malvisguy212:
As Islamists continue to kill innocents,
they provide more fuel for the oft-made
atheist claim that religion is evil. The deadly attack on France by the islamists
Atheist,Richard Dawkins condemned it by tweeting "No, all religions are NOT equally violent. Some have never been violent, some gave it up centuries ago. One religion conspicuously didn't."

Dawkins is right that some religions and
religious people have consistently
perpetrated evil. Atheists often use this
fact to support atheism. However, the
existence of evil turns out to be a bigger
problem for atheists to explain than for
theists. The kind of evil Dawkins and the
rest of the civilized world abhor doesn't
disprove God it disproves atheism.

While it's commonly thought that only
theists have to explain the existence of
evil, the truth is every worldview does.
Eastern pantheistic religions try to get
around the problem by denying that evil even exists. Evil is an illusion, they say (and according to them, so are you!).
Theists say evil is real and try to explain
how evil and God can coexist. Atheists
tend to be caught in the middle. In one
breath they are claiming there is no
good, evil or justice because only material things exist—we are just
material molecular machines "dancing to the music" of our DNA (as Dawkins
himself put it). In the next breath they
are outraged at the great injustices and
evil done by religious people in the
name of God.

Well, atheists can't have it both ways.
Either evil exists or it doesn't. If it doesn't exist, then atheists should stop
complaining about the "evil" things
religious people have done because they haven't really done any. They've just been "dancing to the music" of their
DNA. If atheism is true, all behaviors are merely a matter of preference anyway.

On the other hand, if evil actually does
exist, then atheists have an even bigger
problem. The existence of evil actually
establishes the existence of God.

To explain why, we need to go back to
Augustine who puzzled over the following argument:

1. God created all things.
2. Evil is a thing.
3. Therefore, God created evil.

How could a good God create evil? If
those first two premises are true, He did, and this is a God problem. So God must not be good after all. But then Augustine realized that the second premise is not true. While evil is real, it's not a "thing." Evil doesn't exist on its own. It only exists as a lack or a deficiency in a good thing.

Evil is like rust in a car: If you take all of
the rust out of a car, you have a better
car; if you take the car out of the rust,
you have nothing. g. In other words, evil only makes sense against the backdrop of good. That's why we often describe evil as negations of good things. We say someone is immoral, unjust,
unfair, dishonest, etc.

We could put it this way: The shadows
prove the sunshine. There can be
sunshine without shadows, but there
can't be shadows without sunshine. In
other words, there can be good without
evil, but there can't be evil without good.

So evil can't exist unless good exists. But
good can't exist unless God exists. In
other words, there can be no objective
evil unless there is objective good, and
there can be no objective good unless
God exists. If evil is real as the recent
headlines from France plainly reveal
then God exists. The best evil can do is
show there's a devil out there, but it can't disprove God. The very existence of evil boomerangs back to show that God exists.

Just thanks for listening to PROFFESOR RICHARD DAWKINS anyway.

Just continue, a day is coming soon

malvisguy212:
ok. I gave you an example of hitler but you are not satisfied, you keep on insisting.so hitler killed 6million Jews and to you it was a concept? How?

Hitler was a catholic (a Christian) research well

menesheh:



Hitler was a catholic (a Christian) research well

I think you are missing the point here. . . the point was that hitlers actions were evil and that is it. . whatever he is. . he was giving me example of evil deeds. . please first understand the contest before.

menesheh:



Just thanks for listening to PROFFESOR RICHARD DAWKINS anyway.

Just continue, a day is coming soon

Who will be thanked for listening to you then bro. . . i think you should air your own opinion on this.

johnydon22:


I think you are missing the point here. . . the point was that hitlers actions were evil and that is it. . whatever he is. . he was giving me example of evil deeds. . please first understand the contest before.

I get ur point cus i ve been following your argument but just a contribution to his insistence on hitler and athiesm which is off point on what actions constitutes an evil act of which he is not capable of answering.

johnydon22:


Who will be thanked for listening to you then bro. . . i think you should air your own opinion on this.

