Originally posted by telerionI would put it thus: The fundamental nature of Man is good, but has been wounded by original sin. This wound keeps him apart from God.
Would you say that the following is a fair characterization of your view: "While not perfect, man is basically good, however he has a debt to God that keeps him apart from his creator,"?
Originally posted by no1marauderI was replying to someone else's post, but now that you bring it up. . .
What part of Man is imperfection?
There's our almost constant warfare, our selfishness that fuels our capitalist society, bigotry, corruption (especially in politics), our constant need to argue, our ability to completely disregard reality in favor of a world that suits us, we cry over stubbed toes and hair loss and then look down on those who cry over stubbed toes and hair loss. All of this without even bringing up the popularity of reality television and child porn.
Now, there's plenty of good in humanity as well, but that does not counter out imperfection.
... --- ...
Originally posted by blindfaith101The crux of it is that God prefers a world with free will and with sin than one without free will and without sin. He knowingly chose to create this world. Therefore it was His will to have this world be.
Is it GOD'S will is a will of peace. But those of his creation that have free choice HE allows them to use it. Did HE know the results of the created creatures choosing to go their own way, yes. But Lucifer and man did not have to make the choice to have their own will. Just as GOD has the Laws of obedience, HE has laws for disobedience.
Every time you counter the Argument from Pain and Suffering with "God gave us free will [which led to sin] because he doesn't want a bunch of robots," you agree with my point.
As I've said in other places, if your God is the First Cause, then everything good and bad ultimately comes back to Him.
Originally posted by telerionTelerion: "Therefore it was His will to have this world be"
The crux of it is that God prefers a world with free will and with sin than one without free will and without sin. He knowingly chose to create this world. Therefore it was His will to have this world be.
Every time you counter the Argument from Pain and Suffering with "God gave us free will [which led to sin] because he doesn't want a bunch of rob ...[text shortened]... es, if your God is the First Cause, then everything good and bad ultimately comes back to Him.
Yes, let us kill Him, let's crucify Him.
Originally posted by thesonofsaulI should have been clearer; of course, I was not claiming that Man was perfect. I was responding to this question:
I was replying to someone else's post, but now that you bring it up. . .
There's our almost constant warfare, our selfishness that fuels our capitalist society, bigotry, corruption (especially in politics), our constant need to argue, our ability to completely disregard reality in favor of a world that suits us, we cry over stubbed toes and hair lo ...[text shortened]... plenty of good in humanity as well, but that does not counter out imperfection.
... --- ...
So you could say that the main question the religion faces is what to do about our imperfection?
I don't see how any religion can fix any of the imperfections you mention and would argue that the way religion has been used has contributed to all of them.
Originally posted by lucifershammer"original sin" in the Genesis account is obtaining knowledge; are we wounded by knowledge in your view? Isn't the drive to obtain knowledge one of the most important parts of Man's fundamental nature? If the "wound" of knowledge keeps us apart from God, isn't that saying that our fundamental nature is incompatible with being with God? Aren't you really saying the same thing as Darfius but using nicer words?
I would put it thus: The fundamental nature of Man is good, but has been wounded by original sin. This wound keeps him apart from God.
Originally posted by ivanhoeIvanhoe, this isn't difficult. He knew before He created this world that it would fall and that it would be His desire in such a case to come and be crucified to save His creation. Now as long as we assume that He could create at least one other type of world, then He chose with His will to create exactly this one. You can protest the rationality of His decision all you like; it doesn't change things one bit.
Telerion: "Therefore it was His will to have this world be"
Yes, let us kill Him, let's crucify Him.
Consider this question. Do you think that He chose to create a world that He didn't want to create? If yes, then why?
Please note as well that I'm not making any argument against either your god's existence or your god's character. Given the nature of my usual argumentation here, I can understand why you would initially be wary about agreeing with me.
1 edit
Originally posted by telerionIf God could do the logically imposible...
... Do you think that He chose to create a world that He didn't want to create?...
Maybe God rolled dice. But even that would not work.
telerion, have you posted to the "free will" debate? It was really interesting...and then I posted...and suddenly no one's posting...enough to give me a complex.
Originally posted by no1marauderGen 2:17 :
"original sin" in the Genesis account is obtaining knowledge; are we wounded by knowledge in your view? Isn't the drive to obtain knowledge one of the most important parts of Man's fundamental nature? If the "wound" of knowledge keeps us apart from God, isn't that saying that our fundamental nature is incompatible with being with God? Aren't you really saying the same thing as Darfius but using nicer words?
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you are not to eat; for, the day you eat of that, you are doomed to die.
Note from the New Jerusalem Bible:
This knowledge is a preivilege which God reserves to himself and which man, by sinning, will usurp, 3:5, 22. Hence it does not mean omniscience, which fallen creatures do not possess; nor is it moral discrimination, for unfallen man already had it and God could not refuse it to a rational being. It is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognise his status as a created being, see Is 5:20. The first sin was an attack on God's sovereignty, a sin of pride. This rebellion is described in concrete terms as the transgression of an express command of God for which the text uses the image of a forbidden fruit.
So, it isn't knowledge as we know it that is being referred to here; rather it is a reference to moral authority.
1 edit
Originally posted by lucifershammerThat's an interesting interpretation, but how does it square with the account in Genesis 3? For example,
Gen 2:17 :
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you are not to eat; for, the day you eat of that, you are doomed to die.
Note from the New Jerusalem Bible:
This knowledge is a preivilege which God ...[text shortened]... ing referred to here; rather it is a reference to moral authority.
11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?
Does knowing that you are naked assert "the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognise his status as a created being"? And was God just being sarcastic in Genesis 3:22?
22 And Jehovah God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever-
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderOn "nakedness":
That's an interesting interpretation, but how does it square with the account in Genesis 3? For example,
11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that tho ...[text shortened]... so of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever-
Note to Gen 3:6 from the NJB:
The arousal of lust, as first manifestation of disorder introduced into the harmony of creation.
From The New Jerome Biblical Commentary:
Their innocence lost through disobedience (2:5)