God created evil for his pleasure. Do you recognize the pleasure of creating and doing evil?

[Indeependent]

Of course, in Genesis 6:6 Jehovah 'felt sorry' in a negative sense, while in Jonah 4:2 Jehovah felt sorry in a favorable sense - see Jonah 4:11 "feel sorry" (H2347/chus/lit. "cover" [cp. cover over sins]/compassion/pity.

The word should be comforted as I explained in my prior post.

 

[Indeependent]

Of course, in Genesis 6:6 Jehovah 'felt sorry' in a negative sense, while in Jonah 4:2 Jehovah felt sorry in a favorable sense - see Jonah 4:11 "feel sorry" (H2347/chus/lit. "cover" [cp. cover over sins]/compassion/pity.

Interesting verse.
Jonah did not want them to repent but God did.

 

[Indeependent]

Ad hominem...have I expressed any personal against you or adherents to your religion?
Nope!

LIAR!

C'mon, please show me the post.
In fact, I explicitly mentioned less than an hour about how wonderful Christians are despite having a Scripture that dooms almost all mankind to the Eternal Lake of Hell.
Heck, there are more than enough supposedly Observant Jews who don't act like they should and that really annoys me.

 

[Newtonian]

Of course, in Genesis 6:6 Jehovah 'felt sorry' in a negative sense, while in Jonah 4:2 Jehovah felt sorry in a favorable sense - see Jonah 4:11 "feel sorry" (H2347/chus/lit. "cover" [cp. cover over sins]/compassion/pity.

The word should be comforted as I explained in my prior post.

There are multiple definitions as I posted - in English and in Greek also many words have multiple definitions. The context determines the definition. Genesis 6:6 also says "felt hurt at heart" (or the like) and is followed by Jehovah determining to destroy the grossly evil ones at the flood. Jonah 4:2,11 uses the Hebrew word in a postive/favorable sense - Jehovah felt sorry for the Ninevites and did not destroy them.

The word can have a negative or favorable meaning depending on the context. "Comfort" does not apply in either Biblical account. You need to study the contexts.

Btw - I quoted the 1984 edition of NW - our 2013 edition of NW has this footnote for "regretted" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “was grieved.”

 

[Indeependent]

Of course, in Genesis 6:6 Jehovah 'felt sorry' in a negative sense, while in Jonah 4:2 Jehovah felt sorry in a favorable sense - see Jonah 4:11 "feel sorry" (H2347/chus/lit. "cover" [cp. cover over sins]/compassion/pity.

The word should be comforted as I explained in my prior post.

There are multiple definitions as I posted - in English and in Greek also many words have multiple definitions. The context determines the definition. Genesis 6:6 also says "felt hurt at heart" (or the like) and is followed by Jehovah determining to destroy the grossly evil ones at the flood. Jonah 4:2,11 uses the Hebrew word in a postive/favorable sense - Jehovah felt sorry for the Ninevites and did not destroy them.

The word can have a negative or favorable meaning depending on the context. "Comfort" does not apply in either Biblical account. You need to study the contexts.

Btw - I quoted the 1984 edition of NW - our 2013 edition of NW has this footnote for "regretted" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “was grieved.”

When studying God's word in God's language I use God's language.
Every high school student is told that that most of the subtlety is lost when reading Greek literature in English.
Same for Shakespeare.
I almost always have to listen to lectures or watch long videos to know what a Biblical Hebrew word means, let alone a verse.

 

[Newtonian]

Ad hominem...have I expressed any personal against you or adherents to your religion?
Nope!

LIAR!

C'mon, please show me the post.
In fact, I explicitly mentioned less than an hour about how wonderful Christians are despite having a Scripture that dooms almost all mankind to the Eternal Lake of Hell.
Heck, there are more than enough supposedly Observant Jews who don't act like they should and that really annoys me.

The lake of fire in Revelation is not eternal torment - Revelation 20:13,14 specifically states this symbolism means "the second death."

The word translated "torment" (Greek basanis/G928/basanizo) in Revelation 20:10 has 3 primary definitions:

1. tormented
2. jailed/imprisoned/restrained
3. touchstone (from the literal root)

While Christendom teaches eternal torment, we teach the opposite, to wit:

Satan's course/rulership will serve as an eternal touchstone "in the sight of" Jesus and the angels (Revelation 14:10) so that Jehovah will never have to permit wickedness and suffering for all time anywhere in any universe.

