Original Sin

[John Dibble]

By gaining the ability to make moral judgment, we necessarily became imperfect.

Does God not have the ability to make moral judgements? Does that not make him necessarily imperfect?

so that, all of humanity is ethically debilitated, and powerless to rehabilitate themselves, unless rescued by God.

Just seems to contradict free will to me.

Free will is making your own decisions. It does not mean that you are not influenced by anything.

It's mainly the 'powerless to rehabilitate themselves' part, less the God part.

You're pretty out there if you really believe people can control all their tendencies and personality traits.

You're pretty out there if you really believe God comes down and changes people's tendencies and personality traits for them.

I don't believe we can control all of them, not at the same time(too much to manage at once), however I do believe we can change the bad them over time with conscious effort.

[John Dibble]

1 - God told Adam not to eat from the tree because there were certain things God didn't want Adam to know.

Then why did he create the tree in the first place then?

[Gabu]

3 - As a result of that one sin, Adam's took on a sinful nature and passed it onto the rest of us.

See, this is what my question is asking: if Adam sinned out of his own volition even before having eaten the apple, how exactly did he not have a tendency towards sin even before he ate it?  It seems to me that it was already there, at least in some form.

[Emsworth]

May I ask why we are all concentrating on Adam? Recall that it was Eve who first partook of the forbidden fruit.

[ilikeverin]

1 - God told Adam not to eat from the tree because there were certain things God didn't want Adam to know.

Then why did he create the tree in the first place then?

IIRC God was in the habit of wandering around the Garden of Eden, so perhaps he wanted a nice Snack 'o Knowledge (tm) occasionally

[John Dibble]

1 - God told Adam not to eat from the tree because there were certain things God didn't want Adam to know.

Then why did he create the tree in the first place then?

IIRC God was in the habit of wandering around the Garden of Eden, so perhaps he wanted a nice Snack 'o Knowledge (tm) occasionally

Hmmm, then he should have placed it somewhere the humans couldn't reach then.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

1 - God told Adam not to eat from the tree because there were certain things God didn't want Adam to know.

Then why did he create the tree in the first place then?

I don't believe the bible ever says. 

This is just a guess, but it may have something to do with consequence.  But that is just a guess and I don't like going beyond what is written.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

3 - As a result of that one sin, Adam's took on a sinful nature and passed it onto the rest of us.

See, this is what my question is asking: if Adam sinned out of his own volition even before having eaten the apple, how exactly did he not have a tendency towards sin even before he ate it?  It seems to me that it was already there, at least in some form.

How is it he sinned before eating from the tree?

[Blue Rectangle]

May I ask why we are all concentrating on Adam? Recall that it was Eve who first partook of the forbidden fruit.

Later discussions in the Bible only refer to Adam as the sinner.  In Gen 2, God commands Adam not to eat before Eve is even created (though in Gen 3 Eve is at least aware of the command).  It's tradition to talk about Adam in this context, just as we say "man" or "mankind".  Adam is just the non-PC way of talking about Adam and Eve.

And exactly where in the bible is a foreknowledge of good and evil required before sin can occur?

It doesn't.  But the capacity for moral judgment is a prerequisite for moral action.

Where in the bible does it say Adam lacked moral judgment prior to eating from the tree?  God explicitly told Adam:  

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree of the garden, 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for on the day you eat from it, you will certainly die."  (Gen 2:16-17)

Sorry, I don't see anything about Adam lacking moral judgment.  Heck the scripture even says that Adam was NOT deceived by the serpent.  So Adam at least had the moral judgment not to be swayed by the immoral devil!

What do you believe "knowledge of good and evil" means?  How can we make moral decisions without knowing what is good and what is bad?

I also don't understand the part about Adam not being deceived by the serpent.  If he wasn't deceived, then why did he eat the apple?

An interesting question I've had is the following: I've always heard that Adam's action in disobeying God caused this moral and ethical distortion in every human afterwards, but it seems to me that, given that Adam disobeyed God, the human race was already inclined in that direction anyway, so what did Adam's action actually change?

