Why did God create evil?

[ding]

You are confusing people rationalizing that they didn't do wrong with people don't agree on right and wrong. Two different things. But it is people believing that their actions are right that tells us there is something inside of them that they didn't put there that keeps them from abandoning the concept even when they do do wrong. They just argue that they didn't. Didn't I already go over that?

Man is the only animal capable of knowledge of good and evil. No other creature has this concept. Sure animals can have empathy, but not like man. Animals function on impulse and instinct. Man functions on these too, but in man's case he has the unique ability to override his impulses and instinct for the sake of good. That is free will.

Without deciding what is right and wrong, how can you rationalize what is right and wrong?

How do you know man is the only animal capable of knowledge of good and evil? That's another of these absurd things you say where you don't actually know.

Free will? Do we have free will.

Why do you do what you do? Because of the drugs in your body and the experience you've had which are based on the drugs in someone else's body.

Objective truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Error cannot stand, it eventually fails. But if you want to get to the answer faster, you must die to self and have no preference for an outcome. That's how you can figure out the right thing to do.

If I was walking my dog and came upon you and attacked you for no reason at all, my dog would be tearing at your throat in the fight. My dog is an amazing animal. Smart and intelligent for a dog. He has no clue about the concept of good an evil. Animals operate on impulse and instinct. Their level of empathy is low. They have no concept of right and wrong. If you don't believe me, go and share a coke with a polar bear.

Everyone has free will. Free will is choice. Everything is choice.

The problem with your analogies is that they don't work very well with other similar analogies.

Go have a coke with a bear. The bear will tear you up.

How about you put a human with a cockroach, they go have a coke together. Will the human not try and kill the cockroach?

Or how about a mosquito?

From the mosquito or cockroach's point of view, humans have no empathy.

I don't have roaches. I use roach proof. Mosquitoes don't bother me and I don't bother them.

That polar bear is eating your spleen.

Any empathy for killing roaches? No? You just put poison down and kill them, without a thought to their life, their wellbeing, their family.

No empathy huh?

I say a pray for them.

I killed a bunch of flies today too.

Am I bad person?

 

[ding]

Let's see... red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedman's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, 1st and 2nd Law of Thermodynamics all tell us that ~14 billion years ago space and time were created when all the matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool. Atheists worship science until it doesn't suit their purpose then they throw it under the bus.

Which is a theory that hasn't been proven at all.

We think there was a big bang. What happened before the big bang? We don't know. Did the stuff that exploded out of the big bang exist already, and was merely compacted together.

Imagine a bike inner tube. Imagine that the air can go around this inner tube. But at one point there's only the tinniest of spaces that stuff can squeeze through.

It all explodes from this one place, goes around the inner tube and meets back at the small space a few billion years later.

Is this what happens? Or isn't it?

Do you usually shit all over science when science offends your sensibilities?

Fuck off.

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics tells us the universe had a beginning. You just can't get around that.

Today had a beginning. Doesn't mean there wasn't anything before the beginning.

Do we really have to do this simplistic stuff?

Today isn't really the same thing as space and time, but you go with that while you shit all over science that offends your sensibilities.

 

[MaryL]

My next door neighbor died last Saturday. The guy was a swine, but people liked him . So people showed up en mass and put those weird floaty candles in a paper balloons like Mexicans do, and well, it was moving. We Anglos, we are weird like that. We are like Mr. Spock, we don't show emotions. But Mexicans, hell, they practically firebomb the neighborhood for a complete and total wastrel. It's was amazing the difference between Mexicans and Anglo culture. I think of the Dia de los muertos . No gringo would sit in a graveyard in their right mind. I sort of have to admire mexicans.

 

[ding]

You're probably doing it wrong.

"probably" being that all important word.

I was being nice.

You were being blinkered.

You misspelled trolled the trolls.

Do we really have to pretend we're high school kids looking for a cheap laugh?

There's no need to pretend at all.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Without deciding what is right and wrong, how can you rationalize what is right and wrong?

How do you know man is the only animal capable of knowledge of good and evil? That's another of these absurd things you say where you don't actually know.

Free will? Do we have free will.

Why do you do what you do? Because of the drugs in your body and the experience you've had which are based on the drugs in someone else's body.

Objective truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Error cannot stand, it eventually fails. But if you want to get to the answer faster, you must die to self and have no preference for an outcome. That's how you can figure out the right thing to do.

