I've asked this Q for 40 years & never gotten a rational answer:

[karlrschneider]

If the universe/world was created by a supernatural creator, why would he or she include evil in the creation? (Yes, I've heard plenty of non-answers, usually including some reference to "Satan", but how could a devil exist unless created by the original creator?)

[musette_sf]

1. Man makes God in his own image

therefore there must be a dark expression of that image.

[me b zola]

78. The negative image, if you will

Like a photogragh...this is how yogis have explained it to me.

Beyond that, it is mostly talk of free-will. Us being placed in an earth-bound enviroment to exercise our souls.

[TWiley]

132. He does it to justify all his hatred and prejudice.

That way, he does not have to endure the suffering of a genuine spiritual awakening.

[DireStrike]

2. There is no such thing as evil?

It's all just experiences.

Or how about... evil is necessary to define good?

Have you not heard those, or do you just not like them?

Personally I don't like either of them very much, which makes me not believe in a creator very strongly. I do understand them, and I can't reject them categorically, but I don't like them.

[karlrschneider]

20. Yes, I've heard that...that good cannot exist without evil, but I don't

buy it. Because I don't think evil is ...well, 'necessary'. I guess it's like - there is a table in my kitchen, and it's not necessary for there to be kitchens with no tables in them to either validate or disprove the obvious fact that one sits next to my refrigerator. We can't make a room go dark by painting the light bulb black. I just don't think every concept that we can envision has to have polar opposites; some things just exist and don't need opposites. (Yeah, this borders on philosobabble, but I kinda like thinking about it.) :D

[Clark2008]

21. But how would you know good if there was no evil?

How would you have a concept of "goodness" if there was nothing to compare it to?

For everything there is a season...

[karlrschneider]

33. Good question, and I don't know the answer. Our cat goes out and

catches birds and other small critters & eats them. Most people would recoil from snatching a baby robin from its nest and eating it, but of course it's the "job" of the cat. So, when he does it, seems not evil, but *I* wouldn't do it because it would be anathema to my own code of conduct...so perhaps the act itself is morally "neutral"...?

But all that said, wouldn't most religious (or believers...?) claim that "heaven" is a place without evil? If that is a conceptually possible environment, why couldn't it be duplicated in a human living space? That's what I don't get...

[aneerkoinos]

73. Heaven

Buddhism does not operate with the consepts of good and evil (which are seen as consepts derived from feelings of pleasure and displeasure, which is naturally a mutually dependent pair), but with skillfull and unskillfull action in relation to piling up Karma (cause and effect). There are seven planes of existance in (Tibetan Vajrayana) Buddhism, and heaven is one of them. But heaven, even though it is blissfull state, is still Karmic, and naturally not eternal. Only the Buddha-nature of full enlightment is free of Karma, and thus superior to Gods or whaddaya call them heavenly creatures.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

96. karl you echo my daily laments and logic...i wrestle with this Q too

[TahitiNut]

94. "Fish will be the last to discover water." (Einstein)

[klyon]

102. why do you need either

nothing is good or bad until looked at

In other words we are creating both were none exists

KL

[rockymountaindem]

3. Evil is not included in the creation.

It arises out of free choice. God does not choose to intervine every time, obviously. Personally I think God saw evil and decided to let us deal with it so that we might become closer to him someday. I don't believe in the devil however. People can be evil enough on their own, sadly.

[DireStrike]

4. Then creating choice is creating evil, isn't it?

Why create a choice that allows one to choose evil?

[rockymountaindem]

12. Because that's what the choice is.

A choice between "good" and "good" is not a choice. So that leaves us with the question "why did God allow people free choice?"

The answer to that question is much harder to arrive upon, and I think it could be approached from multiple angles (I'm just riffing here). The first is that God doesn't really care which one we pick. The second is the "we need evil to know the good", and that merits some consideration. The third is that God wants us to chose good over evil in order to prove our worth as individuals and as a society, and that evil represents a failing.

[DireStrike]

16. I don't agree that a choice between good and good is not a choice.

There are laws that bound our universe. I can't slaughter people with my mind right now. Does that mean I don't have free choice?

Excluding evil acts from what we perceive as choice should be possible, I think.

[rockymountaindem]

18. I don't understand what you mean. Could you elaborate further?

[DireStrike]

23. Lemme see...

You are assuming that choice is not based in physics, right? By 'physics' I mean the laws that govern the universe.

In order for choice to be free, it cannot be bound by anything.

Therefore, we can "choose" anything and everything. But, clearly, we can't do anything and everything.

If a creator is omniscient/omnipotent, then the creator can figure out and implement a set of rules that make it impossible to act out choices that are evil.

[rockymountaindem]

28. Well, I disagree with your reasoning.

Just because we can't do everything doesn't mean that we can't do enough. Sure, even the most evil person has some limitations. However, if God were to make it impossible to act on evil urges, then what would be the point of free choice? It would be self defeating because then there wouldn't be any choices. That's like saying "there are only 2 rules. Rule one is that you can do whatever you want, but you must abide by rule two. Rule two is that you can't do anything".

Perhaps God didn't think we'd turn out so bad.

Well, I gotta go to bed. These thoughts in my mind should produce some interesting dreams!