Without knowledge of good and evil, we were like animals.  We had free will, which necessarily gives the power to disobey, but we did not have the capacity to make moral judgments.  Adam's action gave us our "knowledge of good and evil" and therefore fundamentally changed human nature.

[??????????]

Original Sin is medieval garbage in my opinion.
The idea that we are powerless is what Calvinism is all
about. By the way it is also the first step in twelve steps and the step that I most object to. To say humans are powerless is nonsense.
Calvinism says that God arbitrarily decides who will be saved and who will literally burn forever in hell. Somehow, the argument is that God is merciful for allowing anyone to be saved. The fundamentalist idea of God makes God to be a monster. Is it any wonder that so many people have rejected Christianity and even religion altogether?
Anyway, if you ask a Calvinist if s/he believes this the way I have stated it, s/he will say not, but I have yet to hear an explanation that makes any sense.

Well at least we finally agree on something. Calivinism is horribly flawed and T.U.L.I.P. is a horrible doctrine.

[John Dibble]

1 - God told Adam not to eat from the tree because there were certain things God didn't want Adam to know.

Then why did he create the tree in the first place then?

Assuming that there is a (male) god, 'he' placed the tree there, as a challenge to humans to *think for themselves*. Unless Adam and Eve had eaten from the tree, the human race would have forever been in a very ignorant state. Is that a good thing? Is ignorance the same as strength. If you believe that eating from the tree was wrong, you are essentially saying that thinking for oneself is a sin, and therefore that ignorance is a good thing. But where does 'evil' come from if not from ignorance?

Yeah, but by your logic he wanted us to eat the fruit, so it shouldn't have been a sin, lol. He should instead have been pleased about it, instead of casting them out of the garden.

[??????????]

Original Sin is medieval garbage in my opinion.
The idea that we are powerless is what Calvinism is all
about. By the way it is also the first step in twelve steps and the step that I most object to. To say humans are powerless is nonsense.
Calvinism says that God arbitrarily decides who will be saved and who will literally burn forever in hell. Somehow, the argument is that God is merciful for allowing anyone to be saved. The fundamentalist idea of God makes God to be a monster. Is it any wonder that so many people have rejected Christianity and even religion altogether?
Anyway, if you ask a Calvinist if s/he believes this the way I have stated it, s/he will say not, but I have yet to hear an explanation that makes any sense.

Well at least we finally agree on something. Calivinism is horribly flawed and T.U.L.I.P. is a horrible doctrine.

Amen to that. The L in tulip, namely limited atonement, is cruel beyond belief. It boggles my mind that anyone could believe in it.

Well, I'm not sure how you believe but I personally believe some people (not sure HOW many) DO go to hell and people are held accountable for their sins. God DOES punish people and thats the basics of most any religion and I think that's perfectly fair.

[Emsworth]

Scripture seems to agree with John Calvin that salvation is the result of unconditional divine election.

"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world ... Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will." (Ephesians 1:4-5)

"For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth." (Romans 9:11)

"And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." (Acts 13:48)

[ragnar]

Yes, I believe in Original Sin

How can you not, when the world is full of corrupt and egoisistic people?

[Emsworth]

Yes, I believe in Original Sin

How can you not, when the world is full of corrupt and egoisistic people?

Fallacy. Just because some people are corrupt, the whole population is not necessarily tainted by original sin.

[ragnar]

No, that sounds unfair (heck, it is unfair)

And?

Isn´t it unfair when people grow up with problems because they were raised by bad parents?
How is this different?

[ragnar]

Yes, I believe in Original Sin

How can you not, when the world is full of corrupt and egoisistic people?

Fallacy. Just because some people are corrupt, the whole population is not necessarily tainted by original sin.

All people are corrupt, not just a few bad apples

[Joe Kakistocracy]

Nobody is perfect because of a combination of two things: genetic and environmental influences (i.e. 'nature and nurture').

