
Originally Posted by
Bigfoot Oracle
GOD CREATED EVIL- for the record ( a statement from a believer and is supported by the Bible)
how then can a perfect concept of good breed the concept of evil? can evil then come from good?
good and evil are
"the labels given to actions or characteristics" that subscribe to whether such actions are beneficial or detrimental to humanity as individuals and/or as a collective. as i have stated before,
the concepts of "good" and "evil" are relative and dependent to the person/society/collective that gives the label of good or evil. one cannot say that his/her concept of what is good or what is evil is above another person's since it is very probable that their concepts of what is beneficial and what is detrimental could be different in some level. this is the reason why i dare say that morals and one society's sense of morality are not universal.
to kill a person.
in battle (patriotic) in cold blood (murder) in preservation of your own life (self defense) in the electric chair (justice). which is good? which is evil? the labels apply and not the deed itself. it is a most unfortunately common fact in human societies that we look at matters not in what they are but on what labels society in general has placed on them.
the fact that evil exists is a discrepancy that theologians have been arguing about for some decades now. humanity makes the choices on whether to chose good or evil. evil poses such a threat because how can evil exists, when an omni-present and omni-benevolent god exists? does this negate the presence of evil? no. does this negate the presence of god? perhaps. does this negate the presence of freewill? perhaps.
for one not to have full knowledge to warrant a conclusion and jumps to a conclusion anyway, is faith. "bahala na" mentality is at work, most of the time.
the basic problem with faith is bias. the assertion that whatever a particular book says is basically regarded as true, is in itself a manifestation of bias. the insistence that a particular event really did happen, do the point of self righteous rejection to other systems of belief, is in itself a liability to the version of 'truth' that some religions preach.
hard evidence is more admissible than eye witness accounts. false memories and distorted thoughts are all too common in psychology to warrant for the acceptance of such eyewitness accounts without solid scientific evidence backing up such claims.
the bible is a historical book not because all things told in them are regarded by historians as factual and really did happen, but because the bible offers us a picture of the lives of the semites in the time of abraham, isaac and jacob, and even during the time of jesus.
again,
ethical standards or morality, are not universal. they vary from one society to another. the current trend may lead us to believe that there really is because of the colonization of other cultures by the west in the past and the modern information age of the present.
just because one culture is the loudest, the most populous or the most advanced, does not mean that whatever its products are are deemed righteous and the embodiment of truth.