In short: suffering will always exist in the sight of Jesus and the angels vs. suffering will never again happen anywhere for all time due to this touchstone. Christendom teaches the former, we teach the latter.

Remember: God is love (1 John 4:8)!

 

[Newtonian]

Of course, in Genesis 6:6 Jehovah 'felt sorry' in a negative sense, while in Jonah 4:2 Jehovah felt sorry in a favorable sense - see Jonah 4:11 "feel sorry" (H2347/chus/lit. "cover" [cp. cover over sins]/compassion/pity.

The word should be comforted as I explained in my prior post.

There are multiple definitions as I posted - in English and in Greek also many words have multiple definitions. The context determines the definition. Genesis 6:6 also says "felt hurt at heart" (or the like) and is followed by Jehovah determining to destroy the grossly evil ones at the flood. Jonah 4:2,11 uses the Hebrew word in a postive/favorable sense - Jehovah felt sorry for the Ninevites and did not destroy them.

The word can have a negative or favorable meaning depending on the context. "Comfort" does not apply in either Biblical account. You need to study the contexts.

Btw - I quoted the 1984 edition of NW - our 2013 edition of NW has this footnote for "regretted" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “was grieved.”

When studying God's word in God's language I use God's language.
Every high school student is told that that most of the subtlety is lost when reading Greek literature in English.
Same for Shakespeare.
I almost always have to listen to lectures or watch long videos to know what a Biblical Hebrew word means, let alone a verse.

The better course would be to read/study the context and cross references in the Bible itself - not man-made lectures or videos (etc.).

 

[Newtonian]

Of course, in Genesis 6:6 Jehovah 'felt sorry' in a negative sense, while in Jonah 4:2 Jehovah felt sorry in a favorable sense - see Jonah 4:11 "feel sorry" (H2347/chus/lit. "cover" [cp. cover over sins]/compassion/pity.

Interesting verse.
Jonah did not want them to repent but God did.

Yes, and as it the case with many Bible writers - Jonah recorded his own mistakes!

 

[Newtonian]

John 2:13-25...
They would have executed Yeshua right there and then and based on the Talmud Yoma, everyone not serving in the Temple knew not to misbehave there or they would not leave the Temple alive.

Also Jesus uttered the Divine Name! (John 17:6,26)

For example, the greatest commandment in the Bible (Deuteronomy 6:4,5) according to Jesus had the Divine Name 3 times:

Mark 12:28-34
One of the scribes who had come up and heard them disputing, knowing that he had answered them in a fine way, asked him: “Which commandment is first* of all?”+ 29 Jesus answered: “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah, 30 and you must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind and with your whole strength.’+ 31 The second is this, ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’+ There is no other commandment greater than these.” 32 The scribe said to him: “Teacher, you spoke well, in line with truth, ‘He is One, and there is no other besides him’;+ 33 and to love him with one’s whole heart, with one’s whole understanding, and with one’s whole strength and to love one’s neighbor as oneself is worth far more than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.”+ 34 At this Jesus, discerning that he had answered intelligently, said to him: “You are not far from the Kingdom of God.” But no one had the courage to question him anymore.+

However, Christendom has Jesus misquoting this and substituting Lord (Greek kyrios) for the Divine Name.

Btw - this is also in the Jewish Shema.

 

[Indeependent]

Of course, in Genesis 6:6 Jehovah 'felt sorry' in a negative sense, while in Jonah 4:2 Jehovah felt sorry in a favorable sense - see Jonah 4:11 "feel sorry" (H2347/chus/lit. "cover" [cp. cover over sins]/compassion/pity.

The word should be comforted as I explained in my prior post.

There are multiple definitions as I posted - in English and in Greek also many words have multiple definitions. The context determines the definition. Genesis 6:6 also says "felt hurt at heart" (or the like) and is followed by Jehovah determining to destroy the grossly evil ones at the flood. Jonah 4:2,11 uses the Hebrew word in a postive/favorable sense - Jehovah felt sorry for the Ninevites and did not destroy them.

