God, man, and the nature of sin

[Samuel Dravis]

That is certainly one good way to escape the God<=>good dilemma and the dualistic nature of good/evil. Instead of a dualism, actions are just various degrees of good. I'm glad you brought that up. I remember the analogy of the goodness of God overflows out from the Him like the water from the fountain and the farther you move from the source, the thirstier you become.

 

Another way to escape the dilemma is to say that good/evil are two sides of the same coin. Heads=bearded guy in the clouds, Tails=devil with pitchfork. The coin itself is the complete and impersonal Godhead.

Right, that would work too. That would be hard to fit into a Christian worldview, as usually God is not seen remotely like that, but it's definitely possible. I honestly don't know too much about Eastern philosophies or religions, so I don't think I can intelligibly talk on the subject. Perhaps you could explain in a general way how this view works in relation to responsibilities (how to live your life, etc)?

 

Indeed, even if God created each of us to be perfect within ourselves, the world is greater than ourselves. Our interactions with the world and others are outside of our spheres of perfection and thus cannot occur perfectly. "There are no perfect men in this world, only perfect intentions" to quote the Robin Hood movie (). Since God set us into a world of imperfect interactions, sin is inevitable.

Right, that probably would be an accurate representation of it. Still, if we accepted the idea of Aquinas about intentions being the determiner of sin, then while evil may occur, sin is an option, not an inevitability.

 

Of course if evil has no in-and-of-itself existence, then the fear of hellfire can't be used as a driving force for being obedient to God.

I agree... but wanting something can be quite the powerful force as well.

 

Likewise, if evil and good are part of the same thing, then the fear of hell vanishes as does the reward of heaven. Instead the best you hope for is dissolution of the finite and return to the infinite.

Your vile pagan ways are REPREHENSIBLE TK!

[Sabretooth]

Hello guys, missed me?

 

Apple of the tree of knowledge. If you know this little about the subject matter, why are you even participating in the debate?

That raises two questions: How is it logical for God, who did not want Humans to be knowledgeable to put a tree of knowledge on Earth, that too right by Adam and Eve? Don't tell me trusted humanity's damnation over a naked couple in a garden who can talk with serpents.

Secondly, why are humans allowed the capacity of knowledge, without the right to accumulate it? That's like the government telling people you can have your own house, but living inside is illegal. And while we're on it, if knowledge was sin, Adam and Eve committed sin as soon as arrived on Earth - they gained knowledge of themselves, their surroundings, of food, hell - of the tree of knowledge, of speech and countless other things.

 

Also, I don't see reason in letting children suffer for their parents' sin. Remember that parents and children have completely different wills. Then there is the question of Jesus, if he paid the price of mankind's sin, sin has virtually lost meaning. Think of it like this: a man has been given the murder of all of the world's crimes. If that is so, then crime has lost meaning and anyone and everyone can go killing and raping and pillaging and sinning, because said man is the victim anyways.

Your vile pagan ways are REPREHENSIBLE TK!

May the Moon God of Superior Beauty and Strength punish your treachery!

If sin was destroyed, we would never recognize our need for Christ, thus damning us all.

Ah, so we take this to the pre-christ era, God could have removed sin and not let his son suffer, as well. BTW, I don't know this so just answer for me, will you? Christ is the son of God, so who is his mother, a.k.a God's "wife"? Not an argument, that's a simple question.

 

Now, I don't think you caught mine and Ray's argument correctly. We're thinking along a computer programmer's lines:

1. God created everything - that means everything.

2. Satan rebelled against God - that is, God encountered a bug.

3. God condemned Satan - he squashed the bug and proceeded with release.

4. Satan forms Evil, which corrupts the program and harms the data. And this is where God co. starts facing legal issues. Now, since Evil is part of the system God created, he should be able to destroy it, one way or another, since God controls all and is the supreme majesty as far as programming is concerned!

You refer to free will, but this free will has elements of sin in it, at least potentially. That means that if the very nature of sin is traced absolutely and completely traced, it leads to God. This is where tk's theory comes into the picture: Good and Evil are two sides of the same coin - God is Satan (something like Mr. Jekyll is Dr. Hyde).

[Rev7]

God doesn't need a "wife" Sabre. God is a spirit, not a man, not a woman. Have you ever heard of the Trinity, The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit?

 

Right, that probably would be an accurate representation of it. Still, if we accepted the idea of Aquinas about intentions being the determiner of sin, then while evil may occur, sin is an option, not an inevitability.

I disagree that sin is an option, and not an inevitability. Certain sin is an option, yes, and we can be the determiner of certain sin, but it IS inevitable that we humans will sin. It is in the human nature to sin; and I will explain myself further on in my reply. Please answer this question, say, have you ever had anything that was yours and was extremely expensive or really close to your heart, and was stolen from you? You would probably want revenge on that person, right? That could be considered a sin.

