Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Crispy™ What's the hierarchy of Codex staff members?

Self-Ejected

c2007

Self-Ejected
Joined
May 24, 2017
Messages
1,091
Location
404
Logically it has to be. Lots of unintended consequences though. Namely, that evil is necessary because God made it.

It's sad when people give in to evil.
It is in their nature. Flawed God made flawed man, cannot be any other way.

Something something jealous God, made everything but jealous because ???
 
Self-Ejected

c2007

Self-Ejected
Joined
May 24, 2017
Messages
1,091
Location
404
Evil is a privation of good, and privation has no being, and thus is not something made or created.

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/index.p...herself-due-to-cur.127946/page-7#post-6173351
:nocountryforshitposters:

Evil is privation of the GoOD. The GOD never accounted for it, or indeed celebrates it?

Believer, you will never get past the problem of evil. You can depend on all the assumption-based logic you want, being intelligent enough to know full well you have had to buy a premise to be where you are - and still the problem of evil will stare at you unblinkingly and say, "lel".
 
Last edited:

hexer

Guest
Evil is a privation of good, and privation has no being, and thus is not something made or created.

Is vacuum evil? Because it also has no being.
In any universe with free will it's inevitable that the evil will emerge by the sole fact minds produce free roaming thoughts.
Also, from God's perspective, evil cannot do him harm. Thinking evil will harm you is also a test of true faith.
 

hexer

Guest
listening to Catholics speak about anything else other than paedophilia(which they are uniquely proficient in) is the same as listening to some pagan pajeet

Have you ever considered pedophiles might pose as priests so they get easy unsupervised access to kids?
 

hivemind

Cipher
Patron
Pretty Princess
Joined
Feb 6, 2019
Messages
2,386
>pose as priests
nice cope

they don't pose, they are priests, paedophiles are priests, ergo priests = paedophiles

I know your tiny pagan brain can't comprehend this level of logic but just try to accept it on faith(something that Catholics, through their practice of the profane discipline of apologetics, also lack)
 

janjetina

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
14,231
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
Torment: Tides of Numenera
Evil is a privation of good, and privation has no being, and thus is not something made or created.

Is vacuum evil? Because it also has no being.

That is incorrect. Vacuum is surely not a privation of good, but a portion of space that does not contain a single material particle. As it is a portion of space, it has being. By claiming the opposite you are begging the question in favour of materialism. Putting aside the question of real existence of ideal vacuum, that is.

In any universe with free will it's inevitable that the evil will emerge by the sole fact minds produce free roaming thoughts.
Also, from God's perspective, evil cannot do him harm. Thinking evil will harm you is also a test of true faith.

What we understand as a morally evil act is, in a metaphysical sense an informed free choice between a greater and lesser good in which greater good (God) is forfeit for a lesser one (creature). Good is diminished by such a choice. It is just easier to state for us that "evil is done", than to talk about good being deprived.
 
Self-Ejected

c2007

Self-Ejected
Joined
May 24, 2017
Messages
1,091
Location
404
https://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/introbook2.1/x4603.html
"I must make one confession" Ivan began. "I could never understand how one can love one's neighbours. It's just one's neighbours, to my mind, that one can't love, though one might love those at a distance. I once read somewhere of John the Merciful, a saint, that when a hungry, frozen beggar came to him, he took him into his bed, held him in his arms, and began breathing into his mouth, which was putrid and loathsome from some awful disease. I am convinced that he did that from 'self-laceration,' from the self-laceration of falsity, for the sake of the charity imposed by duty, as a penance laid on him. For anyone to love a man, he must be hidden, for as soon as he shows his face, love is gone."

"Father Zossima has talked of that more than once," observed Alyosha; "he, too, said that the face of a man often hinders many people not practised in love, from loving him. But yet there's a great deal of love in mankind, and almost Christ-like love. I know that myself, Ivan."

