is Evil real?

[Iacchus]

Evil is the misappropriation of God's power which, can only be brought about by one thing, "ignorance." And yet since God is all knowing, then evil cannot be not perceived as such. On the other hand when God created man, who in and of himself is nothing but ignorant, then that generates a void, which necessitates the need for an antithesis, "the Devil."

Originally posted on PhysicsForums.Com

[brian]

I've seen fundamentalist Christians become quite frenzied at the mention of moral relativism. They seem unable to handle the idea that humans can determine what is right and what is wrong – that agreement by consensus is invalid as an ethical statement, that right and wrong cannot be decided either by society, the group, or the individual. Which, really, presents its own strawmen – notably when placed against the development of fundamentalist Christian belief itself, which was dictated to by society, developed by the group, and accepted by the individual. Hence it remains entirely relativistic in itself, regardless of the presumption of that particular set of moral relativists.

[Iacchus]

I think to the degree that we remain true to ourselves, and not base our lives upon ignorance--i.e., provided that we have standards--then evil should not become an issue.

And yet this is probably the overall scheme of life, to rebel against the established norm, only to discover our "inherent evils," before attempting to reconcile ourselves on a "higher level."

[WHKeith]

Okay. Let's up the ante, here.

In the book of Deuterononomy, it says:

25:11
When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets:

25:12
Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.

These two lovely verses represent part of the priestly law put forth by the Pentateuch. If I understand this . . . a man is fighting with someone else. The wife of one of the men runs up to help and, being a quick-thinking sort, grabs her husband's opponant by the balls, a sure-fire way to win that fight once and for all. For this service, she will have that hand cut off, and her husband is not allowed to feel sorry for her.

That law was put forth within the dictates of a culture very different from ours today. Women were property, or nearly so. Unfortunately, it's hard to imagine, but there are people today who feel the entire Bible--and therefor this verse--is as completely and as literally true for us today as it was for the ancient Israelites.

And so, I ask you, would that act--cutting off a woman's hand--be evil in and of itself?

Would that act be evil even though the person committing it would, in Iacchus's words, be remaining true to himself by following the absolute dictates of his religion?

What if such a person chose NOT to cut off his wife's hand? By not being true to the tenets of his religion, has he committed an act of evil?

Is the act as described less evil when committed against someone living in a barbaric culture three thousand years ago than it would be if committed by a follower of that religious tradition today?

Women had few rights, if any, in that culture. Women were denied the most basic and fundamental right of human dignity. Is that denial of dignity evil? (It certainly maims the human spirit, IMHO!) Is it evil "now that we know better," but not back then when everyone knew that women were worth less than a couple of donkeys?

I daresay there is no law in Deuteronomy saying the MAN'S hand gets cut off is he accidentally grabs the "secrets" of another woman in the heat of combat. I guess what I'm really asking is this:

Is there such a thing as an absolute evil that transcends dictates of local culture and belief? An evil that goes beyond the bounds of mere social taboo or religious law?

Fascinating debate, here. . . .

[Iacchus]

First you have the establishment of the law--in the "external sense"--which is typically rugged and inflexible, thus comparing to the ancient Israelites in the Old Testament. Then you have the fulfillment of that law--in the "internal sense"--which is typically compassionate and forgiving, thus comparing to the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament. Hence the second aspect of the law becomes the means by which to transcend the first.

Does evil still somehow fit into all of this? Yes it does.

[louis]

Originally Posted by maya

I don't believe in evil. people just do stuff. We decide whether they are evil.People blame satan for evil but ive never seen Satan and think people use him as an excuse.We need to take responsabillity for our selves and not blame others.we make the choice. ???

From Louis...
It depends on what you mean by "evil" .
There's a line in the Bible that says something like "God made the universe and saw that it was GOOD " ( meaning stable, harmonious and being the way He liked things ) .
Which implies that God had to know about "evil" (meaning unstable, chaotic and not the way He liked
things ) and that tried not to include evil in his design.
But "good" is not the same as "perfect" - and, like all imperfect things the universe contains elements that can go wrong. WE classify such elements as "evil".
The "devil" is a PERSONIFICATION of such elements.
In that sense, the devil is "real" - like Mother Nature or
Santa Clause are real because they are symbols for
real things and the way we FEEL about those things.

[louis]

Is there such a thing as an absolute evil that transcends dictates of local culture and belief? An evil that goes beyond the bounds of mere social taboo or religious law?


From louis ....

Truly fascinating....
May I suggest "force" ? - anything from psychological
pressure to physical battery to acheive a private purpose -
such as in the Bible story of Cain and Abel .
All animal life survives by killing and eating other
living things - preserving some lives by forcing others to
give up theirs. Is that "evil" or just necessary ?
How about a CRIMINAL - willing to violate the propety
and lives of others just to make his own life more enjoyable.
Or think of a CANCER cell - it refuses to do the job it was
designed to do - instead, it uses up more than its proper
share of nutrients and infects other cells until it eventually
kills the host that supports it - thus killing itself.
Is that "evil" ?

[suanni]

If good is real then evil is real. There is balance in everything. Where it comes from? Likely man. But what is bad for one, won't be bad for another.
So therefore it boils down to perception of actions.
I believe to use an entity as an excuse for an action is a cop out. We are responsible for everything we do, good or bad.
Why some people are bad and some are good? I have no idea.

[9Harmony]

Dear Friends,

The Baha'i understanding of this topic is basically that evil is nonexistant, it is really just the absense of good. The following quotes help to explain this concept from a Baha'i perspective.