Just an emotional feeling about dawkins.

I cherish the guy's arguments and boldness in the pursuit of what is fact not emotional.

plaetton:

.

ok, All atheists agreed, evil is a concept,Without God, morality is just subjective, it would just one person's opinion versus another. There is no true "evil" under subjective morality because your concept of evil would be different than Hitler's concept of evil. How could you compare the two concepts? Objective morality indicate that particular actions or ideas are right and
wrong regardless of human opinion,meaning there is a moral code in which we can measure morality beyond the HUMAN BRAIN.

The great writer C.S. Lewis points out that the moral code is not always the
standard which we follow but it is the
standard that we want others to follow
when treating us.
http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/apologetics/mere-christianity/Book1/cs-lewis-mere-christianity-book1.php#.

When we mistreat others, we want
mercy. When someone mistreats us, we
want justice.and you guys called this a concept? Seriously? I don't know what to say anymore, let me repeat what I say to Johnny on the other thread

Eyes are of no use when the mind is
blind. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” He thought for a moment, then added: “And lit with electric lights"

wordcat:


You were giving the following to read; Jeremiah 42:10, Amos 3:6, and Isaiah 45:7, why are u going contrary to what your bible said or are you saying that you know Yahweh more than the bible writers??

And someone also said that u need to prove the existence of your god first before attributing anything to him.

I paste the thread for your answer but it look like you did not read it, let me paste the written here;

One of the most common reasons
skeptics reject the existence of God is
due to the presence of evil in this
universe. They reason that a perfect God
would not create a universe in which evil
exists. Skeptics claim that since God
created everything that God must have
also created evil. They even cite Bible
verses, such as:
'' I form the light, and create darkness: I
make peace,
and create evil: I the LORD do all these
things.
( Isaiah 45:7, KJV)''
'' Shall a trumpet be blown in the city,
and the people
not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city,
and the
LORD hath not done it? ( Amos 3:6, KJV)''
'' Out of the mouth of the most High
proceedeth not
evil and good? ( Lamentations 3:38)''
However, evil is not really a created
thing. You can't
see, touch, feel, smell or hear evil. It is
not one of
the fundamental forces of physics, nor
does it consist of matter, energy, or the
spatial dimensions of the universe. Still,
skeptics like to claim that God created
evil and cite the Bible to "prove" their
point. The Bible is quite clear that God is
not the author of evil and insists that He
is incapable of. doing so.
Skeptics love the KJV so much, one would
think that
they were still back in medieval England.
Use of this
translation is problematic these days,
since it uses an archaic version of
modern English, which doesn't
necessarily mean the same things today
as when it
was translated over 400 years ago. In
addition, the
KJV was produced using a limited
number of
medieval manuscripts that did not
represent the
earliest Alexandrian set of manuscripts.
WHAT DO THE MODERN TRANSLATION
SAY?
1.Isaiah 45:7.
The One forming light and creating
darkness,
Causing well-being and creating calamity;
I am the
LORD who does all these. ( Isaiah 45:7,
NASB)
I form the light and create darkness, I
bring
prosperity and create disaster; I, the
LORD, do all
these things. ( Isaiah 45:7, NIV)
Isaiah 45:7 contrasts opposites. Darkness
is the
opposite of light. However, evil is not the
opposite of peace. The Hebrew word
translated "peace" is
shampoo, which has many meanings,
mostly related
to the well being of individuals. Râ‛âh,
the Hebrew
word translated "evil" in the KJV often
refers to
adversity or calamity. There are two
forms of the
word. Strong's H7451a most often refers
to moral
evil, whereas Strong's H7451b (the form
used here)
most often refers to calamity or distress.
Obviously,
"calamity" is a better antonym of "peace"
than "evil."
2.Amos3:6.
If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the
people
tremble? If a calamity occurs in a city has
not the
LORD done it? ( Amos 3:6, NASB)
When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not
the people
tremble? When disaster comes to a city,
has not the
LORD caused it? ( Amos 3:6, NIV)
Likewise, Amos 3:6 uses the same word,
râ‛âh,
referring to calamity or disaster. the
context (a
disaster happening to a city) does not
refer to moral
evil.
3. Lamentations 3:38
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
that both
calamities and good things come?
( Lamentations
3:38, NIV)
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
That both
good and ill go forth? ( Lamentations
3:38, NASB)
The King James Version of Lamentations
3:38 seems
to suggest that God speaks both good
and evil.
However, if one reads the verse in
context, the
preceding verses indicate that God does
not do or
approve of evil. The verse following
indicates that
people should not complain in view of
their sins.
What the verse really is saying that God
decrees
times of good things and times of
judgment.
Lamentations was written by Jeremiah
during a time
of judgment, when Judah had gone off
into exile.
Jeremiah was chosen by God to be the
prophet to
tell Judah to reform or be judged. The
people did
not believe Jeremiah, and, therefore, fell
under
God's judgment. In Lamentations 3:38,
the word
translated "good" is ṭôb (Strong's H2896).
The word
usually refers to good things as opposed
to bad
things. Again, râ‛âh does not refer to
moral evil, but
calamities, in this verse. Likewise, the
Bible
commentaries indicate that the verse
refers to God's
judgment based upon people's sin
Conclusion;
God is not the author of evil. However,
God does
reward and punish on the basis of good
and bad
behavior. Therefore, God does bring
judgment and
calamity (either directly or through
human
authorities) on those who rebel. God will
ultimately
judge all people, since rebels will not be
allowed in
the new, perfect creation.