[DireStrike]

31. Good night! Hope there's no evil in your dreams!

[karlrschneider]

35. It really is the ultimate conundrum, isn't it?

The conflict between predestination and free choice isn't resolvable because one cannot exist without the other, yet it is impossible for both to be in effect. It's even worse than the time-travel paradox.
:D

[aneerkoinos]

75. No

It's problem only if one accepts the Aristotelic Law of the Excluded Middle. The middle way of resolving that conundrum is to say that as long as we stay conditioned beings, our choices are conditioned by the enviroment (and not absolutely free), but there is naturally some relative freedom to the choises we make, as mental processes are probabilistically indeterminate.

On the other hand the whole conundrum arises from becoming a being conditioned by time, so in that way it's related to time-travel paradox.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

97. i like smart people! ....dire

"If a creator is omniscient/omnipotent, then the creator can figure out and implement a set of rules that make it impossible to act out choices that are evil."

[Old and In the Way]

36. I've always liked the Hinduistic concept of Atman and Brahman

The Big God (Brahman) hides him(her)self in each of us ( Little God, Atman). It's like when we sleep and dream. When you wake from a particularly excellent dream or horrible nightmare and think to yourself, "wow, it wasn't real, but I sure did think it was." To experience Him(Her)self, God hides Him(Her)self from him(her)self. And each individual life is just another dream of Brahman. In human form, God is free to experience infinite good and bad realities, because the point of living is for Atman to feel disconnected from Brahman....to trick himself into believing that the human form is real and isolated.

Apparently, Brahman has found that Fundementalist Religions, where we humans are sinners and God is out there, totally disconnected from us...is a partcularly effective way of fooling himself during the dream period we call life. I tend to agree.

Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[knight_of_the_star]

7. Agreed

Humans don't need any help to do horrible things to eachother and other species.

[NGU]

5. I believe...

that it has to do with Binary Opposite. There are certain concepts that mankind cannot truly understand without its opposite--darkness vs. light, happiness vs. sadness. The Creator did allow evil to exit so man could truly understand the grace of the Creator by understanding the opposite. In addition, beliefs mean more when they are freely given and you cannot freely choose a Creator without the opposite. Hopefully that makes sense. I do better explaining things out loud rather than writing them.

[drummer55]

6. define evil.

differs for every civilization.

evil is an entirely human concept.

[karlrschneider]

24. I agree with you in principle, but don't you think that there are some

inherently evil things? And now I am sitting here trying to think of something to write showing you're wrong, and coming up with exactly nothing. Another moral dilemma. Sometimes I wish I could see the world in black and white like so many "conservatives"...life would be so much simpler. :eyes:

[klyon]

104. no only self interest

when one sees themselves as part of everything then how can we do anything against ourselves

KL

[immoderate]

8. Don't hold your breath.

You won't get a rational answer to a question that builds on an irrational premise. Postulate a "supernatural creator" if you will, but then don't wonder if what he does -- just don't seem natural.

--IMM

[DireStrike]

10. Yes, it's always fun to mix reason and conjecture

I love it when you bring up the 'rock so heavy it can't be lifted', and then get chided for basing your question on an irrational premise. A god is irrational and does irrational things.

What the hell is a miracle? An impossible/illogical/unreasonable action.

Gotta keep these discussions lighthearted...

[GreenArrow]

9. to enable us to learn

A world without evil would also be a static one. Does "good" even mean anything without "evil"?

[hfojvt]

65. I think you give evil too much credit

"a world without evil would be a static one?"
So if there was no such thing as murder, rape, genocide, war, torture, theft, tsunamis or childhood diseases nothing would ever happen? That if all we had to do was play, sing, dance, eat good food, socialize, make love, raise children, etc that there would be nothing to learn and no point to anything?
Sure good means something without evil. You think I need to experience a punch in the nose in order to appreciate a kiss? You think that pizza would not taste good unless I know what lima beans taste like? I do not see how pain is necessary in order to appreciate pleasure.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

99. hfojvt EXACTLY!

[GreenArrow]

111. what you describe in your first paragraph

is basically a conception of Heaven, a place where evil does not exist, a place eternal and unchanging; i.e. static. Such a place has never existed on this Earth.

There is a difference between innocence and experience, and that comes through pain, loss, privation and want. Let's say you had spent every day of your life eating wonderful foods of every variety, in unlimited abundance, then awoke one day and found that a handful of cold rice was your only portion for the day. And the next day. And the next. Some days you get nothing, some days you might get two handfuls, but you never know when. And so on, until one day, your portion was garnished with a bit of roasted meat along with a bowl of fresh fruit. And the next day, when you return to your handful of rice, you will have a different conception and new appreciation of food.

[Old and In the Way]

11. If Jesus sits at the Right hand of God................

who's sitting at the Lefthand?

The latin world for left is "sinister", BTW.

I don't think one concept would make any sense without it's opposite. Can't have a mountain without a valley, can't know love without knowing hate. It's the dualistic nature of living.

[TahitiNut]

95. That's gauche.

:evilgrin:

[K-W]

126. Dualistic nature of living?

I hate to break it to you, but dualism is not a universal property of any real universe that we have encountered.

[The Doctor.]

13. Musette put it succinctly... I will not.

It is my belief that in order for creation to 'be' everything, then 'everything' must occur.