Biological deficiences or advantages are usually passed down to the next generation, and will most likely affect the way that person develops.  If they are born with a serious genetic disorder for example, they could go down the path of blaming others for something that wasn't their fault, or they could use it to make them a stronger person inside.

Environmental influences give people their cultural and moral belief structures.  These influences vary from person to person so violently and unpredictably, that it's impossible to determine the behavior of an infant in later life.  As we all know, nobody's behavior (generally good or generally bad) means that they are perfect.

It's simple psychology.  'Original sin' has nothing to do with why there are bad people.

[ragnar]

Nobody is perfect because of a combination of two things: genetic and environmental influences (i.e. 'nature and nurture').

Biological deficiences or advantages are usually passed down to the next generation, and will most likely affect the way that person develops.  If they are born with a serious genetic disorder for example, they could go down the path of blaming others for something that wasn't their fault, or they could use it to make them a stronger person inside.

Environmental influences give people their cultural and moral belief structures.  These influences vary from person to person so violently and unpredictably, that it's impossible to determine the behavior of an infant in later life.  As we all know, nobody's behavior (generally good or generally bad) means that they are perfect.

It's simple psychology.  'Original sin' has nothing to do with why there are bad people.

Yes, but this is just another and more complicated way to say "Original Sin"

[Joe Kakistocracy]

Nobody is perfect because of a combination of two things: genetic and environmental influences (i.e. 'nature and nurture').

Biological deficiences or advantages are usually passed down to the next generation, and will most likely affect the way that person develops.  If they are born with a serious genetic disorder for example, they could go down the path of blaming others for something that wasn't their fault, or they could use it to make them a stronger person inside.

Environmental influences give people their cultural and moral belief structures.  These influences vary from person to person so violently and unpredictably, that it's impossible to determine the behavior of an infant in later life.  As we all know, nobody's behavior (generally good or generally bad) means that they are perfect.

It's simple psychology.  'Original sin' has nothing to do with why there are bad people.

Yes, but this is just another and more complicated way to say "Original Sin"

Perhaps so, but it's a scientific way of saying it, and that's what makes it better.

[ragnar]

Nobody is perfect because of a combination of two things: genetic and environmental influences (i.e. 'nature and nurture').

Biological deficiences or advantages are usually passed down to the next generation, and will most likely affect the way that person develops.  If they are born with a serious genetic disorder for example, they could go down the path of blaming others for something that wasn't their fault, or they could use it to make them a stronger person inside.

Environmental influences give people their cultural and moral belief structures.  These influences vary from person to person so violently and unpredictably, that it's impossible to determine the behavior of an infant in later life.  As we all know, nobody's behavior (generally good or generally bad) means that they are perfect.

It's simple psychology.  'Original sin' has nothing to do with why there are bad people.

Yes, but this is just another and more complicated way to say "Original Sin"

Perhaps so, but it's a scientific way of saying it, and that's what makes it better.

[??????????]

Yes, I believe in Original Sin

How can you not, when the world is full of corrupt and egoisistic people?

True. But as has been pointed out this is the result of free will. Infants are perfect as are young children until what is called "The age of reason" which is around 12 years of age.

[ragnar]

Yes, I believe in Original Sin

How can you not, when the world is full of corrupt and egoisistic people?

True. But as has been pointed out this is the result of free will. Infants are perfect as are young children until what is called "The age of reason" which is around 12 years of age.

Children is as bad or worse than adults, the differents is that they at least doesn´t know better

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Adam is just the non-PC way of talking about Adam and Eve.

Umm, no.  Certainly not in this context anyway. 

--

What do you believe "knowledge of good and evil" means?  How can we make moral decisions without knowing what is good and what is bad?

God has given me a command not to engage in homosexuality.  So I know that it is wrong, even though I don’t have knowledge of what it is like to engage in homosexuality.

I can know something is a sin without having knowledge of the sin.

When I was in school, I knew it was wrong to smoke pot, but I tried pot anyway because I wanted to know what it was like.

