Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is there Biblical support for the concept of "Original Sin"?
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 121 of 240 (590946)
11-10-2010 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by kbertsche
11-10-2010 1:46 PM


kbertsche writes:
ringo writes:
So you agree that becoming more like God was a good thing but you still claim that Adam and Eve became more like God by sinning?
Please see Re: Free Willy (Message 81), which might be a partial answer. But I'm not quite sure what you are trying to ask?
Acquiring the knowledge of Good and Evil made them more like God. How can becoming more like God be a sin? How can the desire to be more like God be a sin?

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by kbertsche, posted 11-10-2010 1:46 PM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by kbertsche, posted 11-11-2010 12:36 AM ringo has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 122 of 240 (590947)
11-10-2010 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by ringo
11-10-2010 5:47 PM


Re: Free Willy
ringo writes:
Your reasoning seems circular.
Definitions usually go that way
You're assuming that there was a sin committed in the Garden of Eden
I'm defining sin as disobeying God - whether that involves a moral element or not. According to that definition, there was a sin committed
and then you're attributing consequences to that sin.
Better said: consequences attached to the disobedience. The text indicates so.
I'm saying that if anything Adam and Eve did in the story was a "sin", then sin is trivial.
Trivial: "of little worth or importance". Importance: "marked by or indicative of significant worth or consequence".
There were consequences and they were significant. Could you show me where your statement attaches to the situation?
-
According to the story, Adam and Eve were "made moral" by eating the fruit. How can you retroactively charge them with sin when the act was what made them capable of sin?
Wasn't sin previously defined as disobeying God (whether or not a moral element was attaching)? If they are moral creatures then sin committed is morally bad. If they are not it's consequentially bad (from their perspective)
But sin in both cases... per definition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by ringo, posted 11-10-2010 5:47 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by ringo, posted 11-10-2010 6:50 PM iano has replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 123 of 240 (590948)
11-10-2010 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by iano
11-10-2010 2:03 PM


Re: Free Willy
iano writes:
Suffice to say she either doubts the first (and moves in direction 2) or doesn't doubt either party and sit's where she is with an unresolved contradiction. But if doubting the first ("the first could be wrong") then she'd immediately have reason to doubt the second ("if one can be wrong then so can two")
You don't supply a reason to doubt the first and not the second.
The reason she accepts that the first party is wrong is because the second party assures her that they are.
She has no reason to think that any of them are lying.
iano writes:
True. But how's she to know the Serpent is correct once doubt is permitted as a resolution of the contradiction?
quote:
Doubt: a status between belief and disbelief, involves uncertainty or distrust or lack of sureness of an alleged fact, an action, a motive, or a decision.
There is no doubt.
The first party was incorrect.
The second party was correct.
iano writes:
We can dance around Panda but nothing of substance has emerged so far: not in the serpent being the last to speak, not in the doubt raised.
Eve has no doubts.
If you think otherwise could you please show why you think she has doubts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 2:03 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 6:47 PM Panda has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 124 of 240 (590950)
11-10-2010 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Panda
11-10-2010 6:31 PM


Re: Free Willy
Panda writes:
The reason she accepts that the first party is wrong is because the second party assures her that they are. She has no reason to think that any of them are lying.
1) Nobody is suggesting anyone need be suspected of lying.
2) If assured that a person can say something and be wrong, what value an assurance when an assurance is merely something someone says and things people say can be wrong. You're reasoning in a circle (edit: or better said: the serpent has her head spinning in a circle - she's left stuck in the dilemma - "who's wrong")
-
If you think otherwise could you please show why you think she has doubts?
See above.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Panda, posted 11-10-2010 6:31 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Panda, posted 11-10-2010 8:38 PM iano has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 125 of 240 (590952)
11-10-2010 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by iano
11-10-2010 6:16 PM


iano writes:
Wasn't sin previously defined as disobeying God (whether or not a moral element was attaching)?
That's how you defined it. I'm saying that that's a silly definition that trivializes sin. Sin has to have more to it than just disobedience of God's whims or it has no meaning. Nobody was hurt (with the possible exception of Adam and Eve), so I don't see how it was a sin.

