Yes, it is rare that a person kills someone just because they want to watch them die. Their motivations are usually motivated by self preservation, either psychologically or physiologically, which could include a disputed inheritance or a thwarted romantic relationship.
Whatever that kind of reason, to kill someone is to want them dead. It is and act of evil.
Yes, that's usually how it starts. If a person threatens another person or the victim interprets it that way, chances are someone might end up dead.
So fear motivates the response...real or imagined...
Yes, someone is jealous and sees the other person as an obstacle to their success or survival.
But is the seeing real or imagined? Is the act of killing someone (or otherwise taking away their ability to compete) evil? If the competitors are much the same in attitude is it just a matter of the more cunning wins and thus it isn't evil? What about the negative consequences of their competitiveness upon others not directly involved but still collateral damage?
I just gave you several examples. Whether we agree with the offender's perception of a threat is irrelevant. This person is usually motivated by something that threatens them in some psychological or physiological way.
The examples are not overly detailed that anyone can make a relevant assessment. It appears finding good or evil in many circumstances requires details.
I don't see the Sunni Muslims as evil, just ignorant. You are right in stating that the conflict is complicated, not to mention that it's been going on for 1000's of years.
And there are levels of ignorance. Perhaps the evil is in the ignorance in which the person has no interest in being less ignorant, preferring to remain in the state of ignorance that suits their agenda.
People in prison aren't necessarily evil, breaking the law and evil are two different things.
Kinda what I was saying but not.
Even here I can see a difference in what either of us define as good and evil. Most of us were taught how to behave in socially appropriate ways and to have compassion. Most that don't have compassion for their fellow man were most likely mistreated as children and suffer from psychological isues as a result, that's not evil, that's pitiful.
If it cannot be helped, perhaps that is something to pity as well as keep an eye on. If the person has it within them to make the necessary adjustments and chooses not to, and acted out evil on others, then that would be evil.
I still maintain that most of us do know good from evil. Those who have had evil acts done upon them, most of them
know the acts were evil and what are commonly called 'psychological issues' are not all things which cannot be changed IF the person who suffered evil acts wants to make that effort. If not, then they will likely become victimizers themselves.
I can empathize with those who have been treated badly as children and have no opportunity or know-how on ways to heal the damage and move forward in goodness. I don't have the same empathy for those who have the opportunity but choose to hold onto their suffering and make others suffer as well.
I don't equate a physical threat with an overall evil person. Sometimes you have to do what you have to do to survive, but that doesn't make my attacker evil just because he targeted me. Did he commit an evil act? Yes, is he evil? Not necessarily.
What would be the deciding factor for you either way?
PTSD doesn't work like that. Now if you're talking about some kind of verbal dispute or other kind of minor conflict, then yes, once forgiven, most of us move on. Physical or severe psychological mistreatment takes a little more than forgiveness to move on, if you ever do, from experiencing something like that.
Yes. I wasn't aware I was marginalize this. Hard work is required. The will to want to heal is required. Time is required. A workable environment where such a thing is supported is required. Nonetheless my point was that forgiveness is crucial and in some ways the first major step towards getting over it and moving on.
Walk in that person's shoes before you decide whether it's so easy to just forgive and forget. I think it's inappropriate for you to marginalize severe physical and psychological abuse in this way or to arbitrarily categorize victims that grew up in these environments that subsequently become the victimizers as evil, I mean seriously, that's messed up IMO.
If the choices are available and the supports in place, no matter that there is a lot of effort needed by the victim to get to that point, if they choose not to do so and become a part of the cycle of abuse by being abusive, then they perpetuate an evil thing.
I am not hard nosed about this but neither am I someone who thinks it is appropriate to enable victims to remain victims and become vicitimizers. That is not a solution to the problem. Some systems are far too precious with victims that victims see a convenience in the sympathy and support which does not have as a critical goal of healing and moving on (becoming a victor) and victims take advantage of that to remain in the victim role. They can even victimize by using their victim status as a means to solicit continuous support and sympathy whilst making no real effort whatsoever to get over it and fully help themselves. They say 'I can't' and that is accepted as truth.
Now I can agree that some simply cannot. They obvious do not have it in them for various reasons. Often they are not purposefully victimizing anyone else. Purposefully victimizing others is evil, even that it has been done to you, how much more one should know the evil of it.
Jesus was discussing bad thoughts because it was impossible for humans to be perfect as long as they occupied physical bodies and were unaware of the greater reality. According to him it's pointless to covet material things, or allow lust or desire to drive your actions, since those material things would never bring true fulfillment which led into the concept of asking for forgiveness for your own human shortcomings.
I assume then that this 'greater reality' is something other than the material one?
Asking for forgiveness is a different thing from being forgiving.
Well it is a thread about God's purpose. In a previous post the OP stated he was referring to the God of Abraham so I'm using Jesus's teachings as my point of reference.
Yes but you said in arguing a point I made...
"That's crap. Every action and reaction is a personal choice. I can't see what I anyone could learn from suffering as a result of an evill act."
that is irony in the sense that the Christian tradition is built around the idea of learning from ones suffering.
More to the point, one can indeed learn from ones own suffering the result of an evil act against one. Every reaction (as you said in the same breath) is a personal choice.
I don't consider myself to be a Christian, but for the most part, I don't have too much issue with Jesus's teachings other than the salvation part of it. I have never understood how his being crucified absolved anything wrong I might have done or will do. And if there is a God that created me as an imperfect being, it's a bit unrealistic to expect me to strive to be perfect in the first place if it's an already impossible task requiring salvation.
Sounds logical yes? And yet, I also can see how some people might require feeling guilty for their actions and that having someone else who didn't deserve it 'pay the price' for your evil actions might be the very thing which tips someone into feeling real remorse and wanting to and making the effort to change the way they act. Apparently this has genuinely happened to many. Not saying of course that such a tactic will work on everyone...but if it works I am not going to criticism it.
The way I look at it, perfection is overrated and misunderstood for that. I can never be perfect (whatever they hey that is) but I can always be better...
As to 'salvation' *shrugs* - From 'hell'? That was just a place for the waste - on the outskirts of town...like the dump...it was a metaphor according to some and how it got twisted into some actual place the organised religion of Christianity created really didn't do their idea of god any favors.
If 0='off' and 1='on' then salvation would be a matter of remaining 'on'. Not 'on'
and sentenced to an eternity of pain and suffering. Seems like as usual some evil got in there and twisted the message to suit some evil agenda... but *whatever*...
Clearly evil. Should have only fought back against Japan. Let those Brits and Frenchies fight their own wars.