The word can have a negative or favorable meaning depending on the context. "Comfort" does not apply in either Biblical account. You need to study the contexts.

Btw - I quoted the 1984 edition of NW - our 2013 edition of NW has this footnote for "regretted" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “was grieved.”

When studying God's word in God's language I use God's language.
Every high school student is told that that most of the subtlety is lost when reading Greek literature in English.
Same for Shakespeare.
I almost always have to listen to lectures or watch long videos to know what a Biblical Hebrew word means, let alone a verse.

The better course would be to read/study the context and cross references in the Bible itself - not man-made lectures or videos (etc.).

"read/study the context and cross references in the Bible itself"
That's exactly what we do.
We cycle through Tanach every year our entire lives.
The fact is that every time I loop through I reach much greater depths of what's going on and my desire to truly understand what a word means increases.
Take the Tower of Babel...
For years I couldn't find the meaning of the word "Language".
There are two words...
Lah Shone literally means the Same Language.
But that's not the word God uses to describe what is almost always translated as "Language".
The word is Soh-fehr...It means "Same Intention".
The Tower was not comprised of people who spoke the same words but of people show had the same intention.
Mankind was never meant to gather in one place and simply "Brick Bricks" (Be worked to death working for one person to impress everyone else.)
Sounds like Bill Gates was running the Tower project.

 

[anotherlife]

God did not create evil. His error correction code went wrong. Every error correction code has a finite number of corrections in its capacity. Then if flops out. But the Book of Revelations tells us that God will eventually give up on His mistake and restart to make a new heaven and a new earth after deleting the current ones.

 

[ding]

God created evil for his pleasure. Do you recognize the pleasure of creating and doing evil?

Rev 4;11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

Some people have what has been termed, the problem of evil. Many cannot fathom why, if god is good, he would create evil. Yet the scriptures are clear that god created evil for his pleasure.

It may be due to my criminal mind and delinquent attitude, but I think I know why. I wondered if you ands others had also dithered out a reasonable answer to show why sin and evil are required for god’s plan and our mental and moral development.

This fact is likely why the ancient Christians determined that sin was necessary for our development. They sing that Adam furthered god’s plan by his sin.

To them, even as Christianity and I clash, and the intelligent position, is that to not sin or do evil, is to derail god’s plan.

In this, issue, I happen to agree with the scriptures and Christians who say the sin and evil is good and necessary to god’s plan.

Do you?

Regards
DL

G-d hates evil,
He only created it to give humanity freedom of choice.

G-d didn’t create evil. Everything G-d created is good. No one does evil for evil’s sake. Evil is not extant. Evil is the absence of good. So G-d did not create evil.

Not sure I can agree no one does evil for its own sake.
However, and who created the possibility for the "absence of good"?

People do “evil” for the sake of their own good. Whether it be for greed, pleasure, vengeance, etc. they don’t do “evil” for the sake of evil. Most rationalize their actions as good.

Yes, God does allow us to have absence of good and to rationalize our actions. That doesn’t make it his fault. We don’t have perfect knowledge. We can’t always see how everything works for good. But I have faith that it does. Suffering and hardship has a way of teaching successful behaviors that can’t be learned any other way.

 

[ding]

God created evil for his pleasure. Do you recognize the pleasure of creating and doing evil?

Rev 4;11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

Some people have what has been termed, the problem of evil. Many cannot fathom why, if god is good, he would create evil. Yet the scriptures are clear that god created evil for his pleasure.

It may be due to my criminal mind and delinquent attitude, but I think I know why. I wondered if you ands others had also dithered out a reasonable answer to show why sin and evil are required for god’s plan and our mental and moral development.

This fact is likely why the ancient Christians determined that sin was necessary for our development. They sing that Adam furthered god’s plan by his sin.

To them, even as Christianity and I clash, and the intelligent position, is that to not sin or do evil, is to derail god’s plan.

In this, issue, I happen to agree with the scriptures and Christians who say the sin and evil is good and necessary to god’s plan.

Do you?

Regards
DL

Which god? Your god? The Christian god? Oden? Thor? Athena? Cheeto Jesus?

Who?

That’s a child’s argument. Don’t confuse religion or perception of God with God.

