Heaven and The Problem of Evil
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-11-2013, 02:12 PM (This post was last modified: 19-11-2013 02:18 PM by docskeptic.)
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
KC,
Perhaps this example might make things clearer for alpha male:

Numbers 31:17
NIV: Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
YLT: And now, slay ye every male among the infants, yea, every woman known of man by the lying of a male YE HAVE SLAIN; and all the INFANTS among the women, who have not known the lying of a male, YE HAVE KEPT ALIVE for yourselves.

In the YLT, the "Ye have slain" is a deliberate mistranslations to shift the blame for the massacre of the innocents from Moses (and by extension God) to the Israelites. However, the original Hebrew says "hirgu kal zakar battap wekal issah yodaat is lemiskab zakar harogu ", literally, "kill, every male, among the little, and every, woman, that has known man, by lying with him, kill" making it an active command from God rather than a passive observation. The second phrase reads ""harogu we-kol hattap bannasim", literally, "and kill, all children, the women" again making it an active command.



Doc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like docskeptic's post
19-11-2013, 02:22 PM
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
I don't see that charging the YLT with deliberate mistranslations helps him, as he claimed it's the most accurate translation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2013, 02:25 PM
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
So..how about the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Didn't god create that?

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2013, 02:28 PM
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
(19-11-2013 02:09 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(19-11-2013 01:58 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Indeed.

If you accept the premise the God is omnipotent, the He must necessarily be the source of everything.

Anything else is incoherent. Well, not that omnipotence itself is a coherent concept, but if you're accepting the premise then you're not concerned with that Wink.

MOREOVER

If He created everything, then He also created our morality. In that, God is in NO WAY obligated to our morality. God is autonomous. We are governed by His morality that He created for us, but He isn't governed by that same morality.

Heck, He isn't governed by any morality... God is amoral in a sense because there is no moral standard that can be compared to. Our immorality isn't immoral to God... like the shark.

So what we know as "evil" or "good" only applies to humanity... and certainly not God. An omnipotent being can't be governed by moral standards anyway because He would lose His omnipotence.

His morals are His own, His own standard, cannot be judged.

With that knowledge, it's easy to see how and why God created "evil" for humanity. It wasn't "evil" for God... it was a device used for His plan for humanity.

Of course we can judge God - just as the sharks can judge us for maiming and slaughtering them for soup.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2013, 02:34 PM (This post was last modified: 19-11-2013 02:49 PM by docskeptic.)
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
(19-11-2013 02:22 PM)alpha male Wrote:  I don't see that charging the YLT with deliberate mistranslations helps him, as he claimed it's the most accurate translation.

Alpha,
My point is that NO translation is accurate (or even true!). People change their interpretation of the original Hebew, Aramaic, Greek, whatever, to suit their own personal view of what the text should say, regardless of what the literal translation may say.

Regards,

Doc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2013, 02:39 PM
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
(19-11-2013 02:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(19-11-2013 02:09 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  MOREOVER

If He created everything, then He also created our morality. In that, God is in NO WAY obligated to our morality. God is autonomous. We are governed by His morality that He created for us, but He isn't governed by that same morality.

Heck, He isn't governed by any morality... God is amoral in a sense because there is no moral standard that can be compared to. Our immorality isn't immoral to God... like the shark.

So what we know as "evil" or "good" only applies to humanity... and certainly not God. An omnipotent being can't be governed by moral standards anyway because He would lose His omnipotence.

His morals are His own, His own standard, cannot be judged.

With that knowledge, it's easy to see how and why God created "evil" for humanity. It wasn't "evil" for God... it was a device used for His plan for humanity.