That means that not only must the Universe be comprised of 'Everything', but that 'Everything' must comprise the whole of 'reality'. ('Reality' is the only word that should always be used in quotes.)

For there to exist an 'everything' and therefore 'Omniscient consciousness', then it likely follows that 'everything' must happen... including Evil.

There can be no true 'Omniscience' without 'all experience'.

Unfortunately, the English language is inadequate to describe these concepts... perhaps this;

3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408128481117450284102701938521105559644622948954930381964428810975665933446128475648233786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326648213393607260249141273724587006606315588174881520920962829254091715364367892590360011330530548820466521384146951941511609433057270365759591953092186117381932611793105118548074462379962749567351885752724891227938183011949....

PI is the key upon which all relativity turns.

[DireStrike]

17. You sure it's not phi? -nt-

[The Doctor.]

27. LOL... yes, but either way - it's LOOOONG. nt

[karlrschneider]

39. PI are round,cornbread are square

I actually memorized the value of PI to 100 decimal places many years ago...alas, I've forgotten the last 60 or so. Somewhere on one of my computers I have a file with it's value to over a million. I don't think it needs to be posted here at DU. :D

I have no idea whether this is original with me, or if it has been proposed in the past, but I've said it for many years - if time is infinite, every conceivable event, and even those that are INconceivable must eventually take place. I know, it sounds ludicrous, but think about the old "infinite number of monkeys typing" hypothesis (I recommend "1, 2, 3 - Infinity" by Georg Gamov.

[The Doctor.]

47. No, that's no ludicrous at all...

In fact, I believe that is the reason there may well be what I can only refer to as a 'multiverse'.

But now you have me trying to fathom that which is 'INconceivable'... ouch! My head!

Bet you've read Douglas Adams.

Try this for fun too;
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2974953#2975051

[klyon]

105. I have always wondered how can we find the circumference of

a circle with a number that is incomplete (PI). What is the exact correct answer? We will can only approximate it. The coast of California is infinite.

KL

[Beetwasher]

115. Eternal Recurrence

I know Neitzsche covered it...Not only does everything that can happen, happen, due to the infiniteness of time and the finiteness of matter, but it all happens over and over and over again...You will live your life over again, infinitely...and every conceivable variant of it as well...

[fob]

14. The circle of life

Birth
Life
Death

It's just like when too many predators are killed off and the bunnies population goes crazy and eats the fields bare which then results in starvation and mass bunny deaths. Evil is the part of the plan that keeps the consumer/resources in balance.

Or I could be talking out my ass.

[knowbody0]

15. dogma

god is all good
god is the creator of all things

these two things are in opposition
makes my mind spin

my conclusion is than without the yin, there is no yang. life is not a circle, but a spiral that expands and diminishes.

[ngant17]

86. my karma ran over your dogma

But really, the question of good and evil is subjective. What is good in one culture, might be interpreted as evil in another culture.

I am of the opinion that all monotheistic religions evolved from sun-worship.

In particular, Judaism evolved from the old solar cult of Aten in Ancient Egypt. I think Sigmund Freud essentially proved this in his last thesis, "Moses and Monotheism".

see this link for a recent essay:

http://www.geocities.com/ngant17/moses9a.html

Physics isn't democratic. It isn't good or evil.

Religions are the product of cultural traditions. So the question of a Creator being "good" and inventing "evil" in the universe is subjective, and the response to such questions will vary according the individual.

[IronLionZion]

19. evil brings out the best in good people

like the huge outpouring of patriotism after Sep. 11 and the whole world was united. That WAS good until Bush and his cronies fucked it up.

[EC]

22. everything has an opposite...n/t

[karlrschneider]

41. Um, okay, what is the opposite of orange? Or air? Corn? Cathode rays?

I'm willing to bet I can name 100,000 things that have no "opposite".
What's the opposite of Begonias?

[Ron Green]

46. The opposite of orange would be no-orange. And of air, no-air. And so on..

and then it follows that if God is love, which I believe, then the opposite of God, or love, would be no God, or no love. Evil seems to me simply to be the absence of God, which we as free beings can choose. The evil that we see perpetrated by humans can be traced to fear: Fear of looking weak, fear of loss, fear of death, etc.

I also believe that love and fear are the only primary emotions, the former being "with God" and the latter "without God," not understanding or apprehending one's God-nature. Without what some call "evil," which is just the failure to deal appropriately with fear, there would be no purpose in living, would there? No lessons to learn, no character to build, no true self to attain.

[The Doctor.]

51. Sorry Ron... but I must disagree...

Which is not 'not-agreement'.

'Dis'agreement is contradictory.

'Non'agreement is the 'absence of'

So the opposite of Orange would be better described as 'dis-orange'.

'No-orange' denotes anything 'without orange', but not it's opposite.

[Ron Green]

55. OK, I'll go along with your point. However, in the case of God, my point

is that "not-God" is the same as "un-God" or "dis-God." If God is the Infinite and Eternal, then man's failure to apprehend God in himself is, although an illusion, the source of evil.

[The Doctor.]

