Who is to blame for our 'sin nature'

Originally posted by sumydid
Actually I see it quite the opposite.

Actually you don't seem to have a fixed opinion. You shift blame here and there with every sentence never really pining it down.

It seems as though most unbelievers think the only way God could have been fair is for Him to have created us with the inability to sin. But really, what sense does that make?
Yes it makes lots of sense.

He might as well have just built a bunch of robots, programmed to love Him unconditionally, with no choice to do anything else.
Fantastic!

That certainly wouldn't be satisfactory to God, or any of us.
Why not? I would find it perfectly satisfactory. Why wouldn't you? Sorry, but you can't get away with vague hints, you have to actually explain.

They basically argue that since God gave us the ability not to love Him, and the ability to sin, then He has no right to punish us for acting on that ability.
No, I argue that if God made us incapable of not sinning, then he has no right to punish us for being unable to abstain from sin. Remember that Christians claim we cannot choose to be blemish free (and blame this on our 'sin nature' inherited from Adams wrong doings).

Seems to me that what God was after, was to create special beings that have the choice to love Him or hate Him, and then in the end, provide a permanent place alongside Him for all those who love Him, and reject the rest.
And it seems to me to be the most ridiculous system one could think up. Its also interesting that it has nothing whatsoever to do with behaviour good or bad, and isn't really a choice anyway. Nobody in their right mind would choose to go to hell. How stupid do you think we are?

Originally posted by sumydid
I don't know where you got that idea. No, it doesn't follow. I certainly never said, or even hinted at such a thing. In fact, my very statement that you quoted refutes your suggestion. I started it off with "God could have...."

Yet you presented the 'robots' scenario as the only alternative.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Yet you presented the 'robots' scenario as the only alternative.

i find it odd that if you suggest god remove the aspects of humanity that cause us to sin, many christians on here use the 'robots' scenario as if its the only option. yet they also say that life in heaven will be perfect and everybody will be happy and at peace all the time, to meet these conditions huge parts of what we are would have to be removed, does this not make us 'robots' as well.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i find it odd that if you suggest god remove the aspects of humanity that cause us to sin, many christians on here use the 'robots' scenario as if its the only option. yet they also say that life in heaven will be perfect and everybody will be happy and at peace all the time, to meet these conditions huge parts of what we are would have to be removed, does this not make us 'robots' as well.

The more wisdom and understanding we gain, the more we see how wise it is to do what is right in God's sight. We then can use our free will to truly love one another instead of devising a plan, the way Satan does, to overcome others for our own selfish pleasure.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!

YouTube

Originally posted by RJHinds
The more wisdom and understanding we gain, the more we see how wise it is to do what is right in God's sight. We then can use our free will to truly love one another instead of devising a plan, the way Satan does, to overcome others for our own selfish pleasure.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJTN6Ww0VfM

so everybody is going to end up thinking in the same way, like robots.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i find it odd that if you suggest god remove the aspects of humanity that cause us to sin, many christians on here use the 'robots' scenario as if its the only option. yet they also say that life in heaven will be perfect and everybody will be happy and at peace all the time, to meet these conditions huge parts of what we are would have to be removed, does this not make us 'robots' as well.

Yes, it may make us robots as well. But if it makes us happy and unsinful then where is the problem? I find that theists love to use the 'free will is obviously good' argument but never actually justify it nor wish to discuss it in detail. Its one of their favourite 'smoke and mirrors' arguments.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Yes, it may make us robots as well. But if it makes us happy and unsinful then where is the problem? I find that theists love to use the 'free will is obviously good' argument but never actually justify it nor wish to discuss it in detail. Its one of their favourite 'smoke and mirrors' arguments.

How can one love without the free will to do so? Just being programmed to do what is right all the time does not make us capable of love. How can we even know what love is without experiencing hate? Perhaps you have a better understanding, but as yet, I don't see it.

Originally posted by RJHinds
How can one love without the free will to do so? Just being programmed to do what is right all the time does not make us capable of love. How can we even know what love is without experiencing hate? Perhaps you have a better understanding, but as yet, I don't see it.

do you think hate will exist in heaven?

Originally posted by twhitehead
So am I correct that you do not feel responsible for contracting this 'lung cancer' known as original sin? What about when you sin yourself? Can you blame your 'sin nature' and thus shirk some of the responsibility?

