|
| Thread: Some thoughts in favor Of God |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
posted November 20, 2010 06:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
@ Everyone
How would you define Evil? I would define it at least for starters; "An act that harms another person".
Quote:
I would start by not defining it.
That's fine, but for my intentions, If I want to give a person something to cuss/discuss "with me", I have to make give sort of definition.
And hence, the post did not end after that 
Quote:
Quote:
But if we do lack a black and white morality, we would just see a few things as bad qualities.
If I am understanding you correctly;
I don't care lots for Black and white thinking at times and most of the time it is because Gray is Not allowed. But, <IMO> it is used in all sorts of ways "for many purposes" to make communication possible. If Definitions of the words that we all use were not in Black and White (pre-decided)than every word in a sentence like this could have thousands of defs. and communication would be impossible about anything. History, Higher Math etc. Again only <imo> Concepts "almost by default" require this "first effort". even more than single-words.
I don't think I grasp what you are saying at all 
We could attempt to discuss the meta concept of "Evil" by invoking Godwins law, or something similar thou.
But the reason I think defining "evil" is a bad idea is because it is a really poor idea if we use it in the definition of the Christian tradition.
We can say doing drugs is evil.
Why is it evil?
Alcohol is a drug, that is accepted by society, hence its not evil because people think its not a drug. Ergo: Doing drugs is not evil, but society thinks doing drugs is evil.
____________
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted November 20, 2010 06:59 PM |
|
Edited by markkur at 05:04, 21 Nov 2010.
|
Quote:
I don't think I grasp what you are saying at all
We can say doing drugs is evil.
Why is it evil?
Alcohol is a drug, that is accepted by society, hence its not evil because people think its not a drug. Ergo: Doing drugs is not evil, but society thinks doing drugs is evil.
Edit= OK...still breathing. Man that was a drag.
In an effort to be exact
I use the word “Evil” as a “Noun” only in the #2 sense and never as an “adjective”.
Webster’s defines it as a “noun” in this fashion
1.what is morally wrong
2.what hinders the realization of the ‘Good’
3.what is materially, especially “socially“, very harmful I.e. famine and disease
Two things; First I realize that this is American English but that’s what I speak. So I am communicating in an accepted framework…here.
Secondly, I do not know how the word or “like-word” i.e.. not-good ,is defined in other languages. Actually I would be interested to know. I had not really ever thought about it before.
However; I still say my own preference for “harming others” is sound. Harming someone “hinders ‘their’ realization of Good” (as has been said by several posters in this thread) Keeping in mind I am not talking about war. I will not give my opinion about it because I don't think I have a right to. I've not had to be a soldier so I am not qualified to utter a word that could be perceived a judgment...by a soldier. Btw, that is my standard for "me". I am not setting rules for another soul/person.
This is what I meant earlier with my comments about words and definitions.
If my postion is at least "clear" (I'm not saying acceptable),then I hope we can just move on to discuss your drug reference.
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted November 21, 2010 03:03 PM |
|
|
Yeah, but when we avoid going into the territory populated by racist psychotic killers, it really starts falling short as a concept.
So nation 1 annexes nation 2 for resources they need.
A thief steals bread because the option is to starve to death.
The child who slaughtered his fellow students in school massacres had been bullied harshly for years, and it was his final solution to the problem.
The guy who kills and rape? He never learned that it was wrong. Or he must have picked up the psychotic hatred somewhere.
Etc...
The only thing we can define as "harmful for the sake of harmful" would eventually fall into minor friendly harm and complete and utter harm.
Regarding what "evil" is in various languages, its mostly after the Christan line after all more or less Christian-influenced languages which more or less orginated in Europa, or Christan colors which have been over a century.
I think its a bit different in Arabic and Islamic affected languages, that is at the least the impression after having read 1001 nights.
I think Hebrew is also different on what the word means.
For everywhere outside of the mentioned, its also a completely different definition.
____________
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted November 21, 2010 04:59 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yeah, but when we avoid going into the territory populated by racist psychotic killers, it really starts falling short as a concept.
