Is the intelligent designer evil?

[MaxGrit]

This is earth. The rain falls on the just and the unjust.

I don't think many Christians question why evil exists. Until Christ returns Satan goes to and fro.
As for the problem of the world cause being good. That's not a problem. Turn on the news.

Man has never made a weapon that he hasn't used.

Is god a fuck up? He created adam and eve and they disappointed him. Then they populated the earth and god wasn't pleased so he flooded the earth to cleanse it and start over all to have the earth re populated with the same type of assholes so he sent his son to be a human sacrifice and we killed his son but it was to "save us" but still we are bad human's who are evil and sin and so jesus has to come back again?

And we call this intelligent design? Seems like god is just an artist who doesn't know what to do with a lump of clay.

All is going according to God's plan.

 

[GrosMinet]

This is earth. The rain falls on the just and the unjust.

I don't think many Christians question why evil exists. Until Christ returns Satan goes to and fro.
As for the problem of the world cause being good. That's not a problem. Turn on the news.

Man has never made a weapon that he hasn't used.

Is god a fuck up? He created adam and eve and they disappointed him. Then they populated the earth and god wasn't pleased so he flooded the earth to cleanse it and start over all to have the earth re populated with the same type of assholes so he sent his son to be a human sacrifice and we killed his son but it was to "save us" but still we are bad human's who are evil and sin and so jesus has to come back again?

And we call this intelligent design? Seems like god is just an artist who doesn't know what to do with a lump of clay.

All is going according to God's plan.

Do you have any evidence that such a plan comes from a GOOD god?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Cathars, the Albigensians, the so-called Blessed One were not evil.

They were so woefully ignorant.

Now go say three Our Fathers.

 

[MaxGrit]

Is god a fuck up? He created adam and eve and they disappointed him. Then they populated the earth and god wasn't pleased so he flooded the earth to cleanse it and start over all to have the earth re populated with the same type of assholes so he sent his son to be a human sacrifice and we killed his son but it was to "save us" but still we are bad human's who are evil and sin and so jesus has to come back again?

And we call this intelligent design? Seems like god is just an artist who doesn't know what to do with a lump of clay.

All is going according to God's plan.

Do you have any evidence that such a plan comes from a GOOD god?

That question is nonsense. There is only one God, who is perfectly good.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Physics, geology, chemistry, biology. There's no "intelligence" about it. It just is what it is.

No design either.

It is what it is because it cannot be anything other.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

This is earth. The rain falls on the just and the unjust.

I don't think many Christians question why evil exists. Until Christ returns Satan goes to and fro.
As for the problem of the world cause being good. That's not a problem. Turn on the news.

Man has never made a weapon that he hasn't used.

Is god a fuck up? He created adam and eve and they disappointed him. Then they populated the earth and god wasn't pleased so he flooded the earth to cleanse it and start over all to have the earth re populated with the same type of assholes so he sent his son to be a human sacrifice and we killed his son but it was to "save us" but still we are bad human's who are evil and sin and so jesus has to come back again?

And we call this intelligent design? Seems like god is just an artist who doesn't know what to do with a lump of clay.

According to gismo, avatar and the other thumpers, he's getting ready to throw another tantrum.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So... does it mean that paedophilia is not "objectively evil"???

It is objectively criminal. Evil is a theist term and therefore not applicable to secular law. As humans we can have more than one set of values. You can be a "good theist" and yet still be speeding and/or drunk driving without being inherently "evil" in the theist view.

In ancient Greece, paedophilia was not criminal. Does it mean it was not evil back then? What about slavery in pre-civil war America?

To me it's inescapable that there are objective moral truths. Whether they are grounded in God's nature is another question.

You just gave examples of the shifting sands upon which morality it based. In some societies dog meat is a delicacy but to others it is morally objectionable.

So your personal "objective moral truths" are yours alone and therefore subjective.

The OP poses the question "Is the intelligent designer evil?"

Since evil is both a theist and subjective term the answer depends upon your point of view. The responses in this thread establish just how subjective these points of view are.

There are no "objective moral truths" that cross all societal boundaries because of their subjectivity. Equally so the imaginary "intelligent designer" can be deemed to be good or evil in a subjective manner only.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Is god a fuck up? He created adam and eve and they disappointed him. Then they populated the earth and god wasn't pleased so he flooded the earth to cleanse it and start over all to have the earth re populated with the same type of assholes so he sent his son to be a human sacrifice and we killed his son but it was to "save us" but still we are bad human's who are evil and sin and so jesus has to come back again?

