Interesting Debate

[Wouldhe]

It's funny how the believers stand on the illogical and that that cannot be explained. To explain why God allows evil is to say whoever is giving the explanation has intimate knowledge of Gods mindset and has special insight into Gods behaviour. Of course we know he doesn't so his basis for explanation has no validity. Anybody can make anything up.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/at...-debate-89362/

[evileye]

Originally Posted by Wouldhe

It's funny how the believers stand on the illogical and that that cannot be explained. To explain why God allows evil is to say whoever is giving the explanation has intimate knowledge of Gods mindset and has special insight into Gods behaviour. Of course we know he doesn't so his basis for explanation has no validity. Anybody can make anything up.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/at...-debate-89362/

The article is very biased to the Cbristian side. I realize it is the CP presenting the information, but any news presenting agency should try to remain professional.

[Wallis]

We need definitions.

Define "evil."

Now, if you are God, how would you define evil? For God, there is no evil. Everything that happens is God's Will.

Again, if there is an entity called evil that can oppose God or circumvent God's Will, then . . . . God ain't God. Period.

And all this time, we have been spinning our wheels when we should be out looking for a real God.

[emilynghiem]

Originally Posted by Wouldhe

It's funny how the believers stand on the illogical and that that cannot be explained. To explain why God allows evil is to say whoever is giving the explanation has intimate knowledge of Gods mindset and has special insight into Gods behaviour. Of course we know he doesn't so his basis for explanation has no validity. Anybody can make anything up.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/at...-debate-89362/

Originally Posted by Wallis

We need definitions.

Define "evil."

Now, if you are God, how would you define evil? For God, there is no evil. Everything that happens is God's Will.

Again, if there is an entity called evil that can oppose God or circumvent God's Will, then . . . . God ain't God. Period.

And all this time, we have been spinning our wheels when we should be out looking for a real God.

Dear Wouldhe and Wallis:
(1) RE: allowing falseness or abuse or "evil"

of course we as humans WANT freedom which gives the ability to do either right or wrong.
that is just human nature to desire freedom.

Can we look at this objectively like the laws of math or natural health.
Bad decisions reap bad consequences, so that we learn the difference by free will and reason.
So with math, wrong answers are possible as well as right ones,
so we can learn to check our work and solve problems correctly.

Same with civil laws, natural laws, spiritual laws.
To learn what is living acting and being "in harmony" means
making mistakes when we are in conflict or out of balance.

So "evil" injury or injustice occurs as a result of wrongful decision or action.
This either hurts people individually or collectively; where, by our human free will, our "natural" desire to seek satisfaction peace and security, and our disdain for pain and suffering, we gravitate toward correction for betterment of ourselves and society, and justice that brings lasting peace.

If we only were designed to choose right answers all the time, we would never learn
what makes a wrong answer and what do you do to fix it if that happens.
How can we grow and develop, scientifically and creatively, without those skills?

(2) Wallis I agree we need consistent definitions

if the opposite of love of knowledge, truth and justice
is fear of the unknown, ignorance and injustice

do we agree that sharing equal knowledge of truth and wisdom
is greater for the common good
and monopolizing or manipulating information or the perception thereof
opens the door for selfish and evil intentions to become hurtful actions

isn't fear and selfishness at the expense of others
the root of what causes hurtful actions and suffering

isn't compassion and freely sharing to benefit ourselves and others equally
by definition better for the public good

anything done by coercion and fear seems to go against human free will
and need for security and equal justice freedom and peace

anything that helps people to interact freely and equally without fear of harming or conflicting with others seems more harmonious and beneficial to humanity

[Wallis]

Originally Posted by emilynghiem

Dear Wouldhe and Wallis:
(1) RE: allowing falseness or abuse or "evil"

of course we as humans WANT freedom which gives the ability to do either right or wrong.
that is just human nature to desire freedom.

Can we look at this objectively like the laws of math or natural health.
Bad decisions reap bad consequences, so that we learn the difference by free will and reason.
So with math, wrong answers are possible as well as right ones,
so we can learn to check our work and solve problems correctly.

Same with civil laws, natural laws, spiritual laws.
To learn what is living acting and being "in harmony" means
making mistakes when we are in conflict or out of balance.

So "evil" injury or injustice occurs as a result of wrongful decision or action.
This either hurts people individually or collectively; where, by our human free will, our "natural" desire to seek satisfaction peace and security, and our disdain for pain and suffering, we gravitate toward correction for betterment of ourselves and society, and justice that brings lasting peace.

If we only were designed to choose right answers all the time, we would never learn
what makes a wrong answer and what do you do to fix it if that happens.
How can we grow and develop, scientifically and creatively, without those skills?