61. Ah... philosophy... I hate that stuff. (not really)

try this out;

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2974953#2975051

[Ron Green]

64. That is a very eloquent post, and it's interesing to consider if we are

now truly more capable of forcing a choice between spiritual evolution and oblivion, rather than the same old cycle of fear vs. wisdom that's been going on for thousands of years. I tend to think that even a nuclear holocaust won't bring oblivion, but simply a low ebb in our cycle. As I posted above, my view is there is only God; therefore our separation from Him is but an illusion, and will have to vanish, if only beyond the constraints of space and time.

[The Doctor.]

74. Nice... you got it.

I'm sleepy though - g'night.

[EC]

50. You're thinking in words-manmade....break it down

an orange is life - opposite death etc...

[The Doctor.]

54. ???

The opposite of an orange is death?

Orange = Life.

Human = Life.

Human = Orange.

[EC]

59. Yeah, The orange is living as long as it is creating

once it is picked and it stops making it's seeds it is dieing.






Balance of Nature thing....or I'm full of shit....


edit for typing

[The Doctor.]

63. No, you've nailed down philisophical relativity is all...

We are as much an orange in all that we have in common with an orange.

It's getting late though - I'll get back into this thread tomorrow if it still bears fruit.

[hickman1937]

25. Balance, N/T

[Salviati]

26. Because the creator created the universe to be somthing novel

something unexpected. The rules of the game were created with random chance built in so as to create something unanticipated and unforeseen. The question goes 'Can God create a stone so heavy that he himself cannot lift it?' We are the answer to that question.

[The Doctor.]

30. Why are we not the creator as well?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2974953#2975051

(It's long - good luck)

[FlaGranny]

29. I always wonder who

Cain and Abel married.

[journalist3072]

32. Adam and Eve

Sin, and going against God's will, started with Adam and Eve eating from the forbidden fruit.

[DireStrike]

34. See my above conversation with RockyMountainDem

Why give them the capacity to sin? Heck, why even put that tree there? Why not pick all the apples? :)

[karlrschneider]

42. Why would a decent deity create a delicious fruit then penalize someone

for eating it? Was He an insane asshole? That makes absolutely no sense.
edit for stupid spelling goof

[Ron Green]

53. I don't know if "decent" is an adjective that works in this case.

Temptation is a fact of life, as it was then. When you choose to think, to explore, to question, you're going to suffer the consequences as well as reap the benefits.

[aneerkoinos]

77. Gnostic creation myth

Yep, the creator God - demiurge - is and was an insane asshole. The snake was a reincarnation of divine Sophia, giving humans a gift of herself that made the Insane Asshole, devoid of wisdom and compassion, a Jealous God.

[patcox2]

108. Are aesops fables "true?"

Do not read the bible literally. That is the mistake of the fundamentalists, and it is what makes them both fundamentalist and wrong.

The fruit is actually denoted "the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil." The eating of the fruit gave to adam and eve their first awareness that evil even existed. I don't know what it symbolizes, maybe the loss of the innocence of childhood, we all long to return to when we were young and our parents were all powerful and protected us and we didn't even know that bad things could happen.

The story indicates that God cannot control us, though, I would point that out. He gave us choice, and thus cannot prevent us from choosing evil. If there were no evil, we would have no choice.

In the end, though, I incline more towards a combination of high agnosticism and buddhism. If you are a part of everything, as someone mentioned, there is no evil and you are part of "god." What we perceive as evil is in most cases simply a perception warped by attachment to material things and alienation from the rest of creation, we are trapped in the ego, in our own selves so deeply that we lose sight of the fact that we are all part of everything.

[bobweaver]

37. Because God is evil.

[quadzilla490]

38. Your answer is simple

There are no such things as angels, demons, gods, or devils. Religions are born of superstition, fear, and ignorance and kept alive by the same. Religion is a crutch for people who can't think for themselves. I can't believe in this day and age, with the knowledge of evolution, the real age of the earth, proof of no great flood, etc, that people still believe these things. Of the 2500 plus gods ever worshipped on this planet, everyone thinks their's is the right one. Yes, the big bang is fact. Did it come from parallel universes colliding? Is it the end result of a super massive black hole? I don't know, but I will NOT falsly answer these questions with 'some invisible being in the sky , who noone has ever seen or heard, made it'. That is a copout.-Chris

[karlrschneider]

43. Oh, I know...I'm an atheist for some 40 years now...BTW, welcome to DU!

:toast:
You might get a little kick from this:

10. You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods of other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.

9. You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created directly from dirt.

8. You laugh at polytheists, but have no problem believing in a Triune God.

7. Your face turns purple when you hear the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua", including women, children and trees!

6. You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and ascended into the sky.

5. You are willing to spend your life looking for loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing the Earth is a few generations old.

4. You believe the entire population of this planet with the exception of those that share your beliefs -- though excluding those in rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of suffering. And yet consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving".

3. While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor and speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.

2. You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence prayer works. And you think the remaining 99.9% FAILURE was simply the will of God.

1. You actually know less than many atheists and agnostics do about
the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself
a Christian.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

[petron]

45. holy shite

I am gonna email this to all my freeper friend and relatives.

Especially like no 4, my bi-polar, schizophrenic mom beats me over the head with this completely intolerant and wholly ungod like concept of everyone is going to hell but "us".

Sad but true.

[karlrschneider]

49. I didn't write it, but I could easily have. So be my guest!

:D

[aneerkoinos]

82. same for science and scientism

"born of superstition, fear, and ignorance and kept alive by the same", ie addiction to explaining.