I agree but I percieve a larger problem at least here in the US. I hope it is NOT a problem "in the rest of the world" but <imo>It is here. "Racist,psychotic killers" is the "preferred" use in mentioning "Killers" and some never "killed". Automatic usage fails even more as a concept and is <IMO> Faaaar more damaging.
When Christains/Non, Dem/Rep, Con/Lib, East/West etc./etc. use accurate "details" in a specific instance and then also use it as a "blanket-description" brimming with buzz-words and blanket-terms that triggers more mud-slinging and don't allow an individual to be seen, that's Not-good and I don;t mean evil
The reason I took the time to "narrow the scope" of what "I mean" by "Evil/Not-good" is because it means too many things to too many people and most of the time,<imo> they have NOT thought about "How" they are using the word.
Quote:
Regarding what "evil" is in various languages, its mostly after the Christan line after all more or less Christian-influenced languages which more or less orginated in Europa, or Christan colors which have been over a century.
I understand what you mean. Many Christians do not understand what they "owe" to a combination of two important events. Hus and the others that shook off the powerful church of that age and the invention of printing-press (the 1500s). For the first time since the infancy of the church, the book could get into the "peoples hands" and they were able to shake off the "sheep-slam" (meaning following "only" the instruction of another person)much moreso, than could have ever been possible before. As you probably know by this collision of ' Events' The Bible was used to teach English-writing etc., since there were very few mass-produced books for a time. It may have been the first in French and German too, with Calvin and Luther but I don't know that's true.
Quote:
I think its a bit different in Arabic and Islamic affected languages, that is at the least the impression after having read 1001 nights.
I think Hebrew is also different on what the word means.
For everywhere outside of the mentioned, its also a completely different definition.
Thank you for sharing that. It confirms something that I think I am beginning to understand about all of this. Since I know only 2 lang. and am only good with 1, that can be a big hurdle in communicating much further than "where's the bathroom?
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted November 22, 2010 07:49 AM |
|
|
Okay, I took the trouble to give narrow definition to Evil in "Harming another person" I had a purpose and it was due to what I want to say about the topic that del_diablo brought up; Drugs being Evil in Society"
Jesus said "It is not what goes into a man that defiles him, but what comes out of Him". It was when I read that, that I understood what was going on in American society and clearly saw what I didn't like about law.
By His definition; if I drink water and everytime want to kick my dog, beat people up and wreck cars, then I better understand...Me. My "personal-chemical-plant" called ME cannot handle "Water"
Whether Society says "it is legal for me to drink water or not" does not matter to me, because I have a bigger reason to make my own decision for myself.
I have known people that can drink water all night and are barely fazed and know many others if they drink "one glass" (their eye-balls change and they far too often wake-up the next morning in an unusual circumstance So One-Law is not addressing peoples differences...is it?
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 22, 2010 08:19 AM |
|
|
Defining evil as "harming another person" isn't gaining anything, because now you have to define "harm". Irouble is, that everyone define "harm" for themselves, subjectively, differently, which means, that trying to find an "objective" definition may not do justice to all people and their sensibilities, as in your drug example.
Moreover, harming another person, is definitely ok under certain circumstances. In fact, if a third person sees what is defined as evil (someone harms someone selse), it's not clear whether it's indeed evil or not (for example a cop may hurt a criminal).
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted November 22, 2010 03:11 PM |
|
Edited by markkur at 15:12, 22 Nov 2010.
|
Quote:
Defining evil as "harming another person" isn't gaining anything, because now you have to define "harm".
Why CANNOT it gain "something" when I use it the way I have? Isn't it better than trying to make my case (in my water example) to use my "graying effort", since too many see Evil as B&W and speak it like confetti in their thoughts and discussions?
This whole branch of needed-discusson is odd to me, in this sense anyway; Christians are accused everday of being too "black and white" and yet it's the concept of B&W that is trying to impede what I call an "accepted practice in communication"; to discuss one aspect of a much larger group of related definitions.
Quote:
Irouble is, that everyone define "harm" for themselves, subjectively, differently, which means, that trying to find an "objective" definition may not do justice to all people and their sensibilities, as in your drug example.