And we call this intelligent design? Seems like god is just an artist who doesn't know what to do with a lump of clay.

All is going according to God's plan.

Do you have any evidence that such a plan comes from a GOOD god?

Yep.

John 14:7 If you had really known me, you would know who my Father is. From now on, you do know him and have seen him!"

Find fault with Jesus Christ. His plan is God's plan.

 

[GrosMinet]

It is objectively criminal. Evil is a theist term and therefore not applicable to secular law. As humans we can have more than one set of values. You can be a "good theist" and yet still be speeding and/or drunk driving without being inherently "evil" in the theist view.

In ancient Greece, paedophilia was not criminal. Does it mean it was not evil back then? What about slavery in pre-civil war America?

To me it's inescapable that there are objective moral truths. Whether they are grounded in God's nature is another question.

You just gave examples of the shifting sands upon which morality it based. In some societies dog meat is a delicacy but to others it is morally objectionable.

So your personal "objective moral truths" are yours alone and therefore subjective.

Do you really believe what you're saying? That the beliefs of the Ku Klux Klan are as fine as the beliefs of Amnesty International? That the beliefs of a paedophile rapist are as fine as the beliefs of normal parents caring about their kids?

Sure, there are disagreements in ethics. But it doesn't support your conclusion that morality is subjective. It's like disagreements over the meaning of historical events. They are hard to solve by applying rational methods, historians will disagree depending on their assumptions, their methods, the limited data they rely on, but it doesn't mean the historical events themselves have no objective meaning...

There are no "objective moral truths" that cross all societal boundaries because of their subjectivity. Equally so the imaginary "intelligent designer" can be deemed to be good or evil in a subjective manner only.

Please show me a society which doesn't believe in the golden rule, where cowardice is a virtue, where people are expected to care more about perfect strangers than about relatives, where incest is praised, where wanton murder (of the in-groups) is praiseworthy, where treachery is deemed to be good. Show me, please.

 

[SillyWabbit]

Hello,

According to the old Gnostics, the Manichees and the Cathars, the Creator of the physical world is actually evil. It's not the morally perfect supreme being we are used to, but a second Principle, entirely devoted to evil, which has entrapped our souls in physical bodies to rule over us.

Some of those heretics said that the evil principle was a Fallen angel, others said it was an independent principle of being, a kind of second uncreated god, but they all agreed that the physical world was not created by the good God.

Well, I know the line of orthodox believers : evil cannot be a principle of being, because evil is actually a privation. So there can only be one supreme being, supremely good.

However, it's not very convincing. Sure, some evils are best seen as privations, but others are better seen as really existing. Especially moral evil. So I don't quite see how the concept of a morally evil can be shown to be incoherent.

Now it seems that intelligent design theorists should interact with this view, even if it's not very fashionable now.

To me, the Cathars and their friends are onto something. But it may be even truer to view the evil principle as natural selection or to hold that the world was created by an indifferent God (as was suggested by Hume).

Much as I hate the source of this quote, I'm inclined to agree.

"There is no good or evil..." - Emperor Palpatine aka the Sith

I think instead there's just actions and consequences. But when identical actions can be said to be good or evil depending on the speaker, it really just reveals how good and evil don't objectively exist.

- A lion that catches then plays with a baby gazelle before killing and eating it isn't an evil lion for instances. Yet that very same action, if done by a human being (which is just another animal) might be said to be an act of evil.

- A soldier who goes overseas to fight some war their government says is justified isn't called a terrorist or evil person. Yet the native inhabitants who're being invaded and resist violently might well be said to be terrorists simply because they're not proper members of a military.

So if designations of good and evil and totally arbitrary, how can they be real?

Perception is reality.

 

[GrosMinet]

All is going according to God's plan.

Do you have any evidence that such a plan comes from a GOOD god?

That question is nonsense. There is only one God, who is perfectly good.

It isn't nonsense. It's not at all self-evident that the ultimate cause of the world is a good God. It could be : brute matter, an indifferent God or an evil God or perhaps something else.

 

[SillyWabbit]

This is earth. The rain falls on the just and the unjust.

I don't think many Christians question why evil exists. Until Christ returns Satan goes to and fro.
As for the problem of the world cause being good. That's not a problem. Turn on the news.

