Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Original Sin
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 103 (175930)
01-11-2005 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by sidelined
01-10-2005 8:06 PM


Re: Original Sin---with No origin? What is the point?
I can give one view of Original Sin, or perhaps Innate Depravity would be the better term.
God established a Covenant with Adam and Eve. They broke the covenant. This covenant is called the "Covenant of Works."
A synonym for the Covenant of Works is "conscience." Now the Covenant of Works is as hard as nails. If you break it once, it is broken forever. The proof that the Covenant of Works is still operative in our hearts is that we know about it and cannot keep it. We constantly break the inner covenant of our conscience. After all, who has not told merely one lie, but a thousand?
This is the proof that we are innately depraved.
We know the covenant and cannot abide by it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by sidelined, posted 01-10-2005 8:06 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 4:59 PM robinrohan has replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 103 (175936)
01-11-2005 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by sidelined
01-11-2005 4:59 PM


Re: Original Sin---with No origin? What is the point?
The term "Covenant of Works" is a Calvinist idea. I don't know that the phrase appears in the Bible. It's called the "Covenant of Works" to distinguish it from another covenant, the "Covenant of Grace" (Christ's ransoming). The Covenant of Grace does not demand "works" (good deeds), only faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 4:59 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 5:22 PM robinrohan has replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 103 (175950)
01-11-2005 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by sidelined
01-11-2005 5:22 PM


sidelined writes:
Would this covenant have something to do with the eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?
Well, yes ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 5:22 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 5:46 PM robinrohan has replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 64 of 103 (175958)
01-11-2005 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by sidelined
01-11-2005 5:46 PM


The Paradox
Therein lies the mystery of the tree of "the knowledge of good and evil."
There are two views you can take about morality in relation to God:
1. Good is good because God proclaimed it so.
2. Good is good in and of itself, and God is following goodness.
Adam and Eve already had a conscience--you might say with one and only one law (don't eat of the fruit of that tree). This corresponds to #1.
Or you might say that Adam and Eve had no conscience; it was the breaking of the Covenant that created the conscience. This corresponds to #2.
The Calvinists, I think, thought that the story of the tree was meant to illustrate that it is both.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 5:46 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 6:21 PM robinrohan has replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 103 (175964)
01-11-2005 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by sidelined
01-11-2005 6:21 PM


Re: The Paradox
Sidelined writes:
Well #1 is out since it would not make sense to claim a consience since the bible does not make wiggle room for this and it would also mean they had an awareness of good and evil for which eating of the fruit of the tree would be a moot point.
By no means. Their concept of good and evil was what God proclaimed.
Do not eat that fruit. That was good and evil for them.
Sidelined writes:
#2 would indicate good to be a quality seperate from god which does not seem to square with what little I know of Christianity.
Some sects have proclaimed that #1 is correct.
It's a very problematic issue, and some believe that this mysterious story about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil addresses this issue, for remember, God said they would die if they ate it.
They didn't die.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 6:21 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by sidelined, posted 01-11-2005 6:38 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 103 (175967)
01-11-2005 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Abshalom
01-11-2005 6:25 PM


Absholam writes:
Well, someone please clarify whether in Genesis 1, when God "saw that it was good" was recognizing a quality that preexisted creation of a "good" object, or God was simply declaring perceived goodness based upon His definition.
That question cannot be answered.
This message has been edited by robinrohan, 01-11-2005 18:43 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Abshalom, posted 01-11-2005 6:25 PM Abshalom has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by robinrohan, posted 01-11-2005 9:50 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 103 (176026)
01-11-2005 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by robinrohan
01-11-2005 6:42 PM


The Tree
But I will tell you what I think about this profound story--the story of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
It reminds me of the idea in the Medieval Jewish Kabbalah tradition--the idea of the Zimzum (withdrawal).
Perhaps there were two withdrawals: (1) the withdrawal of God to make way for the physical world and (2)the withdrawal of God to make way for the moral world.
The first bite of the apple was the beginning of the second Zimzum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by robinrohan, posted 01-11-2005 6:42 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024