jump to last post 1-19 of 19 discussions (97 posts)

An Eye for an Eye

  1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
    Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago

    I wrote a hub called Being Unique... In it I state,

    "Being evil to evil is good, but it is also evil. Being brilliantly good saints at doing evil to evil is a greater evil to evil, but it also a greater good. This I call God's Paradox, because only God could have possibly created something this complex and it, to me is the proof that God is a being of Goodness even though God allows evil to exist.

    Another way of saying this is, you really only have two choices, 1- to do good or 2- to do evil...either way you choose...your doing evil.

    Remember do evil to evil by doing only good, the greater the good you do, the greater the evil you do to evil, and that makes it all alright."


    I'm starting to think maybe this is where the term 'eye for an eye' came from (doing evil to evil), and it became over time about revenge and doing harm to 'Anyone' that did a person any slight....

    Your Thoughts?

    1. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      i don't see it that way.
      It doesn't matter how much Good you do, Evil won't increase nor decrease.
      Evil is one thing, and Good another.
      Let's say that while a war is going on, and a lot of people get killed, there's a Mission doing charity in another country.
      what the 'good' of the mission can alter the 'evil' of the war ?

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
        Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        The point is by doing ONLY good
        if people only do good, there would be no war.

        1. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          If people only do GOOD , Good and Evil disappears all together.
          If there's no action against one or the other, the word loses its meaning.
          If you only have beauty and no ugliness, you don't need the word beauty anymore.
          you couldn't say: How beautiful is miss X, if there's no ugly people
          you can't say Mr. Q is so good, if there's no evil anymore.

          It would never happen in a bipolar world.In a world of opposites.

          1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
            Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this
    2. vox vocis profile image92
      vox vocisposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Nice thoughts! And definitely a better way of thinking compared to usual understanding of this word play!

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
        Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Thank You

    3. AdsenseStrategies profile image71
      AdsenseStrategiesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Only works if you define "doing evil" in some unconventional way which, IMO, you cannot do (because if we ditch the agreed-upon meanings of words and phrases we cannot get anywhere... I can't arbitrarily to decide to start calling turnips "carrots").

      "Doing evil" is doing damage to something of worth (like a person, a great work of art, a planet, and so on). I am not doing evil when I destroy a big pile of garbage, for example, unless, as I say, you want to define "doing evil" in an idiosyncratic way (but, again, if I want to define "eating radishes" as "climbing Mt Everest" that's up to me... doesn't mean I am right)

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
        Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        The definitions:

        from Wikipedia;
        Evil, in many cultures, is a broad term used to describe what are seen as subjectively harmful deeds that are labeled as such to steer moral support. Evil is usually contrasted with good, which describes acts that are subjectively beneficial to the observer. In some religions, evil is an active force, often personified as an entity such as Satan or Ahriman.

        from Dictionary dot com;


        e⋅vil  /ˈivəl/  Show Spelled Pronunciation [ee-vuhl]  Show IPA
        Use evil in a Sentence
        See images of evil
        Search evil on the Web
        –adjective 1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life. 
        2. harmful; injurious: evil laws. 
        3. characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: to be fallen on evil days. 
        4. due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: an evil reputation. 
        5. marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: He is known for his evil disposition. 

        –noun 6. that which is evil; evil quality, intention, or conduct: to choose the lesser of two evils. 
        7. the force in nature that governs and gives rise to wickedness and sin.
        8. the wicked or immoral part of someone or something: The evil in his nature has destroyed the good. 
        9. harm; mischief; misfortune: to wish one evil. 
        10. anything causing injury or harm: Tobacco is considered by some to be an evil. 
        11. a harmful aspect, effect, or consequence: the evils of alcohol. 
        12. a disease, as king's evil.

        –adverb 13. in an evil manner; badly; ill: It went evil with him. 

        —Idiom14. the evil one, the devil; Satan.

        1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
          Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          My interpretation is Evil is simply to damage... even if it is damage to something worthless...

    4. marinealways24 profile image61
      marinealways24posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      As psychologically poor as the bible is written, I don't think that much thought was put into "an eye for an eye". I think it was simply another law in attempts to find an equal punishment to criminals.

      We still use eye for an eye punishment in our justice system along with others. The death sentence is an eye for an eye.

    5. thevoice profile image60
      thevoiceposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      an eye for and eye never works its my street past its so true human writings of bible are not God Jesus the holy spirit in truth birth freedom. Read of holy stigmata is breath of human life with Jesus

    6. goldenpath profile image80
      goldenpathposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Interesting.  In one of my recent hubs on Israel I've illustrated how God actually uses the Adversary's evil designs to bring about a greater good.  The Adversary dwells on the satisfaction of the "here and now" and does not have the eternal perspective capability that God has.  This is actually good for the great plan for the human species.  The bondage of the tribes of Israel was allowed to take place to justify and enable their eventual exodus.  There are many other examples as well.

      As far as "eye for an eye".  Much of the laws in Biblical text are based on the Law of Moses.  What is not well known is that the Law of Moses was fulfilled with the Atonement of Jesus Christ.  After that the replacement for the Law of Moses was the new covenant established by the Savior.  Many in the forums have repeatedly said that they are not saved by works.  This is a misunderstanding of scripture.  That passage refers to the works within the Law of Moses and is not a part of the new covenant.  He was saying that we are not saved by the acts of the rituals under the Law of Moses.  In other words He was teaching us that we can qualify for salvation upon our works under free agency unto our fellow man and not through blind works under the Law of Moses.  Eye for an eye was correct but is under a law that has been fulfilled.

      In fact the purpose of the Law of Moses was TO BE fulfilled and not to endure beyond the Savior's personal ministry.  He fulfilled that and thus the new law and covenant was instituted.

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
        Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I believe that all things are meant to be 'fulfilled' with the exception of God...

        "For every new begining, is an old beginings end."

  2. 0
    lyricsingrayposted 7 years ago

    Love your new pic and each eye, big_smile

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Thanks (blushing)

  3. 0
    A Texanposted 7 years ago

    You lost me at

    "Being evil to evil is good, but it is also evil. Being brilliantly good saints at doing evil to evil is a greater evil to evil, but it also a greater good."

    Please, never do that again.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Not often I agree with the Texan. big_smile

      Seriously - you want to justify your ridiculous beliefs. Do it in your head. wink

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
        Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks for playing...

        1. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Not really wanting anyone's thoughts then?



          That is right - you have all the answers.

          Makes me wonder why you bother asking for people's thoughts. Oh yeah - the fight.

          Good for you. Jesus would be prowd. lol

          1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
            Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this
            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Ah - I see. I don't blame you. My thoughts make sense and you wouldn't want  that to interfere with the fight, ill will and conflict you want to happen.

              I will leave you to your fight then. Jesus would be proud. wink

              Very, very well done. Excellent fight. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

              1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
                Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Thanks

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh - my pleasure. Anyone that drives away people from the idea of a god is alright in my book. Especially when they think they are doing the opposite. lol lol

                  Well done.

                  Just remember - IF YOU CANNOT DISPROVE IT IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!!!

                  lol lol

                  1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
                    Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    you got the quote wrong again   it is if you cannot disprove it... it Could be true...

                    Kids, buy 'em books and buy 'em books...what do they do? Chew on the covers and use the pages for toilet paper...geez

  4. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
    Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago

    @ A Texan
    Lol...

    Is that a way of asking me to clarify? Or are you just being funny?

    1. 0
      A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Don't worry about me, carry on.

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
        Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Ok

  5. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 7 years ago

    The only facts of this thread are that Good and Evil exists.
    They're human conditions.
    Now ,believing in Satan or God ,that's something unreal, that you can choose to believe in. No proof of them.

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Then by your logic if you can't prove it, it isn't true?


      Can you prove God is unreal? How about Satan? Got proof?

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Got proof on the contrary ?

        1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
          Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Is that a no? You don't have any proof.

          In my belief system, I believe that there are things that exist even though we cannot yet prove they exist. For me however the proof that God exists is written in my hub 'why Mikel believes in God'...  If your interested, and again more proof is shown in my hub 'Feelings as Proof'

          1. tantrum profile image60
            tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            well, there are different belief systems. In mine I only believe in myself.
            Anyway Good and Evil are human conditions. nothing to do with Religion. Even if religion wouldn't exist anymore, Good and Evil will remain.

            1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
              Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Well Stated.

              1. tantrum profile image60
                tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I'm glad you agree cool
                You do, right ? hmm

                big_smile

                1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
                  Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Saying you stated your point well, doesn't mean that I necessarily agree, with your well stated statement.

                  1. tantrum profile image60
                    tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    sad sad sad


                    lol

                    there's no remedy for you !
                    I give up!
                    lol

  6. Arthur Fontes profile image92
    Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago

    Evil to me is based on intent.

    Someone may be trying to do good in their heart and it ends up doing more damage than aid.

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Doing good can also be termed:
      Hurting evil...or damaging evil...

      therefore doing good is doing evil(harming evil), but it is ONLY harmful to evil. Since harming evil (stopping evil) is a good thing...

      doing good is the harming of evil, or as I stated earlier, the doing of evil to evil.

      1. Arthur Fontes profile image92
        Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hypothetical:

        I find termites in my house.  I hire an exterminator to commit genocide on the termites with Weapons of Mass Destruction(poison)

        Who is evil me or the termites?

        1. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Both

          1. Arthur Fontes profile image92
            Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            How could the termites be evil they are trying to provide for their family?

            1. tantrum profile image60
              tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              But in the process they're harming you

        2. marinealways24 profile image61
          marinealways24posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          The wood for drawing the termites!

        3. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
          Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I'm not trying to define what is evil and what isn't...
          I'm merely stating that doing evil to evil(whatever acts or entities that may be) is an act of evil, but it is also,at the same time an act of good, because it only hurts evil...
          Which I'm calling 'God's Paradox' ...

  7. moanalisa profile image61
    moanalisaposted 7 years ago

    Does chopping off fingers prevent theft? Is it good to do so? Is it right to put to death a sociopath to prevent further murders?

    The "godsense" is within oneself, to what point can you justify these actions and feel good and right for your actions?

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      But in my mind 'chopping of fingers' is evil...it is not an example of doing only good ...

      the sociopath I would deem as an evil being, therefore doing the evil (execution) would be doing evil to evil, which is a good thing.

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Doing evil to evil isn't a good thing. Finding out what cause them to do what they did and how to fix it? is the answer to explore. Not killing them.

        Taking a life isn't warranted, regardless. It's morally wrong, as is what they did to deserve you taking their life.

        No Human has the right to take another's life. It's morally wrong and NOT good in anyway. Attacking the problem that cause them to kill someone is better addressed, so as to prevent it from happening again.

        Killing them isn't an answer to their action.

        1. marinealways24 profile image61
          marinealways24posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I highly agree. I also think it teaches children that killing is an alright punishment when they see their government legally kill. When a person is killed, nothing is learned from them. If they are alive, things could be learned to prevent similar cases in the future. Agreed.

          1. Cagsil profile image60
            Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            It tells you that a moral standard would need to be established, better than the morality of society presently. Correct? smile

            1. marinealways24 profile image61
              marinealways24posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Yes! But one that can only be believed by faith. I think logic is that government makes far too many profits off of wars and killing.

              1. Cagsil profile image60
                Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Now, you're not making sense. A person can be taught a moral standard. Morality isn't natural.

                Morality is taught by parents to children.

                Regardless of what government wants, it can be set, simply by teaching it to others. smile

                1. marinealways24 profile image61
                  marinealways24posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Will governments ever sacrifice power and money for morals? This is what I mean. I don't think it is logical to believe.

                  Not all children have parents to teach them morals and the ones that do sometimes have parents that teach them negative morals. I don't think there is a book of morals anywhere that is witten as absolute. Even if they were, how many would believe and act on them as absolute?

                  It is hard to teach to others when there is much confusion surrounding it. Sometimes killing is neccessary to prevent future killing at the same time saying the death penalty is wrong.

        2. moanalisa profile image61
          moanalisaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          So if someone is intent on taking the life of my daughter, I am supposed to chat with them, psychoanalize their intentions and try to talk it out of them before I even try to defend my daughter? Life is harsh and sometimes it comes to having to choose between the lesser of evils.

          1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
            Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            again your discussing 'What is evil?' and 'which is the worse evil'

            that isn't what the forum is about...

          2. Cagsil profile image60
            Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Now, you're taking things to an extreme. If your own life is in jeopardy, it is instinctive to defend oneself. Killing itself, is morally wrong in a civilized society. But, instinctive life threatening defense is exactly that. It's not seen as a direct kill. You have to kill in that instance, survival accounts more than the kill.

            There is no lessor of evils. Evil is evil and it can be seen by it's actions.

            1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
              Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              WHATEVER

              1. Cagsil profile image60
                Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Nice comeback. You wit astounds me. roll

            2. moanalisa profile image61
              moanalisaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Ok, I see, there are exceptions when it becomes self-serving?

              1. Cagsil profile image60
                Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Oneself survival? Self-serving? No. Instinctive. There is a difference. smile

  8. moanalisa profile image61
    moanalisaposted 7 years ago

    The fact you even present arguments within arguments, Mikel, you are doing precisely that. Kudos for you for stealthing your own thread and yet by good intentions, derail your efforts.

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I dont understand what your saying here.

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        i don't either.
        Sounds very academic!
        lol

  9. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 7 years ago

    god's paradox is, how an all knowing omnipotent God  can come up with such a foul creation.

    1. marinealways24 profile image61
      marinealways24posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      This is where they say "free will".

      Bible definition of free will: God wants you to be free, but wants you to worship him. big_smile

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        lol lol

    2. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      that goes back to the necessity of having opposites, which you used to argue your point earlier...

      For Good to exist, Evil must also exist...

      as written in my hubs 'Being Unique, the thing that makes us ALL the same.' and 'The Balance of Good and Evil' and 'Knowing Mikel G Roberts...A Piece in God's Puzzle' and 'My Brain... my mental navigator' and so on and so on...

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        The entire human race could be good. It would only mean that EVIL exists somewhere else. smile

        1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
          Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          No that is the point, evil would exist right here...

          goodness is the doing of evil to evil. That is in itself an evil act(the doing of good) to evil.

          that is 'God's Paradox'

          1. Cagsil profile image60
            Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Goodness is NOT the doing evil to evil. As I stated. smile

            1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
              Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Thanks for playing.

              1. Cagsil profile image60
                Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                And, now you're telling me I'm wrong and you're right, by saying "Thanks for playing".

                Nice try to backstop what I have said. And, if you disagree, with what I said, then your actions throughout your entire life, will be selfish and for yourself only.

                So, either way. You have a been told. smile

        2. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          that's called IDEALISM

      2. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        A very wrong creation !You just have to look around.

        And about knowing Mikel G. Roberts.... hmm
        thinking about it !
        lol

  10. aware profile image70
    awareposted 7 years ago

    the end of the eye for a eye thing is' leaves everyone blind'

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      wink smile

    2. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      So you're aware !!!
      big_smile

  11. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 7 years ago

    lol

  12. Alessia Amnesia profile image59
    Alessia Amnesiaposted 7 years ago

    Okay... ignoring all of the previous comments trying to justify the original post, I'm not comprehending the original post.

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      ok   what part is the most confusing?...

      You know what a paradox is right?

      1. Alessia Amnesia profile image59
        Alessia Amnesiaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Yes, I know what a paradox is. The entire thing is confusing. You don't offer any reasons why you think what you think, thus making it very hard to comprehend what you are actually trying to say.

        Give me some examples and maybe I'll understand better what you're trying to say.

  13. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
    Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago

    roll


    turn the lights out when your done...

  14. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
    Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago

    @ Alessia
    Ok proof is the logic of the paradox...which by the nature of a paradox is confusing and self refuting...

    All the hubs I listed in earlier text(on this thread) are where the proof and the rationalizing of the OP took place and reading those might help.
    There is no one or two word explanation though, it is a complex paradox and difficult to understand at best.

    1. Alessia Amnesia profile image59
      Alessia Amnesiaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I guess the topic itself doesn't interest me enough to read the hubs you listed. Perhaps I am just too simple-minded.

  15. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 7 years ago

    I think now it's time to go and see who Mikel G. Roberts is.

    I'm going to your hubs, mate !
    Beware ! lol

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      (grinning) I'm shaking with fear...  wink

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        You should ! I just comment in 2 of them
        lol

  16. moanalisa profile image61
    moanalisaposted 7 years ago

    Good luck to you with your book.

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Wrong thread I think...

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        lol

  17. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
    Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago

    wink

  18. marcel285 profile image83
    marcel285posted 7 years ago

    For every terrific, there is a terrible, in every terrible there is a terrific. There has to be balance, there is balance in absolutely everything. That is the human race, there can be no more evil than good, or no more good than evil, else we would evolve to something other than human. Which is possible, but highly unlikely.

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Nicely Stated, you have read my hub 'Humanity the Middle Ground' I take it...

  19. marcel285 profile image83
    marcel285posted 7 years ago

    No i hadn't read it, but i have now. Sounds like we agree. smile

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image89
      Mikel G Robertsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      smile

 
working