Thanks for that @QHansen.
We must be consistent in applying the premise that the Bible is an entirely “Spiritual” (re: relationship with God) book.
Makes my point exactly.
(1) Physical death must apply to before “the fall” as a mechanism of life.
(2) Possibility of Spiritual Death only occurs after the “Breath of Life” is given (archetype “adam”), hence (Sapience = moral and ethical concerns are evident in thought processes).
(3) At some point (Adam & Eve as prototype) God chooses to require accountability for those thoughts and Spiritual Death becomes the consequence.
(4) The evil of “death” in the world is based on the moral & ethical values generated by our spiritual awareness.
(5) Therefore **distaste" and the other emotional words applied to the pre-adamic “creation account” world is unwarranted.
Quincy, I like your exegesis which denies the intrinsic evil of physical death but stresses the realization that spiritual death remains the true enemy. I presume you consider your approach to be orthodox theology, since you use the term “since the fall”. Have you seriously considered how much it would change your views if it turns out that Sin did NOT enter this world through the disobedience of Adam; i.e. from a human originally created in a state of perfection? I realize that the passages in Gen. 2 & 3 are most often interpreted to reach that conclusion. However, as I see it, Gen.2&3 is totally incompatible with the belief that we humans–at least our physical natures-- are a product of gradual evolution and NOT a product of a “Poof” instantaneous creation. Using the “poof” method, God could have indeed created a perfect (?) Adam. Perhaps we are putting too much emphasis of what the author(s) of Genesis meant by the words: ‘good’ and ‘very good’. If we are considering what kind of world a Perfect God would create, should we not consider that he might prefer a world-in-change; a Universe in a journey from Alpha to Omega–beginning in Him and ending in Him?
Al Leo
That isn’t orthodox doctrine. Christians are not dualists of the sort where there are two eternal, equal-to-a-degree powers locked in an eternal dance. The devil is a creature, more similar to a rock than to the Creator. Per Judeo-Christian doctrine, God is infinitely beyond creation.
Two things: 1. What you cannot find is nevertheless asserted by what God has said to us in the testimony of scripture. Which leads to point 2. The pervasive power of sin and humanity as being enslaved to it (likewise the mechanisms of sins power and the means of the transmission of original sin) are not ‘found out’ by human capabilities of cognition. So far as many theologians are concerned, it’s a revealed part of Christian doctrine. Or at least revelation is the place to start.
[quote=“JustAnotherLutheran, post:85, topic:36407”]
Christians are not dualists of the sort where there are two eternal, equal-to-a-degree powers locked in an eternal dance. The devil is a creature, more similar to a rock than to the Creator. Per Judeo-Christian doctrine, God is infinitely beyond creation. [/quote]
I am well aware that Christians are not dualists, in that they consider the devil to have a power that can be reasonably compared to God’s. But I did (do) believe that orthodox theology considered Lucifer (Satan) a Fallen Angel created as a spiritual person before God created Adam. Am I wrong in this? Is there an orthodox evangelical position on ‘personified evil’? @Christy ?
[quote=“JustAnotherLutheran, post:85, topic:36407”]
The pervasive power of sin and humanity as being enslaved to it (likewise the mechanisms of sins power and the means of the transmission of original sin) are not ‘found out’ by human capabilities of cognition. So far as many theologians are concerned, it’s a revealed part of Christian doctrine. Or at least revelation is the place to start.[/quote]
That is precisely my point, J.A.L. As soon as I accepted the ‘fact’ that humans evolved slowly (and not created instantly Poof!), I realized that neo-Darwinian theory posits a strong selfish component in the 'struggle for survival’. This instinctive selfishness must be overcome if we are to live up to the second command that Jesus gave us: “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” In some manner that we cannot yet explain with biological science, God 'programmed the Homo sapiens brain to become Mind–a Mind that could distinguish right from wrong, and could desire a relationship with its Creator. Knowing what God expects of us, yet preferring to remain in instinctive selfishness, is the essence of Original Sin. At least this is the way I have come to see it.
This is highly unorthodox. Two priests (one Jesuit, one Dominican) were punished for promoting it. And it may be wrong. But, contrary to your statement about the limits of human cognition, it does explain the mechanisms of sins power and the means of its transmission. As a child and young adult, I believed that following the orthodox Catholic doctrine to the letter was the surest way to lead a good life. As I reached maturity and wanted to fully utilize God’s most precious gift, my Mind, I found that some (slight?) changes to dogma (or a significant reinterpretation of Scripture) provided a smoother path to leading a good life. If I am in error and God deems me a heretic, I can only ask His forgiveness–without the necessity of being burned at the stake! Thank God!
Al Leo
I think that’s right. I assume when Evangelicals talk about “spiritual forces of evil” they are talking about actual created beings with free will, not evil as some abstract force.
When we track the origins of this kind of metaphysical entity we get closer and closer to how messianic Judaism and Christianity were formulated in the ancient world. While every culture had its minor demons, only one culture portrayed such a terrible and powerful entity of evil - - the Zoroastrians. Ironically, modern Zoroastrians have moved away from the very imagery they introduced to the World.
