Is doing evil a necessity of life?

What exactly are you
advocating here? Sounds like that "war is peace"
doublespeak, or that you are
condoning immoral behaviour because that's just life. It's a slippery slope my friend...
Regardless of people's stance on evolution, it's the creature that can adapt that will survive, not the "survival of the fittest (richest)".

There have been and will always be entities that decide whether you are fit to adapt or not.

Indeed, I am all too familiar with those who call themselves "authorities", I don't trust anyone who wears a suit or uniform.

The best example is the Spartans and their infanticidal policy. I guess many of those hurled over the cliff would have gone on to become bright minds except they weren't afforded the opportunity. Was that evil a necessity?

I'm sure a lot of Spartans thought so, although the women​ were likely not very happy about it. Even if they weren't killed, Spartan babies had to be able to hold their liquor straight out of the womb. It was a very violent society, with a bit of homosexuality (like in all ancient Greek societies) lots of gods and lots and lots of slaves (murdering one was how you "became a man").

I don't really agree with the Spartan way of life, they were unnecessarily savage and brutal in my opinion, but who am I to judge them? It is ancient history anyway, I'm glad I won't ever meet one. You can certainly learn a lot from history, there were some more articulate Greeks who I enjoyed reading about. The authorities there killed their teacher Socrates, and even those philosophers didn't have all the answers.

We could probably go through all kinds of different examples, but that probably isn't necessary.

Note that they do not
include having to do the
immoral thing and use the
caveat of Jesus as a
scapegoat.
Christians tend to just look for their get out of hell free
card and ignore that having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs they have done, ---so that they might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. Sure, Christians try to justify their using a
scapegoat but cannot
argue their position well at all.

If Jesus is a get out of hell free card, why are some professed Christians going to perish? If we could achieve 'pure repentance' on our own, Christ need not have come to die on the cross. The fact that He came proves that mankind was in desperate need of spiritual assistance. Furthermore, it also proves that only He had the capacity to provide that assistance and no one else.

I don't really want to get into this religious debate again. I will just say that I think it is more important to focus on how he lived and what he said rather than how he 'died' (pbuh). May God guide and protect us all.

I don't really agree with the Spartan way of life, they were unnecessarily savage and brutal in my opinion, but who am I to judge them? It is ancient history anyway, I'm glad I won't ever meet one. You can certainly learn a lot from history

Except the story gets rehashed every other century.

Its how we get to have the Georgia Guidestones first commandment. Some one sees an absolute necessity in maintaining earth's population at half a billion. I was looking at some maps showing where Qatari and Iranian gas pipelines will pass through Syria and i just couldn't believe Big Oil (Halliburton, Exxon et al) would destroy countless lives just to achieve their goals. Do these people ever get a goodnight's sleep? Like you pointed out to GB, its a slippery slope. Who draws the line and where? Obviously, these Big oil execs have rationalized it away in their minds to justify what they are doing. I guess the "upside" in all this is one cannot destroy fellow human beings without destroying oneself (psyche) in the process. In dehumanizing other people we do the same to ourselves simultaneously.
Iam waiting for the Bishop to respond in regard to scapegoating Christ.

With regards to the OP.

In a nutshell, yes, but only to a degree.

Life has to consume other life and compete over resources, this much is evident. There are limits however, and once they are crossed, the hubris, greed and selfishness are only destructive to the world and the soul of the perpetrator of evil. Cooperation is always better, hence the existence of social structures in nature, the relationship between plants and insects or we could even talk about mitochondria.

It goes both ways really, you shouldn't be a complete dick to everything around you who only cares about yourself, but you can't trust anything 100% even if we are all souls trapped in the same crazy boat we call life (maybe even especially because of that). The ancient ideas regarding being moral and attempting to live in peace with all our neighbours still exist (and always will) for some very good reasons, even if we all want to kill each other over the details.

I'm just curious...

What exactly are you advocating here?

Sounds like that "war is peace" doublespeak, or that you are condoning immoral behaviour because that's just life. It's a slippery slope my friend...

