Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

[ding]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

 

[rylah]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

"Them" what?

Where?

"My defeats"?

Oh boy...

Do you do birthdays?

 

[ding]

So it seems that morality is an artifact of intelligence. That in reality we are different than animals.

It's not morality.

It's a set of standards that are agreed upon by the members of a society.

All the human cultures that have condoned human sacrifice or ritualistic violence were not cultures of animals but of humans

Morals are standards. And they exist for reasons. Logical reasons. Which is why morality is an artifact of intelligence and independent of man.

What you are arguing is that because humans are subjective that there are not absolute standards which is ridiculous.

There are not absolute standards and I have already given examples of the differing standards between civilizations of the past.

In some cultures today it is acceptable to subjugate women to the point of raping with impunity. That is what that group of people have deemed acceptable therefore there is no absolute moral standard.

Standards exist for logical reasons so they exist independent of man. They exist because of logic. That makes it absolute.

If there were no men there would be no standards on man's behaviors therefore standards do not exist apart from man

There is no logic if there is no human mind to create it.

Humans can justify absolutely anything they do. So the standards you experience are those that have been agreed upon directly or tacitly over millennia of people living together which is why standards can vary so much between different groups of people.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.

Standards exist for reasons. These reasons are discovered when the standard isn't followed. It's called normalization of deviance. The standard is independent of men. The standard is based upon what happens when the standard is not followed. If you cheat on your wife you will suffer predictable surprises because you didn't follow the standard. Yes, if you never existed you would have never cheated in your wife. That is brilliant logic on your part. I'm being facetious here in case you missed it.

 

[ding]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

"Them" what?

Where?

"My defeats"?

Oh boy...

Do you do birthdays?

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

Man's inclination is for good not evil. G-d says otherwise. Write a letter to your congressman. Did God create evil? Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose. How many times will you be asking the same question? So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create...

www.usmessageboard.com

FYI, you did it again when you parsed out the part you couldn't address.

 

[rylah]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Nice that you've edited that now.

Do I need to explain the meaning of quoting?

I can quote you paragraphs of researches saying Maimonides didn't believe in resurrection of the dead during Messianic era, and yet that's right in his most famous work.

This may surprise you, nevertheless a good opportunity to mention - theJewishLibrary.org
is not the most precise source on Jewish law and history, mildly saying.
There much more authentic serious sources at reach.

"Simon said...." is not gonna ride.

Quote me Maimonides, actual Maimonides, directly.

Then we can talk.

 

[ding]

Let me state this once again. Morals are standards which exist for logical reasons and are independent of man because they exist for logical reasons. man cannot make them be anything he wants them to be.

They do not exist independent of man because man has created them.

No. Man discovered them. Logic established them. They exist for logical reasons. They can’t be whatever you want them to be.

Man created them.

and yes standards can be whatever the people of the society say they are.

Outcomes say otherwise. You can pretend that the standard is one thing but the consequences of following a lower standard will show you your error eventually.

If the universe were created through natural process and we are an accidental happenstance of matter and energy doing what matter and energy do, then there should be no expectation for absolute morals. Morals can be anything we want them to be. The problem is that nature does have a preference for an outcome. Societies and people which behave with virtue experience order and harmony. Societies and people which behave without virtue experience disorder and chaos. So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work. If the universe was created by spirit for the express purpose of creating beings that know and create we would expect that we would receive feedback on how we behave. The problem is that violating moral laws are not like violating physical laws. When we violate a physical law the consequences are immediate. If you try to defy gravity by jumping off a roof you will fall. Whereas the consequences for violating a moral law are more probabilistic in nature; many times we get away with it.



Morals are effectively standards. For any given thing there exists a standard which is the highest possible standard. This standard exists independent of anything else. It is in effect a universal standard. It exists for a reason. When we deviate from this standard and normalize our deviance from the standard, eventually the reason the standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man.



So the question that naturally begs to be asked is if there is a universal code of common decency that is independent of man how come we all don't behave the same way when it comes to right and wrong? The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.



