|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is man inherently good or inherently evil? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4158 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
Well only if people belive in the concept of Sin - I don't believe in that or your Jesus person.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TechnoCore Inactive Member |
I do not think true evil exists at all.
I mean how can evil ever be the main goal in any action? People perform actions in order to gain something, be it satisfaction, wealth, respect or what ever. Evil for the sake of itself is absurd, and serves no purpose. It is all just about perspective. Do you think Hitler thought of himself as evil? Or Stalin? They both did what they thought to be necessary and right at the time of their actions, even if those who got hurt from them obviously thought something else.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 642 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
From your statement, it sounds like the bible is an inkblot test.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 642 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Unless, of course, the atheist is right, and there is no god, and no afterlife.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 642 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Why yes, I am say that Judaism ripped off other religion. The Ugarltic bible, and the sumarian religion are just two sources.
All the various names of God in the Torah are just different godsin the Ugartic mythology. El was the Lord of Lords. and Yahwey was titled 'the son of God'. Basically, all the names of god in the Ugartic mythology were assumulated into one with the early Judaism. In the Ugartic mythology,the consort of Yawhey was Asherea, who is mentioned in 2 kings, when her handmaidens were driven from the temple. The cult of Asherea stayed amoung the rural Jews until the 3rd Century B.C.E, despite the efforts of the priests to irradicate it. Also, look at the Sumarian myth, the Legend of Sargon, which has someparrells to the story about Moses being drawn from the water. http://luna.cas.usf.edu/...urray/classes/ah/sargonlegend.htm Sargon, the mighty king, king of Agade, am I.MY mother was a changeling1, my father I knew not. The brother(s) of my father loved the hills. My city is Azupiranu, which is situated on the banks of the Euphrates. My changeling mother conceived me, in secret she bore me. She set me in a basket of rushes, with bitumen she sealed My lid. She cast me into the river which rose not (over) me, The river bore me up and carried me to Akki, the drawer of water. Akki, the drawer of water lifted me out as he dipped his e[w]er. Akki, the drawer of water, [took me] as his son (and) reared me. Akki, the drawer of water, appointed me as his gardener, While I was a gardener, Ishtar granted me (her) love, And for four and [ ... ] years I exercised kingship,
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 642 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Everyone is equal.
So ,no one needs forgiveness from a 'most high'.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18350 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
TechnoCore writes: You are right. According to my belief, there are two basic perspectives in life. Egocentric, and Theocentric. If my belief says that all wisdom and truth originate from me, I can pretty much get away with doing whatever I want and declaring that no evil exists. If, on the other hand, I acknowledge a Supreme Being who by definition is the source...not only according to my perspective but everyone elses irregardless of their opinions--than evil is defined as rebellion to this authority. The relativists will challenge my definition of God as an extension of my egocentrism...and what can I say? Theists have always been accused of using religion to justify authority. We would claim the authority that we are justifying as God, The relativists would contend that we are using God as an excuse to exercise our own authority. This is a debate with no formal solution.