 

[ding]

God did not create evil. His error correction code went wrong. Every error correction code has a finite number of corrections in its capacity. Then if flops out. But the Book of Revelations tells us that God will eventually give up on His mistake and restart to make a new heaven and a new earth after deleting the current ones.

The law of compensation says otherwise.

 

[ding]

Of course, in Genesis 6:6 Jehovah 'felt sorry' in a negative sense, while in Jonah 4:2 Jehovah felt sorry in a favorable sense - see Jonah 4:11 "feel sorry" (H2347/chus/lit. "cover" [cp. cover over sins]/compassion/pity.

The word should be comforted as I explained in my prior post.

There are multiple definitions as I posted - in English and in Greek also many words have multiple definitions. The context determines the definition. Genesis 6:6 also says "felt hurt at heart" (or the like) and is followed by Jehovah determining to destroy the grossly evil ones at the flood. Jonah 4:2,11 uses the Hebrew word in a postive/favorable sense - Jehovah felt sorry for the Ninevites and did not destroy them.

The word can have a negative or favorable meaning depending on the context. "Comfort" does not apply in either Biblical account. You need to study the contexts.

Btw - I quoted the 1984 edition of NW - our 2013 edition of NW has this footnote for "regretted" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “was grieved.”

When studying God's word in God's language I use God's language.
Every high school student is told that that most of the subtlety is lost when reading Greek literature in English.
Same for Shakespeare.
I almost always have to listen to lectures or watch long videos to know what a Biblical Hebrew word means, let alone a verse.

The better course would be to read/study the context and cross references in the Bible itself - not man-made lectures or videos (etc.).

"read/study the context and cross references in the Bible itself"
That's exactly what we do.
We cycle through Tanach every year our entire lives.
The fact is that every time I loop through I reach much greater depths of what's going on and my desire to truly understand what a word means increases.
Take the Tower of Babel...
For years I couldn't find the meaning of the word "Language".
There are two words...
Lah Shone literally means the Same Language.
But that's not the word God uses to describe what is almost always translated as "Language".
The word is Soh-fehr...It means "Same Intention".
The Tower was not comprised of people who spoke the same words but of people show had the same intention.
Mankind was never meant to gather in one place and simply "Brick Bricks" (Be worked to death working for one person to impress everyone else.)
Sounds like Bill Gates was running the Tower project.

Whereas I believe it is the allegorical account of an actual historical event. The great migration from the cradle of civilization. Which is one of the reasons I believe many of the original meanings have been lost through time.

I know you don’t like my view, but it is a genuine belief. I don’t state my opinion to insult anyone. I have good reasons for my beliefs.

By contrast the OP is intentionally insulting and disrespectful. He is not genuine at all.

 

[ding]

spirit, soul and body.

Spirit is life, the body is our form.

Describe what you mean by soul. Not woo I hope. If you say you have a soul, you should know what it is, otherwise it is just a hunch on your part.

I think it falls into the realm of the unknowable god concept, unless you have suffered your apotheosis like the very few of us have.

Regards
DL

I can't give you an answer about a soul. I don't know, really.

The conception of soul can be easily explained based on dualistic worldview. And there was the time when I was leaning towards it. But now not that much.

Do you mind if I asked what changed?

One of the reason is because I couldn't find an appropriate answer to me about the question I proposed above to another poster. It is possible to assume that a human being has two natures, but how do the two natures manifest themselves in other parts of material world?

The other reason is that some time ago I was interested in Zoroastrianism. I still like their philosophy, though. But I was disappointed by their primitivism as a whole. Btw, Zoroastrianism despite its dualism is on the opposite scale of Gnosticism. For them, the material world is the best creation which was partially spoiled by the evil force.

You have been reading what the inquisitors lied about us to justify their murders of us.

They gave the mythical view that we used against Christians. Not our real view. Please give our real view a look to see how we love matter nand the world that nature has provided.

I have corrected ding a few times on this and he still spreads the lie.

---------

I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religions originators. It shows that Christians should actually hate matter and not Gnostic Christians.

The Christian reality.

1 John 2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Gen 3; 17 Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.

-----------

The Gnostic Christian reality.

Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.

[And after they have reigned they will rest.]"

"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.

If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.

Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.

[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.

But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.

Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

Well, it is not only about the incquision. Modern authors also write about anti-material views of Gnostics.

