Saved to what end?

[Glaurung]

Of course you can sin witho out knowing what sin was - Adam and Eve were cursed without even knowing what sin was.

They knew perfectly well the obedience they owed to God, Eve states that explicitly. They chose the seductive lie the Serpent, which is a wonderful metaphor for the true nature of sin. The foundational lie of sin, is that there is happiness in the pursuit of one's own will and not that of God's.

I do not believe we are responsible for the crimes of our ancestors.

You're not. But sometimes we suffer consequences as a result of the actions of our ancestors. I'm sure you can think of some real world examples yourself.

 

[Bunyip]

They knew perfectly well the obedience they owed to God, Eve states that explicitly. They chose the seductive lie the Serpent, which is a wonderful metaphor for the true nature of sin. The foundational lie of sin, is that there is happiness in the pursuit of one's own will and not that of God's.

Adam and Eve were innocents, there is no sin in believing the serpent - god put the serpent there.

You're not. But sometimes we suffer consequences as a result of the actions of our ancestors. I'm sure you can think of some real world examples yourself.

Sure, but consequences and responsilitiy are diferent things.

 

[Nietzsche]

They knew perfectly well the obedience they owed to God, Eve states that explicitly. They chose the seductive lie the Serpent, which is a wonderful metaphor for the true nature of sin. The foundational lie of sin, is that that there is happiness in the pursuit of one's own will and not that of God's.


You're not. But sometimes we suffer consequences as a result of the actions of our ancestors. I'm sure you an think of some real world examples yourself.

There is a difference here. No one can go back and undo the wrong. No one can take back what their ancestors did. We don't have that kind of power, nor will we likely ever.

Either God can and doesn't, making him questionable as a source for morality at best, or he can't and we should really reconsider why we call him God.

Original sin is not some personal fault for which each person is accountable, (that was an unfortunate Protestant innovation) it's the loss of God's grace and the inescapable propensity towards sin. Human nature is still fundamentally good, but without grace we cannot achieve justification. God has given us Christ who is the means to that justification, but it's your responsibility to accept that grace. God is not going to compel you to do anything.

You cannot sin without knowing it. You commit sin when you do anything that falls short of the moral standards expected by God. You must have intention. In the story of Adam and Eve, they knew that God had forbidden them to eat the fruit, yet they deliberately chose to allow themselves to be deceived. They chose to trust something other than God.

Wait. Either we learned Evil(defiance of God) through the "eating of the fruit" or we were capable of Evil before that. Either way, God stacked the odds against us. Were we made without evil and thus were "tempted" by something we could not possibly fathom or were we already capable of that defiance and God decided to punish us for a mistake in his design anyway?

That's because you hold a distorted view of original sin. We don't suffer accountability, we suffer the consequence of losing God's grace.

...But he's God. Why do I have to suffer for those consequences when he has literally all the authority in the world to right that wrong?

 

[fschmidt]

Not all religions preach salvation. Why does a person need to be saved? From what does a person need to be saved? How can a person be saved?

Saved from genetic extinction. Religion is the means by which moral people beat immoral people in evolutionary competition.

 

[Kolibri]

Not all religions preach salvation. Why does a person need to be saved? From what does a person need to be saved? How can a person be saved?

My position is that I'm just as good as any other, and there is nothing you can do that makes you more worthy. So how can one elevate themselves to the status of saved?

We grow up. we get sick sometime terribly so even before we reach our prime, or have some other disability or infirmary. Once we reach our prime we do not stay there, we quickly (and it seems more so as we get older) wear down. Eventually, if we live long enough we start to look like a hunched over grasshopper barely able to move around..if things go well. After a few decades we die. Before death, for many they are left wondering what next? is there anything? Why would God allow us to have such a futile existence?

Salvation comes in two parts then. A reversal of the condition of futility. And a reversal of having our bigger life questions left unanswered or answered wrongly.

As far as getting saved, besides some legal matters to consider, there is the idea too that it is appropriate set standards as to who you want to spend your time with. Especially as family. Certainly you would not want to just pick anyone to live in the same home as you. God is the same. The 15th Psalm lists some qualities that God expects from his friends. We can be his friend, but we qualify by how we meet his reasonable standards - reasonable because anyone can qualify if they only wanted to.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Not all religions preach salvation. Why does a person need to be saved? From what does a person need to be saved? How can a person be saved?

My position is that I'm just as good as any other, and there is nothing you can do that makes you more worthy.

Salvation is removal of ignorance. That is possible by providing more knowledge.

I agree with that, you are OK, but there is always a chance for improvement. You can always try to make yourself better. Others can perhaps help in that process.

 

[Glaurung]

Adam and Eve were innocents, there is no sin in believing the serpent - god put the serpent there.

They were innocent in the sense that they had not been tainted with original sin. They still evidently had freedom, and they excised that freedom to wilfully disobey God. (Which is sin). Original sin is not the cause of sin, it's a consequence of it.