Man does know right from wrong and when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong he rationalizes he did not violate it. You can see this behavior in almost all quarrels and disagreements. At the heart of every quarrel and disagreement is a belief in a universal right and wrong. So even though each side believes right to be different each side expects the other to believe their side should be universally known and accepted. It is this behavior which tells us there is an expectation for an absolute truth.



If there were never a universal truth that existed man would never have an expectation of fairness to begin with because fairness would have no meaning. The fact that each of us has an expectation of fairness and that we expect everyone else to follow ought to raise our suspicion on the origin of that expectation.

 

[rylah]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Nice that you've edited that now.

Do I need to explain the meaning of quoting?

I can quote you paragraphs of researches saying Maimonides didn't believe in resurrection of the dead during Messianic era, and yet that's right in his most famous work.

This may surprise you, nevertheless a good opportunity to mention - theJewishLibrary.org
is not the most precise source on Jewish law and history, mildly saying.
There much more authentic sources at reach.

"Simon said...." is not gonna ride.

Quote me Maimonides, actual Maimonides, directly.

Then we can talk.

I didn't edit anything. That's the second time I have posted it.

Silly games.

Why lie so boldly
when it says so underneath your post?

Come back when you can address the challenge in my post.

 

[ding]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Nice that you've edited that now.

Do I need to explain the meaning of quoting?

I can quote you paragraphs of researches saying Maimonides didn't believe in resurrection of the dead during Messianic era, and yet that's right in his most famous work.

This may surprise you, nevertheless a good opportunity to mention - theJewishLibrary.org
is not the most precise source on Jewish law and history, mildly saying.
There much more authentic sources at reach.

"Simon said...." is not gonna ride.

Quote me Maimonides, actual Maimonides, directly.

Then we can talk.

I didn't edit anything. That's the second time I have posted it.

Silly games.

Why lie so boldly
when it says so underneath your post?

Come back when you can address the challenge in my post.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."




*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.




The problem of evil played an important role in the philosophy of Martin *Buber . For Buber the source of evil was the failure to enter into relation, and conversely evil can be redeemed by the reestablishment of relations. "Good and evil, then, cannot be a pair of opposites like right and left or above and beneath, 'good' is the movement in the direction of home, 'evil' is the aimless whirl of human potentialities without which nothing can be achieved and by which, if they take no direction but remain trapped in themselves, everything goes awry" (Between Man and Man (19664), 103). Man is not evil by nature, but his misuse of his nature generates evil. Some men can carry evil so far as to give it a kind of independent quality. However, evil is never an independent entity but such men crystallize it into a perverse resistance to the individual's self-fulfillment in relation. After World War II Buber did question the possibility of addressing God as "kind and merciful" in the light of what had happened to the Jews in Europe, but he nevertheless maintained the possibility of man redeeming evil. He denied the gnostic dualistic approach and maintained that man had it in his power to sanctify the world.

 

[rylah]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Nice that you've edited that now.

Do I need to explain the meaning of quoting?

I can quote you paragraphs of researches saying Maimonides didn't believe in resurrection of the dead during Messianic era, and yet that's right in his most famous work.

This may surprise you, nevertheless a good opportunity to mention - theJewishLibrary.org
is not the most precise source on Jewish law and history, mildly saying.
There much more authentic serious sources at reach.

"Simon said...." is not gonna ride.

Quote me Maimonides, actual Maimonides, directly.

Then we can talk.

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil? For you, me, and Adam to answer this question; we need the knowledge of good and evil. Adam may have needed what he was denied by Yahweh to know if the tree of the knowledge of all things, is good or evil to eat from. As scriptures say, he was...

www.usmessageboard.com

Yes, I know you can quote yourself ad nauseam.

Try actually quoting something THEY wrote, the authors,
not what someone else says about what they supposedly wrote.

Get the idea?

 

[ding]

Let me state this once again. Morals are standards which exist for logical reasons and are independent of man because they exist for logical reasons. man cannot make them be anything he wants them to be.