I wonder when this guy will stop this copy and paste that practically is always out of context. . . He thinks he is talking with muslims that they exchange copy and paste wars.


#Sighs... i throw ma hands up

malvisguy212:
I paste the thread for your answer but it look like you did not read it, let me paste the written here;

One of the most common reasons
skeptics reject the existence of God is
due to the presence of evil in this
universe. They reason that a perfect God
would not create a universe in which evil
exists. Skeptics claim that since God
created everything that God must have
also created evil. They even cite Bible
verses, such as:
'' I form the light, and create darkness: I
make peace,
and create evil: I the LORD do all these
things.
( Isaiah 45:7, KJV)''
'' Shall a trumpet be blown in the city,
and the people
not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city,
and the
LORD hath not done it? ( Amos 3:6, KJV)''
'' Out of the mouth of the most High
proceedeth not
evil and good? ( Lamentations 3:38)''
However, evil is not really a created
thing. You can't
see, touch, feel, smell or hear evil. It is
not one of
the fundamental forces of physics, nor
does it consist of matter, energy, or the
spatial dimensions of the universe. Still,
skeptics like to claim that God created
evil and cite the Bible to "prove" their
point. The Bible is quite clear that God is
not the author of evil and insists that He
is incapable of. doing so.
Skeptics love the KJV so much, one would
think that
they were still back in medieval England.
Use of this
translation is problematic these days,
since it uses an archaic version of
modern English, which doesn't
necessarily mean the same things today
as when it
was translated over 400 years ago. In
addition, the
KJV was produced using a limited
number of
medieval manuscripts that did not
represent the
earliest Alexandrian set of manuscripts.
WHAT DO THE MODERN TRANSLATION
SAY?
1.Isaiah 45:7.
The One forming light and creating
darkness,
Causing well-being and creating calamity;
I am the
LORD who does all these. ( Isaiah 45:7,
NASB)
I form the light and create darkness, I
bring
prosperity and create disaster; I, the
LORD, do all
these things. ( Isaiah 45:7, NIV)
Isaiah 45:7 contrasts opposites. Darkness
is the
opposite of light. However, evil is not the
opposite of peace. The Hebrew word
translated "peace" is
shampoo, which has many meanings,
mostly related
to the well being of individuals. Râ‛âh,
the Hebrew
word translated "evil" in the KJV often
refers to
adversity or calamity. There are two
forms of the
word. Strong's H7451a most often refers
to moral
evil, whereas Strong's H7451b (the form
used here)
most often refers to calamity or distress.
Obviously,
"calamity" is a better antonym of "peace"
than "evil."
2.Amos3:6.
If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the
people
tremble? If a calamity occurs in a city has
not the
LORD done it? ( Amos 3:6, NASB)
When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not
the people
tremble? When disaster comes to a city,
has not the
LORD caused it? ( Amos 3:6, NIV)
Likewise, Amos 3:6 uses the same word,
râ‛âh,
referring to calamity or disaster. the
context (a
disaster happening to a city) does not
refer to moral
evil.
3. Lamentations 3:38
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
that both
calamities and good things come?
( Lamentations
3:38, NIV)
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
That both
good and ill go forth? ( Lamentations
3:38, NASB)
The King James Version of Lamentations
3:38 seems
to suggest that God speaks both good
and evil.
However, if one reads the verse in
context, the
preceding verses indicate that God does
not do or
approve of evil. The verse following
indicates that
people should not complain in view of
their sins.
What the verse really is saying that God
decrees
times of good things and times of
judgment.
Lamentations was written by Jeremiah
during a time
of judgment, when Judah had gone off
into exile.
Jeremiah was chosen by God to be the
prophet to
tell Judah to reform or be judged. The
people did
not believe Jeremiah, and, therefore, fell
under
God's judgment. In Lamentations 3:38,
the word
translated "good" is ṭôb (Strong's H2896).
The word
usually refers to good things as opposed
to bad
things. Again, râ‛âh does not refer to
moral evil, but
calamities, in this verse. Likewise, the
Bible
commentaries indicate that the verse
refers to God's
judgment based upon people's sin
Conclusion;
God is not the author of evil. However,
God does
reward and punish on the basis of good
and bad
behavior. Therefore, God does bring
judgment and
calamity (either directly or through
human
authorities) on those who rebel. God will
ultimately
judge all people, since rebels will not be
allowed in
the new, perfect creation.