 

It was Eve's choice to eat the apple, she was given orders to eat anything in the garden she wanted to, EXEPT the apple of the tree of knowledge. She was manipulated by Satan, yes, but she still made the choice to eat the apple. Because of that choice, Adam and Eve were exiled from the garden of Eden. As I said before, certain sin is an option, BUT because of Adam's and Eve's choice to eat of the tree of knowledge, which was indeed a sin, it is in our nature, (you, I , and the human race) to sin because of Adam's and Eve's decision at the Garden of Eden.

[Sabretooth]

It was Eve's choice to eat the apple, she was given orders to eat anything in the garden she wanted to, EXEPT the apple of the tree of knowledge. She was manipulated by Satan, yes, but she still made the choice to eat the apple. Because of that choice, Adam and Eve were exiled from the garden of Eden. As I said before, certain sin is an option, BUT because of Adam's and Eve's choice to eat of the tree of knowledge, which was indeed a sin, it is in our nature, (you, I , and the human race) to sin because of Adam's and Eve's decision at the Garden of Eden.

But that isn't fair. Especially if you consider that there are many, thousands, if not millions who would not have sinned in Eve's place and did not commit sins. The theory you're suggesting is that God is perfect, but humanity is a race of sinners, who can choose to repent. What is worse, is that this is one of the theories you can't run away from, and you can only choose not to believe in it.

 

And more questions arise, which God never answers directly to us, because we lack the mental capacity - Where is God? We know he isn't in the sky, because satellites have the place surrounded. Why is knowledge a sin and doesn't it make Adam and Eve sinners from the very moment they were alive? Why is knowledge of God and His ways not a sin? And lastly, why must we be treated as stupid ants that are suffering every minute just because Adam and Eve sinned? God can very well absolve us of the original sin. Not stopping this mad slaughter and sin that goes on is a form of sadism itself. Why is God so indifferent, so sadistic to us? Why doesn't he use his omnipotent, ultrapowerful will to actually help us rather than make us and let us go to hell (that's just a phrase, not to be taken literally) while watching us kill each other?

[tk102]

Right, that would work too. That would be hard to fit into a Christian worldview, as usually God is not seen remotely like that, but it's definitely possible.

These concepts aren't completely unique to Eastern philosophies but indeed you are right -- they do not fit well with traditional Christian teachings. Meister Eckhart of Germany was charged with heresy in 1326 for proclaiming this exactly this type of Christian mysticism.

 

Perhaps you could explain in a general way how this view works in relation to responsibilities (how to live your life, etc)?

The biggest thing this view provides for me is perspective. Whether in terms of human relations, quantum mechanics, or chaos theory -- the sense that all things are changing but the internal nature within everything is not. It's like when an astronaut looks down at earth and sees this sphere silently hovering beneath him. He knows all the hustle and bustle that is taking place below, but from where his, it appears almost at rest. But unlike the astronaut's view who's looking outwards at something other than himself, this view of the world includes myself.

 

In addition, the belief that God unifies all things helps to reinforce feelings of empathy. When I'm at work or when I'm driving, for example, and I feel angry towards someone, I can overcome those negative emotions by remembering that this person is not someone so different from me. That person and I share the same core being after all. And then suddenly being angry doesn't seem so important.

 

Can't help but remember a Beatles song: I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.

 

Beyond that, I've come to believe that (at least for me) the purpose of religion is not to lay down a set of dogmas to tell me how to live my life, but rather to provide an understanding of the relationships between all people. Morality then follows understanding. And of course, this includes the understanding and acceptance of our own mortality.

 

To wrap up, I'll just point out one of my favorite mnemonics. It is the dancing statue of Shiva Nataraja. This figure symbolizes the idea of eternal being/becoming. The drum that Shiva beats begins the dance of life and symbolizes creation, the fire in his other hand symbolizes its destruction, the raised hand with palm out says "wait, don't be afraid, nothing is really happening, be at peace".

 

I see they put one up in front of CERN.

[Rev7]

Because I think that He wants to see who is loyal to Him Sabre. That is especially difficult to do nowadays because of "the world". Jesus said, "be in the world, not of it". It is our choice to believe in Him, or not believe in Him. Faith is a very important in this belief, as I have said may times, and will probably have to say may times in the future.

 

No one truly knows where God's kingdom is located.

 

I am sorry, but I have to sign off now, I will elaborate more tomorrow (hopefully) thanks

[Empress Padme]

Even God admits to mistakes. The story in the bible ( naturally names escape me) were God basically okay'd a husband to sleep with someone else so the an would have an heir ( of course it totally backfired) and i do believe God admitted that it was a mistake that he shouldn't have encouraged it.

 

God gave us free will so if we mess up it's our own fault. He gave us a guide ( the bible) to show us the right path but let us choose whether we wanted that path or not.If we choose the wrong path we pay the steep price ( Hello Lucifer). He can't intervine in wars or fights since he gave us free will, to intervine would be messing with our free will. The price humans pay for free will is that not everybody will use free will for the greater good and sometimes innocent people die because of it. But isn't it better to have free will than be basically a clone. If we didn't have free will we wouldn't be debating this topic right now . If we didn't have free will there would be no Kavar's Corner cause everybody would be a clone thinking , agreeing on the same thing and that would be very, very boring.God gave us the gift , the ultimate gift of free will , naturally us humans would find a way to mess up a great gift but hey were only human.

