Putting An End3 To The War Between Good And Evil

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

 

You don't see how god's lying nature led to evil? Withholding vital information doesn't strike you as dishonest, especially in this instance with so much at stake?

 

Really?

I get your point already. Let me ask you this....do you "lie" to RN Jr. when you withhold information he doesn't need to know about at his age? Or do you consider it wise.

 

I don't affix eternal hellfire and damnation to him making a bad decision based on information that I have witheld.

 

Might as well...send him over so I can start him on meth.

 

I doubt you'd have much luck, considering the complete honesty with which I have addressed the subject of addiction with him, including my own.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

Let me give you an example....I have two bugs in a jar, one good, one evil. I am holding the jar in my hand. I profess that I am a man that leads to good. I smush the evil bug and release the good bug that leads to good bugs from now on.

 

Have I done evil by smushing the evil bug?

 

Edit: seems very plain that most here are predestination people....that God controls.

 

I would ask so I am clear.....do you believe that God ultimately controls his creation?

Did you create both bugs?  Is the evil bug evil because you created him with a nature of evil?  Are you smushing the evil bug because it is acting upon the nature of evil with which you created it?  Is it possible to mistake the "good" bug for the "evil" one... or are you also omniscient in this scenario?

 

 

 

How do the bugs know what is good or evil?

 

They know because End3 witheld the information from them.

[TheOutsider]

 

 

Let me give you an example....I have two bugs in a jar, one good, one evil. I am holding the jar in my hand. I profess that I am a man that leads to good. I smush the evil bug and release the good bug that leads to good bugs from now on.

 

Have I done evil by smushing the evil bug?

 

If you created both of the bugs, knowing how each of their bloodlines would unfold, then yes. You have created an evil thing. You made it suffer for being exactly what you wanted it to be. And if you're trying to mirror Yahweh, you will continue to make it suffer, endlessly, after you killed it. You are a monster, just like your god.

 

Edit: seems very plain that most here are predestination people....that God controls.

 

I would ask so I am clear.....do you believe that God ultimately controls his creation?

I think that if your mythology is true, and to be clear I don't believe it is, then yes. He knew everything that would happen the moment he made any action. He knew exactly how everything would unfold before he did anything. And he went through with it anyway.

 

He is responsible for everything anyone and anything does. Because he knew, before he did anything, exactly how any action he took would unfold. There is no room for uncertainty, or deviation. God is omniscient. He knew the end before anything even began. He knew every detail in between. He. Is. Omniscient.

 

According to your mythology, he punishes us for doing exactly what he knew we would do. We have no say. We have no autonomy. We are following a script. And we are made to suffer endlessly for it in hell. What a truly just and holy being your god is.

 

Do you believe that humans are inherently evil when they are born, yes or no.

 

 

No.

 

Everyone is capable of doing "good" or "evil" things. Some people are sociopathic, though that's not exactly a common trait. But inherently evil? No. I've never really been one for the misanthropic attitude.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

“If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your insects, how much more shall End3 which is in heaven give good things to the bugs that ask him?”  Mashyou 7:11

[Guest end3]

Let's just cut to the chase.

 

Are people being controlled by God. Cast your votes here.

 

END3 - 1 no. If He is, I'm not aware of it.

 

I want to edit my vote. To be honest, some times, and I don't know how, life works together to teach us what we need to know in order to know life. So I guess I can make an argument for being predestined as well.

 

I don't really know but I lean towards free will. So there you have it....I don't know.

[Guest end3]

“If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your insects, how much more shall End3 which is in heaven give good things to the bugs that ask him?”  Mashyou 7:11

lol, the book of Mashyou was a nice touch.

[sdelsolray]

Let's just cut to the chase.

 

Are people being controlled by God. Cast your votes here.

 

END3 - 1 no. If He is, I'm not aware of it.

 

I want to edit my vote. To be honest, some times, and I don't know how, life works together to teach us what we need to know in order to know life. So I guess I can make an argument for being predestined as well.

