the exact same thing. Their definition is directly related to the culture it spawns from, and it's idea of what is 'wrong'.

 

Many of them are very, very similar, incorporating many of the exact same ideas. In fact, there are some traits that all of them share.

 

Not a single one of them means exactly the same thing as it's counterpart though. Each one varies slightly from the rest, despite their similarities.

 

So, yes. 'Evil' exists as an idea related to English speaking cultures.

 

Though, admittedly, even the definition of 'evil' itself varies depending on which English speaking culture in particular you mean.

[Snakefoot]

Even if everyone alive thought raping a baby was okay it would still be evil.

Why?

[StevoMuso]

Delusional? Me? Nah, God said I can fly with my angel wings!

 

Why not use angel dust? Hehe.

 

[Apologies for silence - been away on tour with band but I'm back now (exhausted but back)]

[StevoMuso]

Even if everyone alive thought raping a baby was okay it would still be evil.

 

Your Bible says I should rejoice when smashing babies against rocks, but I, a lowly atheist, still think it's evil.

[StevoMuso]

Yeah, I remember my breakthrough; it was after months of research and honest inquiry and late one night before I went to sleep, I just kept saying over and over in my head, "this is all bullshit, this is ALL bullshit."

 

Penn and Teller should do a show on this topic. I have a Christian friend who met a guy on the internet. After a weekend together they announced that Jesus had told them to get married (we can only speculate about the spiritually uplifting weekend, hehe). Kids were gonna be moved around, properties sold the works ... all based on what God had told them was His will. Then she caught him surfing for other girls on the net and (fortunately for her) dropped him like a hot potato. Nothing was ever said about how she had been mistaken in "hearing God's will". Nothing. And this same person has since had other "revelations" from God with similar results. I sometimes wish I could give her a shake and wake-up call - but the delusion cloud keeps her firmly delusional.

 

My de-conversion was similar to yours - and yes - the layers of deception took many traumatic discoveries to uncover but they were eventually uncovered by TRUTH. Aaah - the beauty and simplicity of truth. My GOD, I LOVE being an atheist (hehe).

[Shyone]

Even if everyone alive thought raping a baby was okay it would still be evil.

 

Your Bible says I should rejoice when smashing babies against rocks, but I, a lowly atheist, still think it's evil.

I tried to convince OC that infanticide and the execution of captive children is evil, but he insists that it is the highest order of morality, and I gather he only wishes he could have been there with his fellow God worshippers slicing and dicing the kids to death.

 

Sex, however, is evil.

 

ETA: Except when authorized by God, in which case it's good.

 

The virgins that were captured and kept as slaves by the Israelites were kept for unspecified reasons. I'm guessing they raped them.

[Franko47]

 

 

 

The virgins that were captured and kept as slaves by the Israelites were kept for unspecified reasons. I'm guessing they raped them.

 

 

They are even told to keep them as concubines (sex toys). Virgins usually included girls in the single digit age group.

 

They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil. (Judges 5:30 NAB)

 

 

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.

(Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

 

 

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)

 

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

 

 

 

Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves. (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)

 

 

I'm so glad that God's commands are timeless and perfect. I kind of find those young Iraqi girls kind of hot; I would have signed up if I got to keep a few of them. And totally Biblically justified. Totally, without argument. After all, the Bible is perfect and God's word is unchanging. Right ?

[Snakefoot]

I still want to know why FeetOfClay thinks raping babies would be evil even if all mankind thought it wasn't.

 

He won't answer, though. He never answers any of my questions.

 

I wonder why...

[classicchinadoll]

 

 

Judge Not...

 

 

 

There is nothing wrong with mankind any more than there is anything wrong with nature. I believe man is no more good or evil than a dog or horse or tree. Man is a creature of this earth, blessed with astonishing intelligence that allows him to choose to behave well or badly. There is no good or evil, only choices and consequences.

 

 

Hmmm to choose to behave well or badly....so where does that leave murder, incest, and the most vilest depraved things a human can do? is that not evil? Im not so sure.

 

deuteronomy chapter 18 verse 22

 

god's commandment that to punish a rapist he must pay the girl's father 50 shekels (obviously because the sin was against the father for ruining his property) and then he must marry the girl. to my standard of moral code i classify forcing someone to marry their rapist as evil but obviously it wasn't at the time. yes the word evil is subjective to current trends.