"Well, I know nothing of it so far, and can't understand it, and the innumerable mass of mankind are with me there. The question is, whether that's due to men's bad qualities or whether it's inherent in their nature. To my thinking, Christ-like love for men is a miracle impossible on earth. He was God. But we are not gods. Suppose I, for instance, suffer intensely. Another can never know how much I suffer, because he is another and not I. And what's more, a man is rarely ready to admit another's suffering (as though it were a distinction). Why won't he admit it, do you think? Because I smell unpleasant, because I have a stupid face, because I once trod on his foot. Besides, there is suffering and suffering; degrading, humiliating suffering such as humbles me—hunger, for instance—my benefactor will perhaps allow me; but when you come to higher suffering—for an idea, for instance—he will very rarely admit that, perhaps because my face strikes him as not at all what he fancies a man should have who suffers for an idea. And so he deprives me instantly of his favour, and not at all from badness of heart. Beggars, especially genteel beggars, ought never to show themselves, but to ask for charity through the newspapers. One can love one's neighbours in the abstract, or even at a distance, but at close quarters it's almost impossible. If it were as on the stage, in the ballet, where if beggars come in, they wear silken rags and tattered lace and beg for alms dancing gracefully, then one might like looking at them. But even then we should not love them. But enough of that. I simply wanted to show you my point of view. I meant to speak of the suffering of mankind generally, but we had better confine ourselves to the sufferings of the children. That reduces the scope of my argument to a tenth of what it would be. Still we'd better keep to the children, though it does weaken my case. But, in the first place, children can be loved even at close quarters, even when they are dirty, even when they are ugly (I fancy, though, children never are ugly). The second reason why I won't speak of grown-up people is that, besides being disgusting and unworthy of love, they have a compensation—they've eaten the apple and know good and evil, and they have become 'like gods.' They go on eating it still. But the children haven't eaten anything, and are so far innocent. Are you fond of children, Alyosha? I know you are, and you will understand why I prefer to speak of them. If they, too, suffer horribly on earth, they must suffer for their fathers' sins, they must be punished for their fathers, who have eaten the apple; but that reasoning is of the other world and is incomprehensible for the heart of man here on earth. The innocent must not suffer for another's sins, and especially such innocents! You may be surprised at me, Alyosha, but I am awfully fond of children, too. And observe, cruel people, the violent, the rapacious, the Karamazovs are sometimes very fond of children. Children while they are quite little—up to seven, for instance—are so remote from grown-up people they are different creatures, as it were, of a different species. I knew a criminal in prison who had, in the course of his career as a burglar, murdered whole families, including several children. But when he was in prison, he had a strange affection for them. He spent all his time at his window, watching the children playing in the prison yard. He trained one little boy to come up to his window and made great friends with him… You don't know why I am telling you all this, Alyosha? My head aches and I am sad."

It's all so simple when you limit your path of thinking to idealism. When you add one simple dose of reality, the true believer with a brain admits that it is possible they are incorrect and simply becomes a believer, which is perfectly sane.

The rest continue trying to "win" for (((God))).
 

janjetina

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
14,231
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
Torment: Tides of Numenera
https://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/introbook2.1/x4603.html
"I must make one confession" Ivan began. "I could never understand how one can love one's neighbours. It's just one's neighbours, to my mind, that one can't love, though one might love those at a distance. I once read somewhere of John the Merciful, a saint, that when a hungry, frozen beggar came to him, he took him into his bed, held him in his arms, and began breathing into his mouth, which was putrid and loathsome from some awful disease. I am convinced that he did that from 'self-laceration,' from the self-laceration of falsity, for the sake of the charity imposed by duty, as a penance laid on him. For anyone to love a man, he must be hidden, for as soon as he shows his face, love is gone."

"Father Zossima has talked of that more than once," observed Alyosha; "he, too, said that the face of a man often hinders many people not practised in love, from loving him. But yet there's a great deal of love in mankind, and almost Christ-like love. I know that myself, Ivan."