 

I don't really know but I lean towards free will. So there you have it....I don't know.

 

 

 

According to the myth stories themselves, some are directly controlled, and there is no mention about others.  

 

According to reality, no, except to the extent mere belief in your particular god causes thoughts, action or inaction, etc. that would not otherwise occur without the belief.  But I would counter with...it's not the subject of the belief that is the cause...the human with the belief is the cause, in reality.

 

"I don't know" is usually a good answer.

[Guest end3]

Appears like we have the majority saying "no"... humans not being born evil.

 

So do y'all wish to comment on evil God predestining creation for destruction?

[sdelsolray]

Appears like we have the majority saying "no"... humans not being born evil.

 

So do y'all wish to comment on evil God predestining creation for destruction?

 

 

 

Moral evil requires self-awareness, thought and action (or inaction) causing harm.  That's quite a trick for a newborn baby.  Amoral evil requires harm to something or someone, like a tornado or earthquake.  That would be even a better trick for a newborn baby.

[sdelsolray]

Appears like we have the majority saying "no"... humans not being born evil.

 

So do y'all wish to comment on evil God predestining creation for destruction?

 

 

It's a myth, and not a very good one at that.

[TheOutsider]

Let's just cut to the chase.

 

Are people being controlled by God. Cast your votes here.

 

END3 - 1 no. If He is, I'm not aware of it.

 

I want to edit my vote. To be honest, some times, and I don't know how, life works together to teach us what we need to know in order to know life. So I guess I can make an argument for being predestined as well.

 

I don't really know but I lean towards free will. So there you have it....I don't know.

 

Are we being controlled by god?

 

If he exists: Yes. Maybe not directly every second of our existence, but he knew, again before he did anything, exactly how everything would unfold. He kicked it all off anyway. And he want's to punish us forever because we did exactly what he knew we would.

 

He made Lucifer, and the angels that followed him, knowing exactly how that would turn out. And he did it anyway. Then he punishes Lucifer and those angels, eternally, for doing exactly what he knew they would do. Their actions where known before god ever lifted a finger.

 

He made the garden of Eden, Adam, all the animals, including the snake, and Eve, knowing exactly how that would turn out. He did it anyway. And now we are cursed to suffering, and hell, for it. Even though we are only doing exactly what he knew we would do, before he started anything. Our actions where known before god ever lifted a finger. Without his action, literally nothing would have happened, ever. At least, according to your mythology.

 

Very important, pay attention:

 

But, as far as actual reality is concerned, I don't believe he exists. I don't believe anyone is being controlled by god. Only by those who claim to speak for him, at most.

[midniterider]

Appears like we have the majority saying "no"... humans not being born evil.

 

So do y'all wish to comment on evil God predestining creation for destruction?

 

I think the whole bible along with Christian doctrine is baloney. But you believe in God and seem to want to say God is doing good (in the bible) when common sense says he's being a raging moron. It's interesting to watch indoctrination and mental gymnastics in action.

[Guest end3]

 

Appears like we have the majority saying "no"... humans not being born evil.

 

So do y'all wish to comment on evil God predestining creation for destruction?

 

 

 

Moral evil requires self-awareness, thought and action (or inaction) causing harm.  That's quite a trick for a newborn baby.  Amoral evil requires harm to something or someone, like a tornado or earthquake.  That would be even a better trick for a newborn baby.

 

So we may surmise that the snake was the one that changed their awareness. Seems the question is NOW...as I had mentioned PAGES back, was, what do we know about the relationship of God and the snake.

 

Because we are saying this so far:

 

God says humanity was good.

Most everyone says humanity is born moral or amoral.

Morals are through awareness although our forefathers awareness can screw ours somewhat.

 

So again, did God control the snake?

 

Also, why is a dichotomy necessary anyhow?

[duderonomy]

End, do you think the talking serpent did something evil by just talking to Eve?  I think the talking serpent told the truth. Can you point out where the talking serpent lied to Eve?