If I was walking my dog and came upon you and attacked you for no reason at all, my dog would be tearing at your throat in the fight. My dog is an amazing animal. Smart and intelligent for a dog. He has no clue about the concept of good an evil. Animals operate on impulse and instinct. Their level of empathy is low. They have no concept of right and wrong. If you don't believe me, go and share a coke with a polar bear.

Everyone has free will. Free will is choice. Everything is choice.

The problem with your analogies is that they don't work very well with other similar analogies.

Go have a coke with a bear. The bear will tear you up.

How about you put a human with a cockroach, they go have a coke together. Will the human not try and kill the cockroach?

Or how about a mosquito?

From the mosquito or cockroach's point of view, humans have no empathy.

I don't have roaches. I use roach proof. Mosquitoes don't bother me and I don't bother them.

That polar bear is eating your spleen.

Any empathy for killing roaches? No? You just put poison down and kill them, without a thought to their life, their wellbeing, their family.

No empathy huh?

I say a pray for them.

I killed a bunch of flies today too.

Am I bad person?

Keep up.

We're not talking about whether you're good or bad. We're talking about whether you have empathy from the point of view of those you killed.

For the reason that you said that other animals have no empathy because of how they react to humans.

So, if humans react badly towards mosquitoes, cockroaches and flies, it shows a distinct lack of empathy. The same lack of empathy that a bear has for you.

Which means what? That we're no different from other animals (in the context that we all share differences) and therefore your argument about God just fell flat on its face.

 

[ding]

Objective truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Error cannot stand, it eventually fails. But if you want to get to the answer faster, you must die to self and have no preference for an outcome. That's how you can figure out the right thing to do.

If I was walking my dog and came upon you and attacked you for no reason at all, my dog would be tearing at your throat in the fight. My dog is an amazing animal. Smart and intelligent for a dog. He has no clue about the concept of good an evil. Animals operate on impulse and instinct. Their level of empathy is low. They have no concept of right and wrong. If you don't believe me, go and share a coke with a polar bear.

Everyone has free will. Free will is choice. Everything is choice.

The problem with your analogies is that they don't work very well with other similar analogies.

Go have a coke with a bear. The bear will tear you up.

How about you put a human with a cockroach, they go have a coke together. Will the human not try and kill the cockroach?

Or how about a mosquito?

From the mosquito or cockroach's point of view, humans have no empathy.

I don't have roaches. I use roach proof. Mosquitoes don't bother me and I don't bother them.

That polar bear is eating your spleen.

Any empathy for killing roaches? No? You just put poison down and kill them, without a thought to their life, their wellbeing, their family.

No empathy huh?

I say a pray for them.

I killed a bunch of flies today too.

Am I bad person?

Keep up.

We're not talking about whether you're good or bad. We're talking about whether you have empathy from the point of view of those you killed.

For the reason that you said that other animals have no empathy because of how they react to humans.

So, if humans react badly towards mosquitoes, cockroaches and flies, it shows a distinct lack of empathy. The same lack of empathy that a bear has for you.

Which means what? That we're no different from other animals (in the context that we all share differences) and therefore your argument about God just fell flat on its face.

Maybe you should go back and refresh yourself with the OP. We literally are talking about evil.

Now if you want to establish that the standard for evil is killing any life at all, I can't really argue that that is not the highest standard. But what I will argue is that it is not a practical standard as all living things must die. So the highest practical standard is the unnecessary killing of life.

Of course this all seems rather silly sense you are literally arguing that there is no difference between humans and other animals which is total nonsense because no other animal has a concept of good and evil; right and wrong; fair and unfair.

 

[JustAnotherNut]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

Of the good in you I can speak, but not of the evil
For what is evil but good, tortured by it's own hunger and thirst
Verily when good is hungry it's seeks food even in dark caves
And when it thirsts, it drinks even of dead waters

You are good when you are one with yourself
Yet when you are not one with yourself you are not evil
For a divided house is not a den of thieves
It is only a divided house
And a ship without rudder may wander aimlessly among perilous isles
yet sink not to the bottom

You are good when you strive to give of yourself
Yet you are not evil when you seek gain for yourself
For when you strive for gain you are but a root that clings to the earth
and sucks at her breast
Surely the fruit cannot say to the root, 'Be like me, ripe and full and ever
giving of your abundance
For to the fruit giving is a need, as receiving is a need to the root

You are good when you are fully awake in your speech
Yet you are not evil when you sleep while your tongue staggers
without purpose
And even stumbling speech may strengthen a weak tongue

You are good when you walk to your goal firmly and with bold steps
Yet you are not evil when you go thither limping
Even those who limp go not backward. But you who are strong and swift
see that you do not limp before the lame, deeming it kindness

You are good in countless ways, and you are not evil when you are not good
You are only loitering and sluggard
Pity that the stags cannot teach swiftness to the turtles

In your longing for your giant self lies your goodness and that longing is in all of you
But in some of you that longing is a torrent rushing with might to the sea
carrying the secrets of the hillsides and the songs of the forests
And in others it is a flat stream that loses itself in angles and bends and
lingers before it reaches the shore
But let not him who longs much say to him that longs little "Wherefore
are you slow and halting?"
For the truly good ask not the naked, "Where is your garment?" or
the houseless, "What has befallen your house?"