(2) Wallis I agree we need consistent definitions

if the opposite of love of knowledge, truth and justice
is fear of the unknown, ignorance and injustice

do we agree that sharing equal knowledge of truth and wisdom
is greater for the common good
and monopolizing or manipulating information or the perception thereof
opens the door for selfish and evil intentions to become hurtful actions

isn't fear and selfishness at the expense of others
the root of what causes hurtful actions and suffering

isn't compassion and freely sharing to benefit ourselves and others equally
by definition better for the public good

anything done by coercion and fear seems to go against human free will
and need for security and equal justice freedom and peace

anything that helps people to interact freely and equally without fear of harming or conflicting with others seems more harmonious and beneficial to humanity

Emily, you make my head hurt.

No and no.

You don't get it. Read my response in the thread "honey."

Evil only exists in the mind of man. Nowhere else.

People desire freedom only so that they themselves can be king of the hill. Everyone kiss their petootie. Imagine if everyone had the power to be king of the hill! Ever see "Forbidden Planet!" "In a single night, the Krill anhilated themselves. They didn't see it coming, the poor bastards."

There are no wrong answers. That is just the point. If you say that the world is flat or that the sky is green, those are not wrong answers. There is validity in both statements.

Everything a person does hurts someone. This is a philosophical "reality" that should be taught . . . but then no one teaches philosophy any more, I guess.

Everything a person does is wrong. You try to love, you do wrong. You try to teach, you do wrong. You try to correct, you do wrong. This is the crux of life: every action, every word, every thought impinges upon another human being. And that constitutes the apex of pain.

You desire a magic formula, a panacea, by which if everyone followed there would be no pain, no hurt, no nothing. Impossible. Every word I write here is going to be painful. Some a bit intentional, most not. But I realize that it is going to rub you the wrong way, and you are going to take offense. Of course, you taking offense is not my problem: it is yours. And vice versa.

-----
The opposite of love of knowledge, truth, and justice is NOT fear of the unknown, ignorance, and injustice.

Here is where I find your philosophical argument faulty. Love of knowledge implies a studious aspirant for knowledge. The opposite is where there is no avenue for studying. Fear of the unknown has nothing to do with loving or pursuing knowledge.

I know of several people who would not leave their home towns. They are not afraid of what is outside their towns. They are content with living in their circles of comfort. LEAVE 'EM ALONE! Why do we want to change them? They are happy!

What is the truth? Often, it is just plain ignorance. Sappy and Theo-ignorant are two classic examples of late. They spout off Biblical passages like so many magical formulas and mantras and expect the masses to accept them as truth. They are as ignorant as rocks! And when exposed to other "truths," they have chose ignorance as gospel.

So, no. Ignorance is not the opposite of truth. Since truth is one of the most elusive concepts and aspects of life, the opposite of truth is simply another--possibly opposing--truth.

Injustice as being opposed to justice is the new new-age mantra. Another attempt to create a panacea.

Tell me, what is justice?

People have been trying to put the concept into a breadbox long before the first ancient, ancient scriptures and ideas were ever written down. There is no justice, period.

Tell me, Person A kills Person B. Cain and Abel, if you will. Where is the justice? Did God raise up Abel again, dust him off, then turn to Cain and shake his finger and tell him: "Don't do that again!"? Did God punish Cain? The myth has Abel's blood crying to the heavens for justice! Abel didn't get justice. He got death. Cain got to live a nice long life and sire a whole bunch of nations that would hound the ancient Hebrews for a very long time--up to this very day, in fact! Where is the justice in that?

Americans especially are all gung-ho for justice. An eye-for-an-eye, tooth-for-a-tooth. It is a wonder that we all aren't blind and toothless.

We demand justice from God. Why? Because we know better than God what God should be doing and how to mete out justice. Bullshit!

You take it in the ass, and you keep on going. Turn the other cheek. Inherit the earth (six-feet under) and be happy. This world isn't about justice. It is about doing what you can with whatever talents you have, and if you get a short sentence, lucky you. Justice, if anything, lies on the other side of this veil.

And that's another thing: people just can't get justice out of their system. They have create karma and all that other punishment-driven drivel.

It isn't enough to just "leave things alone." This whole world would operate a whole lot better if people would just leave things alone. But no! They have to be king of the hill. They have to have freedom to fuck everyone else in the world, because they are afraid that is they don't do the fucking first someone will fuck them.

Sharing knowledge. What kind of knowlege? Your knowledge? My knowledge?

Ignorance is bliss. Believe me. We would all be so much happier if we all had a lobotomy and didn't have to worry about whether the id, ego, or superego was in charge today.

Better yet, Pray that ET comes along soon and eats all of us.

[emilynghiem]

Originally Posted by Wallis

Emily, you make my head hurt.

