*** 11th fact *** about GOD - revealed by the LAST End Time Prophet Matt Marriott

Washington

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2003
5,092
358
Washington state
✟7,305.00
Faith
Agnostic
The actual definition of ra -


It means evil, but as in a physical evil, in the context of the Isaiah.

Lacking annotation why should anyone believe you. Not saying you're lying, or that it's not relevant, which it very well may be, but it does require a source.
 
Upvote 0

Chalnoth

Senior Contributor
Aug 14, 2006
11,361
384
Italy
✟28,653.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
In that context, yes. In the context of Isaiah, it is meaning physical calamity.
It doesn't necessarily just mean natural calamities, though.

But regardless, the idea that God did not create evil would be contrary to the claim that God is an omnipotent and omniscient creator.
 
Upvote 0

MaxP

Member
Dec 17, 2008
1,040
82
✟9,069.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Republican
It doesn't necessarily just mean natural calamities, though.

But regardless, the idea that God did not create evil would be contrary to the claim that God is an omnipotent and omniscient creator.
No, evil is not a creation - evil is a lack, a lack of good. Nothing is pure evil, because it would be pure lack.
 
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,446
803
71
Chicago
✟121,700.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Well there you have it folks. The bible says god created evil, but JUV says, no, "we" created evil.

so sayeth the Prophet of Definitions. All hail.

I am not trying to ignore you. But the level of your understanding is too low and I do not have time, and interest to explain that much. Sorry.
 
Upvote 0

Washington

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2003
5,092
358
Washington state
✟7,305.00
Faith
Agnostic
MaxP said:
Thanks.
However, looking at your Strong's source I see no reason to interpret the use of "evil" in the verse as a "physical" evil because of its context. In fact, I see it as just the opposite. Because it is directly coupled with "peace," a value expressed as a state of harmony, I would regard "evil" in the same manner: a value expressed as a state of morality, the alternative to its physical (natural) one.
 
Upvote 0

MaxP

Member
Dec 17, 2008
1,040
82
✟9,069.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Republican
Thanks.
However, looking at your Strong's source I see no reason to interpret the use of "evil" in the verse as a "physical" evil because of its context. In fact, I see it as just the opposite. Because it is directly coupled with "peace," a value expressed as a state of harmony, I would regard "evil" in the same manner: a value expressed as a state of morality, the alternative to its physical (natural) one.
The Catholic Bible I have translates it such -
"I form light and create darkness, I make weal[1] and create woe"

Weal - a sound, healthy, or prosperous state.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Chalnoth

Senior Contributor
Aug 14, 2006
11,361
384
Italy
✟28,653.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
No, evil is not a creation - evil is a lack, a lack of good. Nothing is pure evil, because it would be pure lack.
So, you're telling me that when a man assaults a woman in a dark alley, rapes her, and kills her, that's a lack of good? You're telling me it's not a positive action that destroys the life of another?
 
Upvote 0

MaxP

Member
Dec 17, 2008
1,040
82
✟9,069.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Republican
So, you're telling me that when a man assaults a woman in a dark alley, rapes her, and kills her, that's a lack of good? You're telling me it's not a positive action that destroys the life of another?
It's a positive action that lacks good. Good is that which seeks benefit and happiness for all involved in the good act; the act mentioned is a lack of good, happiness, or benefit. Evil can be acted for, but it is not a force in and of itself.
 
Upvote 0

Chalnoth

Senior Contributor
Aug 14, 2006
11,361
384
Italy
✟28,653.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
It's a positive action that lacks good. Good is that which seeks benefit and happiness for all involved in the good act; the act mentioned is a lack of good, happiness, or benefit. Evil can be acted for, but it is not a force in and of itself.
No, lacking good would be passing by the woman without acknowledging her, not raping her.
 