 

[frigidweirdo]

The problem with your analogies is that they don't work very well with other similar analogies.

Go have a coke with a bear. The bear will tear you up.

How about you put a human with a cockroach, they go have a coke together. Will the human not try and kill the cockroach?

Or how about a mosquito?

From the mosquito or cockroach's point of view, humans have no empathy.

I don't have roaches. I use roach proof. Mosquitoes don't bother me and I don't bother them.

That polar bear is eating your spleen.

Any empathy for killing roaches? No? You just put poison down and kill them, without a thought to their life, their wellbeing, their family.

No empathy huh?

I say a pray for them.

I killed a bunch of flies today too.

Am I bad person?

Keep up.

We're not talking about whether you're good or bad. We're talking about whether you have empathy from the point of view of those you killed.

For the reason that you said that other animals have no empathy because of how they react to humans.

So, if humans react badly towards mosquitoes, cockroaches and flies, it shows a distinct lack of empathy. The same lack of empathy that a bear has for you.

Which means what? That we're no different from other animals (in the context that we all share differences) and therefore your argument about God just fell flat on its face.

Maybe you should go back and refresh yourself with the OP. We literally are talking about evil.

Now if you want to establish that the standard for evil is killing any life at all, I can't really argue that that is not the highest standard. But what I will argue is that it is not a practical standard as all living things must die. So the highest practical standard is the unnecessary killing of life.

Of course this all seems rather silly sense you are literally arguing that there is no difference between humans and other animals which is total nonsense because no other animal has a concept of good and evil; right and wrong; fair and unfair.

Maybe you should try and keep up with what you're talking about.

Oh, total nonsense that we're the same as other animals even though you just made an argument which fits together like a lion in a small hole. Right...

Yeah, you just keep throwing the "you're talking nonsense because it's inconvenient for me" line and we'll see how long this conversation last for.

 

[Mindful]

Without deciding what is right and wrong, how can you rationalize what is right and wrong?

How do you know man is the only animal capable of knowledge of good and evil? That's another of these absurd things you say where you don't actually know.

Free will? Do we have free will.

Why do you do what you do? Because of the drugs in your body and the experience you've had which are based on the drugs in someone else's body.

Objective truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Error cannot stand, it eventually fails. But if you want to get to the answer faster, you must die to self and have no preference for an outcome. That's how you can figure out the right thing to do.

If I was walking my dog and came upon you and attacked you for no reason at all, my dog would be tearing at your throat in the fight. My dog is an amazing animal. Smart and intelligent for a dog. He has no clue about the concept of good an evil. Animals operate on impulse and instinct. Their level of empathy is low. They have no concept of right and wrong. If you don't believe me, go and share a coke with a polar bear.

Everyone has free will. Free will is choice. Everything is choice.

The problem with your analogies is that they don't work very well with other similar analogies.

Go have a coke with a bear. The bear will tear you up.

How about you put a human with a cockroach, they go have a coke together. Will the human not try and kill the cockroach?

Or how about a mosquito?

From the mosquito or cockroach's point of view, humans have no empathy.

I don't have roaches. I use roach proof. Mosquitoes don't bother me and I don't bother them.

That polar bear is eating your spleen.

Any empathy for killing roaches? No? You just put poison down and kill them, without a thought to their life, their wellbeing, their family.

No empathy huh?

I say a pray for them.

I killed a bunch of flies today too.

Am I bad person?

You might have the makings of an assassin.

 

[Billo_Really]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

If God only created good, then you wouldn't know what bad was. If HE only created cold, you wouldn't know what heat was. If he only created darkness, then you wouldn't know what light was. If you are the only star in the universe, then you wouldn't know where you were.

God created a balance between good and evil and left it up to free will for us to choose where we are in that balance.

 

[ding]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

If God only created good, then you wouldn't know what bad was. If HE only created cold, you wouldn't know what heat was. If he only created darkness, then you wouldn't know what light was. If you are the only star in the universe, then you wouldn't know where you were.