Ndo.

Sorry

malvisguy212:
[size=1pt]I paste the thread for your answer but it look like you did not read it, let me paste the written here;

One of the most common reasons
skeptics reject the existence of God is
due to the presence of evil in this
universe. They reason that a perfect God
would not create a universe in which evil
exists. Skeptics claim that since God
created everything that God must have
also created evil. They even cite Bible
verses, such as:
'' I form the light, and create darkness: I
make peace,
and create evil: I the LORD do all these
things.
( Isaiah 45:7, KJV)''
'' Shall a trumpet be blown in the city,
and the people
not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city,
and the
LORD hath not done it? ( Amos 3:6, KJV)''
'' Out of the mouth of the most High
proceedeth not
evil and good? ( Lamentations 3:38)''
However, evil is not really a created
thing. You can't
see, touch, feel, smell or hear evil. It is
not one of
the fundamental forces of physics, nor
does it consist of matter, energy, or the
spatial dimensions of the universe. Still,
skeptics like to claim that God created
evil and cite the Bible to "prove" their
point. The Bible is quite clear that God is
not the author of evil and insists that He
is incapable of. doing so.
Skeptics love the KJV so much, one would
think that
they were still back in medieval England.
Use of this
translation is problematic these days,
since it uses an archaic version of
modern English, which doesn't
necessarily mean the same things today
as when it
was translated over 400 years ago. In
addition, the
KJV was produced using a limited
number of
medieval manuscripts that did not
represent the
earliest Alexandrian set of manuscripts.
WHAT DO THE MODERN TRANSLATION
SAY?
1.Isaiah 45:7.
The One forming light and creating
darkness,
Causing well-being and creating calamity;
I am the
LORD who does all these. ( Isaiah 45:7,
NASB)
I form the light and create darkness, I
bring
prosperity and create disaster; I, the
LORD, do all
these things. ( Isaiah 45:7, NIV)
Isaiah 45:7 contrasts opposites. Darkness
is the
opposite of light. However, evil is not the
opposite of peace. The Hebrew word
translated "peace" is
shampoo, which has many meanings,
mostly related
to the well being of individuals. Râ‛âh,
the Hebrew
word translated "evil" in the KJV often
refers to
adversity or calamity. There are two
forms of the
word. Strong's H7451a most often refers
to moral
evil, whereas Strong's H7451b (the form
used here)
most often refers to calamity or distress.
Obviously,
"calamity" is a better antonym of "peace"
than "evil."
2.Amos3:6.
If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the
people
tremble? If a calamity occurs in a city has
not the
LORD done it? ( Amos 3:6, NASB)
When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not
the people
tremble? When disaster comes to a city,
has not the
LORD caused it? ( Amos 3:6, NIV)
Likewise, Amos 3:6 uses the same word,
râ‛âh,
referring to calamity or disaster. the
context (a
disaster happening to a city) does not
refer to moral
evil.
3. Lamentations 3:38
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
that both
calamities and good things come?
( Lamentations
3:38, NIV)
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
That both
good and ill go forth? ( Lamentations
3:38, NASB)
The King James Version of Lamentations