Sure, but consequences and responsilitiy are diferent things.

And have you been reading my posts where I state explicitly that we do not hold responsibility for original sin? (Unless you're a Calvinist) I'm not expecting you to accept what I'm saying, but I am expecting you to at least attempt to understand it. You keep repeating the same thing. And I have only so much patience to state over and over that original sin is a state, not an act for which we're accountable.

There is a difference here. No one can go back and undo the wrong. No one can take back what their ancestors did. We don't have that kind of power, nor will we likely ever.

Indeed, which is why God has given us a remedy to what is otherwise a hopeless situation.

Either we learned Evil(defiance of God) through the "eating of the fruit" or we were capable of Evil before that

Just like the Angels, we were bestowed with the freedom to decide for our own wills. Which is what happened when Adam and Eve ate the fruit. The act implicated them to moral accountability, and the knowledge that by their disobedience they had lost God's grace. The way of putting it is that death had entered the world, because God is life and we were cut off from that life.

But he's God. Why do I have to suffer for those consequences when he has literally all the authority in the world to right that wrong?

He has rightened that wrong, on the cross. Christ has done exactly what you have asked, but just like Adam and Eve, he wants your freely chosen acceptance. He could just restore initial grace with a wave of his hand, but such would require a violation of the freedom we have to reject that grace.

In the long run the answer to all those who object to the doctrine of Hell is itself a question: 'What are you asking God to do?' To wipe out their past sins and, at all costs, to give them a fresh start, smoothing every difficulty and offering every miraculous help? But He has done so, on Calvary. To forgive them? They will not be forgiven. To leave them alone? Alas, I am afraid that is what he does

 

[Bunyip]

Tlaloc

Sure, original sin is metaphoric - I agree with you on that. What people are trying to explore here is the literal notion of salvation. Yes, original sin is a metaphor - and so I guess is salvation. But if you reduce all theology to metaphor it stops being problematic for us poir atheists. An entirely metaphoric god and salvation is not in fact theism.

 

[Nietzsche]

Indeed, which is why God has given us a remedy to what is otherwise a hopeless situation.


Just like the Angels, we were bestowed with the freedom to decide for our own wills. Which is what happened when Adam and Eve ate the fruit. The act implicated them to moral accountability, and the knowledge that by their disobedience they had lost God's grace. The way of putting it is that death had entered the world, because God is life and we were cut off from that life.


He has rightened that wrong, on the cross. Christ has done exactly what you have asked, but just like Adam and Eve, he wants your freely chosen acceptance. He could just restore initial grace with a wave of his hand, but such would require a violation of the freedom we have to reject that grace.

This is where I tend to differ from other non-Christians regarding this.

What if I would prefer that lack of freedom, or if not that how about simply having never been born? I didn't ask to be put here, and I sure as hell didn't ask to be put here in this position.

 

[Kolibri]

This is where I tend to differ from other non-Christians regarding this.

What if I would prefer that lack of freedom, or if not that how about simply having never been born? I didn't ask to be put here, and I sure as hell didn't ask to be put here in this position.

This is where it gets where the question of why does God allow suffering and why has he done so for approximately 6000 years? According to the time scale we are told that God lives by, 1000 years is but as yesterday. So from his time frame it has only been 6 days. But from our short lives, especially in pain that seems like a very long time. What have we learned from the last 6 days? Every single kind of self-rule under various levels of technological advancement has been an utter failure.

Was God right in requiring his standards be kept? If he steps in now or here shortly will there be any question as to whether or not man knows enough or is ever going to be capable of doing things on his own?

When we see the contrast as the earth is blessed instead of just left to entropy, will we ever question if any rebel has a better way of rule then the Creator? With the issue raised by Satan in Eden settled, never again would we ever have to be subjected to this futility. Anything that could be questioned about independence from God would have already been answered emphatically.

 

[Nietzsche]

This is where it gets where the question of why does God allow suffering and why has he done so for approximately 6000 years? According to the time scale we are told that God lives by, 1000 years is but as yesterday. So from his time frame it has only been 6 days. But from our short lives, especially in pain that seems like a very long time. What have we learned from the last 6 days? Every single kind of self-rule under various levels of technological advancement has been an utter failure.

I am going to assume you are not, actually, implying that the universe is only 6,000 years old and that instead you are using analogy, however my response works the same regardless of scale;

What is something as fickle as time to a timeless being? Something that would by necessity have to have existed before time. Literally before time.

Was God right in requiring his standards be kept? If he steps in now or here shortly will be any question as to whether or not man knows enough or is ever going to be capable of doing things on his own?
When we see the contrast as the earth is blessed instead of just left to entropy, will we ever question if any rebel has a better way of rule then the Creator? With the issue raised by Satan in Eden settled, never again would we ever have to be subjected to this futility. Anything that could be questioned about independence from God would have already been answered emphatically.

...and he decides to prove this by rigging the game against us inherently?