Belief in the independent existance of the material world is just as ignorant as the belief in omnipotent, omniscient God. ;)

Note that ignorance means here conseptual, conventional knowledge.

[petron]

40. let's break this down

First of all let me say, this is why I love DU so much, every entry in this discussion was worth reading and everyone had great, potentially valid points. Thanks peeps.

When I say let's break this down I mean let's go down to some of the smallest units known to man, electrons and protons. (Not sure where neutrons fit in this analogy so blast away :))

I may be talking out my ass but let's think about this a minute. Anyone ever heard of "fractals" where things like very similar at all scales. What I am trying to say is that starting at the elemental level there exists the binary concept of opposing positions (Ying-Yang). Or to put it another way, there exists (almost) universally one extreme vs. another extreme.

Am I making sense? I hope so. I've been out with friends eating a drinking at a fancy restaurant and I stumbled upon this discussion and felt I needed to say something.

Think about it. Nearly everything has an opposite and these opposites aren't man made conceptions, are they?

[karlrschneider]

44. See post # 41. Fractals have nothing to do with subatomic particles

which are, as far as we know at the moment, are quarks. (I don't EVEN want to get into string theory at this point) :D

[petron]

48. yea yea

As I was typing my previous response, it dawned on me that once we go subatomic quantum psychics take over and then nothing makes sense but if we talk about the world we can perceive(leaving out all those who came after Einstein, sorry) fractal concepts might help explain polar opposites.

Until the unified theory actually does explains everything, you my friend are going to answerless. :)

on edit: psychics is not physics - teheheh

[karlrschneider]

56. The GUT will be doped out at some point. Maybe by Hawking, maybe by

someone else sooner or later. Perhaps some human or whatever we eventually evolve into will be able to figure out the basic questions: Why does stuff exist, where did it come from and is there any meaning to it all.

[aneerkoinos]

83. Fractals

Fractals are example of what Bohm calls generative, timeless orders. Various orders are entangled and interact at various levels of being, so it should be not excluded that there are generative orders present at subatomic structures.

[FM Arouet666]

67. Oh my.....

My only question is where did you go eat and what where you drinking.:evilgrin:

[librechik]

52. evil is a coherent metaphor to explain

the random tragedy that visits mortal humans daily. It's a human construction, not a divine one.

[karlrschneider]

62. I think I agree, but didn't you mean to say "a convenient metaphor"?

The adjective "coherent" doesn't seem to ...er, 'fit' .......??
Not to be a grammar cop, just trying to comprehend.

[librechik]

71. you're right--I've been researching postmodern poets

and Gelpi's "Coherent Splendor" is sticking in my brain. I long for coherence (as opposed to convenience) in my life, and get so little. But evil is a convenient myth, a metaphor which allows us to lump so much together under one label that reason is unhinged.

I resent the way concepts like evil have been misused so cynically by this administration. It's ironic, because if there were such a thing as evil, surely the Bush administration would embody it. And yet, they are so confident of their own righteousness. It's confounding. The inaugural was a perfect postmodern event, all facade; the content nothing but formalized chaos, kitsch and outrage. "Incoherent Splendor" as it were.

Ah tequila!

[Az]

57. I trust not everyone has told you that there had to be a creator

The problem you will run into is always dealing with the definition of the creator. The contradictions come from the fact that there is no creator presenting itself before us and defining its characteristics. Thus whether there is a creator or not there is no contemporary definitive description of its character.

Of course there are numerous people and beliefs that do not proclaim that there is a creator.

[Dan]

58. Compare and contrast

How can there be good without evil?

[No Exit]

60. How could it have been created, when it is eternal?

What are the boundaries of time? There are certainly no boundaries to it that can be seen by human eyes.

What are the boundaries of space? When I was under 5, I actually tried to picture "the end of the world", as I called it in my mind. (I meant the edge of the world, the physical boundary--not the ceasing to exist of the planet.) I pictured it as a fence. The fence bore a curious resemblance to the fence that separated the farthest yard of our little neighborhood from the highway. Much later, I began to think, but there's something outside the fence... and there's something outside that, and...etc.

It's all infinite. So there's no beginning and end. So, there was no creation.

Just my hastily-written opinion (for today) on this impossible problem.

[klyon]

107. oh you mean the multiverse

I don't believe this question is impossible see my other posts in this thread

KL

[FM Arouet666]

66. The answer

There is no god, no creator, no supernatural force. The existence of the universe does not require a creator. Humankind has invented the god concept to explain things that are beyond comprehension, as a short-cut to thinking. Evil exists as does good, as a concept, developed by mankind, to explain the world. The terms are relative and best debated by philosophers or preachers.

There is no rational answer to your question because your question is not rational. How many angels fit on the head of a pin?

[ghost_of_thoreau]

68. god is the biggest bitch of them all

thats because there really isnt a rational answer to this question.

