26 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Conrau KForget the notion of right or wrong for the time being. Think of it as two competing systems, Windows v Linux, if you want.
I accept that they entered an imperfect world but I refuse to accept the notion that in doing so they committed a sin. I'm also curious, if having no understanding of good and evil, how could they be accountable for their actions? And hence, why should they be in an imperfect wolrd? According to you they didn't commit wrong because no wrong existed at the time.
We'll say Adam and the woman were created to operate on Linux, and did so for an undetermined amount of time. One day, Bill found some alone time with the woman and regaled her with the myriad functions available to her, if she but switch to Windows 98. He convinced her that the codes in Linux were preventing her from ever being as smart as the Programmer.
The woman looked at the pretty packaging, saw that it looked like something that would suit her needs, and decided to load it up. Upon hitting the "Accept" hyperlink, she immediately understood why she was told to refrain from loading the insidious system. She had become dead, knowing that certain death lay ahead, as well.
Misery demanding company, she took the program to Adam, convinced him he should load it up as well. Adam had a choice: join her in her death or stay with his current system.
The system into which they were created was perfect. The only way to leave was to load up the other system offered by Satan, the system of "good and evil." No other sins were possible. Now look at all the 'possibilities.'
Had God not instructed them or prohibited them from the tree, they could not be held accountable. As He had repeatedly warned them, "Dying [physically], you shall die [spiritually]" (as seen in the doubling of the Hebrew mut), they were held accountable.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
26 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYes but with no moral guidance, they could not appreciate the consequences what they were doing. So what if God says no, the're is nothing wrong in disobeying (wrong does not even exist!). It would be like punishing a baby for recalcitrance. Inane!
Forget the notion of right or wrong for the time being. Think of it as two competing systems, Windows v Linux, if you want.
We'll say Adam and the woman were created to operate on Linux, and did so for an undetermined amount of time. One day, Bill found some alone time with the woman and regaled her with the myriad functions available to her, if she b ...[text shortened]... ually]" (as seen in the doubling of the Hebrew mut), they were held accountable.
26 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Conrau KIt doesn't appear that you have read the account lately. God walked with them every day, instructing them.
Yes but with no moral guidance, they could not appreciate the consequences what they were doing. So what if God says no, the're is nothing wrong in disobeying (wrong does not even exist!). It would be like punishing a baby for recalcitrance. Inane!
He placed the trees in the Garden, told them to eat of any tree they so desired, with one exception. If you eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, dying, you will die. The issue was as perspicuous to them as the issue of salvation is perspicuous to us today.
Wrong did exist, if you consider living right!
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
26 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHConsider sociopaths. A defining characteristic is a lack of empathy and inscouciance to other people. Extreme sociopaths suffer from a MEDICAL condition which precludes the perception of right and wrong. No matter how much anyone instructed them they would disobey (And its not their fault, they were born with no conscience).
It doesn't appear that you have read the account lately. God walked with them every day, instructing them.
He placed the trees in the Garden, told them to eat of any tree they so desired, with one exception. If you eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, dying, you will die. The issue was as perspicuous to them as the issue of salvation is perspicuous to us today.
Wrong did exist, if you consider living right!
26 Mar 06
Originally posted by Conrau KAnd you are going where with this...?
Consider sociopaths. A defining characteristic is a lack of empathy and inscouciance to other people. Extreme sociopaths suffer from a MEDICAL condition which precludes the perception of right and wrong. No matter how much anyone instructed them they would disobey (And its not their fault, they were born with no conscience).
26 Mar 06
Originally posted by Conrau KThere were no wrongs or rights. There was no sin possible, except for eating of the forbidden fruit. No morals, no thought restrictions, no touch restricitions. They had to but stay with God's system.
With no moral diection they would be sociopaths (and remember in the genesis story God is not the source of morality... The fruit is).
This was not a question of moral character; morals were not the issue. Obedience and trust was the issue. Would they stay with God and trust His system, or would they decide against God and replace it with the good and evil system?
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
26 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat does it matter if they trust or not when neither is good or evil?
There were no wrongs or rights. There was no sin possible, except for eating of the forbidden fruit. No morals, no thought restrictions, no touch restricitions. They had to but stay with God's system.
This was not a question of moral character; morals were not the issue. Obedience and trust was the issue. Would they stay with God and trust His system, or would they decide against God and replace it with the good and evil system?
By the way, obedience and trust are moral character.
26 Mar 06
Originally posted by Conrau KWhat does it matter?! I don't know if you are purposely avoiding the issue or if I'm just doing a poor job of presenting the issue.
What does it matter if they trust or not when neither is good or evil?
By the way, obedience and trust are moral character.
Forget good. Forget evil. The question comes down to, do you want to live? If you want to continue living, if you do not want to doubly die, if you want to stay in the Garden with Me, do not eat the fruit of that tree. The woman was aware of the issue, but was deceived by her own vanity. The man was fully aware of the issue, but figured the juice was worth the squeeze. Did either of them fully understand the complete ramifications of the fall-out which would eventuate from their decision? Obviously not; this just goes to reveal more emphatically man's need for God. They certainly knew what was at stake for them, however.
Obedience and trust are not indicators of moral character. Otherwise, the Nazi trials were a travesty of justice.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
27 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThats all very good and well, but that doesn't explain "orignal sin". I understand the imperfection and exit from perfection part.
What does it matter?! I don't know if you are purposely avoiding the issue or if I'm just doing a poor job of presenting the issue.
Forget good. Forget evil. The question comes down to, do you want to live? If you want to continue living, if you do not want to doubly die, if you want to stay in the Garden with Me, do not eat the fruit of that tree. ...[text shortened]... re not indicators of moral character. Otherwise, the Nazi trials were a travesty of justice.
However, with no moral guidelines it is impossible for God to expect obedience. And yes, obedience and trust are PART of our moral character. It all depens on who you are obdedient to.
27 Mar 06
Originally posted by Conrau KThe Bible is quite clear in many places that sin is possible without the knowledge or desire to sin. It quite clearly states that it is impossible to be sinless and to live without sin.
Thats all very good and well, but that doesn't explain "orignal sin". I understand the imperfection and exit from perfection part.
However, with no moral guidelines it is impossible for God to expect obedience. And yes, obedience and trust are PART of our moral character. It all depens on who you are obdedient to.
To me the whole concept of inheritable sin and sin without choice is unjust and conflicts directly with the statement that God is just.
I have never seen a logical explanation for origional sin.
27 Mar 06
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe Bible is quite clear in many places that sin is possible without the knowledge or desire to sin.
True.
It quite clearly states that it is impossible to be sinless and to live without sin.
Not true. It is possible to live without sin, although highly unlikely. So unlikely, given our sin nature and natural tendencies/habits/predilections that it is seen as impossible. The power system provided by God has supplied us with everything we need; we don't always use it, unfortunately. Fortunately, I John 1:9.
To me the whole concept of inheritable sin and sin without choice is unjust and conflicts directly with the statement that God is just.
When the attributes of God are seen in their entirety, juxtaposed by the divine decree, it becomes excruciatingly clear how the imputation of Adam's original sin was/is the only method by which our ultimate sanctification could be achieved. Justice as our point of contact with God is necessary for our salvation.
I have never seen a logical explanation for origional sin.
Please read the following threads:
Who give(s) human life?
The Attributes of God
The Doctrine of the Divine Decree