 

Because if Biblegod's creation was good, and sin hadn't entered the world yet (that came later through Adam, I understand), why did the talking serpent get cursed?  What evil did the talking serpent do that was worthy of being cursed?  No evil, because creation was still good, and no sin because Adam had yet to bite the big one, so what did the talking serpent do to get cursed?

 

Oh, and I'm not saying that Biblegod controls the talking serpent, humanity, the universe, or whatever, but I'm not saying he doesn't either, other than that I don't believe in him anymore. 

It just seems that the book says he knows everything and can do anything and even his children have to ask for stuff that he already wants to do if they expect so much as an answer, and he thinks he is the beginning, the ending, the three in one only majesty king father BMOC, you know?  

It's his story, read into it what you want.  Myself, I see where there are a lot of control issues with him, at the very least.

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eve experienced before she ate the fruit. Did she know what she was experiencing?, perhaps not. As I have stated before, it then goes to free will. Did God control the snake, does God control us?

 

Y'all wish to ultimately blame God.

 

Answer this one question honestly: Could Eve have told the snake no because she wanted to?

"For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."  Genesis 3:5

 

What Eve was able to experience was pride: the desire to rise above her station, the need to become greater than she was.  Being like god was an idea that appealed to her at a very deep level.

 

She was motivated by pride.

 

But, isn't pride a sin?  Isn't it, in fact, one of the seven deadly sins?

 

How could she be motivated by sin before eating the fruit?  How could she experience sin when she was still in her "perfect" state?  How could such a motivation even be a part of her nature, if she were created in the "image of god"?

 

Unless sin is also a part of god's nature, in which Eve was created?  Which brings us back to Isaiah 45:7.

 

("I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.")

 

Which was my point if I am not mistaken....

 

Goes back to my other point that if they were capable of experiencing for lack of a better word, or being influenced by sin, then it seems to me that God was only presenting good.

 

Really have no idea why the need to put the temptation in the garden....to play out the Jesus plan?

 

 

But by your own words End, you've agreed that God could not be presenting only good to Adam and Eve.

 

By making them unable to weigh the consequences of their actions (your words) and then setting them a test that required them to do just that, God was doing evil to them.

 

Unless you're saying that by setting up His test for them in this way, God was doing good to them?

 

We're not omniscient BAA. We may only make a limited judgment.

 

 

No need for omniscience, End.

 

Just look to what the text says.

 

Did God withhold the ability the ability to weigh the consequences of their actions from Adam and Eve?

 

And did He then set them a test that required what He withheld?

 

And were their eyes opened to the consequences after they ate?

 

These aren't difficult questions and omniscience isn't required to answer them, End.

 

Just read the text and answer them.

 

Please.

 

 

Please, End.

 

 

Pretty please, End.

[mwc]

     In the beginning god created Adam and Eve in his image.  And this is where it starts to get difficult.  If it's his moral image then we have to assume a lot of things about the morality of god and project them onto his creation.  That assumption usually is that it's all good.

 

     That is, except for the serpent.  The serpent is somehow less than good.  It's morally corrupt.  How it got there we don't know since the story doesn't say.  We're told everything, literally every single solitary thing, is good.  Creation is very good as a whole in fact.  But then there's that serpent.

 

     The serpent has to be a part of the creation.  If it was created then it has to be good.  It doesn't matter when it was created.  It doesn't matter where it was created.  It doesn't matter if it was created as something else entirely and somehow transformed into a serpent.  If it was created it was good in the same way everything else was good and everything as a whole was very good.  That's the very nature of the creation.

 

     So what is it about the serpent that makes it not good?  Or morally corrupt?  Well, lots of texts tend to refer to it as "shrewd," "subtil" or some similar term.  Alone this isn't too bad but once god confronts Adam and Eve she claims the serpent deceived her for while the serpent is punished.  This means that the serpent has the ability to lie all along.  He isn't simply "clever" or "prudent" but an outright liar who, for some unknown reason, wants to trick Eve and who succeeds at his task.  This is something that is not morally good considering we know he knows the outcome if he succeeds when he speaks with Eve.