In the bible it says, you will know a man by the fruit of his tree. If we apply that saying to God (look at the chaotic bloody world he created), as well as the saying in the bible that man was created in God's image.....well it looks to me that God isnt so "good" after all. Furthermore, to create something evil, you have to be somewhat evil yourself, unless you did it inadvertantly, which cannot be in this case, because god is omniscient.

some subtle side notes:

most christians say that god allowed evil because without it humans would have no free will. Well guess what, humans don't have free will even with the existance of evil. Why? Simply because God never asked me if i wanted to have free will in the first place. To have TRUE free will as a human, I would have had the choice of having free will or NOT having free will. God just forced this upon us without our say so. This is analogus to the Iraqis having "freedom." Actually, they dont have TRUE freedom now, because they didnt chose it themselves. Maybe they didnt want to be liberated. So it is not TRUE freedom because the Iraqis themselves were not able to make the decision.

one more thing:

in genesis, it says that god created Adam and Eve as pure good, innocent humans. They did NOT know right from wrong. God told them not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, and they did anyway. For this, God cast them out of heaven. If Adam/Eve could not tell right from wrong, then there was no way they could have known eating from the Tree was wrong. (even after god told them not to, because they did not understand what a "right" action and a "wrong" action was) Therefore, god's punishment was unjust, cruel, and somewhat sadistic. (especially since he is omniscient and knew what would happen anyway)

[Cronus Protagonist]

69. Satan was an angel who got a big ego and thought he was God

It's in the bible, but it's not rational, ergo, your question is still not answered.




http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
Buttons for brainy people - educate your local freepers today!

[Az]

70. I recommend reading Mark Twains Letters From Earth

He has a particularly interesting take on how we humans have crafted the image of god. He manages to shift the reason for creation was for bacteria and hookworms. Humans were just the means of conveyance through the flood.

[Hardrada]

72. History has to proceed

through the phases of thesis, antithesis and finally synthesis. And repeatedly until we arrive at the best state of development. What we correctly think of as evil may also be part of this progression. This does not imply however that we should "sin boldly that grace may abound!"

[0rganism]

76. Easy: the original creator is evil

Hey, you wanted a rational answer, here you go. Two words.

Evil Creator.

This nasty supernatural entity creates many generally peaceful sensitive organisms which are perfectly content to go about their business, coexisting in harmony together until the star they circle becomes a red giant and engulfs their planet, but He doesn't create them to exist in this state forever. Oh no, He does not. Instead, He also creates a flawed breed capable of perpetrating horribly evil deeds, not only upon the other organisms that surround them but upon one-another. He watches in unparalleled glee as the forces they unleash consume them, destroying all life on their tiny fragile biosphere in the process.

Why does He do such a thing? He finds it amusing. Even supernatural creators get bored from time to time on the way to eternity.

If that's not particularly satisfying, try this version of the Creation Myth on for size: Living in the Hands of the Gods

It's an excerpt from Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. You might find it interesting.

[Az]

79. Doesn't have to be evil, just not perfectly good

A flawed creator could create a flawed universe.

Consider this argument. If God is preported to be all powerful, all knowing, and all good then a universe with less evil would certainly seem to be the creation of a more powerful creator.

[0rganism]

80. Or, this could be a trainer-universe

Maybe this universe is just a lab experiment in the undergraduate curriculum for creator deities. Had we been luckier creations, we would have been made by a fully developed and talented maker instead of this confused apprentice who can't even design a decent backbone for the bipedal organisms under his control.

[Az]

81. In that context

Perhaps we were not intended. We may be debrie. Precipitate.

[OxQQme]

84. Imagine a TOTALLY white room

you're floating with no reference points in the audio, visual, touch, or time realms. No hunger or desires.

Just a mind floating there. . . . . . . . . . .

Then a teensiest dot becomes visible. Mind becomes aware that there is an 'out there'. Mind 'moves' itself in that direction until it becomes stopped by a physical barrier. It becomes aware of a limitation in this 'world'. It's a body with eyes, nose, fingers, sexual organs, communication skills, happy things, physical pain, discomfort, et al;
"EVIL" is a human construct, defining the actions that cause pain in other life form. Otherwise we'd just go around stepping on toes or poking our fingers in the eyes of others, just to see what it feels like, without regard for that other life form.
My belief is that we are spiritual (without form) beings here, having a 'human' experience. In addition to this 'eyes open' physical realm, with it's limitations, we also share an 'eyes' closed dream state that we go to, where we can fly, live in underwater conditions, run hundreds of miles an hour, blink our self into any condition, communicate with others that are not in our immediate space or time frame (in their language), more et al; without regard for race or gender.
Thank you all very much for letting me float that out there.

[Azathoth]

85. Good and evil are functions of the same thing

I'm not particularly religious, and I'm a newbie at DU, but I'll take a stab at your question.

Philosophically speaking, the first thing you have to ask is "How do you define 'good' and 'evil'?" Both terms are extraordinarily subjective, carrying an extremely diverse spectrum of definitions and connotations that vary from culture to culture and belief structure to belief structure. What is considered "good" by one person can just as easily be considered "evil" by another. (Gay marriage, anyone?) Hence, there is no absolute definition of good and evil, only a relative definition using one as a point of reference for the other. "Absolute good" is best described as the opposite of "absolute evil" and vice a versa. Thus, the concepts of good and evil are not only inexorably linked, but are in fact functions of the same thing and are dependent on each other for meaning. One cannot exist without the other.

Look at it this way: Suppose I told you that the concept of "down" no longer existed. How then would you know which way was up? Spatially, up and down are relative based on your current orientation. When you move upwards, you are traveling in one direction along a given axis, but the direction itself is defined as being the opposite of going "down".