They do not exist independent of man because man has created them.

No. Man discovered them. Logic established them. They exist for logical reasons. They can’t be whatever you want them to be.

Man created them.

and yes standards can be whatever the people of the society say they are.

Not without suffering the consequences of normalization of deviance they can't. And it is that failure which reveals that the standard can't be whatever one wants them to be. And since they can't be whatever we want them to be they are independent of man.

If the universe were created through natural process and we are an accidental happenstance of matter and energy doing what matter and energy do, then there should be no expectation for absolute morals. Morals can be anything we want them to be. The problem is that nature does have a preference for an outcome. Societies and people which behave with virtue experience order and harmony. Societies and people which behave without virtue experience disorder and chaos. So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work. If the universe was created by spirit for the express purpose of creating beings that know and create we would expect that we would receive feedback on how we behave. The problem is that violating moral laws are not like violating physical laws. When we violate a physical law the consequences are immediate. If you try to defy gravity by jumping off a roof you will fall. Whereas the consequences for violating a moral law are more probabilistic in nature; many times we get away with it.



Morals are effectively standards. For any given thing there exists a standard which is the highest possible standard. This standard exists independent of anything else. It is in effect a universal standard. It exists for a reason. When we deviate from this standard and normalize our deviance from the standard, eventually the reason the standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man.



So the question that naturally begs to be asked is if there is a universal code of common decency that is independent of man how come we all don't behave the same way when it comes to right and wrong? The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.



Man does know right from wrong and when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong he rationalizes he did not violate it. You can see this behavior in almost all quarrels and disagreements. At the heart of every quarrel and disagreement is a belief in a universal right and wrong. So even though each side believes right to be different each side expects the other to believe their side should be universally known and accepted. It is this behavior which tells us there is an expectation for an absolute truth.



If there were never a universal truth that existed man would never have an expectation of fairness to begin with because fairness would have no meaning. The fact that each of us has an expectation of fairness and that we expect everyone else to follow ought to raise our suspicion on the origin of that expectation.

 

[there4eyeM]

"Good" and "evil" are implicit in being conscious, feeling existence and being faced with the inherent necessity of the opposite. All fuses to one again when this division disappears.

 

[ding]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Nice that you've edited that now.

Do I need to explain the meaning of quoting?

I can quote you paragraphs of researches saying Maimonides didn't believe in resurrection of the dead during Messianic era, and yet that's right in his most famous work.

This may surprise you, nevertheless a good opportunity to mention - theJewishLibrary.org
is not the most precise source on Jewish law and history, mildly saying.
There much more authentic serious sources at reach.

"Simon said...." is not gonna ride.

Quote me Maimonides, actual Maimonides, directly.

Then we can talk.

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil? For you, me, and Adam to answer this question; we need the knowledge of good and evil. Adam may have needed what he was denied by Yahweh to know if the tree of the knowledge of all things, is good or evil to eat from. As scriptures say, he was...

www.usmessageboard.com

Yes, I know you can quote yourself ad nauseam.

Try actually quoting something THEY wrote, the authors,
not what someone else says about what they supposedly wrote.

Get the idea?

I am quoting Martin Buber, a Austrian Jewish and Israeli philosopher who was a prolific author and scholar; Saadiah Gaon, a prominent rabbi, and Jewish philosopher; and Moses ben Maimon, a rabbi, physician, and philosopher who is one of the most prolific and influential Torah scholars.

Are you surprised that they believed God did not create evil? Can you show otherwise?

 

[ding]

"Good" and "evil" are implicit in being conscious, feeling existence and being faced with the inherent necessity of the opposite. All fuses to one again when this division disappears.

So evil comes from God? Assuming you believe in God of course.

 

[there4eyeM]

"Good" and "evil" are implicit in being conscious, feeling existence and being faced with the inherent necessity of the opposite. All fuses to one again when this division disappears.

