Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is hate a learned behavior?
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit and a evil tree cannot bear good fruit.
By their fruit we know that all things can possibly/potentially serve a purpose?
the problem is that hitler, like many, judged things as 100% good or 100% evil and tried to obliterate things that they deemed evil, or worthless.Let me challenge this.
Hitler liked dogs. If Hitler was an evil tree, does that imply that loving dogs and taking care of them is a bad fruit?
if no, then either Hitler was not an evil tree. By logical necessity.
In case Loving dogs is a bad fruit, we can infer that whoever loves dogs is an evil tree, since only evil trees can produce bad fruits.
You can replace "loving dogs" with "being vegetarian" if you want.
Ciao
- viole
Is hate a learned behavior?
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit and a evil tree cannot bear good fruit.
By their fruit we know that all things can possibly/potentially serve a purpose?
It all depends upon how you view what good and bad is.Is hate a learned behavior?
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit and a evil tree cannot bear good fruit.
By their fruit we know that all things can possibly/potentially serve a purpose?
Is hate a learned behavior?
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit and a evil tree cannot bear good fruit.
By their fruit we know that all things can possibly/potentially serve a purpose?
Good & Evil, like all dualities, is purely subjective . . . one man's good is another man's evil!
Reminds me of leftist activists who demand world peace, by hating anyone standing before them for not hating those they hold responsible for the world not being at peace.The ^ above ^ makes me think of the old adage that what is food for one man is another man's poison.
The whole problem of Hitler and the Hitlers of the world has been looked at in Literature over and over.
And answered.
One of the more creative examples, IMO, is the movie Hellboy: according to Destiny or Fate or Design, Hellboy was an "evil tree" (to use the OP). He was created specifically to do Great Evil.
Is that what happened? Nope: Hellboy got to Choose-- and he Chose Wisely.
Again, in the stories of Harry Potter: Harry was very much like Voldemort. He had many of the same powers. He was somewhat skeptical of Authority. Rebellious and so forth.
But Voldemort was Evil, and Harry was Good.
Why? Because of the choices each made with the skills they had to work with.
We are not good or evil because of what we are, or who we were born to, or even where.
We are good or evil because of the choices we make.
A Tree cannot Choose. It just Is.
Only Sentient Beings have the ability to Choose. Which is why I classify as "human", only sentient beings-- regardless of their beginnings or design.
the problem is that hitler, like many, judged things as 100% good or 100% evil and tried to obliterate things that they deemed evil, or worthless.
energy cannot be created/destroyed. it simply transforms. people who try to quash their shadow; invariably project it and redirect that energy into potentially destructive behavior.
there is a choice to see the good and bad in everything or see the good in a thing and exploit or direct it towards that realization.
the choice is always there. the difference between punishment and correction is taking the focus and using the energy to do something creative vs something destructive. or taking something and quashing it and believing you fixed the problem by believing someone is worthless. imminent danger is not like blind obedience to authority
I think you've hit it fairly close, IMHO. In the Genesis story it was not the "Tree of Good and Evil", it was the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". The knowledge of good and evil, again in my understanding, is that there is no difference between the two, they are neutral in value; it is up to us collectively and individually to decide what is good and what is evil. This is where the choice comes in as you have said. When A & E ate the fruit they lost their innocence by having the knowledge that forced them to make moral choices.
Both learned and innate.
"Choices" don't actually exist. The idea implies spontaneity. Unfortunately, there are scientists that would rather leave these causal gaps.
I think you've hit it fairly close, IMHO. In the Genesis story it was not the "Tree of Good and Evil", it was the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". The knowledge of good and evil, again in my understanding, is that there is no difference between the two, they are neutral in value; it is up to us collectively and individually to decide what is good and what is evil. This is where the choice comes in as you have said. When A & E ate the fruit they lost their innocence by having the knowledge that forced them to make moral choices.
If there was No difference between the 'two' (good and evil) then to me there would have been No need for God to inform them that the ' evil ' part was: Death. You eat, You die.
So, I think the ' evil ' part was the loss of everlasting life for them, loss of living forever on Earth.
By breaking God's Law I think Adam broke away from God's Law, his God as Sovereign. Then, by breaking God's Law Adam took the Law out of God's hands, and placed the Law into man's hands and set up People Rule as being superior to God Rule. Thus, at that time, then Adam's choice was to individually decide what is good and what is evil in men's eyes, instead of what is good or evil in God's eyes. Adam was Not forced to disobey his God, Adam willingly chose to disobey, and to make his own free-will moral choices from then on, which father Adam passed down to us.
Hunh? Sorry, what you said does not compute. Of course people get to choose.
If there were no choice? That would be Pure Evil. Is that the path you really want to go down?
Is hate a learned behavior?
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit and a evil tree cannot bear good fruit.
By their fruit we know that all things can possibly/potentially serve a purpose?