Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

No

Only Judeism

Only Islam

Yes to both Judeism and Islam

[Arx]

Are you thinking of "For we are saved by grace and faith, not by works, that no man can boast", "For faith without deeds is dead", and "To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life."?

My understanding is that they're not really contradictory, because if you have faith in the Bible, which teaches the importance of - for example - charity ("For what you did for these the least of my brothers or sisters you did also for me"), you will be charitable, and so on. These deeds are an affirmation of your faith; if you are a charitable Christian your faith is likely (not guaranteed, but likely) stronger than that of a total skinflint.

[Biowraith]

But isn't it just as likely that Adam and Eve would have burnt down the tree instead of eating from it? Or that it took something telling them to eat from it for them to actually do it, They never even thought to eat from it until something told them too and Adam was told to not let either one of them eat from the tree but he didn't stop Eve or himself from eating and further more when they gained their knowledge they ran and his from god and lied to him

I think eating from the tree would likely come before burning it down due to them having to figure out fire for the latter but not for the former.  Although if they had burned it down, would God have been ok with that?  Would that have maybe saved them from the possibility of sinning or would that in itself have been a grievous sin?  In any case, that something telling them to eat was the prompt for them to do so doesn't mean it was the only way that would happen - assuming they had the same basic traits as humanity does (besides the knowledge of good/evil part) they'd have that inherent curiosity that would lead to eventually thinking "wonder what that tastes like" and proceeding to find out - and my understanding is that life spans at that point were sufficient that there was a long time (possibly eternity, depending if they were outright immortal) for that "eventually" to come about.

On Adam being told not to let them, that ties into the whole issue that he couldn't know that doing other than he was told was wrong until after they'd eaten, at which point it's too late.  Essentially, telling Adam or Eve to do or not do something pre-fruit was pointless as they'd have no concept that it's right to do as they're told or wrong not to (or understand whether the consequences of either were good or bad).

I think the running, hideing, and lieing to god were all within their new found knowledge and if the actual eating of the fruit wasn't the original sin then this was.

Perhaps, but the effect of eating the fruit and the resulting actions from the creatures he designed and created would all be easily predicted by God (it doesn't even require divine omniscience).  If he knows that sooner or later they'll end up eating it and he knows that the way he designed both would cause the given results from their interaction, that outcome was pretty clearly his intention all along.  It was, as they say, inevitable.

As for condemning all sinners, how was god supposed to keep man from teaching his children to sin?
Think about it, do you have to teach a child to lie? Or do you have to teach a child to be honest?
Do you have to teach a child to how to be disobedient? Or do you have to teach them how to be obedient? We bring sin upon ourselves because it is our nature

Well, besides the obvious answer to "how was god supposed to <anything>", my understanding is that the Christian stance on all of mankind being sinners isn't that it's learned, more that it's like a stain on our souls.  Even if we somehow manage to never sin at any point in our lives, we're still stuck with Adam & Eve's sin from the moment we exist.  Certainly that's what I was taught at my own local church, and I've seen it cited in many an online discussion.  Maybe it's a denominational thing though.

Besides, the consequences of sin are all part of a design, a design which could have been designed differently - it didn't have to result in separation, eternal torture, or the need to be saved, it was deliberately designed to work that way.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

As for the original sin
That's what I meant when I was asking if you had to teach someone to sin, you don't. They naturaly sin because of the original sin

[Biowraith]

That's a large part of why I strongly disagree that it's in any way man's fault - it's all exactly as designed, we can't avoid it.

[Orange Wizard]

Once again, I'm cherry-picking random things people have said so I can give completely unreasonable responses.

This also turned out longer than I intended. Some things may have also already been addressed. RIP.

...

The Father is the loving aspect of God as seen in the New Testament, and the Holy Spirit is what's in the Old Testament. The idea of the Holy Trinity is that God is these three separate entities, and one being all at the same time.

I think you might have those the wrong way around?

...

Adam and Eve, had they not sinned, would not have created you, Cryxis. You would not exist. You would not even have been considered.

Well, not necessarily. I'm pretty sure Adam and Eve could still, y'know, reproduce, seeing as God told them to "be fruitful and increase in number". Whether or not the same people would have been born is another matter entirely.
Then again, it's a silly dissertation, because God never wanted that to happen in the first place.

