I noticed that my simple explanation about how the role of A&E (original sin) can be replaced in theological interpretations does not work well without an additional element. My preliminary thinking is that the missing element could be what we call conscience.
Most people, both Christians and non-Christians, have an internal grasp (feeling) of what is morally ‘good’ or ‘evil’. Although conscience can become dampened or twisted, conscience may tell that the person should not do what is considered to be ‘evil’.
That leads to questions like how did conscience emerge? Is it something that developed through biological selection throughout long time periods, or is it something that God put inside humans?
Another question is whether our definitions about what is ‘good’ and ‘evil’ rise from what our consciences tell?
There might be a two-way relationship between the conscience and the social conventions about what is acceptable or not acceptable, in such a manner that strengthens or directs both.
If our understanding about ‘good’ and ‘evil’ rises from what our consciences tell, do our evaluations about whether God is just or unjust reflect this understanding - God is ‘good’ if He does what human conscience suggests about what is ‘good’?
I think that might be a “dangerous” line of thought
We cannot judge God by human standars even if we believe that those standards came from God. The notion that God must be Good could be idealism. Historically gods were consdiered amoral, disregarding humans altogether. In many ways much of the Old Testament reflects that view. Humans were to obey God regardless of what God required. There was no question. If God said wipe out a race then that was what should be done. Saul paid the penalty of not doing so.
God is beyond human reach in all senses. The psalmist is amazed that God would even take notice of us. It is not until Christ Himself reflects humanity at all that this idea of God relating to, and even sharing human perspectives, comes into play (as it were)
I agree. Yet, I think that happens often when we complain about what God allows to happen. We would have acted differently if we were God, so God should have done as we think is ‘good’.
One of the basic errors in this thinking is that we do not know all the relevant facts. If we knew everything, we might come to different conclusions about what is the best possible or ‘good’ alternative.
Another point is that the Creator of the universe is not equal with us. He is so much above us that He can do whatever He considers to be the best alternative. We may complain or rebel against that but our disagreements with God do not change the basic facts.
It is a matter of opinion whether what God informs us or does should be classified as ‘good’. If the definition about ‘good’ and ‘evil’ in the mind of a human is not the absolute truth, what makes our opinions so perfect that we can judge even God based on our opinions?
The fruit of knowledge of good & evil, or is it judgement. We do not know whether any of Us Humans are doing the will of God. We perceive it as evil and want to stop it and or punish it. The punishment will be determined by God whether it was Our Will or Gods’ will through Us.
Controversial thought of mine is the Sacrifice of the Jewish people of WW2. The World then decided to give the Jewish people The land of Israel back.
Depends on whether we trust what has been written in the biblical scriptures. Even if the scriptures would be largely human expression of what they thought was correct, there are pieces of information that are recorded as messages coming directly from God. If something was informed by God, then acting according to what the message told would be doing the will of God.
The scriptures do not tell anything about many phenomena of the modern cultures or specific situations that we can experience in our life. There are also differing interpretations about some matters. At least in these cases, there may be some amount of uncertainty about the will of God.
I see the word of Investment is used for gambling today. Gambling is trying to get more money than You put in. Money should be given for Our Good Works, not making Money on Money with no Good Works. In essence Money is taking from someone else, and the contributor accepts the loss.
Investment is contributing money to a group of people doing Good Works. When the Works are sold then You get your investment back and part of the profit.
You can only use money for good works if you have it in the first place.How are we supposed to get it? Just by good works? Christ talked abot a fair days pay for a fair days work and a worker is worth his pay. But good works that pay are hard to find. Most good works are voluntary.
If investment is gambling then the losers knew what was at stake. You only do uncertain investing, or even gambling if you are prepard to lose your stake.
Whether Christian shoud gamble is a mute point. I see no harm in a little entertaining flutter that costs less than a night at the movies, but…
There are those who think that Christians are not entitled to time off or frivelous fun. Ah, well, it takes all sorts I suppose. I have no desire to be a saint.
Yes, We are all inadvertently Sinners until The Bible indicating Sodom & Gomorrah occurs again. That’s why it was told to the Adulterer “Sin no More”. We have Alcohol Annomous and 1-800-Gambler for the Sinner who thinks They’re in control of Sin. Rev 18:4, be not a partaker of Her Sins.
Billy Graham once preached about sin and said that the phrase “the world, the flesh, and the devil” is wrong, that biblically it’s the flesh, the world, and the devil. But he also noted that many people want to forget that final item.
I read a sermon years ago called “When the Roll is Called Up Yonder”, a play on the hymn title. It took “Roll” as a tasty cinnamon roll, as a symbol of good things in life, and chastised people for not enjoying the good things God has given us!
And believers are also inadvertently Saints!
The difference being that we made ourselves sinners, but God made us Saints.
What of covetousness or discontentment? Or pride? Sinful desires would seem incapable of being abuses of power themselves, but could be precursors to it, and they are definitely condemned as sinful.
That doesn’t follow–it requires the omnipotent one to abuse that power. Omnipotency does not definitionally require abuse of power.
(a) Excellent come back. Yes, we may wrestle with these. We do. And none may know, and in fact we may compensate to the good. Or they will out. In abuse of power.
(b) Neglect is the worst abuse. And then blaming us for it.
If He were the ground of infinite eternal being, then He couldn’t care less, obviously, by all the evidence, i.e. none whatsoever. He makes up for it in the transcendent, obviously.
I’m glad. And I know it will see you out for the rest of your days. Unfortunately for me, my lived experience means I must make my peace with death. I have internalized the brute facts of existence, against my will, and have no personal evidence any more. Your lived experience has made you impervious to external evidence and its corollaries, bent it to your will. Compels you to reproof it here many times a day. If fora like this did not exist, or you couldn’t use them, how would you do that?
