What goes around, comes around.

Originally posted by chithappens
"Good" here does not mean good (I hate this damn word.) The way it is written can be seen many different ways. For example, it could mean that "good intentions" implies that the person is doing good for themselves or some sense of justice. Hitler going to Hell? More than likely, but he was doing what he thought was "right" to help his people. Extreme case but easily applies. "Good" intention, "evil" acts.

Having thought about it a bit more, I think the statement should have been phrased this way.

"The road to hell is based on men's perceived good intentions."

So to me, the flaw with the original quote is that it gives the impression of man being the final judge on what "good" and "evil" represents. The original author's version of "good" leaves way too much room for subjectivity of what these things truly represent.

So to simplify a bit, I don't believe that something that represents a divine or perfect good -- could lead to an ultimate purpose that consisted of ultimate evil. Still, I must admit that I am speaking from a very limited view and understanding of what "good" and "evil" truly represent. Or perhaps Job describes it best --

"Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know."

Originally posted by chithappens
Personally I just get up at the end. Not sure what to adhere to at the moment.

I want to believe what you said also. Faith in some omniscient being working it out for all of us so long as we do as he says seems so tyrannical. I don't trust it: the words of men have deceived on a historical and personal basis. History is "his story."

As Nas said "Never talking among snakes cause the words of men kill."

Or in this case deceive i.e. Paradise Lost. I hate how John Milton writes but it is a good read once you take you time with it.

I don't believe God's intention is to harm us, nor do I believe it to be tyrannical. He may be the author of the "story" so to speak, but at the same time - I believe that he makes it easy for us to edit it. Ultimately though like any author he does have the rights to do any final revisions on the book, so this is where the faith aspect come's in to play for me. I have faith that this book of life he created has a good ending to it, and I base this faith on what I've observed from the author's Word and actions.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
i hope you find your Heaven...it seems to mean a lot to you....

Just now you're Heaven is not the Heaven that myself or many others desire. We will find our own paths, and our own way.

Thank you. Ultimately though, we all have to take responsability for the choices we make, despite the perceived "good" or "bad" circumstances we find ourselves presented with in this life. I sincerely hope at some point, you are able to see that this "good" exists outside of your own wants and desires, and see how loving this type of good truly is.

Originally posted by Thundar
Thank you. Ultimately though, we all have to take responsability for the choices we make, despite the perceived "good" or "bad" circumstances we find ourselves presented with in this life. I sincerely hope at some point, you are able to see that this "good" exists outside of your own wants and desires, and see how loving this type of good truly is.

Good can't be loving. 😆

In general it seems many believe that the cause/effect cycle implies that there are not effects that simply occur that may be viewed as "bad" or "good" aside from those in question. Just because doing "good" results in some "good" returning doesn't negate all other effects that may occur just by chance, nor does it imply that the returned "good "will outweigh the chance "ill"

Originally posted by Thundar
Having thought about it a bit more, I think the statement should have been phrased this way.

"The road to hell is based on men's perceived good intentions."

So to me, the flaw with the original quote is that it gives the impression of man being the final judge on what "good" and "evil" represents. The original author's version of "good" leaves way too much room for subjectivity of what these things truly represent.

So to simplify a bit, I don't believe that something that represents a divine or perfect good -- could lead to an ultimate purpose that consisted of ultimate evil. Still, I must admit that I am speaking from a very limited view and understanding of what "good" and "evil" truly represent. Or perhaps Job describes it best --

"Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know."

I take the quote to imply the way you paraphrased it. The problem comes with the words used to define the "intentions" - good and bad have always been subjective and can never been applied universally.

I do not believe in a perfect good or an ultimate evil. I believe it far reaching to say that something is "perfect" because you could get have something and say that it is "perfect" meaning that it could never get any better. But what if you think of some improvement of some sort.

* I worded this terribly but I'm tired. Please just look @ refutations of Greek philosophers ideas on the "perfect" forms of the other plane.

Nice quote from Job though. That story is funny because I think it's not something that would happen often but I'll probably come back and say something on that later.

Tired. Chit out.

Originally posted by chithappens
I take the quote to imply the way you paraphrased it. The problem comes with the words used to define the "intentions" - good and bad have always been subjective and can never been applied universally.

I do not believe in a perfect good or an ultimate evil. I believe it far reaching to say that something is "perfect" because you could get have something and say that it is "perfect" meaning that it could never get any better. But what if you think of some improvement of some sort.

* I worded this terribly but I'm tired. Please just look @ refutations of Greek philosophers ideas on the "perfect" forms of the other plane.

Nice quote from Job though. That story is funny because I think it's not something that would happen often but I'll probably come back and say something on that later.

Tired. Chit out.

Well yes, fundamentally - we have to assume there is something that is absolutely correct - or perfect, or else we would have really nothing to base our arguments on, and this would be a rather pointless discussion. The only time subjectivety comes into play is when one believes there is an ultimate judge making such a determination. So true subjectivity of the concepts "good" and "evil" -- really only applies to something divine in nature(i.e. God)

Many men can do things perceived to be good by the world and by themselves, however, the underlying motive and result may bring about evil. I believe that the evil can be found in any one thing or in all of them, and doesn't necessarily have to be present within them all to be deemed ultimately "evil" - at least by a divine judge.

There are definite gray and muddled areas though, just as much as there are polarizing ones. As I grow in understanding, I tend to think that evil is more of an extremist-selfish-discontent mindset, and exists at all levels of the spectrum.

You gave a good example of such a mindset in another thread, relating to a father giving advice to his son of "go out and meet as many women as possible." Was the advice bad or inherently evil? Of course not. Like you stated - the evil aspect comes into play when the son selfishly utilizes this information to the extreme and becomes a womanizer, or when the son then goes back to the father and falsely accuses him of giving bad advice. So in the end, my firm belief is that the choices we make, lead to these perceived "good" or "bad" conclusions.

Still, despite any evil commited - I strongly believe that all things will at some point go to assisting this greater good, which in my mind - exists outside of the spectrum of what I know good, evil, and the gray areas to be.

Or to go back to the son analogy, I'm sure you know of the story of the prodigal son. The son in this story knew that he had commited wrong against his father and hadn't used his inheritance wisely, but in the end despite his evil actions - he took responsability for himself, and ultimately the conclusion to the matter was a good one. I know I'm over-simplifying a bit, and not explaining things all that well - but I think you get the basic gist of the story if you are really looking for it..😉

Karma is a man made thing, guilt is the reason we sow what we reap.

Guilt can be one of the emotions that impedes us most. It can be fun to exploit too, if you don't feel guilty about it.

i agree. i guess we jus never notice d good things dis universe gives us coz we r too busy dealin wit d repercussions of our previous bad doings.