What is the main book of the teaching you follow?

The Gnostic gospels and the knowledge that our myths are not to be read literally.

Let me give you some information and a mental challenge based on logic, reason and science.

I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religions originators. It shows that Christians should actually hate matter and not Gnostic Christians.

The Christian reality.

1 John 2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Gen 3; 17 Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.

-----------

The Gnostic Christian reality.

Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.

[And after they have reigned they will rest.]"

"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.

If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.

Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.

[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.

But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.

Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

The Gnostics were the aggressors. They brought about their own destruction.

 

[ding]

spirit, soul and body.

Spirit is life, the body is our form.

Describe what you mean by soul. Not woo I hope. If you say you have a soul, you should know what it is, otherwise it is just a hunch on your part.

I think it falls into the realm of the unknowable god concept, unless you have suffered your apotheosis like the very few of us have.

Regards
DL

I can't give you an answer about a soul. I don't know, really.

The conception of soul can be easily explained based on dualistic worldview. And there was the time when I was leaning towards it. But now not that much.

Do you mind if I asked what changed?

One of the reason is because I couldn't find an appropriate answer to me about the question I proposed above to another poster. It is possible to assume that a human being has two natures, but how do the two natures manifest themselves in other parts of material world?

The other reason is that some time ago I was interested in Zoroastrianism. I still like their philosophy, though. But I was disappointed by their primitivism as a whole. Btw, Zoroastrianism despite its dualism is on the opposite scale of Gnosticism. For them, the material world is the best creation which was partially spoiled by the evil force.

You have been reading what the inquisitors lied about us to justify their murders of us.

They gave the mythical view that we used against Christians. Not our real view. Please give our real view a look to see how we love matter nand the world that nature has provided.

I have corrected ding a few times on this and he still spreads the lie.

---------

I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religions originators. It shows that Christians should actually hate matter and not Gnostic Christians.

The Christian reality.

1 John 2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Gen 3; 17 Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.

-----------

The Gnostic Christian reality.

Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.

[And after they have reigned they will rest.]"

"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.

If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.

Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.

[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.

But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.

Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Regards
DL

Well, it is not only about the incquision. Modern authors also write about anti-material views of Gnostics.

What is the main book of the teaching you follow?

Read pages 18 through 28 of chapter two. This link will take you to the start of the suggested reading.

The Socialist Phenomenon

 

[rylah]

God created evil for his pleasure. Do you recognize the pleasure of creating and doing evil?

Rev 4;11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

Some people have what has been termed, the problem of evil. Many cannot fathom why, if god is good, he would create evil. Yet the scriptures are clear that god created evil for his pleasure.

It may be due to my criminal mind and delinquent attitude, but I think I know why. I wondered if you ands others had also dithered out a reasonable answer to show why sin and evil are required for god’s plan and our mental and moral development.

This fact is likely why the ancient Christians determined that sin was necessary for our development. They sing that Adam furthered god’s plan by his sin.

To them, even as Christianity and I clash, and the intelligent position, is that to not sin or do evil, is to derail god’s plan.

In this, issue, I happen to agree with the scriptures and Christians who say the sin and evil is good and necessary to god’s plan.

Do you?

Regards
DL

G-d hates evil,
He only created it to give humanity freedom of choice.

G-d didn’t create evil. Everything G-d created is good. No one does evil for evil’s sake. Evil is not extant. Evil is the absence of good. So G-d did not create evil.

Not sure I can agree no one does evil for its own sake.
However, and who created the possibility for the "absence of good"?

People do “evil” for the sake of their own good. Whether it be for greed, pleasure, vengeance, etc. they don’t do “evil” for the sake of evil. Most rationalize their actions as good.

Yes, God does allow us to have absence of good and to rationalize our actions. That doesn’t make it his fault. We don’t have perfect knowledge. We can’t always see how everything works for good. But I have faith that it does. Suffering and hardship has a way of teaching successful behaviors that can’t be learned any other way.

But that's exactly what you're trying to rationalize.
First by denying there's evil, to make way for it to be further equated with personal good.
That cognitive dissonance wouldn't be needed if you didn't recognize vengeance/greed as evil in the first place.

It's like calling rape and murder both "lack of good" and "personal good" in the same breath, trying to hold the stick by both ends - to rationalize immorality.

