Truth

I followed the rest of it, bar this :

Quote:

By eating the fruit, they declined God's authority over their moral decisions in favor of deciding for themselves what was good and what was bad.

Are you saying Adam & Eve traded a partially controlled will, for free will? For what does "Gods Authority over their moral decisions" mean?

And why would he rest his Authority over moral decisions on a decision that has little to do with morals (ie. a rule)?

(I know I'm not religious anymore, but I've always been curious about what people believe)

0 Replies

I thought the meaning of m statement was self evident, although it might not be considered by all a prima facie truth.

0 Replies

I see I havent' quite explained what I was getting at properly. Let me rephrase how I read this whole paragraph.

Quote:

Jehovah created humans with a perfect conscience which would have served in any moral situation. By eating the fruit, they declined God's authority over their moral decisions in favor of deciding for themselves what was good and what was bad. That did not change the reality of what was good and what was bad; it just put humans in charge of decisions which history shows have not been within their grasp.

Adam & Eve were created with a perfect conscience
They broke a rule, thereby declining "God's authority over their moral decisions"
Which allowed them to decided for themselves good from bad

My problem is with the use of 'perfect conscience'...which should mean that deciding good from bad isn't a problem (because our consciences are perfect), and so there is no need for 'Gods authority over their moral decisions' (because of their perfect conscience). Correct me if I'm wrong so far.

It doesn't seem you mean this.

Which...and this is where I have difficulty...does that mean that "Gods authority over their moral decisions" would be needed for that perfect conscience?

Sorry, it's not self evident to me.

Quote:

That did not change the reality of what was good and what was bad; it just put humans in charge of decisions which history shows have not been within their grasp.

This shouldn't have been a problem with a perfect conscience.

0 Replies

Well, the term 'perfect conscience' does not appear in the bible and I refer to it only for the purpose of illustration. However the bible does refer to God's creation as perfect and there are places in the bible where a time is predicted when people will have God's law "written on their hearts" and not in a book. I think it evident, although many strongly disagree, that Adam and Eve originally had God's law (his authority) "written on their hearts" and by eating the fruit rejected God's authority in their desire to decide for themselves what was good and what was bad. This is, after all, what the tree was called.

They also had perfect bodies, and had they not sinned they sould still be here and we would not have war and crime and sickness and death. By sinning they lost their perfection, physically and morally, thus beginning a slow decline to their death. Being no longer perfect, they could not pass perfection on to their offspring, hence the human condition today.

0 Replies

Um, neo, surely the Bible says that upon eating the fruit, they'd know the difference between good and evil just like God does, not that they'd decide what the difference is?

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

The entire bible was written to provide us with the explanation of how God would overcome this rebellion and still give deserving humans the opportunity to regain the promise that Adam and Eve lost.

Where in the Bible does it say humans deserve anything, or that God owes us anything?

0 Replies

echi wrote:

rl,
.....But, as I understand, moral relativism does not deal with any specific moral judgment -- It just says that moral judgments are always relative. ......

Then by it's very nature it deals with EVERY moral judgement. That's why it is an absolute position.

If your position is 'nothing (i.e. no behavior) is immoral', then that is a moral judgement. Moreover it is stated in absolute terms.

An absolute which denies absolutes is a contradiction.

---------------------------------------

But when the rubber meets the road, I've never known a relativist who did not actually believe in moral absolutes.

At some point, each one of them caves and his appeal to an absolute standard is revealed.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

neologist wrote:
The entire bible was written to provide us with the explanation of how God would overcome this rebellion and still give deserving humans the opportunity to regain the promise that Adam and Eve lost.

Where in the Bible does it say humans deserve anything, or that God owes us anything?

God does not owe us anything. The kindness he bestows on mankind is undeserved. One meaning of the word 'grace', BTW.

0 Replies

Agreed. So where does your idea of 'deserving humans' come from?

0 Replies

The KJV puts it this way: "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. . . That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.(Galatians 3: 8-14)

0 Replies

Not sure how that says humans 'deserve' anything.

0 Replies

HMM!

OK.

God may grant deservedness even though we are not worthy of it.

Are we on the same page yet?

0 Replies

I might be in the Seattle area tomorrow (or the next day) neo, I'll pm you the same info and perhaps we'll meet up for a bit! Right now I'm in Birch Bay (in the sun - by the beach - gotta love wifi) but we might hit up Seattle, 'cause I've got a hankering for a guitar. and they are a lot cheaper and more plentiful than in Vancouver BC.

0 Replies

Tomorrow is a good day to do the Puyallup. They usually have someone selling guitars there. And weird Al will be there tomorrow night.

0 Replies

"truth" is when people take themselves so seriously that all other points of view seem impossible, right?

i mean there *may* be an objective reality, but our access to that is purely subjective. if we all take a vote on who is right, we sometimes get lucky, if it looks like a duck, we can call it a duck and feel okay with it- fine, so it's a duck.

"truth" is a bit more slippery to get ahold of than ducks, however. lots of things seem like truth to lots of people.

0 Replies

tinygiraffe wrote:

"truth" is a bit more slippery to get ahold of than ducks, however. lots of things seem like truth to lots of people.

In the context of religiosity you have not stated your views per se albeit by inference one can gather....

0 Replies

Re: Not sure how that says humans 'deserve' anything.

hankarin wrote:

All humans were conceived in sin and brought forth with an inclination toward wrongdoing.

And here I thought my parents had fun in the carnal events leading to my initial conception!

0 Replies

what do you want to know?

Chumly wrote:

In the context of religiosity you have not stated your views per se albeit by inference one can gather....

that i believe in ducks.

0 Replies

Re: what do you want to know?

tinygiraffe wrote:

Chumly wrote:
In the context of religiosity you have not stated your views per se albeit by inference one can gather....

that i believe in ducks.

[size=7]Welcome to A2K I am sure you'll get along just fine![/size]

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know