[classicchinadoll]

Even if everyone alive thought raping a baby was okay it would still be evil.

 

Your Bible says I should rejoice when smashing babies against rocks, but I, a lowly atheist, still think it's evil.

I tried to convince OC that infanticide and the execution of captive children is evil, but he insists that it is the highest order of morality, and I gather he only wishes he could have been there with his fellow God worshippers slicing and dicing the kids to death.

 

Sex, however, is evil.

 

ETA: Except when authorized by God, in which case it's good.

 

The virgins that were captured and kept as slaves by the Israelites were kept for unspecified reasons. I'm guessing they raped them.

 

there are all sorts of reasons you might require your slave to be a virgin girl apart from sex, i mean they did save the virgin boys too didn't they um um, wait til i check an apologists site.

[StevoMuso]

I still want to know why FeetOfClay thinks raping babies would be evil even if all mankind thought it wasn't.

He won't answer, though. He never answers any of my questions.

I wonder why...

I've noticed this too. I think it's because their faith/arguments are based on emotion and not reason. When their "arguments" are challenged they tend to change the subject or go insanely ad hominum in an attempted conversation, but we don't let them get away with it here on the forum. Hehe.

 

I'm so glad that God's commands are timeless and perfect. I kind of find those young Iraqi girls kind of hot; I would have signed up if I got to keep a few of them. And totally Biblically justified. Totally, without argument. After all, the Bible is perfect and God's word is unchanging. Right ?

 

This is brilliant - nice post F47Dude

[Greatest I am]

In moral terms, the terms Good & Evil are only useful on a graph & are Inseparable.

 

I see that many just look at these terms as opposites.

Black white.

Hot cold.

Whatever.

 

It does not matter because, in moral terms, good and evil must be on a graph to be of any use to any discussion of moral issues.

 

That is why the ancients wrote them into the Bible as the tree of good and evil.

It’s fruit symbolizes that good and evil cannot be separated.

 

As nouns, forget it. For morals, they do not stand well alone.

 

As adjectives, they are good.

 

The issues is not what we call the ends of our graph. Good and evil are good and I do not want to discuss the issue of what good and evil mean.

 

It is what goes between these two adjectives that is at issue and how and where we place them on the graph.

Ideally, the good and evil line will have a top and a bottom because issues often times have both within their character.

Like God for instance.

 

Basically, if you are arguing good and evil in any other way than described here; you are IMHO, wasting your time.

 

If you look to God for our moral sense you are also wasting your time because it is to mankind to set the rules of our dominion.

 

Thoughts?

 

Regards

DL

[agnosticator]

That is why the ancients wrote them into the Bible as the tree of good and evil.

It’s fruit symbolizes that good and evil cannot be separated.

 

As nouns, forget it. For morals, they do not stand well alone.

 

As adjectives, they are good.

 

Hi and welcome to the site Greatest. Interesting and relevant points.

 

I think N.T. Christianity separates good from evil much in the same way that the Christian's mind is fractured instead of being unified by the mind games at play in the N.T. It's a ploy to blame something and someone else for the evil side of its' God.

[agnosticator]

Delusional? Me? Nah, God said I can fly with my angel wings!

 

Why not use angel dust? Hehe.

 

So that's how angels really fly!

 

[Apologies for silence - been away on tour with band but I'm back now (exhausted but back)]

 

That's cool, you have to earn that bread. You don't have to apologize though, unless you become an apologist!

[StevoMuso]

[Apologies for silence - been away on tour with band but I'm back now (exhausted but back)]

That's cool, you have to earn that bread. You don't have to apologize though, unless you become an apologist!

Had a great couple of gigs but my singer/bass-player got pissed on the first gig, and went for a 3-hour "glass of wine" with one of the guests. I did the 7-hour gig almost entirely on my own. I fired her the next day and auditioned a new singer immediately to finish the gigs. The new one, thankfully, is much better, more professional, etc.

 

I relate the above story because it's relevant to this discussion on right and wrong. Actually, singer #1 is a 24 yr-old adult who can do as she wishes, with whomever she wishes, but not if it compromises my professional status and thus my income. Singer #2 got the gig because her contribution to the band was positive and therefore added value. To me, the issue of right and wrong in this situation was not that singer #1 got pissed and had an inappropriate encounter with a total stranger, but that she did it in MY TIME, and it had a negative impact on my band.

