09 Jun 06
My opinion on the Adam and Eve is that it makes a good story. If I were Adam in his situation I wouldn't eat the apple, not if I knew the consequences. Free will can coexist with not giving in to temptation, especially in a man that was supposed to be perfect like Adam. When it says that God created man to be perfect does it therefore mean just physically perfect or spiritually perfect too?
09 Jun 06
2 edits
Originally posted by MonsieurGeeI'll give you a guess/theory from my perspective on why we ended up
While ruminating in the shower today.I asked myself the retorical question "If people really believe in God then why do they sin?". Surely if someone truely believes in God then there isn't a chance in hell that they are going to sin because it would make no sense to do so. I came up with the answer that people are irrational and therefore don't always t w on what they think, I'm not saying for or against God really, just asking a question.
the way we are after God created us. God is making us into something
that life here has to do with, and it is still occuring. It could have
happened with us with or without sin, but is still occuring. It would
have been better all around had sin not entered into the picture for
us, but it doesn't detour God's work. Sin and rebellion in heaven and
here on earth with us are but a small bump in the process that will be
short lived, and the eternal will begin without sin, and all that comes
because of it. Evil is just a blip in eternity as an active force, and when
its judgment is done, it and the fruit of its work will suffer the 2nd
death.
People want what they want and will do things that they know is wrong
just to get what they want. Our desires and lusts are very powerful,
they do not have to rule us, but we if we yield than things occur which
we know about more times than not, basically we have our own
forbidden fruits so to speak. We are still given power to act as we will,
and we do, our actions reveal what is within us, as does our speech.
My point of view.
Kelly
09 Jun 06
Originally posted by MonsieurGeeThe entire free will debate revolves around the doctrine that God is love. To love someone you must have free will to do so. If someone tries to make them love you the natural reaction is to distance yourself from them. This is because love demands a choice.
My opinion on the Adam and Eve is that it makes a good story. If I were Adam in his situation I wouldn't eat the apple, not if I knew the consequences. Free will can coexist with not giving in to temptation, especially in a man that was supposed to be perfect like Adam. When it says that God created man to be perfect does it therefore mean just physically perfect or spiritually perfect too?
You are right in that free will can coexist without giring into temptation and Christ proved this point. Christ was tempted as we are and overcame this temptation. If no one ever gave into temptation you could argue that man was never really able to give into temptation because God predestined him never to sin. What you have now is the best scenerio possible. You have the choice to choose him or reject him and people vary as to their responses.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
09 Jun 06
Originally posted by masscatI really hate this attitude that thoughts can be sinful. I don't distinguish between the mind and the body. The body affects the mind. No one can control the chemicals in the brain as much as their own thoughts, sometimes thoughts just appear without any impetus. It's natural to pine over a woman in the office.
Of course. Because I'm human. Actually you don't have to physically do something for it to be a sin. Sin covers wrong thinking, bad attitudes, harmful speach, etc. Jesus gave an example that if a man looks on a woman and lusts after her in his heart (mind), it's sin. So, if I choose to look at porn on a web site, or think about the women in the office i ...[text shortened]... just ask God to forgive me. I think that's where a lot of Christians get all boogered up!
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
09 Jun 06
Originally posted by knightmeisterWhich church?
I personally think that trying to argue against evolution is one of the biggest mistakes the church made. The evidence for it is overwhelming. If you don't believe in evolution as the process for life on earth to exist then you might as well not believe in atomic energy either. Genesis is not literal and it doesn't matter either. The earth is 4 billion ...[text shortened]... free will and guarantee things will never go astray. That's what free will is I'm afraid.
09 Jun 06
Originally posted by Conrau KSo you hate the attitude that thoughts can be sinful? Let me ask you this, where does sin begin? If not in the mind, then why worry about your thoughts. If sin does begin in the mind, however, this is the first battle ground to fight in order to prevent sin from conceiving into a sinful act.
I really hate this attitude that thoughts can be sinful. I don't distinguish between the mind and the body. The body affects the mind. No one can control the chemicals in the brain as much as their own thoughts, sometimes thoughts just appear without any impetus. It's natural to pine over a woman in the office.
You say that the body effects the mind, but you don't conceede that the mind effects the body. Indeed, have you ever been stressed over something that has worried you continuously? Medical science can verify that this is a stressor on your body and will lower your immune system which can usher in a variety of illnesses. It is true that the brain can have chemical imbalances which you may not have control over, however, this does not necessarily mean you have no control over your faculties. I will not make this generalization about everyone seeing as there seem to always be exceptions.