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 6:16 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by iano, posted 11-11-2010 4:55 AM ringo has replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 126 of 240 (590958)
11-10-2010 8:38 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by iano
11-10-2010 6:47 PM


Re: Free Willy
iano writes:
2) If assured that a person can say something and be wrong, what value an assurance when an assurance is merely something someone says and things people say can be wrong. You're reasoning in a circle (edit: or better said: the serpent has her head spinning in a circle - she's left stuck in the dilemma - "who's wrong")
Are you saying that Eve would no longer know who or what to believe because one person had been identified as being wrong?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 6:47 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by iano, posted 11-11-2010 4:42 AM Panda has replied

kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 127 of 240 (590969)
11-11-2010 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by ringo
11-10-2010 5:53 PM


ringo writes:
Acquiring the knowledge of Good and Evil made them more like God.
Yes, in one particular aspect.
ringo writes:
How can becoming more like God be a sin? How can the desire to be more like God be a sin?
Good questions. But rather than answering such questions a priori and forcing the text into an interpretation that fits your preconceived answers, I would recommend going to the text and letting it speak for itself.
E.g. does the text communicate what I claimed in Message 81?:
kbertsche writes:
According to the account, God had placed man in an idyllic garden. But man was not satisfied with this; he wanted to make himself like God. He tried to do this in the garden, and tried to do it again at Babel. The Genesis account portrays these attempts to make oneself like God as very bad, not as beneficial.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by ringo, posted 11-10-2010 5:53 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by ringo, posted 11-11-2010 1:05 AM kbertsche has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 128 of 240 (590971)
11-11-2010 1:05 AM
Reply to: Message 127 by kbertsche
11-11-2010 12:36 AM


kbertsche writes:
ringo writes:
How can becoming more like God be a sin? How can the desire to be more like God be a sin?
Good questions. But rather than answering such questions a priori and forcing the text into an interpretation that fits your preconceived answers, I would recommend going to the text and letting it speak for itself.
I don't have any preconceived answers. I'd still like to hear your answers. And I'd still like an answer to the question I asked you in Message 33: If there is any other support besides the skyhook of Romans 5, please show it.
kbertsche writes:
E.g. does the text communicate what I claimed in Message 81?:
quote:
According to the account, God had placed man in an idyllic garden. But man was not satisfied with this; he wanted to make himself like God. He tried to do this in the garden, and tried to do it again at Babel. The Genesis account portrays these attempts to make oneself like God as very bad, not as beneficial.
No, it doesn't. Eve saw that the tree was "to be desired to make one wise". There's no suggestion that she (or Adam) was dissatisfied with anything. And in no way is becoming more like God - not "attempting to make oneself like God" - portrayed as a bad thing.

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by kbertsche, posted 11-11-2010 12:36 AM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by kbertsche, posted 11-12-2010 6:51 AM ringo has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 129 of 240 (590978)
11-11-2010 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Panda
11-10-2010 8:38 PM


Re: Free Willy
Panda writes:
Are you saying that Eve would no longer know who or what to believe because one person had been identified as being wrong?
For want of a means to know any differently, yes.
The 'means' suggested by you are self-refuting
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Panda, posted 11-10-2010 8:38 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Panda, posted 11-11-2010 6:01 AM iano has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 130 of 240 (590980)
11-11-2010 4:55 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by ringo
11-10-2010 6:50 PM


ringo writes:
That's how you defined it.
I'm playing the hand the Bible apears to have dealt me.
- they weren't moral beings at the point of choosing
- they are stated as disobeying God
- their disobedience is described as sin
ergo: a definition of sin doesn't need to include a moral element. I'm not suggesting that's all that could be said to define sin but it includes at least that - it would appear
I'm saying that that's a silly definition that trivializes sin.
Yet there were "significant consequences arising" from their action. Since the antithesis of trivial is "significant consequences arising"...
-
Sin has to have more to it than just disobedience of God's whims or it has no meaning.
Where, other than within God, would you suppose to ground things in order that meaning can be produced. If the grounding is only within God, how can you ever escape so-called whimsy?
-
Nobody was hurt (with the possible exception of Adam and Eve), so I don't see how it was a sin.
This discussion centres around a biblical notion for sin. Not any old notion for it.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by ringo, posted 11-10-2010 6:50 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by ringo, posted 11-11-2010 11:26 AM iano has not replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 131 of 240 (590985)
11-11-2010 6:01 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by iano
11-11-2010 4:42 AM