 

     But how could the serpent even be created or allowed to be in a creation that is good or very good?  Could god condone such lying as morally good?  That seems unlikely.  Could he have started out as good and somehow transformed into something not good?  How would that have occurred?  We learned that Adam and Eve required the aid of the serpent to move from one state to another.  That is to say we're told that they never thought to go against god's wishes and acquire the knowledge from the tree until the serpent entered the picture.  So was the serpent also given such a prohibition?  Who would act as his catalyst?  And was the knowledge of good and evil also stored in a central location for him as well? 

 

     These questions also make one wonder why god would repeat the same mistake for the humans if this had all happened before?  Or had the serpent simply eaten from the tree in the garden that Adam and Eve were prohibited from eating since the rule seems to only applied to them and not the animals which means all the things the serpent had said to Eve were factual and true in that you could eat from the tree, gain the knowledge of god and not die since he had done so and perhaps so had many of the animals of the garden without harm.

 

          mwc

[sdelsolray]

In the myth in Genesis Chapters 2 and 3, God talks to Adam and tells him not to eat from the tree.  God never speaks with Eve about it.  Eve apparently learns about the tree from Adam.  Someone added the concept that even touching the fruit would cause death.  The snake only spoke with Eve and never Adam.  Eve eats from the tree and gives a piece to Adam.  The story does not say that Eve told Adam it was the fruit from the forbidden tree, although it states he "listened" to her and was with her.  Still we don't know what Adam knew when he was eating.

 

Great communication!

[sdelsolray]

 

 

Appears like we have the majority saying "no"... humans not being born evil.

 

So do y'all wish to comment on evil God predestining creation for destruction?

 

 

 

Moral evil requires self-awareness, thought and action (or inaction) causing harm.  That's quite a trick for a newborn baby.  Amoral evil requires harm to something or someone, like a tornado or earthquake.  That would be even a better trick for a newborn baby.

 

So we may surmise that the snake was the one that changed their awareness. Seems the question is NOW...as I had mentioned PAGES back, was, what do we know about the relationship of God and the snake.

 

Because we are saying this so far:

 

God says humanity was good.

Most everyone says humanity is born moral or amoral.

Morals are through awareness although our forefathers awareness can screw ours somewhat.

 

So again, did God control the snake?

 

Also, why is a dichotomy necessary anyhow?

 

 

 

The snake is a literary device.  Without the snake, the Bible would have ended at the beginning of Genesis 3 with the words, "And they lived happily ever after".

[miamia]

The snake was shrewd. The snake was encouraging skepticism. The snake was prodding eve to think, then, AHHHHHHHHHHH! SEE I TOLD YOU THAT THE ONLY SAFE THING TO DO IS BLINDLY FOLLOWING ORDERS!!NOW EVERYTHING IS RUINED!"

Isn't it blatantly obvious that this is a horror story to terrify people into not thinking? To scare the skepticism right out of them? Created by a human being, to control and manipulate. The greatest experiment in brainwashing of all time? To force obedience without force, and simultaneously vindicate and obscure the true the abuser at the same time?

[bornagainathiest]

I'm seriously considering quitting this thread.

 

When the Prof and End agreed to go at it I hoped that everyone participating would level with each other and not use various plays and ploys to avoid dealing with certain issues.

 

I hoped that no issue would be treated as off-limits or not-to-be-addressed.

 

I hoped that there would be no maneuvering, deflecting and diverting of the thread onto secondary issues.

 

Such as the serpent.

 

What Satan did or didn't do in Eden is a sideshow and distraction from the main event.

 

In this thread we've touched upon that main event but not resolved anything about it because some participants won't go there.

 

Until we ALL go there this thread isn't going to go anywhere much.

.

.

.

So, perhaps someone would like to give me a reason to stay and participate further?