Regardless of people's stance on evolution, it's the creature that can adapt that will survive, not the "survival of the fittest (richest)".

Also...

As to the rest. Check your meds.

Are ad-hominem insults the only way you know how to debate?

That's pretty weak dude...

I did not advocate doing anything immoral.

You agree that we must do evil to survive and thrive.

That being the case, is God justified for punishing us for following the natures he purportedly put into us?

Does the pot get the blame for leaking when God himself made the hole?

As to my insult. All who have gone into intellectual dissonance deserve a reminder to stau in reality and not go into stupid faith based supernatural beliefs.

Regards
DL

Real repentance is about accepting our mistakes and our failure to live according to the moral guidance given by The God and making an effort to make up for any wrongdoing and change our wicked ways. Nobody is perfect and we all stumble, it's the getting back up that counts.

Jesus (pbuh) gave us great advice and a good example to follow, but he isn't going to suffer for anybody else's sins. He is a righteous servant of The One God.

Jesus especially stumbled with his immoral doctrines. For instance, his no divorce for women and his scapegoating policies which are both immoral and anti-love.

If that demiurge is the best moral example of a God you can find to follow, you may as well follow Satan.

Care to argue the morality of the Jesus you follow and the Jesus I ignore as unworthy?

Regards
DL

What exactly are you
advocating here? Sounds like that "war is peace"
doublespeak, or that you are
condoning immoral behaviour because that's just life. It's a slippery slope my friend...
Regardless of people's stance on evolution, it's the creature that can adapt that will survive, not the "survival of the fittest (richest)".

There have been and will always be entities that decide whether you are fit to adapt or not. The best example is the Spartans and their infanticidal policy. I guess many of those hurled over the cliff would have gone on to become bright minds except they weren't afforded the opportunity. Was that evil a necessity?

Note that they do not
include having to do the
immoral thing and use the
caveat of Jesus as a
scapegoat.
Christians tend to just look for their get out of hell free
card and ignore that having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs they have done, ---so that they might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. Sure, Christians try to justify their using a
scapegoat but cannot
argue their position well at all.

If Jesus is a get out of hell free card, why are some professed Christians going to perish? If we could achieve 'pure repentance' on our own, Christ need not have come to die on the cross. The fact that He came proves that mankind was in desperate need of spiritual assistance. Furthermore, it also proves that only He had the capacity to provide that assistance and no one else.

That is pure fantasy.

God cannot die and if the Jesus s story was even real, it would not show a worthy sacrifice as nothing of value was lost.

If Christians wish to think that their God would condemn them in the first place, then they show they have already lost the mental battle against their evil demiurge.

That is why they can adore a genocidal son murdering God and can call that prick good.

Regards
DL

That is pure fantasy.
God cannot die and if the Jesus story was even real, it would not show a worthy sacrifice

Its truly amazing how quick you are to trash history or reality for imagination. So somehow, the earthquake and the sun inexplicably going dark at His crucifixion, we are to take as fantasy. Events that clearly impacted much of the Roman Empire. I guess Tacitus was high on acid when he mentioned Christ, Tiberius and Pilate in his annals. All of them were mythical figures i guess...

The Roman historian and senator Tacitus referred to Christ, his execution by Pontius Pilate, and the existence of early Christians in Rome in one page of his final work, Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.
Scholars generally consider
Tacitus' reference to the
execution of Jesus by Pontius Pilate to be both authentic, and of historical value as an independent Roman source.~Wikipedia

"And out of that hopeless
attempt has come nearly all that we call human history—money, poverty, ambition, war, prostitution, classes, empires, slavery—the long terrible story of man trying to find something other than God which will make him happy.”
― C.S. Lewis,

With regards to the OP.

In a nutshell, yes, but only to a degree.

Life has to consume other life and compete over resources, this much is evident. There are limits however, and once they are crossed, the hubris, greed and selfishness are only destructive to the world and the soul of the perpetrator of evil. Cooperation is always better, hence the existence of social structures in nature, the relationship between plants and insects or we could even talk about mitochondria.