So evil comes from God? Assuming you believe in God of course.

Is 'God' One (assuming you have a coherent idea of what 'God' would be)?

 

[ding]

"Good" and "evil" are implicit in being conscious, feeling existence and being faced with the inherent necessity of the opposite. All fuses to one again when this division disappears.

So evil comes from God? Assuming you believe in God of course.

Is 'God' One (assuming you have a coherent idea of what 'God' would be)?

Use your understanding of God if you like.

My understanding of God is consciousness without form; infinite intelligence, infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite love. I also perceive God as being the creator of existence and being eternal and unchanging.

But what I am asking you is do you believe God - however you perceive God to be - created evil.

Can you answer that question?

 

[there4eyeM]

"Good" and "evil" are implicit in being conscious, feeling existence and being faced with the inherent necessity of the opposite. All fuses to one again when this division disappears.

So evil comes from God? Assuming you believe in God of course.

Is 'God' One (assuming you have a coherent idea of what 'God' would be)?

Use your understanding of God if you like.

My understanding of God is consciousness without form; infinite intelligence, infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite love. I also perceive God as being the creator of existence and being eternal and unchanging.

But what I am asking you is do you believe God - however you perceive God to be - created evil.

Can you answer that question?

You asked a question. You received a question.

 

[ding]

"Good" and "evil" are implicit in being conscious, feeling existence and being faced with the inherent necessity of the opposite. All fuses to one again when this division disappears.

So evil comes from God? Assuming you believe in God of course.

Is 'God' One (assuming you have a coherent idea of what 'God' would be)?

Use your understanding of God if you like.

My understanding of God is consciousness without form; infinite intelligence, infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite love. I also perceive God as being the creator of existence and being eternal and unchanging.

But what I am asking you is do you believe God - however you perceive God to be - created evil.

Can you answer that question?

You asked a question. You received a question.

And I answered it to the best of my ability. I told you how I perceive God. Whereas you have made no effort to answer mine at all.

If my answer did not address your question, maybe you need to ask the question in a different way. Because I made my best effort for how the question was asked. Can you say the same?

 

[ding]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Nice that you've edited that now.

Do I need to explain the meaning of quoting?

I can quote you paragraphs of researches saying Maimonides didn't believe in resurrection of the dead during Messianic era, and yet that's right in his most famous work.

This may surprise you, nevertheless a good opportunity to mention - theJewishLibrary.org
is not the most precise source on Jewish law and history, mildly saying.
There much more authentic serious sources at reach.

"Simon said...." is not gonna ride.

Quote me Maimonides, actual Maimonides, directly.

Then we can talk.

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil? For you, me, and Adam to answer this question; we need the knowledge of good and evil. Adam may have needed what he was denied by Yahweh to know if the tree of the knowledge of all things, is good or evil to eat from. As scriptures say, he was...

www.usmessageboard.com

Yes, I know you can quote yourself ad nauseam.

Try actually quoting something THEY wrote, the authors,
not what someone else says about what they supposedly wrote.

Get the idea?

Here's some more...


Maimonides wrote on theodicy (the philosophical attempt to reconcile the existence of a God with the existence of evil). He took the premise that an omnipotent and good God exists.[71][72][73][74] In The Guide for the Perplexed, Maimonides writes that all the evil that exists within human beings stems from their individual attributes, while all good comes from a universally shared humanity (Guide 3:8). He says that there are people who are guided by higher purpose, and there are those who are guided by physicality and must strive to find the higher purpose with which to guide their actions.

To justify the existence of evil, assuming God is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent, Maimonides postulates that one who created something by causing its opposite not to exist is not the same as creating something that exists; so evil is merely the absence of good. God did not create evil, rather God created good, and evil exists where good is absent (Guide 3:10). Therefore, all good is divine invention, and evil both is not and comes secondarily.

