Talk:Evil

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Blasphemy

Does this really belong here? Murder and rape are univerally recognized by civilized societies as evil. Blasphemy is not.--Dave3172 12:11, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Those who speak blasphemy "shall surely be put to death". (Leviticus 24:16)
"But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin." (Mark 3:29 )
Looks pretty evil to me. Anyone who can't recognize that ain't part of a civilized society.
JC 12:14, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

No, anyone who does not recognize that is someone who is not part of a Judeo-Christian society. There is civilization outside of the Judeo-Christian world; examples include India, China, and Japan.

Conservapedia is an online resource and meeting place where we give full credit to Christianity and America.
JC 12:18, 14 March 2007 (EDT)


Blasphemy is dependent on a) if you follow the religion in question and b) then hold an antithetical view to that religion. It's not a universal evil; in fact, by its very definition it can only be considered evil by a subset of society unless you're talking about a theocracy.
Perhaps a fair solution would be to give blasphemy a separate header and talk about how it can be considered evil. --Dave3172 12:18, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
That's the kind of liberal bias we are trying to avoid.
JC 12:20, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
JC, no it isn't. The bias you are trying to avoid is not mentioning blasphemy at all. Giving it a separate header avoids that problem. --Dave3172 12:23, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

America is not a Christian nation. It is a secular nation with a (nominal, at least) Christian majority. There is a major difference between the two. Blasphemy is not considered a crime anywhere in the US. Religion is not mandatory in the US.

Its not about what America is or ain't but what Conservapedia is.
JC 12:31, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
JC, by insisting blasphemy be considered by all to be evil, all you are doing is substituting your bias for another. Giving it a separate section and discussing it there would be a fair solution. --Dave3172 12:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
So killing babies ain't evil? [1] Ain't that kinda Liberal?
BillyBoy 08:05, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
Psalms 137:9, 2 Kings 15:16, Numbers 31:17.... God's never objected to killing babies, as long as they're EVIL babies. --BobD 02:17, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

goodness

repointing the link for 'goodness' to 'good', since #REDIRECT doesn't seem to be working for me. Ilikepie 16:49, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Isaiah 45:7

The Hebrew word that is translated "evil" can have different meanings, as is common in Hebrew. If you note the full verse, it's a foil. It compares light and dark -- opposites. It then compares peace/prosperity and ??? Calamity or hardship would be more likely. Learn together 15:48, 30 July 2007 (EDT)

I'm a little concerned...

It seems to me that we could take a more definitive stance on evil here. The article seems to be aiming for a neutral presentation, but in places it comes across as suggesting that "evil" is relative and depends on opinion...which seems contrary to Conservapedia's clearly-articulated affirmation of Biblical principles and Christian values. Should this article take a stronger stance in presenting the reality that evil exists, that it is objective, and that it consists of opposition to God's Will? --Benp 17:08, 15 December 2010 (EST)

Yes, it should. Give it a try. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:27, 15 December 2010 (EST)
Will do, but it may be a few days before I can get to it--Christmas is almost upon us! Merry Christmas to all, if I don't get the chance to say it nearer to the actual day. --Benp 16:02, 16 December 2010 (EST)

Is evil inherently liberal?

A belated merry Christmas to all, and now it's time to get back to work.

As I considered how to tackle this article, I realized that one of the issues that needed to be examined is this: is evil inherently liberal?

I realize that the question will provoke howls of outrage and protest from some; that is inevitable. Such people will likely read no further than the title. However, the question is a serious one. Philosophers have sought to know the nature of goodness and evil for thousands of years. As such, I think that it's valid to ask whether evil holds certain inherent characteristics.

To begin, let's clarify what I mean by the question, "Is evil inherently liberal?" I am defining "liberal" here, not in terms of a specific political party at a specific time period, but in its broadest and most general sense: rejection of tradition and a desire to change the status quo. Specific policies generally considered liberal are an outgrowth of this desire.

Viewed in this fashion, I believe it is possible to make a strong case that evil is inherently liberal, given certain axiomatic assumptions.

If we accept that the universe is created by God, and that God is entirely good and just, then it follows that the order of the universe at the time of Creation would ALSO be entirely good. Thus, any rebellion against this order would not be good and just. Conversely, any elements in the universe which are not good and just must perforce represent a rebellion against God's intended order.

In other words: evil is inherently a rebellion against the status quo of God's Creation. Consequently, evil is inherently liberal. Indeed, one could consider Genesis to be the tale of the birth of liberalism, from Adam and Eve's rebellion against the one and only restriction placed upon them by God to the ultimate tale of Big Government overreach, the Tower of Babel. The history related by the Bible is one in which humans rebel against the traditions and laws set down by God, and suffer as a result.

Now, let's fend off the most predictable protests:

1. Most liberals are good people! Saying "Evil is inherently liberal" is not the same as saying "Liberalism is inherently evil." Nor is it the same as saying "Liberals are inherently evil." The world today is considerably altered from God's ideal order. There are many cases where the present status quo is unjust, or where wicked traditions exist. When liberals oppose such traditions, that is certainly a good thing. However, I would argue that even at their best, liberals are well-intentioned but misguided, seeking to throw the baby out with the bathwater. If the unjust status quo is that a company is cutting corners and creating unsafe working conditions for its employees, liberals may well oppose that, which is certainly not evil. However, they are likely to oppose it by creating a slew of far-reaching (and expensive) new regulations that punish the innocent and the malefactor alike.


2. Lots of conservatives are awful, evil people! Setting aside for the moment the fact that liberals tend to be quick to describe anyone more conservative than, say, Karl Marx as "evil," there is a valid point here. Being conservative doesn't inherently make someone a good person. One can believe in small government, fiscal responsibility, and upholding tradition and still be a rotten person. However, again, we have to ask which traditions such a person is committed to upholding. If those traditions represent a deviation from God's intended order--and they would have to, in the case of a truly evil "conservative"--then what is actually being defended is a product of earlier liberal rebellion.

Questions? Thoughts? Is this beyond the scope of the article?

--Benp 15:25, 29 December 2010 (EST)

Actually, it's not beyond the scope of the article. It corresponds with Romans 3, in which Paul states in no uncertain terms that mankind is inherently evil; this includes both liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, men and women, black and white, old and young; absolutely no one has an excuse. There's just one remedy, and it is also clearly-stated in Romans, as well as the rest of the New Testament: turn away from the sins and ask Jesus Christ to be your savior. Just being good isn't going to work. Karajou 20:17, 29 December 2010 (EST)


I certainly concur, which is why I suggested a rewrite on the article in the first place; right now, I'm just trying to sort out how ambitious that rewrite should be. (Incidentally, was any conclusion ever reached on merging this with Good and Evil?) --Benp 20:21, 29 December 2010 (EST)
"Lots of conservatives are awful, evil people!"?????? So 60% of everyday Americans are awful and evil? I challenge you to prove that ridiculous claim, Ben P.--AnthonyDW 22:44, 2 January 2011 (EST)
Anthony, I responded on to your concerns on your talk page. Please read all of what someone has to say, not merely the sections in bold, before jumping to conclusions. Ben has raised several very interesting points here, and I think it's a good discussion to have. Tyler Zoran Talk 23:03, 2 January 2011 (EST)
Personal tools