Just so you know, it is not a sin to have a sinful thought. After all, Chrsit was presented with a variety of temptations and thoughts that were sinful. This does not mean, however, that he entertained these thoughts which then becomes a sin. I once heard a preacher say that you have no control over the birds that fly over your head. However, this does not mean that you have to let them nest in your hair.
09 Jun 06
Originally posted by whodeyThe wheel may still be spinning, but the hamster is dead: K doesn't even believe he has control over his own actions (never mind his own thoughts); quite understandably, the concept of "sin" would then be an anathema to him.
So you hate the attitude that thoughts can be sinful? Let me ask you this, where does sin begin? If not in the mind, then why worry about your thoughts. If sin does begin in the mind, however, this is the first battle ground to fight in order to prevent sin from conceiving into a sinful act.
You say that the body effects the mind, but you don't conceede ...[text shortened]... t fly over your head. However, this does not mean that you have to let them nest in your hair.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
10 Jun 06
Originally posted by whodeyFirst of all I think it useless to use the words "mind" and "body". I think they're the same thing. But just for the point of this thread I'll use the words.
So you hate the attitude that thoughts can be sinful? Let me ask you this, where does sin begin? If not in the mind, then why worry about your thoughts. If sin does begin in the mind, however, this is the first battle ground to fight in order to prevent sin from conceiving into a sinful act.
You say that the body effects the mind, but you don't conceede ...[text shortened]... t fly over your head. However, this does not mean that you have to let them nest in your hair.
I agree that sin must have antecedents in the mind. But this does not make those antecedents sinful. For example, say you lust for a woman in the office. This could easily lead to a sin such as rape. But often it doesn't. So for that example the thought could not have been sinful since it did not culminate in a sin.
I believe it more dangerous to try to control your own thoughts. People can develop serious hang-ups and neurosies about their own thoughts which I believe to be harmful.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
10 Jun 06
Originally posted by HalitoseIts a tricky issue. Some definitions of free will I find acceptable butwhether or not they imply a moral responsibility, I haven't decided. So for this thread I'll avoid using the words free will.
The wheel may still be spinning, but the hamster is dead: K doesn't even believe he has control over his own actions (never mind his own thoughts); quite understandably, the concept of "sin" would then be an anathema to him.
10 Jun 06
Originally posted by Conrau KAs you point out, you must excercise control over your thoughts. For example, you can't just rape the woman in the office even though your thoughts may tell you that you want to have sex with her. Nor can you follow her everywhere if your thought life becomes obsessed with her. When you entertain a thought, you contemplate acting out in a certain way. The more you contemplate acting out in a certain way, the more likely you will be to act out in that way. To function properly in society, one must excercise control of one's thought life with a certain degree of success. For the Christian, this not only means excercising control of one's thoughts to stay out of prison, but also to not sin.
First of all I think it useless to use the words "mind" and "body". I think they're the same thing. But just for the point of this thread I'll use the words.
I agree that sin must have antecedents in the mind. But this does not make those antecedents sinful. For example, say you lust for a woman in the office. This could easily lead to a sin such as rap ...[text shortened]... op serious hang-ups and neurosies about their own thoughts which I believe to be harmful.
13 Jun 06
Originally posted by Conrau KCan't you see that the answer is in your very own post? You say "lusting after a woman could easily lead to rape" , but this is the whole point! You then say that the thought is not sinful even after admitting it's potential to hurt others. What if this woman was your wife? Or your friend? It would be interesting to see you extend this same argument to paedophilia. Would you say it is "not sinful" for a paedophile to lust after a child because it "often doesn't lead to abuse"? Would you say it was Ok for someone to cultivate racist thoughts in their mind on the basis that they might not act on them?
[
I agree that sin must have antecedents in the mind. But this does not make those antecedents sinful. For example, say you lust for a woman in the office. This could easily lead to a sin such as rape. But often it doesn't. So for that example the thought could not have been sinful since it did not culminate in a sin.
If you are talking about right and wrong then that is a different matter but if you are talking about sin in a religious sense then that is entirely different. Sin implies the whole wholeness/ unwholeness issue , and that includes thoughts and your state of mind.
13 Jun 06
Originally posted by knightmeisterLusting after a woman could also lead to marriage. How do you think people hook up?
Can't you see that the answer is in your very own post? You say "lusting after a woman could easily lead to rape" , but this is the whole point! You then say that the thought is not sinful even after admitting it's potential to hurt others. What if this woman was your wife? Or your friend? It would be interesting to see you extend this same argument to ...[text shortened]... whole wholeness/ unwholeness issue , and that includes thoughts and your state of mind.