Agreed, so then what? Never communicate because someone will most likely not "know what I mean"? You know we all blow by that in a heart-beat. esp. because most often we are trying to explain why "their rules" are not "our rules"...correct? Or to say another way; I did not just float about in the breeze and one day land on this opinion but actually burned up a lot of brain-cells arriving to my current conclustion That is if you and I have not got quite sick of even trying to find common ground to further advance "shared understanding".
My narrowing Evil and using the water ex. is NOT going to float "Everyone's boat". I knew that. But...It was not my intent to arrive at a golden commandment for ALL but rather a working solution for some. If another person reads, agrees there is a diamond in the rough of my argument and understands and benefits?...say just 'one'. then it was not a wasted effort. I think that is the approach we all use, don't you?
Concerning "Drugs"...Not "harming another person" is for some, the basis of their stance against prohibition laws. i.e. If a man is in his own back-yard and in no contact with any other human being; why is "law" still at work then?
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
LrdInth
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted December 05, 2010 05:40 AM |
|
|
Jollyjoker makes a great point is saying that harm is defined in different ways. Is it a sin to detain a criminal and in doing so harm them? Many things are unanswerable I think. One verse may help a little bit: Galations 5:19-21, 22-23: "THe acts of sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality [rape], impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like... the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control. Against such there is no law." The verse apparently notes that sinful acts are obvious. Could anyone of you second to that?
When I think of sin I drift into morality verus ethics. There is a huge difference between the two. Morality is not doing something because it is simply wrong and in essence doing something right because it is simply right. From a Christian perspective, saying the Lord's name in vain is wrong just because, and worshipping is right just because.Ethics is not doing something because it has a noticeable consequence, for you or others. In this sense, rape is wrong because ther is a chance of you obtaining sexually transmitted diseases, or the guilt that follows; or the other person has to live in shame or if it is a woman, may have to suffer through childbirth.
However, people tend to miss the part where it harms others, and care about themselves inwardly. This is what is so radical about Jesus' view: [paraphrase] "Treat others as you would like them to treat you." Would you relate to this? Anyway those are just my thoughts. BTW i am very new to these forums
____________
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted December 05, 2010 07:17 AM |
|
Edited by markkur at 07:20, 05 Dec 2010.
|
Quote:
Jollyjoker makes a great point is saying that harm is defined in different ways.
I know and not wanting to take the shine of JJ, but about every word that is spoke/typed is subject to the intention and perception battle of "defined meaning". That is why I tried to narrow the scope to "Harm of another soul/person". I may be wrong but I think that should be a fairly good starting point, since most folks I would think, would have some "un-bidden" notion as to what I would mean when I use that phrase. Also, <IMO> the more of us that got together and tallied, the longer and more accurate the list.
Quote:
Is it a sin to detain a criminal and in doing so harm them?
<IMO> This is too vague to answer. Was the criminal caught in the crime and the crime is against the law? In saying "harm them" you don't mean brutality do you or outside the law?
Quote:
Many things are unanswerable I think. One verse may help a little bit: Galations 5:19-21, 22-23: "THe acts of sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality [rape], impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like...
While I agree with Paul 100% I don't think that the general public will be too keen on that list. Too many things on the list are under "heavy-fire" today"
Quote:
the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control. Against such there is no law." The verse apparently notes that sinful acts are obvious. Could anyone of you second to that?
Again Paul is right on target with me on the good stuff too However that is no shallow statement to understand it's meaning. I've witnessed Christians arguing till they're blue in the face as if they get it and clearly do not. Christ was the end to the law (of Faith) and most folks still end-up wrapping themselves right back up in those invisible-chains. Notice that I said "end-up" and not "want-to". Have you experienced what I just typed? Do you know what I meant?
Quote:
When I think of sin I drift into morality verus ethics. There is a huge difference between the two.
I understand what you mean here and they are very different in usage in the world but I have to share that the line between the two is nearly non-existant for me. I have my sense of right and wrong and it doesn't change with settings. I.e. My business ethics are my Christian morals. As a matter of fact I lost several times in the "get-ahead" careers because I could not leave myself at home, be a good follower and "play by their rules in business ethics" and that reigned supreme in the business I was trying to gain success. That happened on more than one occasion.