Maimonides - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

71 Moses Maimonides (2007). The Guide to the Perplexed. BN Publishers.
72 Joseph Jacobs. "Moses Ben Maimon". Jewish Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2011-03-13.
73 Shlomo Pines (2006). "Maimonides (1135–1204)". Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 5: 647–654.
74 Isadore Twersky (2005). "Maimonides, Moses". Encyclopedia of Religion. 8: 5613–5618.

 

[Mindful]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Nice that you've edited that now.

Do I need to explain the meaning of quoting?

I can quote you paragraphs of researches saying Maimonides didn't believe in resurrection of the dead during Messianic era, and yet that's right in his most famous work.

This may surprise you, nevertheless a good opportunity to mention - theJewishLibrary.org
is not the most precise source on Jewish law and history, mildly saying.
There much more authentic serious sources at reach.

"Simon said...." is not gonna ride.

Quote me Maimonides, actual Maimonides, directly.

Then we can talk.

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil? For you, me, and Adam to answer this question; we need the knowledge of good and evil. Adam may have needed what he was denied by Yahweh to know if the tree of the knowledge of all things, is good or evil to eat from. As scriptures say, he was...

www.usmessageboard.com

Yes, I know you can quote yourself ad nauseam.

Try actually quoting something THEY wrote, the authors,
not what someone else says about what they supposedly wrote.

Get the idea?

Here's some more...


Maimonides wrote on theodicy (the philosophical attempt to reconcile the existence of a God with the existence of evil). He took the premise that an omnipotent and good God exists.[71][72][73][74] In The Guide for the Perplexed, Maimonides writes that all the evil that exists within human beings stems from their individual attributes, while all good comes from a universally shared humanity (Guide 3:8). He says that there are people who are guided by higher purpose, and there are those who are guided by physicality and must strive to find the higher purpose with which to guide their actions.

To justify the existence of evil, assuming God is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent, Maimonides postulates that one who created something by causing its opposite not to exist is not the same as creating something that exists; so evil is merely the absence of good. God did not create evil, rather God created good, and evil exists where good is absent (Guide 3:10). Therefore, all good is divine invention, and evil both is not and comes secondarily.

Maimonides - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

71 Moses Maimonides (2007). The Guide to the Perplexed. BN Publishers.
72 Joseph Jacobs. "Moses Ben Maimon". Jewish Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2011-03-13.
73 Shlomo Pines (2006). "Maimonides (1135–1204)". Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 5: 647–654.
74 Isadore Twersky (2005). "Maimonides, Moses". Encyclopedia of Religion. 8: 5613–5618.

The nearest I came to understanding all your pontificating, analysing, probing, the nature of reality, (particularly that) was from a Chekov short story.

 

[rylah]

Man's inclination is for good not evil.

G-d says otherwise.

Write a letter to your congressman.

Did God create evil?

Yes, and gave humanity the freedom to choose.
How many times will you be asking the same question?

So does God contain evil? Where did God get this evil from to create evil?

What do you mean, where did he get it from?

Everything God created is good because God is good. The goodness proceeds from God. How was God able to create evil if his nature does not contain evil?

You’re just subjectively anthropomorphising Him.

Asking who or what He is might be the best place for you to start.

You call it anthropomorphising. I call it using logic, reason and experience.

I start from the position that existence is good. That man is inclined to good and that man prefers good over the absence of good. I rely on observations and my own experience to form that conclusion. If one were to make a tally of every single act and event and catalog that act and event as bad or good, goodness would overwhelmingly dominate the list.

You can know from your own experiences that virtue is the greatest organizing principle in your life. You are drawn to people who behave with virtue and you are repulsed by people who behave without virtue.

You can use logic to understand why you are drawn to people with virtue and why you are repulsed by people devoid of virtue.

Logic tells us that the natural order is set by the creator. So why wouldn't the attributes of the natural world be the attributes of the Creator of the natural world?

Sorry. It’s all too convoluted for me. I’m out.

Except that >

In Jewish thought, one of the things Jews struggle against every day is the "evil inclination," also known as the yetzer hara (יֵצֶר הַרַע, from Genesis 6:5).The yetzer hara is not a force or a being, but rather refers to mankind's innate capacity for doing evil in the world.