[Ray Jones]

Poppycock. Where does it say that removing sin from existence means free will has to be removed from mankind? If god is omnipotent he must know a way to accomplish this. Since he's not doing this he's making things unnecessary complicated, it's stupid and useless. He puts his son through suffering, for what? Putting any lifeform through suffering is immoral. He could have done it the moral way, but he didn't. Why?

 

Also, god has free will, right? Is god a sinner? No. Hence free will without sin is possible. What's his problem?

 

Why are you following a god that prefers to put sin/pain/suffering upon others, instead of ending it all by simply removing sin from that darn universe?

[Corinthian]

It doesn't say that, because the Bible doesn't deal with hypothetical situations. It deals with what actually happens. As for your pointless questions that are essentially just there to irritate...hypothetically, if you were taken to a shack, flung in and locked in with no means of getting out, would you be free? Of course not. By denying us the option of defying God, we have no free will. God doesn't want our devotion to him by having it hardwired into our heads. He wants it to be our choice.

 

God has Free Will and is not a sinner. Correct. However, while Jesus was on Earth, there was the potential for him to sin. He had that choice. Satan tempted him with it quite often. I don't suppose you've ever heard of Jesus' fasting for forty days in the desert.

 

We have pain and suffering because we sinned and this is a fallen world. We have sin because God gave us that option. Ignoring Original Sin, which is an extremely complicated subject and most theologians don't entirely understand it, every human, except Jesus, has sinned, thus damning us. According to the Laws God laid down, if you sin, you must pay the penalty. Why would he erase his Laws from existence? That removes the whole point of the Law! It would be like if we made murder legal as soon as someone was on trial for it. It defeats the entire purpose of the law.

 

Of course, you'll pull some kind of complaint that he should just make it all okay for us despite the fact that we defy and sin against him every day, and forgive us whether we ask for forgiveness or not. But you don't want forgiveness, do you? You'd prefer it just all get taken away and you never had to deal with it.

[Sabretooth]

It doesn't say that, because the Bible doesn't deal with hypothetical situations. It deals with what actually happens. As for your pointless questions that are essentially just there to irritate...hypothetically, if you were taken to a shack, flung in and locked in with no means of getting out, would you be free? Of course not. By denying us the option of defying God, we have no free will. God doesn't want our devotion to him by having it hardwired into our heads. He wants it to be our choice.

Oh, so questions to broaden out intellect exist to irritate? Why are we pursuing science, then? We'd all might as well live under rocks. Again, why does God want have us free and then acknowledge his existence when he could hard-wire it, after he created the universe and all. From a creator's perspective, that makes no sense - that's like creating a web browser that will go to websites only when it wants to.

 

Of course, you'll pull some kind of complaint that he should just make it all okay for us despite the fact that we defy and sin against him every day, and forgive us whether we ask for forgiveness or not. But you don't want forgiveness, do you? You'd prefer it just all get taken away and you never had to deal with it.

Quite frankly, yes. I refuse to believe that we're just test subjects God made to rule over with tyranny. Also, God instates a law that doesn't have a constitution, a right to trial, and a right to defense. You can laugh at that statement, but a real law has these facets. The only law where you don't, are tyrannical fascist laws.

 

We have pain and suffering because we sinned and this is a fallen world.

*I* have not sinned. Not once in my life. (Assumption) Eve sinned. And I didn't choose to be born in this fallen world. If I didn't choose any of this, why must I follow some God's law?

 

God has Free Will and is not a sinner. Correct.

Then why didn't he model us along that very line? The world would have obviously been a much better place, and it is quite possible to acknowledge God without recognizing sin. This need for sin and death and suffering is utterly useless.

[Ray Jones]

It doesn't say that, because the Bible doesn't deal with hypothetical situations.

It doesn't say that because people try to avoid thinking about that, and a proper answer is most probably going to render god immoral, a sinner or the whole thing itself useless.

 

It deals with what actually happens.

Nope. It tells metaphoric stories, which are more of hypothetical nature rather than contemporary. Especially since the book is 2000 years old.

 

As for your pointless questions that are essentially just there to irritate...

Err, please. Questions cannot irritate. However, obviously you just don't know a valid answer to my questions, and to cover that you accuse me of being irritating. You are irritated, indeed. Actually this is not due to my questions, but because you cannot answer them, and even more, you recognise that my questions arise a very good point.

 

 

hypothetically, if you were taken to a shack, flung in and locked in with no means of getting out, would you be free? Of course not.

How is that relevant to god removing sin?

 

By denying us the option of defying God, we have no free will. God doesn't want our devotion to him by having it hardwired into our heads. He wants it to be our choice.

AGAIN: remove sin and nothing but sin. Nothing else. Is that so hard to comprehend?

 

God has Free Will and is not a sinner. Correct.

OK. Then we have prove that 'no sin' and 'free will' is an easy to solve task.