Loving Greetings, Harmony

The reality underlying this question is that the evil spirit, Satan or whatever is interpreted as evil, refers to the lower nature in man. This baser nature is symbolized in various ways. In man there are two expressions: One is the expression of nature; the other, the expression of the spiritual realm. The world of nature is defective. Look at it clearly, casting aside all superstition and imagination. If you should leave a man uneducated and barbarous in the wilds of Africa, would there be any doubt about his remaining ignorant? God has never created an evil spirit; all such ideas and nomenclature are symbols expressing the mere human or earthly nature of man. It is an essential condition of the soil of earth that thorns, weeds and fruitless trees may grow from it. Relatively speaking, this is evil; it is simply the lower state and baser product of nature. - Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p 296

In creation there is no evil; all is good. Certain qualities and natures innate in some men and apparently blameworthy are not so in reality. For example, from the beginning of his life you can see in a nursing child the signs of greed, of anger and of temper. Then, it may be said, good and evil are innate in the reality of man, and this is contrary to the pure goodness of nature and creation. The answer to this is that greed, which is to ask for something more, is a praiseworthy quality provided that it is used suitably. So if a man is greedy to acquire science and knowledge, or to become compassionate, generous and just, it is most praiseworthy. If he exercises his anger and wrath against the bloodthirsty tyrants who are like ferocious beasts, it is very praiseworthy; but if he does not use these qualities in a right way, they are blameworthy. Then it is evident that in creation and nature evil does not exist at all; but when the natural qualities of man are used in an unlawful way, they are blameworthy. -Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p 215

[samabudhi]

Originally Posted by 9Harmony

Dear Friends,

The Baha'i understanding of this topic is basically that evil is nonexistant, it is really just the absense of good. The following quotes help to explain this concept from a Baha'i perspective.

Loving Greetings, Harmony

Marvellous. Baha'i will go far with this sort of thinking.

[StrangeQuark]

Okay, but what's the difference between "right" and "good" in this context?

[StrangeQuark]

This is loaded question if I ever heard on. As usual, I will attempt to answer it in the context of my own belief:

The word "evil" may be misleading because of certain connotations. I believe in "sin," however, which is an equally loaded term--but what the hay. I do't define it exactly the same way as other Christians might. The main reason I believe in it is because I do it, sometimes intentionally and sometimes not, and I am tempted to sin.

Sin is still part of the conscious condition, therefore I need to "own up" as it were. It's not Satan's fault (although some may say that "Satan" it the personification of sin) when I do something wrong--it's mine.

The words "good" and "evil" actually suffice; I''m just uncertain how they are interpreted in some spheres. God, I believe, is transcends space-time, but something in him was not satisfied in one way or another--before creation. There was some kind of imperfection, or chaos, or unhealthy state that needed to be addressed. Chaos was "unsatisfying," for one reason or another. Maybe it threatened, in some way, to destroy the deity? Something like a cancer within God, you might say.

Whatever God has done, I think it may have been done for several reasons: a) to know himself; b) to heal himself; c) related to b, to love. Was he lonely? Who knows--there was just something. since I believe that God's plan it ultimately to reconcile all of existence with love, then evil must be opposite of love, and it must be a force that works against it.

I realize this stuff is very vague, even more so than many myth cycles. It just works for me.

Man, I really am living up to my signature here, aren't I? I may need to refine these ideas a lot, but like I said, in a sense at least I believe that evil exists.

Of course, this still does not answer the question. Yes, I believe in a force that is counter to God's will, but no, it is not responsible for the choices I make (although it probably does actively try to influence my choices.) And yes, when I sin I have done something "wrong."

[StrangeQuark]

The post above confuses me even more after reading it. I'll try to avoid taking on these kind of topics until I'm a little more clear on the subjects. I still appreciate everyone else's thoughts!

[lunamoth]

SQ said: "since I believe that God's plan it ultimately to reconcile all of existence with love, then evil must be opposite of love, and it must be a force that works against it."

Actually this bit is quite nice. Hang in there, you're doing fine.

I'm not sure that evil is a "force," but then I don't really know how to call it otherwise. Let me first think about what love is, and then if evil is the opposite of that.

1. Let's see, love is attachment. Is evil detachment? No, I don't think so. Perhaps it is a matter of what the attachment is to. Loving people, loving virtues, loving God, these are good things. Loving money, loving material things, this can lead to evil because others might be hurt by one's selfishness. What about love of self? Some love of self seems healthy. Hmmm, no simple theory here.

2. Love is an emotion. Actually, is love an emotion? I know that when I love someone I want more than anything else to be with them, I can feel joy, anticipation, thrill, passion, endearment. If I am denied my love I feel pain, loss, even anger. Some say that the opposite of love as an emotion is hatred. Hatred seems like it could be related to evil. What makes hatred? IMO, hatred comes from fear, which comes from lack of understanding and lack of a feeling of control. Everyone needs to feel they have some control over their lives. Maybe it comes from a feeling, somewhere along the line, of being unloved.

3. Love is a policy. I kind of like this one. I know I feel the emotions and the attachments of love when I am with people I "love," my husband, my children. But there are days when I don't feel real loving. I feel grumpy, tired, ill. My children are testing me all the time, my husband comes home too tired to help out. Yet we all muddle through because of this policy of love. And this is the kind of love we mean when we practice love of mankind. I mean, we don't really feel that same attachment and emotion for every single person in the world. And what about for our enemies, those who would harm us or our families, as Christ told us to love them also. So here, love is a policy. Do unto others etc., the Golden Rule. Found in some form in every religion I am aware of. This is also the best place to see that evil is the opposite, or the adversary, of love.

Cheers,
lunamoth

[StrangeQuark]

Thank you, lunamoth. This will help me to think about it some more.