Upvote 0

MaxP

Member
Dec 17, 2008
1,040
82
✟9,069.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Republican
No, lacking good would be passing by the woman without acknowledging her, not raping her.
No, passing the woman without acknowledging her would be neither here nor there. Raping her would be committing an act deliberately void of any good; evil.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

MaxP

Member
Dec 17, 2008
1,040
82
✟9,069.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Republican
Passing her without acknowledging her would also be void of any good.
Right, but you are not taking an action deliberately void of good. It's an action that is neither good nor totally lacking in good; it's neither here nor there.
Point is, evil is not existent save for the existence of good, as darkness is not existent save for the existence of light, nothing can be completely evil; there are differing scales of evil; just like as long as light exists there can not be complete darkness. We all have the inherent tendency toward the "light" and we never lose it. What we do is act completely void of that light. When we are compelled to be kind to the woman; we can not acknowledge her, which would not be kind, per se, but also not be acting void of any kindness. Raping her would be acting void of any kindness or good.
 
Upvote 0

Chalnoth

Senior Contributor
Aug 14, 2006
11,361
384
Italy
✟28,653.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Right, but you are not taking an action deliberately void of good.
Sure I am! What if, for example, she dropped her keys just before I passed her? Continuing to ignore her would be completely devoid of any good whatsoever, while picking up her keys for her would be at least a little good.

Point is, evil is not existent save for the existence of good, as darkness is not existent save for the existence of light, nothing can be completely evil; there are differing scales of evil; just like as long as light exists there can not be complete darkness.
Pain would still be pain even without the ability to experience pleasure. Just as pleasure would still be pleasure without the ability to experience pain.

When we are compelled to be kind to the woman; we can not acknowledge her, which would not be kind, per se, but also not be acting void of any kindness. Raping her would be acting void of any kindness or good.
What kindness is there in ignoring her? Are you under the impression that we're all rape machines walking around dreaming, longing to rape any woman we come across, and it is only through kindness that we fail to engage in those impulses?
 
Upvote 0
T

TroubleShooter43

Guest
11th fact about GOD - revealed by the LAST End Time Prophet Matt Marriott
10 KEY facts about God, known ever since Day 1, were maximally reduced first time by the LAST End Times Prophet, Matt Marriott. (1)

Two years later and yet nobody was able to state what the eleventh FACT is.

Christmas 2008 - the time for the last chance to let you state it. If that will not be the case until December 31 2008, it MUST NOW be revealed by End Times Prophet, may GOD will.

Notes
(1) http://who-god-is.blogspot.com/2007/...ver-since.html

(2) [URL]http://end-times-history.blogspot.co...-trenches.html[/URL]

Dear MM,

I have three words for you: seek professional help.
 
Upvote 0

MaxP

Member
Dec 17, 2008
1,040
82
✟9,069.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Republican
Sure I am! What if, for example, she dropped her keys just before I passed her? Continuing to ignore her would be completely devoid of any good whatsoever, while picking up her keys for her would be at least a little good.
Yes, and ignoring her would be bad - like a very, very, very, light shade of gray. You are taking an act devoid of any good, but not harming anyone in that act.


Pain would still be pain even without the ability to experience pleasure. Just as pleasure would still be pleasure without the ability to experience pain.
Nope. If no one knew any pain, pleasure would be pain; if no one knew any pleasure, pain would be pleasure. They are comparative terms, and they are different thing than good - evil.


What kindness is there in ignoring her? Are you under the impression that we're all rape machines walking around dreaming, longing to rape any woman we come across, and it is only through kindness that we fail to engage in those impulses?
No; ignoring her is not good, but not completely devoid in that your action does not harm her.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

WilliamduBois

BenderBendingRodriguez
Mar 11, 2006
252
9
Desselgem, WVL, Belgium
Visit site
✟7,964.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Yes, and ignoring her would be bad - like a very, very, very, light shade of gray. You are taking an act devoid of any good, but not harming anyone in that act.

No; ignoring her is not good, but not completely devoid in that your action does not harm her.

So the act is devoid of any good (exactly as you have defined evil), but then "not completely devoid"?


If you're saying that there still is some good in that act because he has not harmed her, that means evil is more than just the lack of something.



Incidently, one of the things that made me question my faith back in highschool, was because my teacher was unable to explain this satisfactory. This conversation reminds me of it.
 
Upvote 0