Demiurge

If there is a God, why do we want bad things? Why do we get the urge to be violent, or do something "bad" or "sinful"?

Before you get our old trusty "free will," think about this. Even if we are free to choose to go along with those urges or not, how did they get there in the first place?

Who put them there?

If they are the result of Original Sin (i.e., we are all "born evil" and that is why we are inherently rebellious), then that still begs the question of what was in Adam or Eve that made them first want to disobey. Or what was in Lucifer that made him want to disobey. You can take the regression back as far as you want, the question is still relevant.

Where does the buck stop?

[ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: Demiurge ]</p>

-DB-

Well Christians are going to tell you it is because of the original sin caused by Adam.

Heleilu

I asked that once on another board. The resident fundamentalist Catholic replied that people aren't essentially good or evil (I asked why God couldn't have made people prefer altruism), so my question was pointless. In other words, no answer.

Albert Cipriani

Dear Heleilu,
That "fundamentalist" (there's no such thing!) Catholic was speaking what passed for his namby pamby P.C. mind, not Catholic doctrine.

The Church teaches we were created perfect and rendered imperfect by our first parents. Which means, we are born evil, not good. That's why being good takes effort while being evil comes naturally. Sincerely, Albert the Traditional Catholic

CodeMason

So I'm paying for something that I myself did not do? Great sense of mercy and justice your God has there.

Optimistic

We're inclined to do opposite of what our mind wants unless we put ourselves into gear. e.i. I don't like to get up in the mornings, but I like what I can learn if I do get up. I would no doubt like to be a simple man with simple needs, but I can't because my mind is addicted. If our mind didn't consist of 3 portions, we probably wouldn't even ask questions because we couldn't object against ourself. I'm an idiot yes, so bare with me.

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ

Morality is to do not what you WANT but what you SHOULD-even if it means going against what you want.

How can man be moral if the thought to act in any other manner does not appear? I maintain that every human has dark urges (probably because they rage within me, barely unchecked)--yet, in most cases (leaving out the insane, who cannot control their behavior), they choose how to act upon them, they choose what is right to do. Morality is a choice, as is immorality.

In short--
If one has free will, one must have urges to deliberate upon. And if morality exists, then there must be both good and evil urges.

Jamie_L

Wait a minute. If we were created perfect (i.e., our "first parents" were created perfect), then why did they commit original sin? If they were indeed perfect, they would have resisted. Assuming that committing sin is imperfect, in order to commit the first sin they were either a) created imperfect, or b) created perfect but made imperfect at some later date. If God created them perfect, one would assume part of that perfection included incorruptibility - no outside influence could render them imperfect, only God could.

So, if they committed original sin, God either made them imperfect to begin with, or changed his mind and made them imperfect later. And, if God is omniscient, he knew when he made them that they would commit the sin. If that was going to piss him off so much, why not make them so they wouldn't do it. Or, if that was beyond his power, and he knew what they would do, why not put a guard by the tree in the first place and preserve his precious, imperfect creations.

Makes no sense.

Jamie

Transworldly Depraved

Contemporary theistic philosophers usually say that having the power to choose between good and evil is a great good which outweighs the evil that could possibly result.

They often argue that in order for us to have a deep form of responsibility for each other we must be capable of harming as well as helping each other.

Claims based on the bible do not seem to play much of a role among analytic philosophers of religion.

Transworldly Depraved

Jamie_L:

What does "perfect" mean anyway? It seems extremely subjective. I believe it is most likely just an emotional or evaluative expression people often make. It is just a way of saying "That's great!". More a matter of values than of facts. For example, a friend of mine recently said that the temperature in her apartment was perfect. That just means it suits her purposes and fits what she thinks is good or right for her(ie. is evaluative).

If the theist believes that God's purpose in creating mankind was to create conscious beings with the power to choose between good and evil and the power to accept or reject God, then we are perfect (assuming, of course, that we have the features God purportedly intended for us to have). If things are as he wants, then they would seem to be perfect. You might say that things are not as God wants because there is evil and God cannot be good and want evil. Theistic philosophers respond to that by saying that such evil is a logically necessary condition for greater goods. God cannot want and permit the greater good unless he permits the evil.

There would only be a problem for the theist if you define "perfect" as "incapable of wrong action". But if their god's purpose was to create conscious beings with the power to choose between good and evil then a being incapable of doing evil would not be perfect. The reason is that such a being would not fulfil their god's purposes.

According to the Genesis account, Adam and Eve clearly had the power to perform a wrong action since they did. So saying they were perfect must mean something else.