It goes both ways really, you shouldn't be a complete dick to everything around you who only cares about yourself, but you can't trust anything 100% even if we are all souls trapped in the same crazy boat we call life (maybe even especially because of that). The ancient ideas regarding being moral and attempting to live in peace with all our neighbours still exist (and always will) for some very good reasons, even if we all want to kill each other over the details.

I'm just curious...

What exactly are you advocating here?

Sounds like that "war is peace" doublespeak, or that you are condoning immoral behaviour because that's just life. It's a slippery slope my friend...

Regardless of people's stance on evolution, it's the creature that can adapt that will survive, not the "survival of the fittest (richest)".

Also...

As to the rest. Check your meds.

Are ad-hominem insults the only way you know how to debate?

That's pretty weak dude...

I did not advocate doing anything immoral.

In the OP you said.

"If sin and doing evil is good and necessary for Adam, who represents all of mankind, then the church and I are suggesting that it is good that we all do evil."

Ignoring for a moment that I simply don't see the necessity for (excessive) evil and sin. Perhaps I should ask you what you think the difference is between 'evil' and 'immorality'?

You still haven't defined those "acts that must be done" or said where the line is drawn....

You agree that we must do evil to survive and thrive.

To a degree, but there are limits, as I clearly said.

If you need some examples. Life consumes life, animals eat other animals or plants, plants take nutrients from the soil which mainly got in the soil due to things dying, that is a necessary evil in this world. Those Jewish banking cartels and secret societies are certainly thriving at the expense of everything else in the world. Are you saying we should be more like those assholes?

Can you see the difference that I am pointing out? Between being balanced and respectful or being excessive and selfish/arrogant. There is a massive difference the way I see it which is why I keep asking you to clarify your position.

The rest of your post is just speculative faith based nonsense, as you would say

As for your next post addressed to me...



I'm not even going to quote that nonsense.

You are aware of the fact that I don't believe Jesus (pbuh) is God, right? I'm pretty consistent in what I say about him, whereas you seem to swing wildly between loving and hating the guy and always deceptively twisting his words to try and suit whatever you are trying to push at the time. This is why I struggle so much to comprehend what your beliefs actually are and what you are advocating. It seems confused and contradictory at best, or just straight manipulative and sinister at worst, either way it seems filled with hate. What would Gnostic Christian Jesus do?

Matthew 5:43-48
You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Peace be upon you Gnostic Bishop, it has been... interesting, as always

As to the Christ I believe had the right ways. He is not the one you follow.
Here are the key points and
quotes.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore
thine eye be single, thy whole
body shall be full of light.
John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

that was in Why did God give Satan to mankind thread. Your ever changing goalposts. Iam dishing out more speculative faith based nonsense from the mythical Christ you believe in (???????)
John 12:32-33
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all
people to myself.” 33 He said this to show the kind of death He was going to die.
John 3:14-15
Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness,
so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.”
John 10:10
The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.

That is pure fantasy.
God cannot die and if the Jesus story was even real, it would not show a worthy sacrifice

Its truly amazing how quick you are to trash history or reality for imagination. So somehow, the earthquake and the sun inexplicably going dark at His crucifixion, we are to take as fantasy. Events that clearly impacted much of the Roman Empire. I guess Tacitus was high on acid when he mentioned Christ, Tiberius and Pilate in his annals. All of them were mythical figures i guess...

The Roman historian and senator Tacitus referred to Christ, his execution by Pontius Pilate, and the existence of early Christians in Rome in one page of his final work, Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.
Scholars generally consider
Tacitus' reference to the
execution of Jesus by Pontius Pilate to be both authentic, and of historical value as an independent Roman source.~Wikipedia

Fantasy and fantasy characters is all you have. That is all all idol worshipers have.

That does not explain why you would want to follow a vile genocidal maniac.

Care to tell us why you would pick a God with such poor morals?

Regards
DL