Following this line of reasoning, it becomes apparent that when God created "good", he had to create "evil", as they are both parts of the same thing. One cannot exist without the other, and the presence of each gives the other meaning.

In terms of christian religious dogma, the question of good and evil concerns the issue of free choice. Put simply, it is impossible to have free choice if there is nothing to choose between. Christians believe that God so loved his children that he allowed them knowledge of, and the ability to understand, good and evil, and thus they are allowed to choose between them. This gift is not granted to any of his other creations; plants and animals have no concept of good or evil. The gift/burden of free choice and the knowledge of good and evil is one of the primary reasons Christians believe god "made man in his own image."

[JerseygirlCT]

87. Free will

[sendero]

88. I have a different question...

self deleted, could be seen as saying something I did not intend to say.

[Hollowkatt]

89. Answer:

Heres the thing. If you are coming from a Judeo-Christian point of view, then there is no possable explanation. The answer is that god is either arbitrary or vindictive and either way I think hes an asshat for doing so.

[Malva Zebrina]

90. Some who are Deists would say

that a god created everything, then washed his hands of the mess, and left it to itself, never to be seen or heard from again, nor leaving a forwarding address.

Gnostics have and had some two thousand years ago, the take that the creator as described in the Bible or Torah, was not the real god, but a flawed look alike, who is responsible for the mess.

Humans have no choice but to anthropomorphize a god. No matter what the belief, intelligent designor, force, energy etc. it is a description of the deity, even if they say he, she or it is "unknowable". "Unknowable", in that case, and in every case, is an attribute assigned to the diety, therefore, the deity is indeed knowable.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

92. exactly..the God man has created is a sick and ugly one to boot

[Solomon]

93. I love this kind of thread.

[G_j]

98. Box of paints

I read this analogy long ago:

The creation is like a box of paints, all pure colors (none of them "evil")
The human, having free will, is the artist. He or she can mix those colors in anyway they chose. We can paint a picture either of great beauty, horrific ugliness or something in between.

[dweller]

100. (no answer)

Pointing directly to the human heart
See your own nature and become Buddha





Read the Heart Sutra. Peace.
dp

[mcscajun]

101. 'Cause this is a beta version of reality and we're on the test bench?

I just couldn't resist that one.

(disclaimer: I'm not a a believer.)

[klyon]

103. In Zen when you are awake and seeing

the great virtue will be compassion and through compassion you will make the right decisions. When you are awake you are seeing clearly.

KL

[aneerkoinos]

113. Compassion

is the natural state when action is freed from bounds of ego-continuity and illusion of separateness, it comes without effort, by letting go. It is the evaluating being based on pleasures and displeasures of the ego and conseptualizing those into value systems of good and bad which veils the immediate perception of world as it becomes and creates a protective barrier of thought against compassion, where there is no difference between suffering of this and that being.

[Ron Green]

123. Well-said. And what we call "evil" is the inevitable result of ego-driven

activities, all of which are false in their nature, as the ego is a false shell of self formed to defend against pain and fear in the world. Our job seems to be, as you say, to learn to let go, but to do it consciously.

[klyon]

125. yes I would say that is true

The goal of the Buddha was to show people that their suffering was self inflicted and could be avoided. We construct the world that is all around us and if we let it it will be a very horrible and painful place. I do not believe I am qualified to explain, nor did I intend to explain Zen her today. Just point out that there are different ways of looking at he question raised without belief in god or defining something by what it is not. I think this has been a very interesting thread.

KL

[Steely_Dan]

106. Well...

All I know is that you cannot put your foot in the same river twice.

-P

[leesa]

109. Karl, it's a fairy tale invented to deal with our existence on this planet

If people want to believe it, fine...as long as they don't hurt other people and the planet.

[DrWeird]

110. I like Tolkein's rational.

God created the universe as a song. With the angels as the instruments, and the world as the theme. Then he created evil. And the angels were afraid. But then they realized that the evil was a dischord, it was all a part of the song from the beginning.

[Freddie Stubbs]

112. Free will:

It includes the option to do good, to to do evil. Without free will, we wouldn't be human.

[txaslftist]

114. Dude... get a hobby or something.

You've spent 40 years asking a question that can't be answered?

Grow chia pets. They'd be HUGE by now.

[Greyskye]

116. God is a chia pet

What we call god is really the chia pet of some ancient alien philosopher who existed in the time close to the beginning of the Universe.

1) God is everywhere - therefore is huge
2) God doesn't do anything to affect your life in a physical, verifiable manner - much like a chia pet
3) Grass is good, therefore God is good
4) Sometimes even chia pets can get evil crabgrass (or shrub) infestations

Makes as much sense as anything else.

Chia, I really need some coffee right now!
Thank Chia it's Friday!
:evilgrin:

[txaslftist]

117. But could you grow a GOD/CHIA in 40 years?

What is the exponential growth of chia with unlimited water and soil and nutrients?

You may be onto something.

[karlrschneider]

128. ROTFL! (I actually DO have some Chia thingys...herbs for cooking)

:D

[genieroze]

118. In my religion God created him as good and he turned against

God and tried to take Gods place.