God created a balance between good and evil and left it up to free will for us to choose where we are in that balance.

I think that is very close. He created everything and everything can be used for good or bad. It is up to us how we chose to use it.

Existence itself is inherently good. It is better to be than not to be.

The knowledge of good and evil is not a human construct it is a reality of intelligence.

 

[Natural Citizen]

You are the one who has no evidence for what you are saying as you are literally arguing against science.

I thought you guys were supposed to worship science.

Agreed on the latter. However, you, too, fall victim to the former. I think that you do not realize this. But, then again, don't we all. The courage to admit that we don't have all of the answers and that there will always be another question is quite another phenomenon in itself. Humility is hard.

 

[BreezeWood]

The problem with your analogies is that they don't work very well with other similar analogies.

Go have a coke with a bear. The bear will tear you up.

How about you put a human with a cockroach, they go have a coke together. Will the human not try and kill the cockroach?

Or how about a mosquito?

From the mosquito or cockroach's point of view, humans have no empathy.

I don't have roaches. I use roach proof. Mosquitoes don't bother me and I don't bother them.

That polar bear is eating your spleen.

Any empathy for killing roaches? No? You just put poison down and kill them, without a thought to their life, their wellbeing, their family.

No empathy huh?

I say a pray for them.

I killed a bunch of flies today too.

Am I bad person?

Keep up.

We're not talking about whether you're good or bad. We're talking about whether you have empathy from the point of view of those you killed.

For the reason that you said that other animals have no empathy because of how they react to humans.

So, if humans react badly towards mosquitoes, cockroaches and flies, it shows a distinct lack of empathy. The same lack of empathy that a bear has for you.

Which means what? That we're no different from other animals (in the context that we all share differences) and therefore your argument about God just fell flat on its face.

Maybe you should go back and refresh yourself with the OP. We literally are talking about evil.

Now if you want to establish that the standard for evil is killing any life at all, I can't really argue that that is not the highest standard. But what I will argue is that it is not a practical standard as all living things must die. So the highest practical standard is the unnecessary killing of life.

Of course this all seems rather silly sense you are literally arguing that there is no difference between humans and other animals which is total nonsense because no other animal has a concept of good and evil; right and wrong; fair and unfair.

.

Of course this all seems rather silly sense you are literally arguing that there is no difference between humans and other animals which is total nonsense because no other animal has a concept of good and evil; right and wrong; fair and unfair.

no other animal has a concept of good and evil; right and wrong; fair and unfair ...

is Flora an animal, individually and collectively the above two refute your christian values ...

the truth is your statement is inherently flawed as all physiological beings are conscious of an existence not associated with their particular physical presence, however you try to define it ... especially using canned 4th century values.

 

[Mindful]

Is this good or evil?

Or just as is?

 

[ding]

Humility is hard

Brother, you have no idea.

 

[BreezeWood]

Is this good or evil?

XXXXX

Or just as is?

.
- almost seems evil to have posted that video, the point is, nothing is, just as is ... unless of course if you worship a book disguised as a religion in that case, just as is, is.

 

[LittleNipper]

Is this good or evil?

Or just as is?

I believe the reason such exists is because of the Fall of Adam. Before the Fall everyone and everything only ate vegetation. With the FALL all creation was corrupted. Even the diseases of today have likely deviated from some original divine purpose. Adam could have lived forever and never died. Obviously, everything now dies.

 

[BS Filter]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

If God only created good, then you wouldn't know what bad was. If HE only created cold, you wouldn't know what heat was. If he only created darkness, then you wouldn't know what light was. If you are the only star in the universe, then you wouldn't know where you were.

God created a balance between good and evil and left it up to free will for us to choose where we are in that balance.

I think that is very close. He created everything and everything can be used for good or bad. It is up to us how we chose to use it.

Existence itself is inherently good. It is better to be than not to be.

The knowledge of good and evil is not a human construct it is a reality of intelligence.

Man could have chosen the tree of life, but chose the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Jesus is life. One day, all evil will be gone.

 

[BS Filter]

Is this good or evil?

Or just as is?

I believe the reason such exists is because of the Fall of Adam. Before the Fall everyone and everything only ate vegetation. With the FALL all creation was corrupted. Even the diseases of today have likely deviated from some original divine purpose. Adam could have lived forever and never died. Obviously, everything now dies.

Agree. Adam had to be driven of the garden so that he didn't eat from the tree of life. If he had, he would have lived forever in a fallen state without any chance at redemption.

 

[Taz]

God created evil because He’s a bad ass at heart.