Thread: The devil/fiend

I am looking for information on ways at expressing evil. I would love a variety of ways so that I utilize this information to create a poem about the darker side of life. We have a good side i.e. angels God and our good natured selves. But I wish to explore the darker side of life and see what way I can use this to create a plausable poem worth publishing on this subject matter

Your help and imput would be greatly appreciated.

All the best,


wacker

Well, personally, I like to torture small animals and torment handicapped children.

What about the mentally ill, like sociopaths who don't recognize evil or pain in others. That scares that shit out me. Also, crazy evil for no reason. I guess they go together.

I also thing of bullies who get there jollies from watching weaker people skwerm and cry. I want to kick those people in the teeth, they are embracing their evil side pretty damn well.

Yep. I can speak with experience for both of those concerns. A lot of rotten stuff gets done not to be bad, but because of a lack of concept of good and bad.
This is not an innate thing. Infants are monsters.

When I was a kid I remember thinking about the "knowledge of good and evil" in the Biblical mythology. How could knowledge hurt you? What's the big deal about good and evil, to get you kicked out of paradise?

The more I get along, the more I see the wisdom of it. Just being aware that somethings are wrong tosses you out of the paradise of innocense and no two ways about it. Trying to actually do good and avoid evil is a pain in the ass.

Evil doesn't exist, it's an illusion. If Lin likes to snip the legs off kittens and watch them wiggle because it gives him a hard-on, for him it's a good thing, it gives him gratification. Very few people that do bad things set out to do them 'because they're evil'. People have all kinds of motivations and justifications for what they do.

The closest thing I can think of to pure evil is apathy.

So which is worse, ignorance or apathy?

Sooo tempted to answer 'Who cares'!

Ignorance is lamentable, wilful ignorance is terrible, but apathy trumps all.

So which is worse, ignorance or apathy?

I don't know, and I don't care.




Gotcha!

Groan.

I was wrong. Evil walks the earth, and it's name is Robinson.

Just for grins and giggles, and to be thoroughly pedantic, I thought I'd point out that man wasn't kicked out of the Garden of Eden because he ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and now knew the difference between 'good' and 'evil', but rather so that he wouldn't then eat the fruit of the Tree of Life, thus having knowledge and immortality. If that happened, God feared man would become the equal of God. Although another interesting fact is that the word used for 'God' in that passage is actually plural. Just sayin'...

Wolfson- love it when someone makes me question my faith I know that might sound bitchy, but it is ment with sincerity. As for the ignorance vs. apathy discussion, apathy is worse, but willful ignorance is no different from apathy. How are choosing not to know and knowing but choosing to do nothing different? Either way, you sit on your hand by choice.

Well, no Adam and Eve DID eat of the fruit of the tree. Snake tempted, Eve takes a bite and passes it around? All that?
The idea of God's "fear"--and interesting concept--is never stated in those terms that I recall.
And whether a certain word is used for God is such a vague concept by the end of all the translatioins and document shuffling and deutronomic reforns that it's not really something to puzzle over.
Just for my own giggles. Gotta get something out of those two semesters of require Bible I had to take at Wake Forest just to keep a scholarship that I lost anyway.

Just for grins and giggles, and to be thoroughly pedantic, I thoughtI'd point out that man wasn't kicked out of the Garden of Eden becausehe ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and now knew the differencebetween 'good' and 'evil', but rather so that he wouldn't then eat thefruit of the Tree of Life, thus having knowledge andimmortality. If that happened, God feared man would become the equal ofGod. Although another interesting fact is that the word used for 'God'in that passage is actually plural. Just sayin'...

How are choosing not to know and knowing but choosing to do nothing different?

Seem pretty different to me. Just knowing something doesn't automatically impose a certain action or reaction. I might learn that your kids are smoking pot or blowing boys in the garage. Whether or not I choose to come tell your about is the result of an active decision. Not acting on the knowledge could very well be the wisest and least harmful thing to do.

Originally Posted by lin

Well, no Adam and Eve DID eat of the fruit of the tree. Snake tempted, Eve takes a bite and passes it around? All that?
The idea of God's "fear"--and interesting concept--is never stated in those terms that I recall.

Heh. To the first: Yes, they ate of the tree... of knowledge. Then, in Genesis 3:22 it says, "And the LORD God said: 'Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.'" The next verse they get kicked from the Garden.

To the second: No, it never actually says God feared, but if you read between the lines, it gets kinda interesting.

As far as translations go, we've got some pretty old extant Hebrew texts, which is where one can double check this stuff. When it get's translated into English (especially back in King James' day), they translate the plural adonai into English as 'God', but then have God use the 'Royal "We"' as he speaks. Like I said... Just sayin'.

Anyway... One interesting concept I read was the idea that 'evil' is, first of all, culturally relevant - one culture's evil isn't necessarily the same in another culture. But, more to the point, 'evil' is necessary in order to give humans something by which to have a contrast in order to understand 'good'. Duality in religion and philosophy is almost always the norm - Christianity (and similar theologies) just tend to paint it into the black and white that we understand as 'good versus evil'.

Yay. I was a theology student once upon a time, with an eye toward seminary... but they really didn't like the questions I'd raise.


Disclaimer: It is not my intention to discredit any religion, nor to enter into an opinionated theological debate with anyone - as an American, I believe the Founding Fathers actually intended freedom of religion, and so I feel everyone is entitled to pursue spiritual growth however they wish. Or not pursue it, if that's their wish. I, for one, do not have any of the answers to 'The Meaning of Life', 'The Nature of God', or anything of that sort. I just have my thoughts.

Lin, God is always plural (Let us make man in our image) just as man is plural. Sentience begets sentience and must be plural. Without other people, all babies become animals like any other.

Something I've been thinking concerning the Trees and Eden is this:

Once you obtain Knowledge and the Concept of Good and Evil, you realize you are mortal. Eating of Knowledge deprives you of Paradise.

Think of it like this, before you realize that people can die (obtain knowledge), you live like you're immortal and, in a way, you are. After people obtain knowledge, beheavior alters and things that were enjoyable or possible before are no longer.

Babies don't think about dying. As far as they know, they'll live forever. To fear death is to rob someone of eternal life.

Thus, God didn't rob man of life or happiness; man did in obtaining knowledge of death and fear of his own concience. He robbed himself of complete simple joy until he no longer fears death and can begin untraining his distaste for simplicity, for pleasures he's forgone since childhood. Because not everything has to be complicated (the love of complicating is the foundation of adulthood).