You are correct. When I accepted Jesus as my atonement for something I could not pay, all my sins were "washed "away or forgiven. Any sin after that, I blame myself. Yes it is due to the sinful nature, but I have a choice not to sin. Before I was "born anew", that is in my original state, I had no choice. Now I have a new nature residing in me . So essentially I now have two natures at odds with one another. But I have a choice on which one to obey. I try to starve the sinful nature which thrives on worldly views, world system and philosophies,not to mention my senses, lust, appetites,etc., while I feed the new nature spiritual things, like God's words, I pray in the spirit, etc...these things make the new nature stronger and dominate the sin nature. I am not always successful, but I can honestly say today, I am thankful, I am better that who I was a 30 years ago. Hell, I am better than I was yesterday.

Originally posted by RJHinds
How can one love without the free will to do so?

I don't see what free will has to do with it. We could simply be programmed to love. In fact, I think we probably are to some extent.

Just being programmed to do what is right all the time does not make us capable of love.
Does it make us incapable? Why?

How can we even know what love is without experiencing hate?
I don't think experiencing hate tells us anything about love, nor do I think it is required for understanding or experiencing love.

Perhaps you have a better understanding, but as yet, I don't see it.
And I don't see how hating helps you love, nor why love is required in the first place.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
You are correct. When I accepted Jesus as my atonement for something I could not pay, all my sins were "washed "away or forgiven. Any sin after that, I blame myself. Yes it is due to the sinful nature, but I have a choice not to sin. Before I was "born anew", that is in my original state, I had no choice. Now I have a new nature residing in me . So essen ...[text shortened]... hankful, I am better that who I was a 30 years ago. Hell, I am better than I was yesterday.

So why do you not simply always choose to do good, and who do you actually blame when you do bad. It seems to me that you only partially blame yourself and to some degree are still pushing a large part of the blame onto your sinful nature (for which you do not take responsibility).

Originally posted by twhitehead
So why do you not simply always choose to do good, and who do you actually blame when you do bad. It seems to me that you only partially blame yourself and to some degree are still pushing a large part of the blame onto your sinful nature (for which you do not take responsibility).

Because it is not always easy to do good. Are you saying it is easy for you? Are your motives always pure?
Yes after thinking about it I think you are right, I only partially blame myself. I am weak and I survive by God's grace.
Here is a section from Romans that helps explain...
Rom 7:12-8:8
So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.

14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do — this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23 but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God — through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.

8 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, 4 in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.

5 Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; 7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. 8 Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
NIV

Originally posted by sumydid
Exactly! But we have to remember, the idea is, all this is for God's glory and pleasure. God chose to do it the way He is doing it.

Like I said before, God could have just created a bunch of robots that automatically, and without choice, love Him unconditionally. Seems to me that the bible has taken great pains to explain to us that God (for His own di ...[text shortened]... hat she's not with you because she loves you, she's with you because you gave her no choice.

I don't agree that all of this should be for God's glory and pleasure. He has moral obligations to the beings he creates.

Is all the suffering in the world for God's pleasure as well? If so, he's got a twisted mind.

God also could have created a race of spiritually enlightened, compassionate, wise beings that would choose to do the right thing all the time. That isn't making robots. It's actually similar to the Christian myth of heaven, where only the 'saved' live. They are not robots, yet do not sin. So why didn't God just start by making heaven?

Originally posted by twhitehead
I don't see what free will has to do with it. We could simply be programmed to love. In fact, I think we probably are to some extent.

[b]Just being programmed to do what is right all the time does not make us capable of love.
Does it make us incapable? Why?

How can we even know what love is without experiencing hate?
I don't think exper /b]
And I don't see how hating helps you love, nor why love is required in the first place.[/b]

I don't mean that you have to hate to love. But I think for us to understand real love, we must see the result of what hate does, not necessarily our own hate, but hate from others.

God is love. There are three Persons within the Godhead that exchange love and I believe He created us to be able to share in this love. I don't see how one could be forced to love. I would not call that real love or love at all. If one does not give love freely, it is nothing but pretending to love and is fake. We must have the free will to choose between love and hate and not be forced by programming or there is no real love at all.

You wrote, "I don't think experiencing hate tells us anything about love, nor do I think it is required for understanding or experiencing love."

Look around you and see the murder, rape, poverty, greed, etc. that hate causes and think about what experiencing hate tells you. Is it good or bad?

Originally posted by checkbaiter
That is not the point, I could have used a lot of different analogies. The old saying don't cry over spilled milk, may fit. Once we have the ailment, who is to blame is irrelevant.
The point is, what to do with it.
Further more, God does not do all the work...

Of course God does not do all the work. Patient compliance and the placebo effect are important factors in any treatment program.