So that is what that is!!! I see it now, but for years my casual peripheral sight of that profile picture on my ipad or screen registered in my brain as a shadowy silhouette with some vague kind of storm cloud over it! I guess that says more about my mind and associations than it does George’s! Sorry, @gbrooks9! My appreciation for your flavor and style of enthusiasms here really has grown. [edit — and I’ll just leave that there.]
edit … well --maybe not “years”; I’m not sure how long you’ve been around this forum, George; but … ever since you made your presence known, anyway…
Haha, no I think George’s profile picture is meant to signify the Creation of Adam as painted by Michelangelo (see below for a comparison). Zorro is shown in the background of his profile:
[quote=“aleo, post:86, topic:36407”]
In some manner that we cannot yet explain with biological science, God 'programmed the Homo sapiens brain to become Mind–a Mind that could distinguish right from wrong, and could desire a relationship with its Creator. Knowing what God expects of us, yet preferring to remain in instinctive selfishness, is the essence of Original Sin.
[/quote] Bold Mine
Very good! You have expressed my reasoning for the accuracy of the Genesis account by including the “Breath of Life”. At some point we must exceed the limits of a physical and chemical (evolutionary) functions to become the moral & ethical creatures we appear to be.
To me the “Breath of Life” in the account is the only “WHY” explanation that makes sense. Darwinistic “drive” or “struggle” for life may be a mechanism that is not “conscious” of itself until sentience. Yet how does it make the leap to sapience? The moral and ethical aspect, as well as self-sacrificial “love” has to be beyond the reach of the mechanisms of physicality (granted it must be thoroughly entwined with it!).
Ah, Dune. Was introduced to the series in college, loved the first few books, seemed to go downhill a bit as they progressed. It does seem that our world is getting a bit more Ixian, these days.
Ha! You know… I never even thought of that delicious piece of serendipity. @Christy actually knows where Zoro comes from (and perhaps you do too - but making for a clever thought!).
Perhaps, but I tend to think that much of if is becoming followers of House Harkonnen, treating humans the same as animals. The sure and certain degradation that occurs when persons become animals by following the “baser instincts”.
Quite the point of the current topic!
And I agree it went downhill. I have read only a book or two of the more recent series and no desire to read more.
We must be the same age. I read at 21 when it first came out.
Sorry for the late-ish response, Al. To be succinct, I believe that “the fall” was a real historical event in which the person or people in which God had revealed Himself to decided to disobey God through sin. I do not believe there was ever a point in history in which humans were totally free from sin. I don’t think sin entered the world through anybody. I think we’ve been sinful for as long as moral standards have been put in place for humans. Apologies if this doesn’t answer your question entirely.
Hi Mr. Leo
Thank you for bringing this up. This is a thing that I and other non-scientists, I think, have a lot of trouble with and why many people reject evolution. I remember a documentary I watched saying humans, as we are, have existed anywhere from 100K to 400K years, based on some recent fossil evidence. It’s hard to imagine that we sat around, barely clinging to survival for 90K-400K years. Then, in the last 5-15K years decided to make fire, houses, farming, basic technologies. Then we just kind of sat there for a few more thousand years. Then BAM in 300-500 years went from pulleys and fire to flying, visiting the moon, heart transplants, genetic engineering and instantaneous cross-planet communication.
That has been hard for me and I think others, too.
Humans have been controlling and using fire for at least 100,000 years and probably for hundreds of thousands of years. They and their ancestors been making stone tools for much longer than that. They were probably making stone-tipped spears half a million years ago. Modern humans spread out of Africa at least 60,000 years ago, so they were hardly on the edge of extinction.
The big external factor controlling our collective progress was the climate. The last ice age only ended about 12,000 years ago. Prior to that, climate was too harsh and too unstable for agriculture to develop. Remember domestication of plants and animals isn’t just a matter of rounding up some cows or planting some seeds; the domesticates themselves have to be changed by a long, slow process of breeding, and that wasn’t feasible until there was a sustained period of stable, good climate. Without domestication, humans were hunter gatherers, a lifestyle that sustains much smaller population densities and usually requires considerable mobility. Most of the technological developments you’re talking about rely on large, sedentary populations to develop, and that requires domestication. Domestication happened about as soon as the climate allowed.
Just a few notes from even less of an expert. Stone tools were likely invented by H. habilis 2.5 mil. years ago. H. erectus controlled and used fire about 1 mil. years ago. H. heidelbergensis used wooden spears to hunt horses 300,000 years ago. The human population underwent a bottleneck sometime between 74-60,000 years ago, just prior (or during) the “out of Africa” migration into the Levant through Yemen, and it was very nearly an extinction event.
In any case, I thought you would find the following graph interesting. It correlates the changes in brain case volume and climate over time:
You can find it here on the Smithsonian’s Museum of Natural History website on human origins. Lots of good info there!
