Your statements presuppose that you have solved the problem of evil. Let us suppose for argument's sake, that we indeed can distinguish good from evil. Even so, for every evil act, one can find some higher religious purpose or belief to justify the supposedly evil act.
Take murder, for example. Was it evil of Stauffenberg to try to murder Hitler? What if god had personally appeared to him, and told him to act? Could we see this from the outside? How can we judge something as evil, when we never have all the information, perhaps pertaining to a higher cause we do not see/comprehend? And if we believe that we can easily tell the difference, do we not run the risk of seeing what we wish of the world, instead of its truth? How can we know this beyond our inner selves, for others? Søren Kierkegaard, a Christian, was extremely critical of how Christian faith was practiced: just "acting" the religion and abusing faith for comfort to abandon the search for what evil really means and how to cope with it. He saw it as a deep and confusing problem that religious practice ignores, and questions how we could ever know to do god's work if we are not brave enough to admit our ignorance and attack the problem. I don't want to suggest in any way that you read him, and merely use this example to point out, that what your statements suppose to know, nature of good and evil, is the huge problem of ethics linked with theology, and that its complexity, is orders of magnitude removed, from "this is good and this is evil" statements in Bible, Quran etc. , and that thousands of mystics, shaman, thinkers, scientists, theologian have wrestled with this problem with no clear answer in sight. How do you reconcile this problem with the absolute certainty invoked in the literal interpretation of sacred scripture that says "lying is bad"... when somebody can lie to save lives, for example? How can we tell good religious and deeds from the opposite? Does evil even exist, and why would a god create it, if he were not an evil tester? A loving parent would not create or wish such for its children. Why would a possible god do so? You assume I don't read religious text. This is false. I just restrict my reading of text concerning fundamental search to text that can attack the kinds of question and problems I have raised with you. But I don't want to mention them or influence anybody's search. So if you have solved the problem of evil, as your statements suggest, you could elaborate on this if you feel comfortable doing so. Mere prescriptions "this is good/god's will, and this is bad" don't count beyond our personal horizon. Theology has a problem here, regardless of particular religion. The effect is more general. PGC On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Samiya Illias <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Samiya Illias <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Seeing might make you know *that* you see, but it does not entail >>>>> that you know *what* you see, as you might be dreaming or hallucinating. >>>>> >>>> >>>> That wasn't what I was implying... I see not point to "believe" or not >>>> "believe"... Why *shoud* I believe anyway ? >>>> >>>> >>>> because, if there is more than just this terrestrial life, your >>>> eternity might depend upon your belief, motives and consequent actions >>>> >>> >>> Why should it depend if I believe or not ?? >>> >>> >>> That would depend who is making the rules and what the rules are. If it >>> is for us humans to make rules, given our limited knowledge, desires, hopes >>> and wishes, we would probably do away with the need to believe. If the >>> rules are made by a superior intelligence who knows human potential: past, >>> present and future, then we really do not have a choice in the matter. >>> >> >> Again, you presume to know the intention of such possible intelligence >> and expose again the blasphemy problem, without clarifying. >> > > I think discarding all scriptures is also a blasphemy problem. When the > entire known creation are bound by the laws of nature, then how can it be > that humans are not bound by anything. This free-will, ability to harness > power, this so to say dominance over the Earth, how can it all come to > humans only, and not some other creation? And if we humans are blessed with > some unique privileges, there has to be some responsibility and > accountability attached to such freedom of action. What do you think? > >> >> >>> Since we can flavour a mixed bag of good and bad, >>> >> >> I don't know what you mean with this metaphor. >> > > We witness and experience so many contrasting things, as some listed below > > >> >> >>> happy and sad, fulfilment and deprivation, intelligence and ignorance, >>> great wealth and comfort in contrast with abject poverty and misery, and so >>> on, what makes us so comfortable that this cannot be repeated, and that >>> also in greater degree, indefinitely, perpetually? >>> >> >> This is possible; but only equally as possible that some lying evil >> god/devil made this world; and that any books, such as the Bible for >> example, based on a theological interpretation of this world, confuse >> therefore god with a devil. >> > > Possible, but then why would the devil exhort good, order to restrain from > evil and ask to believe in the unseen one God, and state clearly that the > devil is your avowed enemy, so treat him as the enemy, and do not follow > the devil? > Also, whoever made this world, why would He need to lie? > > >> Following the Bible in this case, would run counter to the real god's >> will. >> > > Therefore, we must study and research, and evaluate for ourselves what > resonates as true to our mind and heart > > >> >> If your god is the kind that is jealous if you worship other being, he >> will punish us for following the Quran or Bible in this case. >> > > God is not jealous. God is God and deserves the worship, gratitude and > love for being the Creator, Sustainer and Provider of care, comfort, beauty > and affections. To not to worship with love and gratitude is to deny God > what is rightfully His. > God challenges that nobody can create the Quran without God's help, even > if all creatures work together to create it. Hence, the challenge is open > for all doubters to examine and evaluate and estimate for themselves. > > >> Such god would logically punish us for not doubting the lies of the devil >> in the book. >> > > Yes, the Quran clearly states that God does not order evil or lewdness or > immorality, and therefore one must reject all such things claimed in the > name of God. Further, it also exhorts to think deeply about the visible > world and reflect and try to understand the guidance. > >> >> This is again part of why a punishing god is not very convincing: a god >> should understand that theology is not this simple. >> > > Are we now trying to instruct God? > > >> >> Now, we can turn the question around and ask: What makes you so >> comfortable the Quran is NOT upside down work of the devil, masquerading as >> god? >> > > Why would the devil exhort good, order to restrain from evil and ask to > believe in the unseen one God, and state clearly that the devil is your > avowed enemy, so treat him as the enemy, and do not follow the devil? > And then, why would the devil relate the stories of past generations who > were more advanced than us in many ways, and their worldly advancement in > knowledge had led them to arrogance and denial of the one and only Creator > and resurrection and judgement , and how they were sent messengers and > books, and when they absolutely and resolutely refused to reason and > believe, they were destroyed and replaced with another people? > The Quran doesn't seem to serve the purpose of the devil. However, its > true that a lot of terrible things are done in the name of God and > scripture, but that doesn't make the scripture irrelevant or obsolete, it > only causes loss to those who abuse the scripture to suit their desires. > > Samiya > > >> >>> Don't you think it is being very bold and perilous to oneself to be >>> agnostic or atheist on such a thing? >>> >> >> I don't use atheist nor find the term convincing, but agnostic... because >> of these kinds of questions/problems, a skeptical agnostic stays silent and >> discuss/observe/doubt theology rather than preach it or try to convert >> others. PGC >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