The idea of rules is teach people what not to do BEFORE they attain firsthand knowledge of the consequences of their actions.

---

I also don't understand the part about Adam not being deceived by the serpent.  If he wasn't deceived, then why did he eat the apple?

What don’t you understand? 

Does Genesis ever say Adam was deceived?  No.

Doesn’t Paul claim that Adam was not deceived?  “Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived." (1Tim 2:14)

---

Without knowledge of good and evil, we were like animals.  We had free will, which necessarily gives the power to disobey, but we did not have the capacity to make moral judgments.  Adam's action gave us our "knowledge of good and evil" and therefore fundamentally changed human nature.

That whole paragraph is simply wrong.

First, Adam was NOT like the animals prior to his sin.  In fact, the bible describes sinful man as being like an animal, which is the exact opposite of what you are saying. 

Second, Adam was made in the image of God.  A search among the animals for a suitable helper turned up nothing for Adam, making Adam aware he was NOT an animal.  Since the search turned up empty among the animals, God made Eve out of Adam. (All of this is explicitly stated in the bible.)

Third, NOWHERE in the bible does it say Adam ever lacked “moral judgment”.  You’re simply pulling this out of thin air.

Fourth, it was sin itself that changed our nature for the worse, not the knowledge of good and evil.  You’re making it sound like knowledge of good and evil is a good thing when it is not.  We are commanded several times in the bible (old testament and new testament) NOT to attempt to attain knowledge of evil.

[Blue Rectangle]

What do you believe "knowledge of good and evil" means?  How can we make moral decisions without knowing what is good and what is bad?

God has given me a command not to engage in homosexuality.  So I know that it is wrong, even though I don’t have knowledge of what it is like to engage in homosexuality.

I can know something is a sin without having knowledge of the sin.

When I was in school, I knew it was wrong to smoke pot, but I tried pot anyway because I wanted to know what it was like.

The idea of rules is teach people what not to do BEFORE they attain firsthand knowledge of the consequences of their actions.

Jesus instructs against blind following of rules.  Strict adherence to The Law can itself be less lawful than doing what is right (Mk 3:1-6):

Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.

How are we to know what is good or evil, if the Law technically in conflict with what is good?  Jesus broke the Law!  Did he commit a sin by the good act of healing a man?

Without knowledge of good and evil, we were like animals.  We had free will, which necessarily gives the power to disobey, but we did not have the capacity to make moral judgments.  Adam's action gave us our "knowledge of good and evil" and therefore fundamentally changed human nature.

That whole paragraph is simply wrong.

First, Adam was NOT like the animals prior to his sin.  In fact, the bible describes sinful man as being like an animal, which is the exact opposite of what you are saying. 

Second, Adam was made in the image of God.  A search among the animals for a suitable helper turned up nothing for Adam, making Adam aware he was NOT an animal.  Since the search turned up empty among the animals, God made Eve out of Adam. (All of this is explicitly stated in the bible.)

Gen 3:22
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil..."

Adam did not have "knowledge of good and evil" before eating the apple.  This is perfectly clear despite the "in our image, in out likeness" quote.  After eating the apple, Adam's eyes "were opened".  It was only then that Adam became (more) like God.  At no point in human history has man been exactly like God, so you cannot infer that any similarities before the Fall necessarily included similar moral judgment.

Third, NOWHERE in the bible does it say Adam ever lacked “moral judgment”.  You’re simply pulling this out of thin air.

Please answer this question: What does "knowledge of good and evil" mean?

Fourth, it was sin itself that changed our nature for the worse, not the knowledge of good and evil.  You’re making it sound like knowledge of good and evil is a good thing when it is not.  We are commanded several times in the bible (old testament and new testament) NOT to attempt to attain knowledge of evil.

And your own quote earlier advised attaining knowledge of good.  It's a double-sided coin; you can't have one without the other.  The good news is that our knowledge can lead us to greater goodness:

You must be logged in to read this quote.