The Inherent Goodness Fallacy (page 5)

comforter

???Larc is quite correct, you have evaded, or at least attempted to evade both the spirit and the letter of my question regarding the Jewish genocide that took place in Caanan. Was this a bad act that took place for a good end? If so how does this adjust a persons definition of what is 'bad' and what is 'good'????

No it was not a bad act that took place for a good end. Do you got it now, my smarty pants?

???Please also answer my questions regarding the classification of shunning, as to whether this painful procedure is in your definition a 'bad' act or a 'good' one.???

It all depends. Shunning may be a good act or a bad one. You can't simply ask an unqualified answer like that and expect Comforter to answer it. You gonna have to nuance your question a little more.

SixofNine

Raven101, well said!

larc

Comforter, You keep changing words. Now you say that people have a sembalance of good, which means, not very much. Before you said basically, which, no, I did not interprete as totally. I understand the difference between words. Now, with your new use of the word semblance, I disagree with you, but I agree with your former word choice, i.e., basically. Now, to my other observations and my question. In my own personal experience, I find most people to be basicly good, with some mistakes on the way. I asked you a very personal question, that is, what has been your personal experience with real people that you know? Are they, by and large, good or bad? On the subject of Joshua, why do you think that was good, because God said to do it? Well, through human history, many have claimed that it was God's will to engage in mass murder. How is Joshua different than all of the other claims? Because a book said so?

comforter

???Comforter, You keep changing words. Now you say that people have a sembalance of good, which means, not very much. Before you said basically, which, no, I did not interprete as totally. I understand the difference between words. Now, with your new use of the word semblance, I disagree with you, but I agree with your former word choice, i.e., basically.???

Lets review my first post verbatim:

>>>>>Most or all people are good. So they say. Actually, humans are basically evil. The Bible says that man be inclined toward what is bad from his youth up. (Genesis 8:21) The human heart is treacherous, who can know it? (Jeremiah 17:9) All men have sinned and fall short of God's glory. Men are basically evil.

Comforter is not saying that people are totally depraved. They are not. We are made in God's image and we retain a touch of that image even while sinful. But all humans are inclined toward evil because of Adam and Eve.<<<<<

How can you now say I changed words?

???Now, to my other observations and my question. In my own personal experience, I find most people to be basicly good, with some mistakes on the way. I asked you a very personal question, that is, what has been your personal experience with real people that you know? Are they, by and large, good or bad????

They have been bad, if you define "bad" by the biblical and philosophical standards I espouse. If one defines "bad" as an absence of the good (the good being what is positively determined by God), then most people on earth are bad if they break God's standards.

>>>>>On the subject of Joshua, why do you think that was good, because God said to do it? Well, through human history, many have claimed that it was God's will to engage in mass murder. How is Joshua different than all of the other claims? Because a book said so?<<<<<

If Joshua heeded a divine command when he carried out his actions in war that you brought up, then what he did was good. But this conclusion is contingent on the bible being God's expression of truth to man. I believe the Bible not because it says so. But because the bible has survived all criticisms and been proved true by God. You dont have to accept this claim. I believe it with all my heart.

hillary_step

Comforter,

No it was not a bad act that took place for a good end. Do you got it now, my smarty pants?

Then how would you define the slaughter that took place in Caanan? A good act or a bad act. For example, some of us feel that Barry Manilow is a bad act, others would disagree..lol

You seem to forget that the issue I have with you is that your lack of definition as to what constitutes a good person and a bad person is confounding this debate. They seem to be based on, "This book says who is good and who is bad, but you do not seem to be entirely sure. You may indeed be correct, but the book then needs to be examined with great care for consistency in ethic.

You are stating nothing new Comforter, but just regurgitating, and not very efficiently at that, post-Augustine Catholic thought, that is, that man has an internal struggle with his own will and inclinations and those of God. You then seem to conclude that most people have lost the battle. We surely have a right to expect a few definitions of what constitutes your definition of what a good person and a bad person are.

Back to Psalm 58:3. Please note that this Psalm does not use the term sinful but the word wicked ( perverts NWT ) to describe those behaving this way since birth. That is why I suggested you research ancient Hebrew society and grammar a little more carefully, as it is I am quite sure by your response, that if you have Gesenius on your shelf it is still sitting mylar wrapped and unopened.

As to my smarty pants, well I suspect that you might also wear a pair Comforter. It may though be a good idea to remove them before you drive as they may obscure your vision.lol

Take Care - HS

gravedancer

While I think this is a largely pointless argument (because it depends on your views of mans origin and mans destiny) I do have a great site to add to the mix for you guys:

gravedancer

Another take way to look at things: best and worst participants:

larc

Comforter, so you believe the Bible is the word of God, and everything in it is true. Am I correct in what you believe? I ask this, because I don't want to waste my time or yours, so I want to know what you believe. On the subject of Joshua, why is mass destruction a good thing?

hillary_step

Good is that which improves the lot of a community.

Evil is that which weakens the lot of a community.

Gravedancer,

Thank you for your interesting post. Now at least this person has tried to define what 'good' and 'bad' are. I do not totally agree with this definition, but in order for a debate to progress, Comforter now needs to put down his own definitions.

Apart from that I am off for a coffee and Kaluna.

Kindest regards - HS

Jesus Christ

Yeah, I'm the one saying be good to each other and stop putting words in my dad's mouth and I'm the one that's evil? Correct me if I'm wrong but did I not say the only thing you have to do is love each other and dad and that's it? Saying how evil man kind not only is unloving to your fellow man but implies that dad's process of evolution makes horrible creatures as well and, as we all know, father knows best.
Now be nice to people before dad smites you and/or exposes you collection of "alternative" magazines to you real life aquaintrnces.

Just for the record, dad and I don't really care about you porn because its all consenting adults who are just enjoying the gift we gave them but I doubt your friends and family would be as approving as we are. Now stop trying to make us as small and petty as you would like us to be.

The Inherent Goodness Fallacy

Share this