• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Tree of Good and Evil

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
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?
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
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?

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
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
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
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
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
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.
 

Sleeppy

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
Both learned and innate.

"Choices" don't actually exist. The idea implies spontaneity. Unfortunately, there are scientists that would rather leave these causal gaps.
 
Last edited:
Between Love and hate there is a balance. One can not exist without the other.
Hate is more aggressive than Love, and tends to spread far and wide.
Love remains, in some measure, here and there.
A garden, untended, goes to weeds.
While the tended garden returns to fragile balance.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
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 tree produced fruit the fruit gave you knowledge the knowledge was both of good and evil.

Is Hate knowledge or emotion and where does emotion come from, did we have emotion before or after eating the fruit. I don't know and the bible really doesn't say.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
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?

When 'trees were taxed' a bad fruit tree (barron) proved to be a liability thus was cut down.
I suppose the 'potentially serve a purpose' would be the cut-down tree could serve as: fire wood.
As a good tree does Not bear bad fruit, then one's learned belief, teachings, conduct/behavior would serve a good purpose.
In connection to Matthew chapter 7 ' good trees '(people) serve a good purpose in that they do good towards others.
 
The ^ above ^ makes me think of the old adage that what is food for one man is another man's poison.
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.
I.E: whoever is standing before them...
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
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.

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.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
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

Nice. But that does not answer my question. I don't care about energy conservation or Hitler's Manichaeism or his obsession of dividing things in right or wrong. . This is just noise trying to avoid a clear cut answer. I am only interested in the fruits, in order to evaluate your claim rationally and objectively.

Are "loving dogs" or "being a vegetarian" or "not drinking alcohol" bad fruits?

Yes/no/maybe

Ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
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.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
Both learned and innate.

"Choices" don't actually exist. The idea implies spontaneity. Unfortunately, there are scientists that would rather leave these causal gaps.

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?
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
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.

An interesting perspective. And bonus points: I had to think a bit, about what you just said. :D

I have always seen Genesis as pure allegory-- in that choices were paramount, beyond what was given to us as we were born (which I always saw as pure random factors-- in direct contrast to the bible's lurid claims of pre-destination, a belief I never did buy into, even when I was a believer).

I do think that collectively, the human race chooses what is moral and immoral--but I also think there are some innate things we are born with, that are instinctive.

For example, the concept of "fair". What is fair, really? It it kind of like "beauty" in that you know what it is, and you known what it isn't, but it's hard to pin down to a simple script.

But toddlers quickly recognize "fair" and "not-fair". Even our simian cousins show a marked understanding of "fair" and "not fair" in recent studies. I expect most of the near-sentient mammals do this, and not a few avian species as well.

So we appear to be born with ideas of "fair play"-- which we seem to use as a starting point for Morality with a capital M.

Things to ponder late at night, when sleep won't come... :)
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
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.

But the "law" was 100% arbitrary, really. Apart from slave-like "obey!" there was nothing really there one way or another.

Did Adam murder a bunch of people wantonly? No? (wait-- that isn't actually against god's laws, is it-- as god commanded exactly that, multiple times, later on in Exodus... )

Maybe Adam cheated on Eve? No? (couldn't really-- nobody else there... Hobson's choice)

Did Adam burn down the garden? No? Did he cruelly slaughter the animals just for the pleasure of it? No?

What, exactly DID Adam do that was worthy of the Death Penalty?

Other than fail to act like a mindless slave?
 

Sleeppy

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
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?

And how did you determine that everything would be "pure evil", at that point?
 
Top