So are rape and murder good or evil?

 

[ding]

God created evil for his pleasure. Do you recognize the pleasure of creating and doing evil?

Rev 4;11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

Some people have what has been termed, the problem of evil. Many cannot fathom why, if god is good, he would create evil. Yet the scriptures are clear that god created evil for his pleasure.

It may be due to my criminal mind and delinquent attitude, but I think I know why. I wondered if you ands others had also dithered out a reasonable answer to show why sin and evil are required for god’s plan and our mental and moral development.

This fact is likely why the ancient Christians determined that sin was necessary for our development. They sing that Adam furthered god’s plan by his sin.

To them, even as Christianity and I clash, and the intelligent position, is that to not sin or do evil, is to derail god’s plan.

In this, issue, I happen to agree with the scriptures and Christians who say the sin and evil is good and necessary to god’s plan.

Do you?

Regards
DL

G-d hates evil,
He only created it to give humanity freedom of choice.

G-d didn’t create evil. Everything G-d created is good. No one does evil for evil’s sake. Evil is not extant. Evil is the absence of good. So G-d did not create evil.

Not sure I can agree no one does evil for its own sake.
However, and who created the possibility for the "absence of good"?

People do “evil” for the sake of their own good. Whether it be for greed, pleasure, vengeance, etc. they don’t do “evil” for the sake of evil. Most rationalize their actions as good.

Yes, God does allow us to have absence of good and to rationalize our actions. That doesn’t make it his fault. We don’t have perfect knowledge. We can’t always see how everything works for good. But I have faith that it does. Suffering and hardship has a way of teaching successful behaviors that can’t be learned any other way.

But that's exactly what you're trying to rationalize.
First by denying there's evil, to make way for it to be further equated with personal good.
That cognitive dissonance wouldn't be needed if you didn't recognize vengeance/greed as evil in the first place.

It's like calling rape and murder both "lack of good" and "personal good" in the same breath, trying to hold the stick by both ends - to rationalize immorality.

So are rape and murder good or evil?

I don’t believe you quite understand the concept of rationalizing a wrong as a right if that’s how you see my belief that God did not create evil. When God asked Adam if he ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, Adam replied the woman you made gave it to me. That was Adam rationalizing that he didn’t do wrong. When God asked Eve, if she ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Eve replied the serpent deceived me. That was her rationalizing that she didn’t do wrong. When I state God did not create evil, I have nothing to gain from this. I certainly am not responsible for the absence of good in others. I am only responsible for the absence of good in myself. It isn’t a rationalization to say that evil or darkness or cold are not extant. That is literally a fact. They don’t exist in and of themselves. They only exist in relation to the extant phenomenon. Cold is the absence of heat. Darkness is the absence of light and evil is the absence of good. Light, heat and good exist.

Your own religious text tells you that everything God created is good. We can know through inspection that existence is good. It is better to exist than to not exist. Nature verifies that there is a preference to exist. Living things fight to exist. We can know through inspection that man prefers good over the absence of good. We can know through inspection that nature prefers good over the absence of good. Virtue is the greatest organizing principle known to mankind. Societies that live with virtue experience peace and harmony. Societies that live without virtue experience discord and chaos. Not all behaviors lead to equal outcomes. This is the moral law at work. You can see in almost all quarrels men arguing fairness. They argue they are being fair and good and their adversary is being unfair and not good. You never hear someone say the hell with being fair and good. Screw your goodness. No one has ever done evil for the sake of evil. They do evil for the sake of their own good. And then they rationalize that what they are doing is good.

 

[ding]

It's like calling rape and murder both "lack of good" and "personal good" in the same breath, trying to hold the stick by both ends - to rationalize immorality.

People don’t commit those acts for the sake of evil. They commit those acts for their own selfish good. They do those things because they get something out of it. In fact, more times than not they rationalize that the person they harmed deserved it. That it was their fault. That’s exactly what Adam and Eve did. Your ancestors understood this. Man knows right from wrong and when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept he rationalizes he didn’t violate it. But he knows in his heart that he did wrong and that’s why they hid when they heard God coming. This is the moral of the story. This is what ancient man understood. This is what he was passing down in the account of the fall.