It is said that God limits the power of the devil. In which case, he didn't limit the power of Satan on his creation...

In Reformed doctrine, God did in fact limit the power of the devil. Otherwise Adam and/or Eve would have been as evil as they possibly could have been, and... I dunno. Burned the garden to the ground and drawn pentagrams with each others' entrails. Eating fruit is comparatively not bad.

in other words, he manipulated events to happen as they did. Nearly everything seems to point to sin being God's intended course in his creation. The creator ex nihilo, "Creator out of nothing," must have also created sin.

I'd say he set events in motion that led to the occurrence of sin as a result, but the action itself was done by Satan, but that's mostly semantics.

...

Also
1. All people can be saved
2. All people can know they are saved
3. All people can be saved to the utmost

What about the person that has never had any way of knowing God?

Pretty much. Someone who has never heard of the Bible or God can never be saved. This also accounts for... pretty much every non-Jew before Jesus' ministry.

What about the person that has never had any way of knowing God?

God will repay each person according to what they have done.

The laws of Christianity are very much in line with what most people believe to be optimal for society. They are judged on how they followed their consciences, is what my minister just said.

Well, not really. God's laws are very clear. "You shall have no other gods before me" is something that's very, very hard to follow without actually hearing about which god you're supposed to worship in the first place.
Also, if we take the metaphor of us as being a broken and tarnished mirror of God, why is it not possible for our sense of morality to also be broken? Heck, just look at all the people who can't agree on nonsense like abortion. Both sides have different moral arguments and they simply don't match up.
If we're going to say that's okay, are we then not putting our own morality on a pedestal higher than the laws of God?

Are you thinking of "For we are saved by grace and faith, not by works, that no man can boast", "For faith without deeds is dead", and "To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life."?

My understanding is that they're not really contradictory, because if you have faith in the Bible, which teaches the importance of - for example - charity ("For what you did for these the least of my brothers or sisters you did also for me"), you will be charitable, and so on. These deeds are an affirmation of your faith; if you are a charitable Christian your faith is likely (not guaranteed, but likely) stronger than that of a total skinflint.

Yeah, pretty much. Doesn't help people who've never heard the word, though.

...

That's a large part of why I strongly disagree that it's in any way man's fault - it's all exactly as designed, we can't avoid it.

A car, if the design is faulty, is still a fault with the car. The car didn't choose to be faulty, but it's still going to be sent to the scrapyard because it doesn't work right.

[Biowraith]

A car, if the design is faulty, is still a fault with the car. The car didn't choose to be faulty, but it's still going to be sent to the scrapyard because it doesn't work right.

However, few people would assert that the car being faulty was car's fault, most would assert that it's the designer's fault.

[Orange Wizard]

That's just semantics.

[Biowraith]

I dunno, one carries blame with the implication that the species/car could (and should) have avoided the fault, while the other just says to the species/car, "bad luck, sucks to be you".  It's blaming the species/car that I take issue with - if anyone's to blame it's the designer.

[Orange Wizard]

Yeah, pretty much.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

I'm going to honestly say that not believing in your own free will is just an excuse to do whatever you want and say,"Welp I can't help it, I had to do it because it was predestined for me to do it"

[Frumple]

It doesn't actually work like that, no. Most of the time, anyway.

In any case, the argument generally isn't necessarily that things are predetermined, but rather that the existence of a being like YWHW necessitates that things be so. Free will and omniscience can't really coexist.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

I'm talking about outside if fath too


But if you don't believe in free will then you can go shoot up a crowd and say that gate made you do it or it was going to happen because of how the universe works

[Graknorke]

But if you don't believe in free will then you can go shoot up a crowd and say that gate made you do it or it was going to happen because of how the universe works

People say the same about not believing in an afterlife, but you see significantly fewer mass murderers than you'd expect were that the case as well.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

True but it is just another reason that they could


And peoe who believe that please don't take offence, I don't expect you to go and commit atrocities for it but people can use that as an excuse

[anzki4]

I'm talking about outside if fath too


But if you don't believe in free will then you can go shoot up a crowd and say that gate made you do it or it was going to happen because of how the universe works

Yes, and then you go to jail because of how the universe works.