Man has never made a weapon that he hasn't used.

Is god a fuck up? He created adam and eve and they disappointed him. Then they populated the earth and god wasn't pleased so he flooded the earth to cleanse it and start over all to have the earth re populated with the same type of assholes so he sent his son to be a human sacrifice and we killed his son but it was to "save us" but still we are bad human's who are evil and sin and so jesus has to come back again?

And we call this intelligent design? Seems like god is just an artist who doesn't know what to do with a lump of clay.

Well, at least he hasn't treated it like a warm water melon.

 

[Derideo_Te]

In ancient Greece, paedophilia was not criminal. Does it mean it was not evil back then? What about slavery in pre-civil war America?

To me it's inescapable that there are objective moral truths. Whether they are grounded in God's nature is another question.

You just gave examples of the shifting sands upon which morality it based. In some societies dog meat is a delicacy but to others it is morally objectionable.

So your personal "objective moral truths" are yours alone and therefore subjective.

Do you really believe what you're saying? That the beliefs of the Ku Klux Klan are as fine as the beliefs of Amnesty International? That the beliefs of a paedophile rapist are as fine as the beliefs of normal parents caring about their kids?

Sure, there are disagreements in ethics. But it doesn't support your conclusion that morality is subjective. It's like disagreements over the meaning of historical events. They are hard to solve by applying rational methods, historians will disagree depending on their assumptions, their methods, the limited data they rely on, but it doesn't mean the historical events themselves have no objective meaning...

There are no "objective moral truths" that cross all societal boundaries because of their subjectivity. Equally so the imaginary "intelligent designer" can be deemed to be good or evil in a subjective manner only.

Please show me a society which doesn't believe in the golden rule, where cowardice is a virtue, where people are expected to care more about perfect strangers than about relatives, where incest is praised, where wanton murder (of the in-groups) is praiseworthy, where treachery is deemed to be good. Show me, please.

You are misreading what I posted!

I used examples to establish subjectivity. The KKK was deemed to be moral by those who joined at that time in history. In hindsight it is anything but. Just another example of the fluidity of morality. Marriage to barely pubescent girls was the norm in medieval Europe but would be considered rape today. The "Golden Rule" was around in both of those examples. As far as "praiseworthy wanton murder" is concerned have you ever read the old testament?

 

[GrosMinet]

You are misreading what I posted!

I used examples to establish subjectivity. The KKK was deemed to be moral by those who joined at that time in history. In hindsight it is anything but. Just another example of the fluidity of morality. Marriage to barely pubescent girls was the norm in medieval Europe but would be considered rape today. The "Golden Rule" was around in both of those examples. As far as "praiseworthy wanton murder" is concerned have you ever read the old testament?

Yet, if morality is subjective, and it seems to be your claim, there is no real basis to condemn paedophilia or the KKK. Sure, the laws may define those things as crimes, but in the absence of objective morality, laws are meaningless in themselves. Our laws are no better than pre-civil war laws or those of ancient Greece. Indeed, if it was not believed that morality and laws are separate, there would have been no incentive to improve the past laws, for any set of laws would be as meaningless as the ones they are to replace. Any willingness to improve existing laws involves objective moral claims.

The Old Testament never said that the murder of innocent in-groups was permissible. Remember the Ten Commandments? People who were to be killed were either criminals or members of other tribes.

 

[MaxGrit]

Do you have any evidence that such a plan comes from a GOOD god?

That question is nonsense. There is only one God, who is perfectly good.

It isn't nonsense. It's not at all self-evident that the ultimate cause of the world is a good God. It could be : brute matter, an indifferent God or an evil God or perhaps something else.

The discussion is about God as revealed in the Bible. It started with God's plan for his creation and how it's manifesting perfectly as according to his will.

It's a nonsense question in that context.

 

[GrosMinet]

That question is nonsense. There is only one God, who is perfectly good.

It isn't nonsense. It's not at all self-evident that the ultimate cause of the world is a good God. It could be : brute matter, an indifferent God or an evil God or perhaps something else.

The discussion is about God as revealed in the Bible. It started with God's plan for his creation and how it's manifesting perfectly as according to his will.

It's a nonsense question in that context.

I didn't start the thread to discuss whether the Cathars' exegesis was right, but to make a point about whether there is any good reason to ascribe goodness to whatever is the ultimate cause of the universe.