3:38 seems
to suggest that God speaks both good
and evil.
However, if one reads the verse in
context, the
preceding verses indicate that God does
not do or
approve of evil. The verse following
indicates that
people should not complain in view of
their sins.
What the verse really is saying that God
decrees
times of good things and times of
judgment.
Lamentations was written by Jeremiah
during a time
of judgment, when Judah had gone off
into exile.
Jeremiah was chosen by God to be the
prophet to
tell Judah to reform or be judged. The
people did
not believe Jeremiah, and, therefore, fell
under
God's judgment. In Lamentations 3:38,
the word
translated "good" is ṭôb (Strong's H2896).
The word
usually refers to good things as opposed
to bad
things. Again, râ‛âh does not refer to
moral evil, but
calamities, in this verse. Likewise, the
Bible
commentaries indicate that the verse
refers to God's
judgment based upon people's sin
Conclusion;
God is not the author of evil. However,
God does
reward and punish on the basis of good
and bad
behavior. Therefore, God does bring
judgment and
calamity (either directly or through
human
authorities) on those who rebel. God will
ultimately
judge all people, since rebels will not be
allowed in
the new, perfect creation.[/size]

As Johny has said previously, if you want to be taken seriously, present your argument in a concise manner rather than blocks of texts.

Once again, at least give credit to the orignal writers, in this case Rich Deem
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/evil.html

malvisguy212:
ok, All atheists agreed, evil is a concept,Without God, morality is just subjective, it would just one person's opinion versus another. There is no true "evil" under subjective morality because your concept of evil would be different than Hitler's concept of evil. How could you compare the two concepts? Objective morality indicate that particular actions or ideas are right and
wrong regardless of human opinion,meaning there is a moral code in which we can measure morality beyond the HUMAN BRAIN.

The great writer C.S. Lewis points out that the moral code is not always the
standard which we follow but it is the
standard that we want others to follow
when treating us.
http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/apologetics/mere-christianity/Book1/cs-lewis-mere-christianity-book1.php#.

When we mistreat others, we want
mercy. When someone mistreats us, we
want justice.and you guys called this a concept? Seriously? I don't know what to say anymore, let me repeat what I say to Johnny on the other thread

Eyes are of no use when the mind is
blind. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” He thought for a moment, then added: “And lit with electric lights"

Simply look-up utilitarianism.

DProDG:


Simply look-up utilitarianism.

http://www.utilitarianism.com/utilitarianism.html
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart
Mill that an action is right if it
tends to promote happiness and
wrong if it tends to produce the
reverse of happiness—NOT just
the happiness of the performer
of the action but also that of
EVERYONE AFFECTED BY IT.

I still maintain,evil is beyond human brain and not a concept,I have seen a little boy that is illiterate but when it come to evil, he is an expert, does it come from his concept?