No and no.

You don't get it. Read my response in the thread "honey."

Evil only exists in the mind of man. Nowhere else.

Hi Wallis
Yes to this, and also beyond the mind.
Yes the negative energy attacks the mind and spirit,
so THAT IS where it is manifested. But not all negative sick energy comes
just from the mind.

Wallis this is like acknowledging that disease
resides within the body. But its causes can
come from external sources.
Same with spiritual and mental sickness that manifests as demonic evil.

Wallis in that book I sent you, Scott Peck also started with the same
premise as an experienced doctor and scientific minded person.

it was after he observed FOR HIMSELF what the demonic manifestations
and process of eliminating these were like, and that they followed patterns
and stages, that he did recognize these were not generated by the patients'
chemistry or mental delusions/conditions in their minds.

He acknowledged that because of the level these phenomena manifest,
of course it is in the mind, both of the patients and the people observing
the sick evil being expressed. some of it was caught on video but most of it was perceived in the mental and spiritual space wehre both the patients and the observing treatment team were vulnerable to attack which they all witnessed.

Originally Posted by Wallis

There are no wrong answers. That is just the point. If you say that the world is flat or that the sky is green, those are not wrong answers. There is validity in both statements.

OK Wallis so why are you saying my statement is wrong
that evil influences can exist beyond the human mind??

Originally Posted by Wallis

Everything a person does is wrong. You try to love, you do wrong. You try to teach, you do wrong. You try to correct, you do wrong. This is the crux of life: every action, every word, every thought impinges upon another human being. And that constitutes the apex of pain.

You just said there are no wrong answers
and now everything we do imposes somewhere so it causes wrong.

Aren't you really trying to say that things are relative?
What may be right or wrong in one situation may be the other way
elsewhere.

Isn't what causes pain and suffering in relations
the conflict or imbalance between one person's will expectation or consent
and what someone else does wills or imposes?

If you understand and agree in advance, that is different
than when something is imposed without our permission
knowledge or consent. isn't that the issue?
The quality of the action and whether it is in harmony
with the beings and actions affected by it?

Originally Posted by Wallis

You desire a magic formula, a panacea, by which if everyone followed there would be no pain, no hurt, no nothing. Impossible. Every word I write here is going to be painful. Some a bit intentional, most not. But I realize that it is going to rub you the wrong way, and you are going to take offense. Of course, you taking offense is not my problem: it is yours. And vice versa.

please distinguish between pain on different levels of experience, Wallis.
you cannot avoid pain associated with death, giving birth, etc.
But you can avoid pain from NOT FORGIVING/LETTING GO of the past
where you keep reliving or re-associating negative fears attached to
these thoughts memories and perceptions. That is the pain we CAN do something about.

Wallis one pattern I do find in listening to people:
the ones who judge someone or something and don't forgive
tend to project the "can't" attitude and compete to reject or prove
someone else from such group or viewpoint wrong

the ones who forgive and correct as life goes on,
tend to speak in terms of what CAN be done
and work WITH people not against

-----

Originally Posted by Wallis

The opposite of love of knowledge, truth, and justice is NOT fear of the unknown, ignorance, and injustice.

Here is where I find your philosophical argument faulty. Love of knowledge implies a studious aspirant for knowledge. The opposite is where there is no avenue for studying. Fear of the unknown has nothing to do with loving or pursuing knowledge.

I know of several people who would not leave their home towns. They are not afraid of what is outside their towns. They are content with living in their circles of comfort. LEAVE 'EM ALONE! Why do we want to change them? They are happy!

Dear Wallis from the fear of the unknown also stems
the fear of change. So if these people have no fear of
the unknown and no fear of change, I agree there is
no problem and that is NOT what I am talking about.

I am talking about when there IS a conflict where people are not at peace
becuase of either
1. fear of the unknown
2. fear of change or loss of control to outside authority or influence/will
3. fear of confrontation and conflict

so fear and separation related to ignorance fuels
division and these other fears.

If people don't have these fears and don't try to compensate
by preemptive strikes imposing on others, then I agree: there is no problem!!

Originally Posted by Wallis

What is the truth? Often, it is just plain ignorance. Sappy and Theo-ignorant are two classic examples of late. They spout off Biblical passages like so many magical formulas and mantras and expect the masses to accept them as truth. They are as ignorant as rocks! And when exposed to other "truths," they have chose ignorance as gospel.

if something is false delusional etc then it is not truth.
I think you mean perceived truth or relative truth?
That is still true for that person.

What I mean by universal truth is what is common to ALL people.
So we find that by sharing our relative truths and sort out
where these agree by eliminating all conflicting points of disagreement.