 

However, while Jesus was on Earth, there was the potential for him to sin. He had that choice. Satan tempted him with it quite often.

Oh, so Satan propagates sin? Here's my suggestion: remove Satan. One problem regarding sin solved.

 

I don't suppose you've ever heard of Jesus' fasting for forty days in the desert.

And you base that assumption on what fact? Also, I cannot see the relevance to 'make sin go away' either.

 

We have pain and suffering because we sinned and this is a fallen world.

'fallen world' - what does that mean anyway? This is a vague phrase, and makes no specific point at all. And, also, that whole sentence is not true. We have pain and suffering because god created it. If god created everything, he also created cause for pain and suffering, and thus pain and suffering. He is also not taking it away, thus knowingly putting us through pain and suffering, thus he is acting immoral. Ain't that a sin?

 

We have sin because God gave us that option.

I cannot see that option in the phrase "every human is a sinner". Focus on the word "is".

 

Ignoring Original Sin, which is an extremely complicated subject and most theologians don't entirely understand it

But yet you fight these theories as if there was no tomorrow. You orientate your life after something you don't understand, without even asking questions for further understanding.

 

every human, except Jesus, has sinned

Oh, and so has a unborn or newborn baby? Again, where is the "option" to sin or not in that statement.

 

thus damning us

I sense immorality.

 

According to the Laws God laid down, if you sin, you must pay the penalty

Again, since everybody sins, everybody must pay the penalty. Why that whole "god gave us the option to sin" gibberish then. God made us sinners, that would be correct.

 

Why would he erase his Laws from existence? That removes the whole point of the Law! It would be like if we made murder legal as soon as someone was on trial for it. It defeats the entire purpose of the law.

Nobody said make sin legal.

 

Of course, you'll pull some kind of complaint that he should just make it all okay for us despite the fact that we defy and sin against him every day, and forgive us whether we ask for forgiveness or not.

Without sin, no forgiveness of sin is needed. Simple logic.

 

But you don't want forgiveness, do you? You'd prefer it just all get taken away and you never had to deal with it.

Hey, why bother me with something that bothers god? If he dislikes sin so much, he should do something against it, not I. Also, why should I deal with the 'sins' of everybody else? It still makes no sense to me.

[tk102]

Samuel Dravis gave a plausible explanation for this on the first page.

We're told that in the beginning, there was no evil - God looked at his creation and saw that it was (perfectly) good. But there's an idea here we don't want to miss: maximally perfect in the sense of limited beings is not maximally perfect in an absolute sense. Now, here I presuppose that God can't do logically impossible things, like making a REAL married bachelor and the like (I'm sure some would like to say he could but I'm going to ignore them). Anyway, created beings are by definition limited, so God is in a difficult situation - he can't create a being that's not limited, because doing so would break the definition of creation. He's left with beings that are limited, and being so limited they are capable of error (and thus sin).

Perhaps you are suggesting God should do something logically impossible?

[Ray Jones]

(A) God is omnipotent. He can, by the very definition of omnipotence, do the logically impossible, especially since god does not necessarily follow human or any logic with what he is doing.

 

(B) What is logically impossible? Something we cannot comprehend logically. It says that god can do things that we cannot comprehend. Ergo, if doing something logically impossible is something we cannot comprehend, god would still be able to do it, since he can do what we cannot comprehend.

 

Comprehende?

[tk102]

(A) You are using a logical definition of omnipotence to assume God can do something that violates the definition of a thing. If God's omnipotence allows him to violate logic, God's omnipotence does not allow him to violate logic. Did that make sense? No, but that's about as meaningful of a discussion as we can have on the matter.

 

(B) Something is logically impossible if it violates its own definition. A = B, B != C therefore A = C is logically impossible. "Ergo, if doing something logically impossible is something we cannot comprehend, god would could maybe still be able to do it, since he can might do what we cannot comprehend." Fixed. We cannot say what could or could not be done when logic is suspended. See (A) for explanation.

[Samuel Dravis]

These concepts aren't completely unique to Eastern philosophies but indeed you are right -- they do not fit well with traditional Christian teachings. Meister Eckhart of Germany was charged with heresy in 1326 for proclaiming this exactly this type of Christian mysticism.

That was quite interesting, thanks for the link TK. I confess I am unaware of most heresies; my concentration up to now has been figuring out if even the most popular religions make sense.

 

 

The biggest thing this view provides for me is perspective. Whether in terms of human relations, quantum mechanics, or chaos theory -- the sense that all things are changing but the internal nature within everything is not.

 

...

That's an good way to look at it, TK... if nothing's happening then why get upset about it? Got any books on the subject that you liked in particular? I'd be interested in reading them if so.

 

 

 

Ray, here's a quote I shamelessly stole from Wiki, which shamelessly stole it from C.S. Lewis' The Problem Of Pain. He talks about God's omnipotence:

His Omnipotence means power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense. This is no limit to His power. If you choose to say 'God can give a creature free will and at the same time withhold free will from it,' you have not succeeded in saying anything about God: meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prefix to them the two other words 'God can.'... It is no more possible for God than for the weakest of His creatures to carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives; not because His power meets an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.