Malvisguy Human morality is as a result of empathy and compassion.... too bad you theists yours is as a result of fear of hell and hope for reward, thats why i have been asking you ur standard for recognizing morality but you cant even answer that.... next time you want to debate stop the copy and paste and bring on your own words...

malvisguy212:
http://www.utilitarianism.com/utilitarianism.html
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart
Mill that an action is right if it
tends to promote happiness and
wrong if it tends to produce the
reverse of happiness—NOT just
the happiness of the performer
of the action but also that of
EVERYONE AFFECTED BY IT.

I still maintain,evil is beyond human brain and not a concept,I have seen a little boy that is illiterate but when it come to evil, he is an expert, does it come from his concept?

Simple question question, is evil a thing (material thing)? yes or No?

DProDG:


As Johny has said previously, if you want to be taken seriously, present your argument in a concise manner rather than blocks of texts.

Once again, at least give credit to the orignal writers, in this case Rich Deem
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/evil.html

I produced rich deem homepage link on many occasion, but the atheists don't click the link, I paste one of rich deem teaching to pleatton on why natural disaster must happened, but he called me a lazy man. Thank you for posting it, maby this time they will tak it serious. Rich deem is a genius, he is a tormentors of atheists.

johnydon22:


Simple question question, is evil a thing (material thing)? yes or No?

now I believe, you did not read the op before commenting, I will Not answer you until you read the op. Good morning.

malvisguy212:
I produced rich deem homepage link on many occasion, but the atheists don't click the link, I paste one of rich deem teaching to pleatton on why natural disaster must happened, but he called me a lazy man. Thank you for posting it, maby this time they will tak it serious. Rich deem is a genius, he is a tormentors of atheists.

for crying out loud present your own arguments not copy other people's work. . .
Natural disasters are all natural and any learned man know their causes... Told you before atheist do not blame an imaginary deity for anything, they only use that language when a theist start thanking a god for a good fortune then atheist present the bad ones and ask y the deity left that part.

malvisguy212:
now I believe, you did not read the op before commenting, I will Not answer you until you read the op. Good morning.

Lmao i freaking read the Op, i was even the one that refuted it line after line...simple question.. Is evil a thing? yes or no. (you keep dodging questions)

johnydon22:
Malvisguy Human morality is as a result of empathy and compassion.... too bad you theists yours is as a result of fear of hell and hope for reward, thats why i have been asking you ur standard for recognizing morality but you cant even answer that.... next time you want to debate stop the copy and paste and bring on your own words...

see, I have even forget hell exist until I joined nairaland where Hell is one of the most discus issue here.read the post I quoted to pleatton, I did not ignore you, I waited to here the view of many atheists on" evil is a concept", Alas they agreed with you, you guys a very wrong.
1 Corinthians 1:27
But God hath chosen the foolish things of
the world to confound the wise; and God
hath chosen the weak things of the world
to confound the things which are mighty;

johnydon22:


Lmao i freaking read the Op, i was even the one that refuted it line after line...simple question.. Is evil a thing? yes or no. (you keep dodging questions)

then why are you asking? The answer is in the op .

malvisguy212:
see, I have even forget hell exist until I joined nairaland where Hell is one of the most discus issue here.read the post I quoted to pleatton, I did not ignore you, I waited to here the view of many atheists on" evil is a concept", Alas they agreed with you, you guys a very wrong.
1 Corinthians 1:27
But God hath chosen the foolish things of
the world to confound the wise; and God
hath chosen the weak things of the world
to confound the things which are mighty;

Can you just answer my question...is evil a thing? yes or no... should i start shouting it?

malvisguy212:
then why are you asking? The answer is in the op .

I need just. a simple Yes or No from you... why are you dodging.. (are you scared)

johnydon22:


for crying out loud present your own arguments not copy other people's work. . .
Natural disasters are all natural and any learned man know their causes... Told you before atheist do not blame an imaginary deity for anything, they only use that language when a theist start thanking a god for a good fortune then atheist present the bad ones and ask y the deity left that part.

even though I do not copy and paste, but you keep on saying this in all your post. I got most of this idea from C Lewis (a former atheists) on stealing from God.but you keep on accusing me of copy and paste. Keep it up.

malvisguy212:
even though I do not copy and paste, but you keep on saying this in all your post. I got most of this idea from C Lewis (a former atheists) on stealing from God.but you keep on accusing me of copy and paste. Keep it up.

scroll up and see where DProDG provided the link to most of your post here, even your op is also a copy and paste which he also provided a link to..