 

I'll listen.

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I think even the serpent demonstrates that god cannot be trusted. We know that god created everything, including the serpent; and that he declared that everything, including the serpent, was "good".

 

If the serpent were somehow "evil", then god lied when he called it "good.". Furthermore, if complete honesty, and a desire to help Adam and Eve gain knowledge, is what makes the serpent "evil", then that also speaks volumes about what god's lack of honesty.

 

god is simply not to be trusted. he manipulates trust and uses it for evil.

 

This little bunny trail with the serpent may not bring End to the same conclusion; but I'd wager it has served its purpose for a lurker or two.

[midniterider]

BAA: I hoped that there would be no maneuvering, deflecting and diverting of the thread onto secondary issues.

 

...

 

God creates A&E. 

God has to test his creation? Why does a perfect being have to test his creation? Only man has to do quality control because he is imperfect. The A&E story smells of a human writer giving human attributes and frailties to an infinitely supreme being.

 

God magnificently creates the universe then later on sets up his first two people to fail? Really? Does God need medication?

 

Christian sees this ... diverts to the serpent..."Hey, stop looking at God! Look over here at the serpent..." :-)

[quinntar]

BAA: I hoped that there would be no maneuvering, deflecting and diverting of the thread onto secondary issues.

 

...

 

God creates A&E.

God has to test his creation? Why does a perfect being have to test his creation? Only man has to do quality control because he is imperfect. The A&E story smells of a human writer giving human attributes and frailties to an infinitely supreme being.

 

God magnificently creates the universe then later on sets up his first two people to fail? Really? Does God need medication?

 

Christian sees this ... diverts to the serpent..."Hey, stop looking at God! Look over here at the serpent..." :-)

You're supposed to eat from the tree of knowledge just not when a crafty salesman is selling you snake oil from it. God was warning them to stay away from that asshole, but they DESIRED to know.

[mwc]

     If everything was good then the serpent cannot be marked out as not good.  There's no special reason to be suspicious of the serpent.

 

     What that means is the conversation that the serpent has with Eve is innocent.  The serpent isn't intentionally trying to trick or mislead her into eating from the tree.  It's only giving her another set of facts as it sees it.  Eve at this point has to make her own decision.

 

     People would like the serpent to have some motive so they can point to it and say "It's the reason.  That crafty old serpent!" just like people pointed to Eve and said "That woman caused the fall of mankind."  But we can see Eve didn't have the wherewithal at this point in time for any assignment of this sort of blame to be appropriate.  I'm also saying it's wrong to try to blame the serpent in this way as well.

 

     Based on the story you'd have a serpent that flat-out lied since it far more information than Eve about the tree and it's effects (there's no reason god would inform serpents and other animals more so than humans if god was being upfront about everything as we're led to believe).  That would seem impossible if it were good.  So it would seem the serpent actually knew what it were talking about from (in)direct experience.  Since animals could eat from this tree and god was not upset it would appear the only animals that had the prohibition from eating the fruit were humans.  So if the serpent ate from this tree itself (or another animal did and informed the serpent of its effects) then what the serpent told Eve was the truth.  There was no deceit as she later claimed and the story supports this.

 

     Strangely enough not a single animal of any type, apparently not even a germ, in the entire garden managed to eat from the Tree of Life.  Not one.

 

     Anyway, there's no reason to go on about the serpent.  It's not important.  It was a victim as much as anything else in the garden.  It was good.  It got caught up in this scandal.  It got punished along with the rest.  If this was a test for Adam and Eve then it was also a test for the serpent.  If punishment is an indication of failing a test then the serpent failed as well.  But there are no special cases here.

 

          mwc

[TheRedneckProfessor]

So, End3, now that the serpent has been found not guilty, do you still think god is a trustworthy character?  The evidence demonstrates how he abused and manipulated Adam and Eve--yes, even the serpent-- by using their trust and naivete against them.  Is it "good" or "evil" to trust god?