FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-25-2003, 12:08 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Monterrey, N.L. Mexico
Posts: 11
Default

All this assuming that Adam could sin in the first place. Not one of you have even pondered on the issue: How could a PERFECT GOD create an IMPERFECT BEING?

If Adam was created by God, a perfect being, then Adam too, must have been perfect. Yet, he sinned (ate the forbiden fruit despite God's command). So, how could he sin if he was perfect? Or does God make imperfect creations? Is He an amateur all of a sudden?

The whole "free will" issue is silly. There is absolutely no mention of it in the Bible; rather, it is an a posteriori rationalization done in order to reconcile the problem of original sin and the perfection of creation - an unavoidable conundrum whenever one deals with such a poorly written book.

http://members.aol.com/ckbloomfld/be...html#issref123
ftorresgamez is offline  
Old 07-25-2003, 12:53 PM   #12
CJD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: greater Orlando area
Posts: 832
Default

Quote:
Not one of you have even pondered on the issue: How could a PERFECT GOD create an IMPERFECT BEING?
Normally I would ignore the arrogant, but this is a bit much. Theoretically, if a perfect God created the world, he would create according to his perfect attributes. He is not bound by them, as they are not separate from him. Not creating according to a "set" standard of perfection is almost a non-question. In any case, this theoretical CreatorGod is not required to create a perfect being insofar as the act of creating an imperfect being does not violate his perfect attributes. Does it? Prove it.

Regards,

CJD
CJD is offline  
Old 07-25-2003, 02:55 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
Default

There is no indication that the God written about in Genesis is, or was ever intended to be, a "perfect God".

All that theological guff came later.
Jack the Bodiless is offline  
Old 07-25-2003, 03:47 PM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default Theological consensus??

I think you need to check all your assumptions.
Adam was not "disposed to good". It is just that temptation did not come "from within". he needed to be tempted by a third party.

Following the fall he was tempted "from within"
judge is offline  
Old 07-26-2003, 06:29 AM   #15
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Posts: 15,576
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by SignOfTheCross
I like it how you tried to make an arguement out of a rebuttal. Adam and Eve did realise they were sinning, but not that they were doing wrong.

Peace,
SOTC
Can you clear that up for me? They knew they were sinning, however they didn't know they were doing wrong? I'm not sure how you define sin, but I the concept of being knowledgable of what is right and wrong is the crux of the issue anyway.

Regards,

Invictus
Soul Invictus is offline  
Old 07-26-2003, 05:10 PM   #16
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Quezon City, Philippines
Posts: 1,994
Default Re: Theological consensus??

Quote:
Originally posted by judge
I think you need to check all your assumptions.
Adam was not "disposed to good". It is just that temptation did not come "from within". he needed to be tempted by a third party.

Following the fall he was tempted "from within"
Yet this is an unwarranted assertion. Why wasn't he disposed to good?
Secular Pinoy is offline  
Old 07-27-2003, 11:15 AM   #17
Amos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Notes on Biblical Original Sin

Quote:
Originally posted by scumble
I'm just after some comments on some notes I've been making...



It just occurred to me when reading about the doctrine today.
It would help to distinguish between "man" who was created in Gen.1 after the image of God and the ego awareness of man that was created in Gen 3. This second ego identity was called Adam and only in this awareness can evil be conceived to exist.
 
Old 07-28-2003, 02:03 AM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default Re: Re: Theological consensus??

Quote:
Originally posted by Secular Pinoy
Yet this is an unwarranted assertion. Why wasn't he disposed to good?
Hi secular pinoy!

Well I suppose it could be that Adam was "disposed to do good". It may end up being a semantic issue.

In the context of the original post I don't think this is the best way to explain it.

Following the assertion in the first post scumble asks..."But if this is true, why would Adam suddenly decide to disobey the Lord?"....

The hidden assumption here seems to be that if Adam was "disposed to do good", he should not have disobeyed.

In this sense he was not "disposed to do good". In other words he was not"disposed to do good" in a way that moved him to resist the temptation to disobey. But this is obvious because he disobeyed. Which makes me wonder what the original kwestion was about....hmmm..and makes me wunder wot eye am still doing hear.
A least thats how I see it (presently)

Hope this helps.
judge is offline  
Old 07-28-2003, 03:01 AM   #19
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 279
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by CJD
The "keep it" bit, however, is. This charge entails guarding the garden from encroachment. So, the two keepers of the garden should have driven the serpent out; instead the serpent (indirectly) drives them out.
Where do you get the idea that the serpent comes from outside the garden?

What I see as the main problem is the claim that Adam was somehow better beforehand. If he was so ready to eat the friut because Eve gave it to him, how does that make him closer to God? Isn't Adam just the same as anyone, he just happened to disobey the first command? And wasn't it inevitable? Why does on transgression change Adam? If he wasn't tempted "from within" before, how does knowledge of Good and Evil make men sin? Genesis doesn't suggest knowledge from the tree is any different from God's knowledge. Why does knowledge of Good and Evil make a man ashamed of being naked?

Quote:
Why? I don't know. Ask him.
Ah. That's the trouble. Before you come to these things, you already have an assumption at the back of your head. Why should I need to ask him, anyway?

Quote:
They were cast out because God didn't want man to have both knowledge of good & evil as well as eternal life.
I only just noticed that yesterday, mike. It suggests immortality is completely out of the picture as far as man is concerned.
scumble is offline  
Old 07-28-2003, 09:44 AM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 1,505
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by scumble
I only just noticed that yesterday, mike. It suggests immortality is completely out of the picture as far as man is concerned.
Yes, the message is that we were created as mortal, innocent/ignorant workers. The curse of Man is not that we we inherited a sinful and disobedient nature because of Adams action, the curse of Man is that we know the difference between good and evil and we have to choose between the two.

I think Christians have a lot of trouble with that notion. They keep trying to read "Original Sin", "Spiritual Death" and "Loss of Immortality" into the story and those elements simply are not supported by the text.

-Mike...
mike_decock is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:57 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.