Humans: Good or Evil?

Originally posted by Halitose
you really are a bundle of joy aren't you?

In a thread that mentions Jeremiah , you ought not use the word "joy" in reference to a frog unless you have wine and an old "three dog night" album.

Originally posted by LemonJello
i give you a C+ for the book report.

you may be able to elevate it to the status of an argument (and get a better grade) if you provide some evidence for the bible's status as a credible authority on these matters.

The bible, a credible authority? It's ironic that this bible that people are so critical of, will one day judge them!..Look, it's not my job to prove the scriptures are genuine. I have already done that for myself. What I will do is answer you with scripture itself.

Prov 25:2
2 It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings is to search out a matter.
(NKJ)

In other words, God does not make it easy to find answers. You have to dig and search.

Prov 2:3-6
3 Yes, if you cry out for discernment, and lift up your voice for understanding,
4 If you seek her as silver, and search for her as for hidden treasures;
5 Then you will understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.
6 For the LORD gives wisdom; from His mouth come knowledge and understanding;
(NKJ)

Heb 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.
(NKJ)

Do you see a pattern here?...God is not interested in critics...He is looking for humble and sincere persons to share His love with.

1 Cor 2:14-16
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one.
16 For "who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him?" But we have the mind of Christ.
(NKJ)

I once heard a story of a young student searching for God. He came upon a man of God and asked. The older, wiser man took the student to a river and held his head underwater, until he was about to pass out. After releasing him, the student frightened and concerned, asked why he did that. The wise man said "When you have a desire for God as you did for that breath of air, you will find Him.

Originally posted by Palynka
Are you pretending you didn't see the other answers?

Sorry. I seem to have missed it.

Okay. I'm going by the definition TousandYoung posted.

Sure. Pleasure, happiness, and all other feelings and experiences valued by any being are good.

So lets take rape as an example. The rapist is experiencing pleasure, so for the rapist as least this is a good act.

Suffering, pain, misery, and all other feelings and experiences a being values the absence of and finds unpleasant are evil.

From this definition, the person being raped is experiencing an evil deed. So in one deed we are experiencing both good and evil. What is to decide who is right and who is wrong?

Please understand me correctly here. I'm not promulgating that atheists therefor say rape is good. All I'm pointing out is that good and evil is arbitrary and can therefore change at will.

Now here's another thought. TOE teaches that the species are propagated through natural selection and survival of the fittest. Isn't rape, natural selection at work? Isn't murder, "survival of the fittest"? Do we have a problem with a lion obeying it's killer instincts? What's wrong with human killing another? Hey! Hold on! Lions don't kill each other, they only kill sick and slow gazelles to eat! Nope! Lions do occassionally kill for sport, and not just gazelles, but their own specie. Female lions have to defend thier cubs viciosly from the alpha male.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You believe love and goodness are a result of evolution, interesting.
How is it that love and goodness could or would arise out of dirt or
whatever the muck that life supposedly came from? It has been a
topic of conversation before where it was brought up that when a lion
kills a zebra nothing evil takes place according to evolution, it is just
the li ...[text shortened]... ll display. So how would you get love and goodness
out of the survival of the fittest?
Kelly

It has been a topic of conversation before where it was brought up that when a lion kills a zebra nothing evil takes place according to evolution

Good and evil are not topics addressed by evolutionary theory. The Theory of Evolution does not include the concept that "nothing evil takes place when a lion kills a zebra". Evil is not addressed whatsoever by the TOE.

So how would you get love and goodness out of the survival of the fittest?

Now, we're going to have to clarify what we mean by goodness and love before I can address how they originated through the process of evolution. If goodness is pleasure and the lessening of pain for all beings, as I define it, then this concept was selected for because it helped humans act socially - helping one another. The emotion of love accomplished the same thing, but focussed on those who helped the individual survive and pass on genes; children, spouse, family and friends.

Originally posted by checkbaitor
Yes...since the fall of man in the garden of Eden, man is inherently evil by nature. That is the whole purpose in salvation through Jesus Christ. The ramifications of disobeying God in the beginning were immense.Every one born since, is born with a sinful nature. This sinful nature stays with us even after we are "born again" through Jesus Christ. The ...[text shortened]... plication we begin to change and become more like Christ. This is basically what the bible says.

Yes...since the fall of man in the garden of Eden, man is inherently evil by nature.

This does not help define 'evil' in any way. The rest of your post in no way discusses evil (or good) at all.

Originally posted by Halitose
Sorry. I seem to have missed it.

Okay. I'm going by the definition TousandYoung posted.

Sure. Pleasure, happiness, and all other feelings and experiences valued by any being are good.

So lets take rape as an example. The rapi ...[text shortened]... ale lions have to defend thier cubs viciosly from the alpha male. [/b]

The rapist is experiencing pleasure, so for the rapist as least this is a good act.

Evil and good by my definitions are not defined relative to any one person. The evilness or goodness of an act depend on how it affects everyone and everything that can experience those experiences I mentioned in the definition.

Isn't rape, natural selection at work? Isn't murder, "survival of the fittest"?

Probably.

Do we have a problem with a lion obeying it's killer instincts?

I do, to some extent, but not that much. There is a lot of evil that I accept either because it's impossible to change or I don't care about that particular evil very much.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]It has been a topic of conversation before where it was brought up that when a lion kills a zebra nothing evil takes place according to evolution

Good and evil are not topics addressed by evolutionary theory. The Theory of ...[text shortened]... l survive and pass on genes; children, spouse, family and friends.[/b]

Good and evil are not topics addressed by evolutionary theory. The Theory of Evolution does not include the concept that "nothing evil takes place when a lion kills a zebra". Evil is not addressed whatsoever by the TOE.