 

Isn't the whole issue of "right and wrong" related intimately with "cause and effect"?

[Shyone]

Had a great couple of gigs but my singer/bass-player got pissed on the first gig, and went for a 3-hour "glass of wine" with one of the guests. I did the 7-hour gig almost entirely on my own. I fired her the next day and auditioned a new singer immediately to finish the gigs. The new one, thankfully, is much better, more professional, etc.

 

I relate the above story because it's relevant to this discussion on right and wrong. Actually, singer #1 is a 24 yr-old adult who can do as she wishes, with whomever she wishes, but not if it compromises my professional status and thus my income. Singer #2 got the gig because her contribution to the band was positive and therefore added value. To me, the issue of right and wrong in this situation was not that singer #1 got pissed and had an inappropriate encounter with a total stranger, but that she did it in MY TIME, and it had a negative impact on my band.

 

Isn't the whole issue of "right and wrong" related intimately with "cause and effect"?

That's a very good illustration! Thanks!

[StevoMuso]

That's a very good illustration! Thanks!

 

Hey Shyone - wassup? BTW after the first gig with singer #2 I spent nearly an hour and a half giving out business cards and talking to people wanting to book us for future events - cool hey? This NEVER happened in the years I worked with singer #1. So the moral choices turned out to have immediate and measurable results - very chuffed

[Greatest I am]

That is why the ancients wrote them into the Bible as the tree of good and evil.

It’s fruit symbolizes that good and evil cannot be separated.

 

As nouns, forget it. For morals, they do not stand well alone.

 

As adjectives, they are good.

 

Hi and welcome to the site Greatest. Interesting and relevant points.

 

I think N.T. Christianity separates good from evil much in the same way that the Christian's mind is fractured instead of being unified by the mind games at play in the N.T. It's a ploy to blame something and someone else for the evil side of its' God.

 

They do like to do that yes but what I find more disheartening is their efforts to not have to take the consequences for their sins.

 

The Jesus died for me mantra has sickened me over time even as I point out to them that they should not try to profit from the murder of an innocent man.

 

I keep telling them that we are supposed to help carry the cross and not put our fat asses on it.

 

It mostly falls on death ears because they cannot let go of their scapegoat ideas.

 

I often ask them if they would tell their children that it was ok for the child to let some other kid take their punishment and they mostly agree that that would be wrong but then return with some B S about a blood sacrifice being the only thing that can save man.

 

Frustrating as hell to have any admit the immorality of vicarious redemption. Brainwashing runs deep and the priests do not help because if they get rid of the vicarious redemption, the coffers might dry up more than they presently are.

 

I find too many in this position while listening to me.

 

Regards

DL

[agnosticator]

They do like to do that yes but what I find more disheartening is their efforts to not have to take the consequences for their sins.

 

The Jesus died for me mantra has sickened me over time even as I point out to them that they should not try to profit from the murder of an innocent man.

 

Frustrating as hell to have any admit the immorality of vicarious redemption.

 

Yes, believing that the innocent should take the place of the guilty makes a mockery of morality. Sorry for the late reply.

 

 

 

Brainwashing runs deep and the priests do not help because if they get rid of the vicarious redemption, the coffers might dry up more than they presently are.

 

Precisely. Whenever I bring this point up, they say I am being cynical or negative! I guess having their head in the sand makes them better people.

[Greatest I am]

They do like to do that yes but what I find more disheartening is their efforts to not have to take the consequences for their sins.

 

The Jesus died for me mantra has sickened me over time even as I point out to them that they should not try to profit from the murder of an innocent man.

 

Frustrating as hell to have any admit the immorality of vicarious redemption.

 

Yes, believing that the innocent should take the place of the guilty makes a mockery of morality. Sorry for the late reply.

 

 

 

Brainwashing runs deep and the priests do not help because if they get rid of the vicarious redemption, the coffers might dry up more than they presently are.

 

Precisely. Whenever I bring this point up, they say I am being cynical or negative! I guess having their head in the sand makes them better people.

 

Only if they learn to shut the hell up.

 

Regards

DL