Arguement Against Evil - Knowing Good From Evil - Rejecting Evil.

[Eli_Zsia]

Tell me how God expects us all to Reject All Forms Of Evil, Yet God doesnt like us when we reject God for doing evil? How come God is Allowed to create evil things and do evil things and God gets angry at us when we Reject The Evil Things God Commits? When God Is Telling us To Reject Evil?

 

AM I WRONG TO ASK THIS? God tell us to know good from evil, to do Good and Not Evil, To Accept Anything Good and Reject Anything Evil... But God Gets Angry When We Reject The Evil Things God Is Willing To Commit And Create? How Can We Follow A Path Of Goodness When God Is Asking Us To Accept The Evil Things God Wants To Commit To.

 

Im Sorry, But I Just Dont Get It..... Do Good, Reject Evil... But Dont Reject Evil If God Is Doing it Or Creating It? Hell Is The Most Evil Sadistic Place We All Have The Right To Reject Because IT IS EVIL, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO REJECT EVIL, AND SO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO ARGUE A CASE AGAINST ALL FORMS OF EVIL.... Knowing Good From Evil Is TO Reject Evil, That Is Our Purpose.. How Are We Supposed to Be Perfect When God is Telling Us To Accept The Evil Purpose Of Eternal Suffering? Know Good From Evil.. Do Good, Reject Evil, But Don't Reject Anything Evil God Does Or Creates?

 

How Can We Be Perfect When We Being Controlled To Accept Evil, When Eternal Suffering In Hell Is The Most EVIL thing....

 

 

Someone Give Me An Answer...

Edited November 9, 2016 by Eli_Zsia

[Strange]

It Is Evil (And Very Slightly Annoying) To Capitalise All Your Words. Why Do You Do It? How Do You Do It? It Is Really Hard Work.

 

 

 

Someone Give Me An Answer...

 

Invent a different god if you don't like the one others have invented.

[Phi for All]

Someone Give Me An Answer...

 

You could remain skeptical until evidence to support God's existence is found. It works for me.

 

And I agree with Strange, title case is for headlines and... titles of things. Discussing things this way (where you capitalize every word) is like talking to a newspaper. It's a bad habit that inhibits communication, adds nothing, and creates extra work for you.

[Country Boy]

You are assuming a number of things. For one thing, who told you that God wants us to "reject all forms of evil"? What makes you think God has commited evil things? Are you assuming the "Judeo-Christian" God? If so you should say that!

Edited November 9, 2016 by Country Boy

[Sirona]

I avoid thinking in terms of 'good' and 'evil' because if you don't identify with religion, the concepts are too black and white; the complexity of human nature cannot be defined in such simplistic terms.

[Phi for All]

I avoid thinking in terms of 'good' and 'evil' because if you don't identify with religion, the concepts are too black and white; the complexity of human nature cannot be defined in such simplistic terms.

 

Smart. Even if you don't think of people as being "good" or "evil", an act that one person thinks is evil may be good to another. I'm thinking along the lines of letting a forest fire burn, or aborting a child that will harm the mother. There's little nuance in good vs evil.

[Sirona]

Smart. Even if you don't think of people as being "good" or "evil", an act that one person thinks is evil may be good to another. I'm thinking along the lines of letting a forest fire burn, or aborting a child that will harm the mother. There's little nuance in good vs evil.

Exactly. I think the fundamental misconception the OP has is that morality is simply Universal; I support that it's both Universal and relative. I believe there is little correlation between ethics and religion and it's best to seperate them to examine human nature. Ethics evolves with culture over time as humans adapt to survive.

[sethoflagos]

Aristotle's concept of the Golden Mean (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_mean_(philosophy)) has always seemed a more satisfactory idea for those of us with a 'fifty shades of grey' world view.

Edited November 9, 2016 by sethoflagos

[Sirona]

Although I like the concept of the Golden Mean and appreciate Aristotle's great contribution to of virtue ethics, I believe his teachings are too simplistic on their own to form a 'world view'. The most important of Aristotle's teachings, I believe, is that virtues are learned by practice, but I interpret this in the modern world as meaning: societies perception of what is virtuous evolves over time, rather than individual practice. However, what is the 'mean'? How do we define it (more importantly, is it universal?) We know in the modern world that one's personality depends largely on genetics and environment (in the early stages), therefore, the idea that the rule of averages can always guide us is not consistent. The Golden Mean cannot guide us in specific situations; it's one thing to say that being too generous or too greedy is unvirtuous, but how can you apply this to a specific situation?

[sethoflagos]

The exact location of the mean definitely isn't universal. Particularly in this day and age we need to be able to adapt to the customs and mores of whatever community we find ourselves in, and those may be very different to the ones we were born into. As a general rule, if you listen to the guidance of those around you as to where the acceptable limits of personal conduct lie, and find somewhere within those boundaries where you feel comfortable with your own personal values, that's quite enough.

 

Personally, as someone you has lived and worked in quite a wide variety of cultures, I find the flexibility of Aristotelian ethics suits my purpose. It allows me to remain functional so long as I avoid the more intolerant locations such as Saudi Arabia.

 

People with fixed personal codes of conduct that are out of step with those around them tend to run into problems very quickly (I could give you a list of nationalities that typically relocate well, and those that tend to relocate badly).

[seriously disabled]

If God really exists then he must be very evil or maybe he doesn't even exist at all.

 

The God of the old Testament was a monster with his behavior very much like Satan.

 

http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_evilgod.html

 

http://www.dpjs.co.uk/god.html

 

http://new.exchristian.net/2015/06/the-christian-god-is-evil.html

Edited November 28, 2016 by seriously disabled

[dimreepr]

A bully isn't born, a bully is created, this is why good and evil exists on a continuum; do we blame the bully or the bullies creator or theirs, ad infinitum?

Edited November 28, 2016 by dimreepr

[fluid]

Evil itself is not evil.It is the absence of good.The evil thing that you are trying to say that God does is punishment.

[Memammal]

The evil thing that you are trying to say that God does is punishment.

Punishment..? For what, by who?

[Itoero]

God tell us to know good from evil, to do Good and Not Evil, To Accept Anything Good and Reject Anything Evil...

Why do you think your God wants that?

[Moontanman]

Evil itself is not evil.It is the absence of good.The evil thing that you are trying to say that God does is punishment.

 

 

So anything gods do is good?

[dimreepr]

Oolon Colluphid is the author of the "trilogy of philosophical blockbusters" entitled Where God Went Wrong, Some More of God's Greatest Mistakes and Who is this God Person Anyway?. He later used the Babel Fish argument as a basis for a fourth book, titled Well, That About Wraps It Up For God. - Douglas Adams