Comment by Matthew on November 23, 2009 at 10:23pm

Its a cop out because they dont want to think! what a crock of shit! Sweeden and Denmark have the lowest crime rates and the highest numbers of Atheists in the world. Coincidence?!......

Comment by shawn brian judd on November 24, 2009 at 5:34am

man has always the greatest capacity for either good or evil,so why would his gods not?It is should be the goal of every man to be better than his gods,for christians this should not be all that hard;after all they're God is a complete Jackass!

Comment by Dave G on November 24, 2009 at 11:38am

the same argument works for a totally evil god, who has to allow good in order for us to truly appreciate how much we are suffering. It's funny how they don't like that argument, though.

Comment by a7 on November 24, 2009 at 6:50pm

surley with an evil god,m there would be no good, just a lesser evil but then, I am smashed.


george

Comment by uzza on November 24, 2009 at 10:48pm

There's no problem with the yin/yang theory; it is impossible to define good without referring to evil (or vice-versa). the problem comes when they hook it to some concept of the world functioning in some way they consider 'right'. It functions the way it functions, and there's inevitably stuff in it that from our POV is "bad".

I just 'murdered' a tumor, for example. He'd probably think that was evil of me, but from my POV it was just fine. World goes right on functioning either way. Christians make it a problem when they adopt the POV that there's some 'god'' who not only gives a damn, but has the same POV they do (and not the POV of the different congregation down the street, lol).

Comment by Reggie on November 24, 2009 at 11:45pm

What uzza said.

Comment by Anders Knudsen on May 3, 2010 at 6:04pm

Well, in the literate way of thinking: Good and evil are opposites and adverbs, which leads to the point that if the words good nor evil had not been defined, neither of them would exist. In other words: If all actions were merely actions, none good or evil, we would have a whole different society.

Child molestation, murder, robbery, cancer, AIDS, diabetes etc., as you mention, would in a world without the definitions good and evil, be "accepted". None would be punished, for there would be no criminals. None would be appriciated, for there would be no heroes.
That would be a terrible society, or a great society, who knows? Studies actually show that in order to make people do stuff, is to make it illegal. People still commit murder even though it's illegal. People still smoke marihuana even though it's illegal. Maybe if we had no rules and no judgement of other people, we would have the world we've always wanted, or maybe we wouldn't.

Crimes and evil actions are based on morals. Morals that come from religion, which was once only suggestions. Then came power, manipulation, order and diciplin. Four very linked words which are still being used to this very day, in every corner of the world. None of which should never have existed.

So yes; there can be no good without evil to balance it out.

Comment by Mario Rodgers on May 4, 2010 at 4:33pm

I don't think Yin and Yang are synonymous with Good and Evil. They're just vague representations of philosophies involving opposites, sometimes conflicting and sometimes complimentary. The idea of cycles and balance is very prominent in Eastern thinking.

Comment by Anders Knudsen on May 6, 2010 at 8:18am

Murder, rape and stealing: All three of them are crimes, all of them are listed in the ten commandments, written in the bible. They are the core of our legal system today. I doubt you'd disagree that the bible is based on morals and that the ten commandments are a short list of moral issues.
Take the vikings as an example. Murder, rape and stealing/looting was a part of their life, not just commited on foreign shores, but also individualy. All that changed once they converted to christianity, then they suddenly had laws.

I never said good actions are based on morals.

What I actually ment to say in my earlier post was: Crimes and evil actions are based on morals in our current society.

Comment by Anders Knudsen on May 6, 2010 at 8:26am

Good and evil are opposites in a litteral way, which I also wrote. Like beautiful/ugly, intelligent/dumb etc.
Again, good and evil balance each other out in a LITTERAL way. I'm not saying that when you've done something good, you have to do something evil. I'm saying that in order for there to be good actions, there must be evil actions. You can't have an adverb without it having an opposite.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page