 

I do recommend the book if you're wanting to get a better explanation of why God would allow evil.

[Corinthian]

It doesn't say that because people try to avoid thinking about that, and a proper answer is most probably going to render god immoral, a sinner or the whole thing itself useless.

 

Nope. It tells metaphoric stories, which are more of hypothetical nature rather than contemporary. Especially since the book is 2000 years old.

 

Err, please. Questions cannot irritate. However, obviously you just don't know a valid answer to my questions, and to cover that you accuse me of being irritating. You are irritated, indeed. Actually this is not due to my questions, but because you cannot answer them, and even more, you recognise that my questions arise a very good point.

 

 

How is that relevant to god removing sin?

 

AGAIN: remove sin and nothing but sin. Nothing else. Is that so hard to comprehend?

 

OK. Then we have prove that 'no sin' and 'free will' is an easy to solve task.

 

Oh, so Satan propagates sin? Here's my suggestion: remove Satan. One problem regarding sin solved.

 

And you base that assumption on what fact? Also, I cannot see the relevance to 'make sin go away' either.

 

'fallen world' - what does that mean anyway? This is a vague phrase, and makes no specific point at all. And, also, that whole sentence is not true. We have pain and suffering because god created it. If god created everything, he also created cause for pain and suffering, and thus pain and suffering. He is also not taking it away, thus knowingly putting us through pain and suffering, thus he is acting immoral. Ain't that a sin?

 

I cannot see that option in the phrase "every human is a sinner". Focus on the word "is".

 

But yet you fight these theories as if there was no tomorrow. You orientate your life after something you don't understand, without even asking questions for further understanding.

 

Oh, and so has a unborn or newborn baby? Again, where is the "option" to sin or not in that statement.

 

I sense immorality.

 

Again, since everybody sins, everybody must pay the penalty. Why that whole "god gave us the option to sin" gibberish then. God made us sinners, that would be correct.

 

Nobody said make sin legal.

 

Without sin, no forgiveness of sin is needed. Simple logic.

 

Hey, why bother me with something that bothers god? If he dislikes sin so much, he should do something against it, not I. Also, why should I deal with the 'sins' of everybody else? It still makes no sense to me.

Starting from the top...

 

The Bible doesn't deal with hypothetical situations like "What if Jesus was black?" or "Could God have his cake AND eat it too?" Which is basically the gist of what you're asking because the Bible has a point.

 

You cannot definitively say that the Bible is metaphoric. You were not present when it was written. Now, you can say you THINK it is metaphorical, but as you're trying to disprove, the burden of proof lies with you.

 

Questions can irritate. For example, every day I am asked several questions regarding whether I would like to increase the size of a certain organ. Your questions aren't quite that annoying, but they're up there.

 

Sin is what displeases God. That's pretty much the heart of it. That was my point. If God removed Sin from existence, we would have no choice but to do as God wanted, as there would be no alternative.

 

AGAIN: Without sin, we are forced to obey God, as disobeying God is sinful. Do you get it? Geez, maybe if I converted this to Binary or something?

 

Satan and Sin are not linked together that closely. Satan is the first sinner, but if he ceased to be, sin would still exist.

 

The relevance was that the Forty Day Fast in the Desert was where Satan tempted Jesus. Your question regarding the matter proves my point.

 

Fallen World. Well, here's Fallen... fall·en /ˈfɔlən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[faw-luhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–verb

1. pp. of fall.

–adjective

2. having dropped or come down from a higher place, from an upright position, or from a higher level, degree, amount, quality, value, number, etc.

3. on the ground; prostrate; down flat: Exhausted, the racers lay fallen by the road.

4. degraded or immoral.

5. (of a woman) having lost her chastity.

6. overthrown, destroyed, or conquered: a fallen city.

7. dead: fallen troops.

 

And here's World...world /wɜrld/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[wurld] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun

1. the earth or globe, considered as a planet.

2. (often initial capital letter) a particular division of the earth: the Western world.

3. the earth or a part of it, with its inhabitants, affairs, etc., during a particular period: the ancient world.

4. humankind; the human race; humanity: The world must eliminate war and poverty.

5. the public generally: The whole world knows it.

6. the class of persons devoted to the affairs, interests, or pursuits of this life: The world worships success.

7. a particular class of people, with common interests, aims, etc.: the fashionable world.

8. any sphere, realm, or domain, with all pertaining to it: a child's world; the world of dreams; the insect world.

9. everything that exists; the universe; the macrocosm.

10. any complex whole conceived as resembling the universe: the world of the microcosm.

11. one of the three general groupings of physical nature: animal world; mineral world; vegetable world.

 

Hurray!

 

See how annoying it is when I deliberately reinterpret what you try to say?

 

We have pain because God created it. Correct. You see, pain is a very important part of the human mind. It shows us that such a thing is dangerous. It's why we don't jam our hands into fires, electrical sockets, glass shards, knives, and potent acids. Welcome to elementary biology.

