The Problem of Evil

[Bond]

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here Angrist. I'm well aware of all the teachings of the Bible, I've read it twice, the New American and King James version.

Now, from a philosophical standpoint, I'd like to stay away from the Bible, because we're going to get into the messy situation of where some believe it is the written word of God and others don't. But don't get me wrong, there is great philosophy in the Bible, it's just that these discussions become hard to respond to, because I certainly do not want to discredit what anyone believes in, but it is hard to have a true argument or something to respond to your Jehovah's article with without doing just that.

Now, I never said hell was a burning place for punishment. And to call other religions heathen was not very nice (depending upon what definition of heathen you are using).

[Professor S]

Typhoid, Angrists posts are a perfect example of the power of faith.

If it is in the Bible it is true. Don't bother arguing about it, because there is no argument. There are no other possibilities beyond that which has been given down by God: His Word is law, and just as there will be no other God's before him, there will also be no other laws before His (natural or otherwise).

There can be no discussion of Evil with Angrist outside of his religion, because his religion dictates both good and evil concepts. There are no questions left unanswered when it comes to this.

Now I don't particularly care for this view of religion, because I do think it lends itself to closed mindedness. Also, citing bible passages as "proof" only works if the person you are conversing with has the same beliefs as you. If not, you might as well be quoting any fictional novel.

I don't like to think that God answered all questions for us. In my mind, ideas and belief go hand in hand, and without examination and overcoming challenges there is no value to either.

That is simply my interpretation, no offense meant to anyone.

[Angrist]

Isn't the definition of heathen anything that isn't your religion? So when christianity introduced teachings of other religions, those could be called heathen teachings.
Most christian people are aware of the teachings that do not come from the bible, like most of the christmas celebration. But please don't take it as an offense.

As noted by Bond and the Prof, I cannot take part of this discussion, because I simply believe in the truth of the word of God. All I did was provide our/the explanation to 'the problem of evil', as was the topic of this thread. And I quoted the Bible, I haven't seen others do that.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Angrist

Isn't the definition of heathen anything that isn't your religion? So when christianity introduced teachings of other religions, those could be called heathen teachings.

Well most scholars believe that the oldest form of Christianity that is still in existence is Russian Orthodox, and their view of Christianity could not be more divergent from yours. They view the bible as a book of parables: story's based in truth but meant as guides for living your life. There is no literal translation. Now considering they do not view the bible as strict law, does that make their view heathen since it is not specific to the exact Word?

[Angrist]

I should be a heathen in your eyes, since I have a different religion than you. End of discussion?

Originally Posted by Professor S

that is still in existence

Bingo. So because they're the oldest, they must have it right? Look at the Bible books that were written after Jesus died and compare it to Christian religions these days.

One (hopefully) last thing: I don't get it, it seems so pointless to me. First people came up with teachings that caused the misunderstanding of evil. Then they don't want you to explain it by telling what the Bible says about it.
So it's about the discussion and not about understanding/solving, if I am correct?

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Angrist

I should be a heathen in your eyes, since I have a different religion than you. End of discussion? Bingo. So because they're the oldest, they must have it right? Look at the Bible books that were written after Jesus died and compare it to Christian religions these days.

One (hopefully) last thing: I don't get it, it seems so pointless to me. First people came up with teachings that caused the misunderstanding of evil. Then they don't want you to explain it by telling what the Bible says about it.
So it's about the discussion and not about understanding/solving, if I am correct?

1) No. Its not the end of the discussion. Actually, I think its just the beginning. To call someone heathenb who is Christian falls into the same mistakes the Catholic religion fell into when converting pagan tribes in Brittania, where Christian faiths were slaughtered in their entirety for believing in Christ and the church differently than they. As I say, many paths to one God is my belief. Religion should be based on love and inclusion, not exclusion, but thats my personal belief. Most of what I've written has been simply impersonal discussion and consideration of possibility, unless specifically noted as my personal belief system.

2) I think you misunderstand. We consider evil to be beyond just Christianity, or more specifically, its definition in the literal Bible. This is why I talk about western/christian themes and not specific text. We're trying to analyze evil objectively through religion as a whole, and not just one's personal faith.

Also, I'm not Russian Orthodox. I'm not even Christian, but instead a deist. I think Christ was a brilliant man, but I'm not certain he was the son of God by any means.

[Bond]

This discussion is free to continue, but I have started a new one on utilitarianism.