Quote:
However, people tend to miss the part where it harms others, and care about themselves inwardly. This is what is so radical about Jesus' view: [paraphrase] "Treat others as you would like them to treat you." Would you relate to this?
Yup. Completely. But here's the rub; What the Lord did not say was,. how lopsided it would be. To fulfill his teaching here you have to not give-up and throw in the towel when it seems no one will give you a break. I would venture to say that 'anyone in the world' that is really denying themselves and doing the right things regarding others, is quite often not receiving the same consideration in like kind. "Salt of the Earth" has a lot more to it than 4 words.
Quote:
Anyway those are just my thoughts. BTW i am very new to these forums
Thank you for sharing your thoughts, they matter as much as anyone else's. Welcome to HC. It's a good HoMM forum and lots of good folk about. Lots of info to gain. I've been here only since Sept. I came here because I am a nut about making maps in the dreaded HoMM5. With H6 just around the corner most folks are just waiting...and hoping.
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted August 28, 2012 04:54 PM |
|
Edited by Seraphim at 18:52, 28 Aug 2012.
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted August 28, 2012 05:55 PM |
|
|
An atheist world is without purpose, its only absolute, is that it will end.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2012 06:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
An atheist world is without purpose, it's only absolute, is that it will end.
A theist world would end one day as well, sorry mate.
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted August 28, 2012 06:42 PM |
|
|
What? I wasn't contesting that silly, read it again "its only absolute"
Besides, trying to apply atheist way of thinking to theist beliefs is not going to yield any constructive fruit. Sure the mortal plain will end, like the sun rises and it sets, but we forged it to better ourselves, what that means is left to each individual to determine.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted August 28, 2012 06:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
An atheist world is without purpose, its only absolute, is that it will end.
Without purpose? Hmm, I know very well that I would want to enjoy this one life. Keywords "Enjoy life".
Point is, life is snow. We are thrown into this harsh reality and we are supposed to survive.
believing that one can go to a place where you are bombarded with happiness hormones because you were a "Good" person is nothing but children's story for me.
Forget that, how can you enjoy an awesome perfect place when, lets say, your favorite person is burning in "HELL" ?
Makes sense?
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 28, 2012 06:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Besides, trying to apply atheist way of thinking to theist beliefs is not going to yield any constructive fruit.
Like the opposite will. But here we are.
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted August 29, 2012 05:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Forget that, how can you enjoy an awesome perfect place when, lets say, your favorite person is burning in "HELL" ?
Who could/would? For me, that is a non-heavenly description of the present life. People today can laugh in the course of their lives while millions starve or die in the course of their lives.
If the promise of Christ proves true at the time of my death and heaven exists, i seriously doubt that it will be anything I would have imagined while earth-bound.
I think the whole idea of man describing what he has not seen, is about as sensible as; telling a 9th century Celt all about modern Tokyo.
(In any language)"You know how you can rent a room at a hotel?"
(Response in ancient Brittisc) Translates..."What?"; meaning: "what are you saying" not "what do you mean."
"Well, there you can rent a small coffin-sized-space that has a bed, some drawers and compartments to keep your stuff while you ride the rails and see the sights."
"What?!"
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 29, 2012 05:35 PM |
|
|
|
Funny, you strive for something but you don't know what that something is. That doesn't make much sense. Most people will prefer the explanation with the 72 virgins and the fires.
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted August 29, 2012 07:50 PM |
|
|
Sub sole nihil novi est.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted August 29, 2012 08:35 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Funny, you strive for something but you don't know what that something is
Strive is from my past, old codgers like myself...merely coast.
<imvho> What is problematic (for all) of much of the Bible is it's frequent double-edge meaning that is found in much of the prose, poetry and story-telling that makes-up the whole.
I know exactly what the something has been in this/my life but have to have Faith about the next. About that...I trust in a promise and not much more. Btw, I've never been very interested-in the beginning or the end of things; for me, the here and now has always been enough to fill my bucket.
When this trip is over, either it will be as most here think; then it will not matter to me anyway, or; if my Faith ends true, well, it wiil be one of the few things I got right while visiting this planet.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 29, 2012 10:28 PM |
|
|
|
Sounds fair put that way.
|
| |
|
|