"Well, I know nothing of it so far, and can't understand it, and the innumerable mass of mankind are with me there. The question is, whether that's due to men's bad qualities or whether it's inherent in their nature. To my thinking, Christ-like love for men is a miracle impossible on earth. He was God. But we are not gods. Suppose I, for instance, suffer intensely. Another can never know how much I suffer, because he is another and not I. And what's more, a man is rarely ready to admit another's suffering (as though it were a distinction). Why won't he admit it, do you think? Because I smell unpleasant, because I have a stupid face, because I once trod on his foot. Besides, there is suffering and suffering; degrading, humiliating suffering such as humbles me—hunger, for instance—my benefactor will perhaps allow me; but when you come to higher suffering—for an idea, for instance—he will very rarely admit that, perhaps because my face strikes him as not at all what he fancies a man should have who suffers for an idea. And so he deprives me instantly of his favour, and not at all from badness of heart. Beggars, especially genteel beggars, ought never to show themselves, but to ask for charity through the newspapers. One can love one's neighbours in the abstract, or even at a distance, but at close quarters it's almost impossible. If it were as on the stage, in the ballet, where if beggars come in, they wear silken rags and tattered lace and beg for alms dancing gracefully, then one might like looking at them. But even then we should not love them. But enough of that. I simply wanted to show you my point of view. I meant to speak of the suffering of mankind generally, but we had better confine ourselves to the sufferings of the children. That reduces the scope of my argument to a tenth of what it would be. Still we'd better keep to the children, though it does weaken my case. But, in the first place, children can be loved even at close quarters, even when they are dirty, even when they are ugly (I fancy, though, children never are ugly). The second reason why I won't speak of grown-up people is that, besides being disgusting and unworthy of love, they have a compensation—they've eaten the apple and know good and evil, and they have become 'like gods.' They go on eating it still. But the children haven't eaten anything, and are so far innocent. Are you fond of children, Alyosha? I know you are, and you will understand why I prefer to speak of them. If they, too, suffer horribly on earth, they must suffer for their fathers' sins, they must be punished for their fathers, who have eaten the apple; but that reasoning is of the other world and is incomprehensible for the heart of man here on earth. The innocent must not suffer for another's sins, and especially such innocents! You may be surprised at me, Alyosha, but I am awfully fond of children, too. And observe, cruel people, the violent, the rapacious, the Karamazovs are sometimes very fond of children. Children while they are quite little—up to seven, for instance—are so remote from grown-up people they are different creatures, as it were, of a different species. I knew a criminal in prison who had, in the course of his career as a burglar, murdered whole families, including several children. But when he was in prison, he had a strange affection for them. He spent all his time at his window, watching the children playing in the prison yard. He trained one little boy to come up to his window and made great friends with him… You don't know why I am telling you all this, Alyosha? My head aches and I am sad."

It's all so simple when you limit your path of thinking to idealism. When you add one simple dose of reality, the true believer with a brain admits that it is possible they are incorrect and simply becomes a believer, which is perfectly sane.

The rest continue trying to "win" for (((God))).

Of course, Ivan Karamazov. Read more Aleksej, less Ivan.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Messages
105
Location
the little TV in your left ear
The rest continue trying to "win" for (((God))).
Catholics don't believe in God though.

They believe first and foremost in Paul(a jew) and then three demigods with magical powers.

2iLGdfs.jpg
 

hexer

Guest
That is incorrect. Vacuum is surely not a privation of good, but a portion of space that does not contain a single material particle. As it is a portion of space, it has being. By claiming the opposite you are begging the question in favour of materialism. Putting aside the question of real existence of ideal vacuum, that is.

OK, for a moment I thought you were a materialist.
I'm an idealist too, there's nothing else I could be with me being a chemist and theologist by education
 

Jasede

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
24,793
Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Codex Year of the Donut I'm very into cock and ball torture
It's interesting that some people don't mentally ignore that roleplayer to this day.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom