evil

Discussion in 'The Sanctuary' started by reggie_jax, Jan 3, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    can there really be any such thing?

    the atheistic position is predictable enough. i'm not talking about moral relativity.

    say the world is created by god. can he really have let in a force that he is fundamentally opposed to? where could this mysterious force have come from if not from the supreme creator?

    don't try to use man's free will as an excuse. he only has the same freedom that every other creature has.

    [youtube]xZRw0IYdf3g[/youtube]
    [youtube]DCDPYgqdLjg[/youtube]

    who could in all honesty call that evil? it'd be evil if a person did it cause we expect people to 'know better.' if the animal is ignorant to evil then how can he be guilty of it? yet ignorance does not erase the deed itself. where does this malicious behavior arise from other than the very nature of the world we live in? the lion is not evil because the lion is only acting in accordance to his nature.

    my take: there is joy, and there is suffering. we make joy into good and suffering into evil. it is both an emotional response to reality and a practical tool for regulating behavior.
    test
  2. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    my take: there is joy, and there is suffering. we make joy into good and suffering into evil. it is both an emotional response to reality and a practical tool for regulating behavior.


    yes, point is there was never supposed to be. That wasn't the intention. Before the fall lions and sheep layed together beside adam. Everything needed was provided. The authority God gave man, man gave to satan when he disobeyed God.

    The only thing God expected of Man was to tend to the garden, there was no need to work the ground, no need to plant to grow food. All that came about after.
    test
  3. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    did lions evolve into such masterful killers prior to or after the fall?

    i'm not being a smart ass. i literally don't see why they would have such a biological design unless they were meant to hunt and kill.
    test
  4. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Yes. All animals were plant eaters. All that came about after, as a result of the garden no longer providing food.

    I recently learned some interesting facts on the naming of the animals ill post it ina sec.
    test
  5. breathlesss

    breathlesss Registered Sex Offender

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,600
    just to humor you, and myself...
    so, if they were originally plant eaters, then, they EVOLVED into creatures set up for eating meat, digestive system and all, right?
    test
  6. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    test
  7. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    hell, forget the digestive system since i doubt facts like that would leave much of an impression on biblical loyalists, though i definitely see why you'd bring that up.

    just think of the lion's basic morphological design. it's claws, teeth, muscles, roar. everything about the lion is masterpiece in the art of predation. so what bp is actually saying is that prior to the fall, the lion was not a lion at all. it was a sheep.
    test
  8. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    .....
    test
  9. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Watch the vid.

    And God created every living creature that moveth.

    Meaning he created everything possible.

    The guidline was if it could be created it was. All possibilities. Why is every person born unique? For the same reason, every possibility of human is still being created to this day.

    Interesting when u think about it, and what makes me diff from you. Perhaps thats niether here no there. Relevent to the topic tho so figured id throw it in there
    test
  10. breathlesss

    breathlesss Registered Sex Offender

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,600
    so then, national geographic says animals evolved from plants?

    hey...ya know, that made me think, i don't think i've ever learned, or even thought about really, the scientific history of plant evolution...or even whether the pre-plant organism came before or after the pre-animal organisms in the oceans

    any smart people know anything about this?
    test
  11. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    A nature sanctuary for animals needs a big food supply. The animals of Eden were herb-eating. In this era many animals are flesh-eating but in the Kingdom era they will be herb-eating, as in Eden (Is. 11:6-8). This will be a restoration of the original creation (see Acts 3:21). Genesis 1:30, And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food. And it was so
    test
  12. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Well its saying the circle of life begins with plants, so essentially its still in the diets of all animals
    test
  13. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    entertaining preacherman, but i don't really see what this was meant to prove

    first off his interpretation of the verse in genesis seems somewhat dubious. he concludes that the animals were akin to clay sculptures based on the fact it says god "brought" them to adam?

    Hebrew Concordance: way·y?·?ê -- 50 Occurrences

    ^listing of the same instances in which that same hebrew word was used throughout the ot. based on the various contexts in which it was used i daresay he's stretching things with his interpretation, but in all honesty this is a digression from my main objection:

    god allowed adam to name the various animals, therefore he had no knowledge of their nature despite having designed them? this is quite simply impossible. you don't design an eagle without an understanding of flight, and you don't design a lion without an understanding of predation. in fact what you are asserting almost seems to undermine the very core of 'intelligent design.'
    test
  14. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    i'd like bp to post the article he took that quote from. i'm guessing the context will provide a little more clarity. my guess is that they're saying that herbivores eat plants and carnivores eat herbivores, thus all nutrition is traced back to the plants, though i could be wrong.

    as for the evolution of early plant life, most of what i've learned about it deals with the evolution of photosynthesis itself, which was a function utilized by certain bacteria before the development of plant life. plant life did evolve prior to animal life though.
    test
  15. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    i don't quite buy that every possible organism exists or has existed on earth. either way, diversity is hardly an inherent virtue when some animals are designed to prey on other animals and god is supposedly opposed to predation.

    it seems like this topic has gone way off the rails. i honestly was not anticipating the argument that predation is in fact a tool of satan.
    test
  16. breathlesss

    breathlesss Registered Sex Offender

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,600
    see not that's the thing i think of all possibilities...right now, there are a finite set of species, but there used to be others in the past, also a finite number, so, that right there is limiting the ALL possibilities, to me, evolution is an equation of eternal possibility, an equation scribed by god...and to limit the entirety of an everything to what is current is doing an injustice to the original, sole plan of "god"


    and so, god created inanimate creatures, but adam brought them to life? I thought jesus was the only performer of miracles in concordance to your shackles of faith
    test
  17. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    factual portrayal of events:

    [youtube]LRtKAQJUc3g[/youtube]
    test
  18. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    wasnt trying to prove anything just an interesting on topic bit of sermon i thought id post.