 

God gave our forebears that option. Now, I guess I'll take care of your point that you should get away with your sin because Adam did it first. I like to think of that as the "Toddler Defense." AKA "He did it first" defense. Johnny Cochran would have loved it. God is merciful and just, but he is also, for lack of a better world, angry and vengeful. If we ask for his forgiveness, he will forgive our sins and cleanse our souls, but for each of us that sins, that stain remains until we ask forgiveness for it. But if we don't ask for it, if we don't WANT his forgiveness, God will understand that we have no desire for him and cast us into the outer darkness, where we can be with the one we love the most for eternity. Ourselves.

 

It's not complex. Casting down our sin and accepting Jesus into our hearts is not easy, but it's more than possible. God doesn't ask much of us to gain his forgiveness. Ever hear the story of the thief on the cross? He was vile enough to warrant crucifixion even by his own standard and when he asked forgiveness, Jesus told him he would be with him in Paradise that day. God doesn't ask us to sacrifice our hands for him or become hermits in the mountains, he simply asks us to let go of our sin and accept him into our hearts. If we sincerely want it, it's ours.

 

Think about that. All he asks us to do is let go of our burden and we'll be saved by him. He's not asking us to give up something that should be near and dear to us. He doesn't ask you to sacrifice your firstborn child or make some other great sacrifice, he asks you to give up something that brings nothing but bad. Consider that.

[tk102]

Got any books on the subject that you liked in particular? I'd be interested in reading them if so.

Well I liked Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse, the Mandukya Upanishad, and various excerpts from Sri Aurobindo that I've come across. I confess most of my reading in this area was done at a university using Radhakrishnan and Moore's A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy over 10 years ago.

[Sabretooth]

The Bible doesn't deal with hypothetical situations like "What if Jesus was black?" or "Could God have his cake AND eat it too?" Which is basically the gist of what you're asking because the Bible has a point.

 

You cannot definitively say that the Bible is metaphoric. You were not present when it was written. Now, you can say you THINK it is metaphorical, but as you're trying to disprove, the burden of proof lies with you.

But you stated before that the Bible is a book sent by God for the humans to understand and follow laws, which makes it a pseudo-constitution. And books that lay down the law should be completely based on hypothetical situations, and not read out like a storybook compilation.

 

Sin is what displeases God. That's pretty much the heart of it. That was my point. If God removed Sin from existence, we would have no choice but to do as God wanted, as there would be no alternative.

And isn't that what we should be doing? Are you suggesting that sin is a viable alternative to following God?

 

AGAIN: Without sin, we are forced to obey God, as disobeying God is sinful. Do you get it? Geez, maybe if I converted this to Binary or something?

You're not making any sense here, mate. We won't be "forced" to obey God if we don't sin. Also, if not sinning is being forced to obey God, then we are as it is being forced to obey God by being threatened of sin, damnation, hell and Satan.

 

Satan and Sin are not linked together that closely. Satan is the first sinner, but if he ceased to be, sin would still exist.

But Satan propagates sin. We would considerably debilitate sin if we take Satan out of the picture.

 

Hurray!

 

See how annoying it is when I deliberately reinterpret what you try to say?

No, that is being an 11 year old *******.

 

We have pain because God created it. Correct. You see, pain is a very important part of the human mind. It shows us that such a thing is dangerous. It's why we don't jam our hands into fires, electrical sockets, glass shards, knives, and potent acids. Welcome to elementary biology.

Hi, ever heard of emotional pain, trauma, that of sort of thing? Psychology, perhaps? Go try that dictionary of yours.

 

God gave our forebears that option. Now, I guess I'll take care of your point that you should get away with your sin because Adam did it first. I like to think of that as the "Toddler Defense." AKA "He did it first" defense. Johnny Cochran would have loved it. God is merciful and just, but he is also, for lack of a better world, angry and vengeful. If we ask for his forgiveness, he will forgive our sins and cleanse our souls, but for each of us that sins, that stain remains until we ask forgiveness for it. But if we don't ask for it, if we don't WANT his forgiveness, God will understand that we have no desire for him and cast us into the outer darkness, where we can be with the one we love the most for eternity. Ourselves.

The point is, why should we be punished for what Adam and Eve did? My soul, my will did not choose to be Adam's descendant. I was forced into this world. Why should I be forced to be born a sinner?

 

Casting down our sin

But we are sinners to begin with! Imagine this scenario: A baby is killed five days after he is born. He is a sinner, according to the Adam/Eve theory and he wasn't intelligent enough to seek repentance. That would mean the baby goes to hell for no particular reason.

 

Think about that. All he asks us to do is let go of our burden and we'll be saved by him. He's not asking us to give up something that should be near and dear to us. He doesn't ask you to sacrifice your firstborn child or make some other great sacrifice, he asks you to give up something that brings nothing but bad. Consider that.

And if a person doesn't consider his sin a burden? We're talking about mass murderers, terrorists, psychopaths here, especially the last. He loves killing and doesn't consider it a burden, and hence doesn't bother asking for forgiveness, still he would go to hell. In his eyes, he did nothing wrong, he is completely innocent and his brain is damaged, hence he cannot comprehend morality. What would God's anti-sin SS do now?