[quote="Wallis"]...
It isn't enough to just "leave things alone." This whole world would operate a whole lot better if people would just leave things alone. But no! They have to be king of the hill. They have to have freedom to fuck everyone else in the world, because they are afraid that is they don't do the fucking first someone will fuck them.[/quote="wallis"]
You just said to leave people alone and now you say it isn't enough.
Isn't the issue to focus where people do feel change is needed and
find out what that is? To work on what we feel is important and leave the other points to people who focus or specialize in that? So it's about PRIORITIZING and delegating things out in teams if something needs correcting or reform.

Originally Posted by wallis

Sharing knowledge. What kind of knowlege? Your knowledge? My knowledge?

Ignorance is bliss. Believe me. We would all be so much happier if we all had a lobotomy and didn't have to worry about whether the id, ego, or superego was in charge today.

Better yet, Pray that ET comes along soon and eats all of us.

Yes to all levels and angles on knowledge.
by assimilating all, and comparing notes to check and balance for mutual corrections, we can sort out what is good information and ideas by sharing experiences so we accelerate the learning curve and reduce errors by learning from the past.

All the previous things about justice/injustice, truth/ignorance you said seem to point to things being RELATIVE. and yes I agree.
what I mean is not being afraid of this, and working to connect with eachother on ideas and principles we share in common, so we CAN work on those!

So not to FEAR our differences or fear conflict/confrontation.

As for ignorance and bliss, again it's a matter of prioritizing.
I am going to worry about where I am going when I am driving,
and something that needs my attention immediately
before I worry about something happening next year.

Wallis I would like to know
what is your basic philosophy.
One friend summarizes everything in terms of fear, stress, anxiety
where getting rid of the cause of these internally solves whatever
problems aer attached to it in our minds regardless of things outside
we may ormay not control.
I call it fear of the unknown, fear of change/outside control or authority,
fear of conflict and confrontation.

I point out the issue is forgiveness/unforgiveness.
Where forgiveness opens the door to love and compassion, positive thoughts and energy to help bring about correction, and
gets rid of fear and anger etc. that blocks change from happening.

What is your philosophy besides
ego being the downfall
and this relativism thing you bring up
where things we do are wrong but there are no wrong answers
people should be left alone and ignorance is bliss but
doing nothing is not enough at the same time.

clearly it's both things
how do you define your philosophy
in terms of thought word action
spirit mind and body?

Wallis if you don't like my terms that are too relative
what do YOU USE?

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by emilynghiem

Wallis this is like acknowledging that disease
resides within the body. But its causes can
come from external sources.
Same with spiritual and mental sickness that manifests as demonic evil.

Don't know about you folks but I find it frightening that there are people walking amongst us in the 21st century who still believe that illness is caused by 'demons'. What frightens me even more is that they are allowed to vote and affect all our futures.

[Wouldhe]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

Don't know about you folks but I find it frightening that there are people walking amongst us in the 21st century who still believe that illness is caused by 'demons'. What frightens me even more is that they are allowed to vote and affect all our futures.

I second that notion, and they become leaders of nations as well.

[OneArm]

Originally Posted by Wouldhe

I second that notion, and they become leaders of nations as well.

This is very true. It seems like one of the prerequisites for becoming president is a belief in god. When will a person of rational thought step up and take the reigns?

[emilynghiem]

Originally Posted by OneArm

This is very true. It seems like one of the prerequisites for becoming president is a belief in god. When will a person of rational thought step up and take the reigns?

Dear One Arm: One day it won't matter so much what words we use, what will matter is the spirit and concept behind it that is universal to all people (or else it cannot be the real meaning of God if it does not include all people and views).

All this conflict and controversy over references to "God" in secular or govt contexts
can be resolved by agreeing that "under God" is the equivalent of saying "for the Public Good" or the "Greater Good."

Once a consensus is reached that the ultimate highest good for all humanity is what is meant by following "God's will" then it does not matter so much HOW you say it but WHAT IT MEANS. So if we agree what it means THAT'S what matters. And yes, government making decisions on behalf of the people SHOULD be for the public good. We should be able to agree on that, and remove any other issues that otherwise get in the way of sticking to agreement!

NOTE: Same with "Jesus" as universal messiah meaning "equal Justice for all" By agreeing we all seek to receive and establish perfect justice, then we can agree what we mean when people invoke the name of Jesus or sake of Justice.
When the spirit of what we mean is the same, the wording should not be an issue. "Lord of all" can be translated to mean "Source of all" if you mean God as Creator or Divine author of all things, or "Law of all" if you mean authority.
God and Jesus can mean different things in different CONTEXTS so each one may be translated differently into secular terms for that same CONCEPT or value.
(Such as God meaning Love, Wisdom, Universal Truth, Highest Good, Life, Creation, etc. depending on the context.)