 

[Ingledsva]

Saved from genetic extinction. Religion is the means by which moral people beat immoral people in evolutionary competition.

NOT! LOL!

 

[Glaurung]

Sure, original sin is metaphoric - I agree with you on that

No, original sin is a very real stain on humanity. And the the truths described in the book of Genesis are very real. What I said is that we need not take the story of Adam and Eve as a historical retelling of literal events as say the Gospels are.

 

[Kolibri]

I am going to assume you are not, actually, implying that the universe is only 6,000 years old

You are correct in that assumption. All I was implying is by bible chronology Adam was created in the year 4026 B.C.E. The earth and the physical heavens have been around much much longer. And since all 6 creative days in preparing the earth for habitation were also called a "day," we really have no clue how long those epochs took. And that was just the preparation for habitation. Ge 1:1 just says God created the heaven and the earth, then verse 2 fast-forwards to what the universe looked like from the perspective of the surface of the planet at the beginning of the first day.

 

[Kolibri]

...and he decides to prove this by rigging the game against us inherently?

I disagree with this totally. It was never God's intent for man to ever sin. He had the right to remind them that he is the final arbitrator of what is right and wrong. The were not prone to fail. Eve even knew that she should avoid looking at the tree as to look would create a longing. Maybe that was an added instruction from Adam. Of all the distractions that token reminder of final authority was very very very easy for them not to fail.

It was rigged for them to succeed. They broke themselves, and could no longer pass on the ability to easily resist sin.

Jesus proved that they were fully in the wrong. They had it easy and gave up their integrity. He was pushed to the limit and never did.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Not all religions preach salvation. Why does a person need to be saved? From what does a person need to be saved? How can a person be saved?

Humanity rebelled against God and is fallen, we are given over to choose sin and our own selfish desires. A person is to be saved from their own slavery to sin, their rebellion against God and eternal separation from Him. God came to earth to die for His people, to pay the debt that they owe Him because of their sin and rebellion. Those who trust in Him and accept Jesus as Lord will be delivered from their bondage to sin, from their captivity, no longer slaves but sons to live in God's household forever.

My position is that I'm just as good as any other, and there is nothing you can do that makes you more worthy. So how can one elevate themselves to the status of saved?

No one is worthy of salvation. We all deserve Hell. The "good" that you do does not save, for all have sinned and fallen short. Works can save no one, we do not "elevate" ourselves but it is God who does that. It is God's grace alone that saves us, those who believe and trust in what Jesus accomplished on the cross and accept Him as Lord.

 

[Bunyip]

No, original sin is a very real stain on humanity. And the the truths described in the book of Genesis are very real. What I said is that we need not take the story of Adam and Eve as a historical retelling of literal events as say the Gospels are.

How does that stain cross generations?

 

[Glaurung]

How does that stain cross generations?

Original sin is not so much a genetic defect which you pass on, it's a fundamental alteration of human nature itself. The very state of being human is to take on original sin. Baptism removes the stain of original sin insofar as it prevents a direct relationship with God, but the propensity towards sin remains.

 

[Bunyip]

Original sin is not so much a genetic defect which you pass on, it's a fundamental alteration of human nature itself. The very state of being human is to take on original sin. Baptism removes the stain of original sin insofar as it prevents a direct relationship with God, but the propensity towards sin remains.

Ok great.I'm sorry if I frustrated you.Call it 'sin' or 'stain' whatever you wish. But my point remains - why not forgive all future generations of this stain? Why prevent all future genrations from this relationship you speak of, rather than forgive a simple mistake? Why create a species with a 'propensity for sin' and then judge them for a trait you crrated in the first place?

If it were me, I would whave forgiven them snd then thought hard about how to be a better parent.

 

[Glaurung]

But my point remains - why not forgive all future generations of this stain?

God has, though Christ. All you need to do is accept Christ, be baptised and live a Christian life as best to your ability.

Why prevent all future genrations from this relationship you speak of, rather than forgive a simple mistake?

I wouldn't call a wilful turning from God a simple mistake. We abandoned him, not the other way around. Yet, God did not abandon us to our fates, for upon the fall of humankind God had already countered it with the incarnation of Christ which was to occur in good time. Could God just have done away with original sin and restored the world to its original state? Absolutely, but God has a better plan for the world (which incorporates human freedom) and that plan will bring about the greatest good. God allows what he does because he is working towards something much better than should he just godwave everything bad away. It's that God has a much bigger picture in mind than that.

Why create a species with a 'propensity for sin' and then judge them for a trait you crrated in the first place?

He didn't, he created us wholly good. But he also created us with freedom (and thus we had the ability to become morally corrupt) and though the seduction of the Devil, we chose to accept the lie of our own deity and thus reject the only true deity.

For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil

We have been dealing with the consequences of this ever since, but God has rectified the situation and will bring about the greatest good in the end.

Whether or not you cooperate with him and submit to his will, or you accept that same lie Satan gave to Adam and Eve, that your own will takes precedence, is wholly up to you.