Of course we can judge God - just as the sharks can judge us for maiming and slaughtering them for soup.
That's how all of this started didn't it? Well..not sharks but listen. Our great ancestors had to KILL in order to LIVE. Perhaps that's how religion started, that this act of killing a creature, in very close proximity. The first time that they realized that animals bleed the way humans bleed, this act they must do in order to survive. It brought them closer, a possible kinship. I'm sure they initially felt sorry for this, guilt. They painted animals on cave walls, wore their skins for warmth and protection, they became those animals, studied them to prepare for the hunt, to ease the creatures suffering, make a clean kill. Weapons improved, sharper, deadlier for a quick kill. There is no doubt that this triggered something, sparked our inventive nature. Tales of the hunt, what happens when the animals die and what happens when we die.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2013, 02:41 PM
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
(19-11-2013 02:34 PM)docskeptic Wrote:  Alpha,
My point is that NO translation is accurate (or even true!). People change their interpretation of the original Hebew, Aramaic, Greek, whatever, to suit their own personal view of what the text should sya, regardless of what the literal translation may say.
Sure, sometimes they do. That's why we check multiple translations, and check to see how the same underlying word was translated in other, more mundane verses where there was no obvious motivation to manipulate the translation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2013, 02:48 PM
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
No translation is accurate.

The closest thing to being accurate is reading the Greek and Hebrew.

All dynamic translations are bad... The Message and the NIV being the worst. Of the modern literal translations, the NASB and ESV are the most accurate.

The most accurate of all the translations is the YLT and Darby's. Of course, as Doc pointed out, even they have their issues.

This is why I always direct things back to the Hebrew and Greek.

On a side note, Alpha, my apologies for thinking you thought God was omnipotent. My bad. I assumed.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2013, 03:50 PM
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
(19-11-2013 10:20 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(19-11-2013 09:38 AM)Boysurroundedbymoms Wrote:  Eliminating Evil DOES NOT eliminate good.

For instance, the lack of ability to commit rape, murder, etc would not really affect your ability to choose between a salad of a burger.

The salad being the better choice for you.

In a sense,I can't fly, does that make me unaware of the true meaning to being on the ground? Nope, or at least not completely.

Either way, Free Will is bullshit, and their (theists) insistence on trying to square the circle is abhorrent.

Ehhh, not really.

Good and evil is subjective and not absolute. If "evil" is eliminated, there cannot be a "good" as you can't have something be moral without having something that is immoral. Basically, actions take on an amoral sense; therefore, there are no moral consequences for actions because those actions don't have connotative morality attached to them.

Much like a shark. Murder is immoral. Sharks murder, but they aren't immoral. Murdering for them is amoral because they don't have a morality to live by because "good" and "evil" don't exist to them.

So, all the "evil" stuff that is eliminated from heaven will leave only simple actions with no moral connotation.

Depends on how you define good.

Good: something which is not Bad

^That definition relies on bad.

Good: An action that increases the well being of you or someone else without drastically lowering the well being of another.

Now, you can say "What exactly is a increase of well being?" And "Well, if we don't have decreases in well-being, we can't know what increases are."

However, it's nonsense.

Let me try to illustrate is using numbers:

Living equals the sum of one.

Every time you do a good deed, you increase a number,

1+2+3+4 etc. now, you don't need to know that decreases happen to know that increases happen, all you need to know is the number you started out with, and you can tell if you are increasing a number.

Making a life better is better than just living. So, bad acts don't necessarily have to be the scale to which goodness is measured, all you need is a standard.

Now, before I tackle the notion of Free Will, we must define what we are talking about.

The version of Free Will I think is nonsense is this: The ability to make CONSCIOUS, uninfluenced decisions.

Notice the word Conscious and uninfluenced.

Neuroscientists have done experiments tests the notion of conscious free will:





Now, there are many videos similar to this one, and I wish I could find the one that I really like to use, but they all come up to the same conclusion, our brain prepares for the motion before we "consciously" decide to commit the action.


So the notion that we "consciously" is nonsense, and this shouldn't be an issue when we are talking about committing evil.

Now, about God creating everything:

I have to ask a question.

If God created something, and then that creation created a toothbrush...

Did God create that toothbrush?

I say no.

I think God created the circumstances of it coming into existence, but he did not bring the thing into existence. He might have control over this toothbrush, but he did not originate it.


I think the same thing applies with morality.



But, hey, I might be wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2013, 04:34 PM
RE: Heaven and The Problem of Evil
About the Libet experiments...

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and...lve.1.html

...which calls into question the reductionism assumed where one stimulus/one response is said to counter the nuanced selection process occurring with "free will." I'm thinking, not so fast. Tongue

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: