Good and Evil: How do you know the difference?

[ChrisP]

But he was the one who had hardened Pharoh's heart.

Scripture pls.

 

[drekmed]

Could you please provide chapter:verse for the Hardening of Pharoah's heart. Couldn't find it sorry.

Exodus 10
1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might show these my signs before him:
20 But the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go.
27 But the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he would not let them go.

Exodus 11
10 And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh: and the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land

Exodus 12
29 And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon °; and all the firstborn of cattle.

Exodus 14
8 And the LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and he pursued after the children of Israel: and the children of Israel went out with an high hand.


I believe these are the verses JerryL was referring to

Drekmed

 

[Paraprakrti]

Hi All,

How can you tell the difference between good and evil? Are there any moral absolutes? If so, what are they? Or if you don't believe in moral absolutes, how do you personally view something as "good" or "evil" (or do you not use those categories at all?) Does your view of God hold that s/he is good, evil, a little of both or above (or below) those categories?

Peace

Atheists define morals based on sense gratification. Theists define morals based on a relationship with the Absolute God. That is really the bottomline. The theistic basis for morals doesn't rule out giving comfort to others in their material existence, but it is only focused on such as a means to an end; that end being, of course, a relationship with God. The idea is to reduce the suffering enough to allow spiritual-realization.

The position of God is truly transcendental to relative designations of so-called good and evil. The theist typically refers to God as good because He is the goal of all knowledge. If I were teaching a class and were to ask the students the answer for 2+2, when someone answers, "4", I may reply, "good". Similarly, God is good because He is the final conclusion. Another way to look at this is that our designating God as "good" helps us to develop (or better yet, reveal) our relationship with Him. If "bad" is relatively defined as that which is unnaceptable or undesirable then to say that God is bad contradicts our spiritual realization; that being that we are all spirit-souls who are eternally related and dependent on God.

 

[WindsofWater2]

It's quite a paradox...good and bad can be recalled in a flash when it comes to any man. But to scratch beneath the surface makes us question.

They may be relative, they may be subjectively originited, but plus, subjectivity is the only way to determine morals, to determine what doesn't harm man. It's probably how "absolute" morals were engineered, because many people already believe they found the best morals, after relative "experimenting." All morals are pointed in the direction of the highest preservation of the overal society's survival factor. It all aims toward survival, or happiness, to say the least.

I wouldn't stick with one side, relative or absolute. It's both, depending on what paradigm you are using at the time.

 

[constantine]

good and bad(evil) are defined by morals.
morals are defined through oneself learning the benifits and downfalls to each..
he who would do for others the way he would want done for himself ,
defines a common belief for the entire world to be able to tell the difference between
something good like....love...friendships and family......
or something bad like...hate....,rape.....and a punch in the face.......

unless somebody enjoys a punch in the face.......

 

[linwood]

Atheists define morals based on sense gratification. Theists define morals based on a relationship with the Absolute God. That is really the bottomline.

Crap..

I`ve defined my morals upon that which causes no or less harm.
If living up to my self implied moral standards causes me pain or disconfort I am still held to those moral standards.

Sense gratification has no bearing on my moral standards.

 

[linwood]

good and bad(evil) are defined by morals.
morals are defined through oneself learning the benifits and downfalls to each..
he who would do for others the way he would want done for himself ,
defines a common belief for the entire world to be able to tell the difference between
something good like....love...friendships and family......
or something bad like...hate....,rape.....and a punch in the face.......

unless somebody enjoys a punch in the face.......

The point is that none of this is objective.
Love ..friendships and family can and often are "Bad".
The only way to objectify them is to raise the "No true scotsman fallacy".

Hate and a punch in the face can in their turn both be "good".

You have me on rape as I can find no way within my moral code to subjectify it.