From Jewish view of Satan..

Again, you can arrive at that exact same position without believing that God created evil as long as you recognize that what you perceive as evil is in reality absence of good.

I even posted several links of Jewish thought that said the exact same thing.

Actually you can't, neither did you,
and that's exactly the opposite of what Rabbi Sa'adiah Gaon wrote,
you'd know that if you actually learn the context of the discussion he was addressing.
But that would take reading actually Rav Sa'adia Goan, and then Rambam with Ibn 'Ezra.

Kinda better than quoting what someone says they supposedly said.

You never replied to them. That's how you roll. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities.

The need to account for the existence of evil in the world became even more acute with the manifestation of dualistic movements. Saadiah Gaon strongly rejects these dualist doctrines and affirms God's unity. Steeped as he was in the *Kalām tradition, he states that God conducts the world with infinite justice and wisdom. God, according to Saadiah, would not have created evil because evil does not have a separate existence sui generis but is nothing more than the absence of good. The sufferings of the righteous are either a requital for the few sins which they have committed, or they serve as an instrument of chastisement or trial, for which reward will be given in the afterlife. Saadiah thus upholds the doctrine of "afflictions of love."

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

*Maimonides also views evil as a nonexistence, namely the absence of good, which could not have been produced by God. He distinguishes between three different kinds of evil. The first category is that of natural evils which befall man, such as landslides, earthquakes, and floods, or his having been born with certain deformities. The cause of this type of evil is the fact that man has a body which is subject to corruption and destruction. This is in accordance with natural law and is necessary for the continuance and permanence of the species. The second kind of evil is within the social realm, such as wars. This type of evil, Maimonides says, occurs infrequently and, of course, being wholly within the control of man, could not have been caused by God. Though difficult, its remedy is within the hands of man. The third class of evil, the largest and most frequent class, is the evil which the individual brings upon himself through his vices and excessive desires. Again the remedy is within man's power. Maimonides rejects the notion of "afflictions of love," holding instead that even the minutest pain is a punishment for some previous transgression. He explains that the tests mentioned in the Bible, such as God's request to Abraham to offer up his son, have a didactic purpose, to teach the truth of God's commandments and how far one must go in obeying them.

Good & Evil

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Nice that you've edited that now.

Do I need to explain the meaning of quoting?

I can quote you paragraphs of researches saying Maimonides didn't believe in resurrection of the dead during Messianic era, and yet that's right in his most famous work.

This may surprise you, nevertheless a good opportunity to mention - theJewishLibrary.org
is not the most precise source on Jewish law and history, mildly saying.
There much more authentic serious sources at reach.

"Simon said...." is not gonna ride.

Quote me Maimonides, actual Maimonides, directly.

Then we can talk.

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil?

Is the knowledge of good and evil, good or evil? For you, me, and Adam to answer this question; we need the knowledge of good and evil. Adam may have needed what he was denied by Yahweh to know if the tree of the knowledge of all things, is good or evil to eat from. As scriptures say, he was...

www.usmessageboard.com

Yes, I know you can quote yourself ad nauseam.

Try actually quoting something THEY wrote, the authors,
not what someone else says about what they supposedly wrote.

Get the idea?

I am quoting Martin Buber, a Austrian Jewish and Israeli philosopher who was a prolific author and scholar; Saadiah Gaon, a prominent rabbi, and Jewish philosopher; and Moses ben Maimon, a rabbi, physician, and philosopher who is one of the most prolific and influential Torah scholars.

Are you surprised that they believed God did not create evil? Can you show otherwise?

Nope you don't quote the later two.
Austrian Jewish philosophers are neither authority on Jewish thought nor law.

Yes I can show otherwise, back in our discussion I referred to a verse in which G-d calls man's heart wicked. That was about the point where you started to deflect.

Why are you never capable of quoting the actual text, authors?

Ah remember..."believe".