[tk102]

Reminder, anyone who is irritated by questions in this thread or any other should remember they are under no obligation to answer them. You have the power to control your own anger and that is one of the expectations when you enter a debate here.

 

Thank you.

[Ray Jones]

Starting from the top...

 

The Bible doesn't deal with hypothetical situations like "What if Jesus was black?" or "Could God have his cake AND eat it too?" Which is basically the gist of what you're asking because the Bible has a point.

Whether do I ask 'what if' nor do I ask 'can he', I am asking for a reason for what he *is* or *is not* doing. Different thing.

 

You cannot definitively say that the Bible is metaphoric. You were not present when it was written. Now, you can say you THINK it is metaphorical, but as you're trying to disprove, the burden of proof lies with you.

I see that quite the other way around. I must not prove it to be metaphoric. And I can't. Because to do so, you'd need to point out to valid evidence that it is describing history how it happened. However, that is not what I am interested in.

 

Questions can irritate. For example, every day I am asked several questions regarding whether I would like to increase the size of a certain organ. Your questions aren't quite that annoying, but they're up there.

Annoying does not equal irritating. And I think I am anything but about to ask you to upsize your breast.

 

Sin is what displeases God. That's pretty much the heart of it. That was my point. If God removed Sin from existence, we would have no choice but to do as God wanted, as there would be no alternative.

There would be no alternatives and choices left? Like where to go? What movie to see? What's for dinner? Who you wanna marry? Which is your favourite colour? Go outside naked or paint the kitchen green? Come on.

 

AGAIN: Without sin, we are forced to obey God, as disobeying God is sinful. Do you get it?

Oh, I sure get it. But try to get that without sin, disobeying god wouldn't be sinful anymore. Oh, and how can we disobey god, if we have free will, and have been given the choice?

 

Satan and Sin are not linked together that closely. Satan is the first sinner, but if he ceased to be, sin would still exist.

Yes, but if he ceased to be, the would be one needless troublemaker off the list, right? Or do we seriously need Satan for anything?

 

The relevance was that the Forty Day Fast in the Desert was where Satan tempted Jesus. Your question regarding the matter proves my point.

And you base that assumption on what fact? Also, I cannot see the relevance to 'make sin go away' either.

I think you should reread what I wrote.

And I repeat my question: how does that relate to "god should strike sin off the list".

 

See how annoying it is when I deliberately reinterpret what you try to say?

Nope.

 

We have pain because God created it. Correct. You see, pain is a very important part of the human mind. It shows us that such a thing is dangerous. It's why we don't jam our hands into fires, electrical sockets, glass shards, knives, and potent acids. Welcome to elementary biology.

Oh, that one was good. However. I have no problem with that and that was not my point, either.

 

preachery

No.

 

All he asks us to do is let go of our burden and we'll be saved by him. He's not asking us to give up something that should be near and dear to us. He doesn't ask you to sacrifice your firstborn child or make some other great sacrifice, he asks you to give up something that brings nothing but bad. Consider that.

Consider that: do something good for those around you, but not for god, or out of the self centered and selfish wish to be 'saved'. Do something selfless and good, without god or Jesus in your mind.

[Corinthian]

Have you ever really done anything altruistic? I doubt it. Nobody does anything really, truly altruistic. There's always that little thing in the back of your mind that you're hoping the girl you like will see you, or you'll get praised, etc, etc, so on and so forth. Humans are reward-motivated people.

 

How is it selfish to want to be saved? It's not like you being saved denies it to anything else. It's in your own interests, yes, but that does not make it selfish.

 

Sorry, you don't understand burden of proof. You have to prove something stated is wrong, the stater does not have to prove it is right. Although I could see if I can get Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John to come down and prove their points...sorry, they're not interested.

 

Mammary glands aren't organs, and even if they were, my moobs are big enough.

 

Yes, I suppose you would have a choice about trivial matters, but not over anything really significant. Without sin in the world, everyone and everything would be effectively perfect. No worrying about which politician to vote for: They're all humble, good people who don't lie, and it's the same all over the world.

 

Again, I'm going to reiterate this one last time, and if you ignore it, I'm done with this thread.

 

Why would God, who's Law is perfect, override that law because it's not convenient, because you don't want to pay the same price as the rest of humanity? And you call me selfish for wanting to be saved.

[Ray Jones]

Have you ever really done anything altruistic? I doubt it. Nobody does anything really, truly altruistic. There's always that little thing in the back of your mind that you're hoping the girl you like will see you, or you'll get praised, etc, etc, so on and so forth. Humans are reward-motivated people.

I said 'without god in mind' not altruistic. And sometimes the reward is to see someone happy, your child, mom, girlfriend, who cares. Yeah I also do work for money to buy food so my family has something to eat. How reward orientated and selfish. The point is, I don't do that to be saved, I do that for me, and those around me.

 

How is it selfish to want to be saved? It's not like you being saved denies it to anything else. It's in your own interests, yes, but that does not make it selfish.