I said. that good and love were spiritual, you brought evolution into
the discussion. I said, that they could not come about because of ole
dead dirt changing over time into living beings, that the evolutionary
process does not care one wit about good or love, it is simply a
process nothing more. You said,

"Well, we need to clarify what "spiritual" means. However, in short, I do believe love and goodness by whatever definition being the result of evolutionary processes acting on life. "

You need to clarify what you mean, I'm not sure I follow your
reasoning at the moment, because on one hand you rely on
evolutionary process to create good and love acting on life, and
the other you say it has nothing to do with it as I read your posts.
It is either responsible or not, you seem to want it both ways now.
Kelly

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]It has been a topic of conversation before where it was brought up that when a lion kills a zebra nothing evil takes place according to evolution

Good and evil are not topics addressed by evolutionary theory. The Theory of ...[text shortened]... l survive and pass on genes; children, spouse, family and friends.[/b]

You define goodness as lack of pain for a lot of people?
You define love as just an emotion of caring?

I believe they are much more than that, but doubt you can use
even those definitions and show me how during the evolutionary
transformation from dead dirt till now, how we can even reach
those definitions, and not have them nothing but truly human
personal tastes when it comes to concepts.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
[b]Good and evil are not topics addressed by evolutionary theory. The Theory of Evolution does not include the concept that "nothing evil takes place when a lion kills a zebra". Evil is not addressed whatsoever by the TOE.

I sai ...[text shortened]... er responsible or not, you seem to want it both ways now.
Kelly
[/b]

I believe that evolutionary processes are how the concept of good and love originated. However, evolutionary theory is not a system for judging good and evil; it explains why we judge things as good and evil. There is a difference. Are you unable to understand that difference?

You define goodness as lack of pain for a lot of people?
You define love as just an emotion of caring?

I define goodness as one of two things; an increase in pleasure (happiness, contentment, joy, etc), or a lessening of pain (suffering, misery, depression, etc). If we're talking about the goodness or morality of an act, then we need to take into account the consequences of that act in terms of the changes in pain and pleasure due to that act for all people affected. So your paraphrase of what I said is very poor.

You need to clarify what you mean

I don't call things 'spiritual' so there's no need for me to clarify what I mean by it. Are you not capable of clarifying what you mean by the word?

I'm haven't bothered to carefully define 'love' and 'caring' so I don't know if I think they are the same or not. They are definitely very similar.

but doubt you can use even those definitions and show me

I can't show you anything. You refuse to listen to or try to understand any arguments that you don't like. I don't think I want to bother trying to reason with someone who holds his hands over his ears and screams "NO NO NO YOU'RE WRONG LA LA LA!!!!". You don't care about the laws of physics; you've argued that maybe God changed them! Maybe light went at some different speed than c! Maybe God made it look like light came from the stars when it really didn't!

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I believe that evolutionary processes are how the concept of good and love originated. However, evolutionary theory is not a system for judging good and evil; it explains why we judge things as good and evil. There is a difference. Are you unable to understand that difference?

[b]You define goodness as lack of pain for a lot of people?
You def ...[text shortened]... rent speed than c! Maybe God made it look like light came from the stars when it really didn't!

typical
Kelly

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]It has been a topic of conversation before where it was brought up that when a lion kills a zebra nothing evil takes place according to evolution

Good and evil are not topics addressed by evolutionary theory. The Theory of Evolution does not include the concept that "nothing evil takes place when a lion kills a zebra". Evil is not addres ...[text shortened]... those who helped the individual survive and pass on genes; children, spouse, family and friends.[/b]

You tread some dangerous waters if you attempt to claim some kind of moral knowledge coming from science. Science has absolutely nothing to say about morality; it also is incapable of telling us anything about ourselves as people (a phenomena arising from its objectivity). If you expect to find the answer to 'what is goodness' in any broad sense of the term, science is not going to yield it to us.

Originally posted by yousers
You tread some dangerous waters if you attempt to claim some kind of moral knowledge coming from science. Science has absolutely nothing to say about morality; it also is incapable of telling us anything about ourselves as people (a phenom ...[text shortened]... broad sense of the term, science is not going to yield it to us.

You tread some dangerous waters if you attempt to claim some kind of moral knowledge coming from science.

I only claim to have knowledge of how morality probably came to be as a concept in a general way.

If you expect to find the answer to 'what is goodness' in any broad sense of the term, science is not going to yield it to us.

I don't. Goodness is whatever we define it to be.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]You tread some dangerous waters if you attempt to claim some kind of moral knowledge coming from science.

I only claim to have knowledge of how morality probably came to be as a concept in a general way.

If you expect to find the answer to 'what is goodness' in any broad sense of the term, science is not going to yield it to us.

I don't. Goodness is whatever we define it to be.[/b]

why try to prove it to them, they won't listen. All you will get from them is "prove it' and any proof you offer will be discounted because its not written in a stone age book.

Originally posted by frogstomp
why try to prove it to them, they won't listen. All you will get from them is "prove it' and any proof you offer will be discounted because its not written in a stone age book.

You can't possibly always enjoy being ignored, so just to say that I actually noticed your post.

Originally posted by Halitose
You can't possibly always enjoy being ignored, so just to say that I actually noticed your post.

wondered when half of the Bobbsey twins would say something negative.
btw which one are you again Dumber or Dumbest?