Now please answer my question, Is evil a thing? (yes or no)... chai

johnydon22:


I need just. a simple Yes or No from you... why are you dodging.. (are you scared)

you claimed you read the thread dint you come across this;

To explain why, we need to go back to
Augustine who puzzled over the following
argument:
1. God created all things.
2. Evil is a thing.
3. Therefore, God created evil.

Then what kind of trick you want to play?

johnydon22:


scroll up and see where DProDG provided the link to most of your post here, even your op is also a copy and paste which he also provided a link to..

Now please answer my question, Is evil a thing? (yes or no)... chai

you are a liar a father of it, am I not the first that provide the link DProDG provide? I even paste it to pleatton on one thread. Pleased don't quote me if you are bias. Respect!!!

malvisguy212:
http://www.utilitarianism.com/utilitarianism.html
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart
Mill that an action is right if it
tends to promote happiness and
wrong if it tends to produce the
reverse of happiness—NOT just
the happiness of the performer
of the action but also that of
EVERYONE AFFECTED BY IT.

I still maintain,evil is beyond human brain and not a concept,I have seen a little boy that is illiterate but when it come to evil, he is an expert, does it come from his concept?

Why is the word concept had for u to understand? What do u mean by "does it come from his concept"? This question just shows you don't even understand what has been explained to u.

No wonder quickly believe a a spirit got a virgin pregnant.

If an Illiterate boy is expert in evil how does the act fail to be a concept? Isn't it his undesirable action that is labeled evil? What has being literate got to do with acting out in an unfairly manner to people.

Guy, its a concept because evil can't be seen, its just a name given to an extremely unfair situation on us either by nature or others around us.

malvisguy212:
you claimed you read the thread dint you come across this;

To explain why, we need to go back to
Augustine who puzzled over the following
argument:
1. God created all things.
2. Evil is a thing.
3. Therefore, God created evil.

Then what kind of trick you want to play?

hahahahaha now i got what i want... so evil is a thing and not a name humans ascribe to ACTIONS and events that is not favourable to the general human well being or survival... Good..


Now give me one example of evil that is a thing... (please don't point at actions or event i want you to tell me the thing)

malvisguy212:
you are a liar a father of it, am I not the first that provide the link DProDG provide? I even paste it to pleatton on one thread. Pleased don't quote me if you are bias. Respect!!!

On another thread... i think you need to read this thread again... lol.. oga what we need is first hand argument from the brain of the debator not copy and paste.. YOu are not debating muslims that you all embark on copy and paste work... we need first hand brain work when debating an atheist. Go and learn then come back

johnydon22:


hahahahaha now i got what i want... so evil is a thing and [b]not a name humans ascribe to ACTIONS and events that is not favourable to the general human well being or survival... Good..


Now give me one example of evil that is a thing... (please don't point at actions or event i want you to tell me the thing)

your trick is very childish and you failed woefully. Augustine do not stop there, continue reading my friends;

"How could a good God create evil? If
those first two premises are true, He did,
and this is a God problem. So God must
not be good after all. But then Augustine
realized that the second premise is not
true. While evil is real, it's not a "thing."
Evil doesn't exist on its own. It only exists
as a lack or a deficiency in a good thing.
Evil is like rust in a car: If you take all of
the rust out of a car, you have a better
car; if you take the car out of the rust,
you have nothing. g. In other words, evil
only makes sense against the backdrop
of good."

They say you can forced a cow to the river but you can't forced the cow to drink water, in this case, I did.

malvisguy212:
you claimed you read the thread dint you come across this;

To explain why, we need to go back to
Augustine who puzzled over the following
argument:
1. God created all things.
2. Evil is a thing.
3. Therefore, God created evil.

Then what kind of trick you want to play?

Evil is not evil when it is used to counter evil.