    Ok, clay sculptures? Hes just saying they were made from the same sort of stuff we were, dirt.

    I agree with you that even had he forgave the knowledge of what they were prior to bringing them to adam he would have had knowledge of what adam would decide them to be.

    Did he know their nature prior to adam naming them. This is tricky in the sense that, their nature, more accurately the nature of every living thing was a kin to Gods nature. There is no death in him (God) and there was no death in eden. Therefore there was no predatory nature period. Death came thru sin, sin came through adam. So through adam sin death came into the world.

    My hats off to you for actually going to the concordance and looking at the context. I am highly impressed. Im a little cloudy on what word u looked up tho.
    test
  19. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Bugs came post flood. As did rain.

    True. Well bring it back. I wouldnt say toooolll nessicarily, well ya i guess i would. My main point here is that death itself in any form was not original to the earth, God didnt create them to need to live like that or preditate on things he could however have built them with the foreknowledge of that happening which i would suppose would be why we see them now the way they are with the nessicary bodily functions to do it and do it well. Animals were innocent bystanders (other than snakes which were a type of lizard at first) in adams screw ups.
    test
  20. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    this is a good question. i've been thinking about it more and more lately too

    i've been realizing more and more how base it actually is to everything we are doing here as humans in human society, and as physical things in this physical universe - as being human and being in human society with its unique systems tends to make us look over the physical reality and its own intrinsic systems that ultimately govern over everything. that is, i think we forget that we're bound to the physical reality, as we mistake humanity and our human society as being the whole of reality when its really just an add-on to a much larger entity; an add-on that can work in congruence to that larger entity and what are its systems, or against it. i guess that sounds sort of overly mysterious so i want to try to explain. i want to try to make an argument for morality as objectivity and this is very hard for me to do

    in civilization and its discontents freud makes an argument for two contradictory forces that exist within humans: eros and thanatos. eros representing nurturing, protection, caring and loving - and thanatos, representing destruction, aggression, insatiability and hate. a life instinct and a death instinct. your concluding statement at the end of your post is actually really similar here.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_and_Its_Discontents

    i think freud got it right when he talks about the tyrannical origins of early man as a thing that freely gave himself away to his thanatos instinct and the creation of society as a new add-on that introduces the eros instinct to try to suppress it, at least individually. he shows this phenomena creating an eternal struggle between society and man; thanatos and eros, life and death.

    there is even a possibility that humans developed opposable thumbs and bi pedal movement simply because the men who had these kinds of hands x this kind of upright body, would have given them a body type with an improved ability to pick up and wield primitive weapons and effectively swing them as attacks to kill the men that lacked these sorts of traits. this would have given them a tremendous advantage, as they would have then used this ability to kill the men who lacked these things, and then reproduce with their mates and ultimately pass on these traits (opposable thumbs and a more upright body) further and further into prominence into humanity. so the beginning of what we might recognize as ourselves becoming physically human, may have ultimately completely resulted from thanatos. this would really go against the grandeur and nobility of what we generally see humanity as being. that is as some kind of triumph over the brutality of nature, when it may have really just been just some brand new expression of that brutality.

    something that may have happened too tho, was the ability for men to form into groups/gangs. suppose that some time after every man now had the hands and upright body necessary for effective weapons combat, that there were new men that had what we can say as being some kind of gang trait. in the same way that the previous traits would have made these men better at holding and swinging weapons, a new gang trait would have given them the ability to attack in groups vs individually. this obviously would have made them considerably more effective and we should see without 2 much difficulty how something like that might trend its way into prominence. the only things they would have needed to do that would have been an ability to recognize each other as having similar traits, that they would have then used to differentiate themselves from any men that had non-similar traits. in that way, gangs of men would assemble themselves into gangs of similarity and then organize attacks against gangs of men that were lacking in this similarity. from that point, its likely that increasingly efficient strategy and weaponry would become necessitated as being the next logical phase along what was becoming this more nuanced thanatos trend. in essence, men would have started becoming smarter and better at creating technology.

    gradually they would have started forming not just gangs, but complex society. they would have needed one last thing: a way to suppress their own thanatos, so that it wouldnt destroy the very society that they had now created. they would need to have eros.

    this, i think, is our crisis currently.

    i believe that this means nature starts out w thanatos; yet thanatos trends outwardly in varying ways and becomes different things. if you look at a mouse and then look at a cat, you are going to see that they have extremely similar bodies. thus, you must conclude that they must have branched off from a single evolutionary point at some time not very long ago in the history of this universe. was the cat simply, at one point, a mouse that was gripped by the forces of thanatos? the cat eats the mouse, so is the mouse wrong to not have been gripped by the forces of thanatos too? was the cat right to choose thanatos so long ago?
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)