Isaiah 14:12-15

12 How you have fallen from heaven,

O morning star, son of the dawn!

You have been cast down to the earth,

you who once laid low the nations!

13 You said in your heart,

"I will ascend to heaven;

I will raise my throne

above the stars of God;

I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,

on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain.

14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;

I will make myself like the Most High."

15 But you are brought down to the grave,

to the depths of the pit.


Then he was sent to earth

Ezekiel 28:17

17 Your heart became proud

on account of your beauty,

and you corrupted your wisdom

because of your splendor.

So I threw you to the earth;

I made a spectacle of you before kings.

Islam teaches basically the same thing

from the Quran
http://www.jetlink.com.ph/~religion/relig017.htm

Judaism teaches something different

"For the Jewish faith, Satan’s purpose in seducing man away from God poses no problem because Satan is only an agent of God. As a servant of the Almighty, Satan faithfully carries out the divine will of his Creator as he does in all his tasks."

It seems to say that Satan works for God and is there to test us.
http://www.outreachjudaism.org/satan.html

[AgadorSparticus]

119. What if a flaw/evil isn't really a flaw but just a perception of flawed?

by universal design and physical/metaphysical laws, everything is the way it should be. free will is just another constant in the equation. the difference is our understanding of it.

everything, even chaos/evil, is by natural design (i.e. fractals). things are the way they are bound by natural, physical and metaphysical laws (maybe they are all one and the same. who knows).

just as there is physical, mental and emotional development, there is also "spiritual" evolution. and when we evolve enough to comprehend the vastness of the universe, it will naturally unfold for us--with or without free will.

[Hardrada]

121. Ionian Greek Anaximines said

"All things must render unto each other for the inequalities and inexactitudes wrought by time." That is to say that everything will work out in the end for various levels of justice. I wish this would happen sooner than later.

[Old Mouse]

120. Good and evil are NOT created by "God"

When an individual thought experience introspection and effort creates enough consciousness to have a true and aware personal morality then that individual has created, within himself, a sense of "good" and "evil".

These concepts do not exist outside of advanced thought. Animals, although on a sliding scale of consciousness, eat each other, kill each other for profit or mere sport, rape and abuse each other, and even commit genocide. The price of life is death. There is no good or evil in nature, only suffering and the lack of suffering.

The individual that has managed to create a true personal morality, the separate notions of "good" and "evil" now has a precious responsibility: choice. Once you have identified the actions you can take in life as "good" or "evil", not by societies terms, but your own inarguable personal philosophy, you will have to choose on a regular basis whether or not to commit acts you believe to be evil. That is choice, true choice.

[shrike]

122. Abraxas

As posed by Herman Hesse in his novel, Demien (sp?)

In a nutshell, God has two faces, two natures, good and evil, therefore both good and evil exist. I know Hesse purloined the Abraxas concept from someone else, but for the life of me I can't remember.

DU oldsters may remember the Santana album, Abraxas. That's where the name came from.

[karlrschneider]

129. I still have that album (and about 500 other old vinyl records)

Need to find a turntable to play some of them, my old one died years ago. ;-)

[greendog]

124. The Valentinian Gnostic Christians had the perfect answer...

...but they were "eliminated" by the ancestors of todays Christians.

Their answer: God is flawed.

http://www.gnosis.org/library/valentinus/

[enki23]

127. silly. this is the best of all possible worlds

how do we know this? because we know god would not make it less than the best it could possibly be.

[Senator Lamb]

131. God is

a tortured artist.

[IndyPriest]

130. Karl: good Q. But give us some goal posts to shoot through

What would you take to be a rational answer?

[TWiley]

133. Evil is our label.

We use it to define the difference between pleasant and unpleasant. There must be opposites to everything; Light or Dark.

Evil is only the label we place on the inconvenient state.

Most important is the infinite shades of Grey between.

[amazona]

134. because supernatural doesn't mean all-powerful

You seem to conflate being a creator with being all-powerful. If you were an artist, you would not make this mistake. Every creation is flawed and the flaws seem most glaring, ugly, frustrating, and upsetting to the creator herself.

The Creator didn't include evil on purpose. Like all creations the universe didn't come out quite as expected. There was a snake in the grass if you'll recall the story. The dirty little secret is that God screwed up. Mistakes were made. It happens. Now God goes stomping about trying to say, "I meant it to be like that! I planned it that way all along!" But the bluster is unconvincing and exposes rather than conceals all His secret doubts about the whole business.

Yes, this is a heresy, and in ancient days, a rather notorious one, but I think it more satisfying than pretending that this is the best an all-powerful being could possibly do. I mean, sheesh, if I were all-powerful, I have a long list of ideas just waiting to be implemented...

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[mutus_frutex]

135. You might want to read something on theodicy.

(I'm an atheist and I think your question is directed to believers they since have the burden of proof, in this case).

That said, a lot of people have studied this, the problem of evil. Leibniz introduced the term theodicy to describe this and some other things. You can probably find tons on this topic on the web.

The short answer is that the concepts of a good god, an omnipotent god and the existence of evil, are mutually inconsistent. Something has to give way.

If you want to piss believers, especially catholics, just agree that god is omnipotent and evil.. :-)

To piss off evangelical fundies just tell them that their god is not omnipotent.

Cheers..