It is all just about perspective. Do you think Hitler thought of himself as evil? Or Stalin? They both did what they thought to be necessary and right at the time of their actions, even if those who got hurt from them obviously thought something else.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 507 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Phatboy writes:
I strongly recommend taking a course in philosophy of ethics. If my ethics professor were standing next to you, he'd grab you by the throat and yell into your ear all the moral theories that ever existed until your head begin to ring. That's what he did with us and look what I've become. You are right. According to my belief, there are two basic perspectives in life. Egocentric, and Theocentric. If my belief says that all wisdom and truth originate from me, I can pretty much get away with doing whatever I want and declaring that no evil exists. If, on the other hand, I acknowledge a Supreme Being who by definition is the source...not only according to my perspective but everyone elses irregardless of their opinions--than evil is defined as rebellion to this authority. The relativists will challenge my definition of God as an extension of my egocentrism...and what can I say? Theists have always been accused of using religion to justify authority. We would claim the authority that we are justifying as God, The relativists would contend that we are using God as an excuse to exercise our own authority. This is a debate with no formal solution. But seriously, the world of ethics ain't as simple as you think, dude. The Laminator B ULLS HIT For goodness's sake, please vote Democrat this November!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3958 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
neither. man is inherently stupid. good and evil are social constructs... rules that man has placed on himself. god is being is all and the idea is for man to attain knowledge so that he can be like god.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18350 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Darth, I know that the study of ethics gets far more complex than my simplified proposals. Here is a quote concerning virtue ethics and the fundamental attribution error:
G.Harmon writes:
In everyday experience the characteristics of actors and those of the situations they face are typically confounded--in ways that contribute to precisely the consistency that we perceive and count on in our social dealings. People often choose the situations to which they are exposed; and people often are chosen for situations on the basis of their manifest or presumed abilities and dispositions. Thus, clerics and criminals rarely face an identical or equivalent set of situational challenges. Rather they place themselves, and are placed by others, in situations that differ precisely in ways that induce clergy to look, act, feel, and think rather consistently like clergy and that induce criminals to look, act, feel, and think like criminals...Darth writes: But what "world" are you talking about? Mans attempts to explain his behavior? My simplistic view suggests that Man cannot explain his behavior because he is unable to focus on a fixed point of reference outside himself except for the study of other humans. If ALL humans have similar traits, no other human can serve as a reference point. That is why Theists focus on God as a point of reference.
the world of ethics ain't as simple as you think, dude.brennakimi writes: Only as much as your belief states that humans are the creators of definitions. If the good book was written by the opinions of men, you are right. If the book was written by men inspired by an outside point of reference, you are not right. Thus, our differing points of view.
good and evil are social constructs |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Phatboy responds to me:
quote: Of course. Judaism is more than just the Torah just as Catholicism is more than just the Bible. But you are missing the entire point: To say that a text suddenly means something it was never understood to mean is disingenuous at best. You are suggesting that Jews don't know the theological implications of their own holy work.
quote: (*chuckle*) Go read the NIV translation of the Bible and then come back to me.
quote: True, but to imply that it was written with Christ and Christians in mind is just as fallacious.
quote:quote: So salvation is by faith. That contradicts Peter, though.
quote: Misquote. Why didn't you include the stuff that came before? 1 Peter 1:17: And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: 1:18: Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 1:19: But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 1:20: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, 1:21: Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God. As 1 Peter 1:17 clearly points out, god judges without favoring people. You get your faith by doing good works and through those good works, you gain heaven. You are redeemed by the act of Jesus, not simply the belief in god. If belief were all that was required, then Jews would get to heaven since they believe. Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
dpardo responds to me:
quote: Again: (*blink!) You did not just say that, did you? What do you think that god is doing as he "judgeth according to every man's work"? You can't divorce this verse from the surrounding ones. The entire book of 1 Peter is all about salvation. Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
CHRIS PORTEUS jr avoids my question (by deliberately misquoting me, I might add):
quote: Non sequitur. Let's try again, shall we? Will an atheist go to heaven if he does good works? Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
ramoss responds to me:
quote: Pascal's Wager. I'm so sorry. You didn't think the god that truly exists was the Christian one, did you? It is possible that both atheists and Christians are wrong, you know. For all we know, god loves the atheists. The Bible is actually a test, you see. God gave humanity judgement, brains, and maturity (I say that any boob can take and shove a ball in a pocket) and then presented the creation a book that was obviously false in order to see what we would do. Would we reject the book that claimed to be the word of god in order to find our own way through the universe, relying upon the gifts we were given? Or would we blindly follow the book simply because it claimed to be the word of god, talking ourselves into thinking we actually heard god tell us it was true? Perhaps god prefers those who think for themselves, even if they wind up being wrong, over those who play it safe and have their lives pre-digested for them. Heck, what if the Bible is actually the work of the devil, designed to corrupt our souls and turn us from the path of god? The choice is not between "god" and "not-god." There is "not-god" and a whole panoply of mutually exclusive definitions of "god." Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Phatboy writes:
quote: But the mere existence of atheists proves this concept to be a fallacy. Unless you're claiming that atheists have no morality. Are you? Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024