Oooh, I gotta do good, else I'm not saved, but I want to be saved, so I am not going to hell. --- Selfish.

 

Yes, I suppose you would have a choice about trivial matters, but not over anything really significant. Without sin in the world, everyone and everything would be effectively perfect. No worrying about which politician to vote for: They're all humble, good people who don't lie, and it's the same all over the world.

Wouldn't that be great? Nice people everywhere. However, please do not come up with "but what's with individuality", since being nice and honest and without sin does not mean everybody is the same.

 

Why would God, who's Law is perfect

Who says it is perfect? And again, who says "change the law"? Let's say it together: no body but you..

 

Screw god's law - just wipe sin from the world. You don't know how? Ask your oh so perfect god.

 

override that law because it's not convenient, because you don't want to pay the same price as the rest of humanity?

Wrong. I don't want humanity pay the price for what a naked couple did ten thousand years ago. It makes no sense. It's like someone is taking your little sister, brother, mother, father, son and wife to prison because your grand grand grand grandpa shot the sheriff.

 

And you call me selfish for wanting to be saved.

I didn't call you selfish. I call doing good out of the will to be saved selfish. I do good without wanting myself to be saved. Yes, I do that to get a smile or to hear "i love you daddy" because that makes me happy. However, I couldn't care less if I'm gonna be saved by some god or not.

[Corinthian]

You obviously didn't read the post before last. Apparently. Since you ignored a significant chunk of it as 'preachery.'. You can't get to Heaven by doing good. It has nothing to do with your own goodness. Trying to find Heaven by doing good on your own is pointless and futile, because God's standard is perfection, which a human can and will never achieve under his own power. But with Jesus, we can instantly be purged of all sin, thus qualifying us for entry into heaven because we turned our sin over to Jesus, who has already paid the penalty so that we would not have to.

 

God doesn't just remove Sin because we chose sin a long time ago, and taking it away from us would be taking away something the majority of humanity is pleased to have. To purge Sin from the world, he'd also have to remove many of the Freedoms we all cherish so much. Freedom of Speech? Gone. It's sinful to say some things, like taking God's name in vain. Freedom of Religion? Gone. It's sinful to worship other Gods. Freedom of the Press? Same as Freedom of Speech. So on.

 

Basically, you want to have your cake and eat it too. You want to have the knowledge of the Apple of the Tree, but you don't want to have the penalty that came with it. It doesn't work that way.

 

Again, it would be violating our freedom to take sin away from us against our will. We can turn it over to Jesus, but by the Law someone has to pay for it. If we cling to our sin, we pay for it. But if we give our sin over to Jesus, he can pay for it, and he already has paid the penalty.

[Ray Jones]

You obviously didn't read the post before last. Apparently. Since you ignored a significant chunk of it as 'preachery.'.

I didn't ignore it. I usually do not ignore people when they talk to me. Especially if I talk to them too. However, I chose my rather short answer regarding that topic.

 

You can't get to Heaven by doing good. It has nothing to do with your own goodness. Trying to find Heaven by doing good on your own is pointless and futile, because God's standard is perfection, which a human can and will never achieve under his own power. But with Jesus, we can instantly be purged of all sin, thus qualifying us for entry into heaven because we turned our sin over to Jesus, who has already paid the penalty so that we would not have to.

What you might overlook here is, I don't want to go to heaven. I don't care about that kind of stuff. Here and now, and tomorrow is what I care about.

 

God doesn't just remove Sin because we chose sin a long time ago, and taking it away from us would be taking away something the majority of humanity is pleased to have.

Okay so we're now wanting sin? That makes even less sense.

 

To purge Sin from the world, he'd also have to remove many of the Freedoms we all cherish so much. Freedom of Speech? Gone. It's sinful to say some things, like taking God's name in vain.

But we're still free to say "hey nice hat", "yeah baby lets do it that way", "oh ray", "ooooooh raaaaayyy" and "oooooooooooooooooooooooooohhh rrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy", right? That's enough I guess, who cares if I can take god's name in vain?

 

Freedom of Religion? Gone. It's sinful to worship other Gods.

XDDD lol, I don't even wanna guess how many religions make that statement..

 

Freedom of the Press? Same as Freedom of Speech.

So it's sin to write about news of the day? Or funny things? New discoveries?

 

Basically, you want to have your cake and eat it too. You want to have the knowledge of the Apple of the Tree, but you don't want to have the penalty that came with it. It doesn't work that way.

Who says it doesn't work that way? Penalty for gaining knowledge? Knowledge and wisdom is something really desirable, and I'd accept no god who'd punish anyone for seeking for it.

 

Again, it would be violating our freedom to take sin away from us against our will.

It is not against my will to take away sin. Is it against your will?

 

But if we give our sin over to Jesus, he can pay for it, and he already has paid the penalty.

Gee, why would I pass my responsibility for what I have done to someone else, even more to the son of god? I am responsible for what I have done, no one can take that from me!

[Darth Xander]

What if God is of a species who have spread amongst existence creating stuff and hanging out?