Re: Free Willy
iano writes:
For want of a means to know any differently, yes.
The 'means' suggested by you are self-refuting
And just to be completely clear: do you know of any 'means' that would have allowed Eve to know any differently?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by iano, posted 11-11-2010 4:42 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by iano, posted 11-11-2010 7:51 AM Panda has replied
 Message 143 by Shanara99, posted 11-12-2010 9:46 PM Panda has seen this message but not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 132 of 240 (590991)
11-11-2010 7:51 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Panda
11-11-2010 6:01 AM


How does a free, balanced choice work?
Panda writes:
And just to be completely clear: do you know of any 'means' that would have allowed Eve to know any differently?
That the one was wrong when the other wasn't? No.
Which seems to return us to her being presented with a balanced choice in which she is the decider - not external influences.
And neither of us seems to know how process of choosing in a balanced choice situation is worked out.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Panda, posted 11-11-2010 6:01 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Panda, posted 11-11-2010 10:14 AM iano has replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 133 of 240 (591000)
11-11-2010 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by iano
11-11-2010 7:51 AM


Re: How does a free, balanced choice work?
iano writes:
Which seems to return us to her being presented with a balanced choice in which she is the decider - not external influences.
And neither of us seems to know how process of choosing in a balanced choice situation is worked out.
She couldn't ask God because he could be wrong.
She couldn't ask the Serpent: he could be wrong too.
Eve would just say "If one person is wrong then you all could be wrong, so I might as go by what I see as that is the only way for me to judge."
quote:
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it.
So God ensured she would fail and then punished her for failing?
That seems as cruel and pointless as commanding a child not to cry; slapping them across the face; and then slapping them even harder when they start crying.
Few children have the emotional control to not cry. As adults, we know that.
Is God really a sadistic cruel bully?
Eve clearly did not have the right 'mental tools' for the job, and God knew it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by iano, posted 11-11-2010 7:51 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by iano, posted 11-11-2010 11:29 AM Panda has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 134 of 240 (591022)
11-11-2010 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by iano
11-11-2010 4:55 AM


iano writes:
- their disobedience is described as sin
Where is their disobedience described as sin? The first mention of sin in the Bible, as I recall, was in reference to Cain, several years later.
iano writes:
ringo writes:
I'm saying that that's a silly definition that trivializes sin.
Yet there were "significant consequences arising" from their action.
It hasn't been established that their action had anything to do with sin. You're extrapolating to say that any disobedience of God would be a sin, with or without consequences. That's how your definition trivializes sin.
iano writes:
Where, other than within God, would you suppose to ground things in order that meaning can be produced.
Within our own consciences, of course. Without personal responibility, without free will, the concept of sin is no different from the whim of any petty tyrant.
iano writes:
This discussion centres around a biblical notion for sin. Not any old notion for it.
That's what I'm saying. I don't think your notion of sin has Biblical support, particularly in this context.
Edited by ringo, : Spqlling.

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by iano, posted 11-11-2010 4:55 AM iano has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 135 of 240 (591023)
11-11-2010 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Panda
11-11-2010 10:14 AM


Re: How does a free, balanced choice work?
Panda writes:
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it.
When the man saw that the fruit of the Ferrari was good for speed, pleasing to the eye and a magnet for drawing babes, he laid down the dough and ripped out of the forecourt.
He finds out subsequently that the babe magnetism of the Ferrari isn't quite enough to offset the male pattern baldness that has advanced of late. More topically, he remembers that this Ferrari-as-babe-magnet notion took hold subsequent to his seeing Ferrari advertisement in mens magazines which suggested that this would be the case.
The serpent has built a case for the desirability of the fruit prior to her eating it. Her seeing it as desirable after his pitch can be:
a) it was desirable all by itself but God's prohibition held her in check (in which case she had a free choice). Then the serpent comes along and reduces the restraint of the prohibition by sowing the notion that people (him and God) can be wrong. The fruit, the third party, exercises control.
b) Her having chosen for his pitch as an exercise in free choice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Panda, posted 11-11-2010 10:14 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Panda, posted 11-11-2010 11:47 AM iano has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024