If there is such a thing as ORIGINAL SIN what does that do to "morality"? (page 3)

myelaine

it is only outside the garden that a "moral code" is addressed.

what kind of moral code do you think was needed between A&E in the garden?...or was it introduced, as learned, by the parents as "family" increased outside the garden?

xo

myelaine

dear Terry...

in the garden of eden there was an ideal situation between A&E, they were "companions"...where does there exist a need to learn a moral code?

the need to teach/learn a moral code arises when the original two reproduced...there is the tension, when the many are not "one".

I think you blur the line between living in the grace of God and living with the need for the grace of God.

for instance...A&E didn't gain experiential knowledge of sin upon eating the fruit...the experiential knowledge occured after they were expelled...

there is no way that buying a ticket to a concert is actually the experience of attending a concert.

love michelle

Terry

myelaine opines:

it is only outside the garden that a "moral code" is addressed.

what kind of moral code do you think was needed between A&E in the garden?...or was it introduced, as learned, by the parents as "family" increased outside the garden?

Was the tree a MORAL tree? Before you laugh--remember morality consists of Good and Evil.

Creator God had pronounced it "Good". So, it must have been a moral tree, right?

Does a tree THINK so as to have KNOWLEDGE of good and evil?

Would any of this strike you as perhaps a fable?

Treating the story like a newspaper report is self-defeating.

God is invulnerable. You can't scratch him, shoot him, poison him or in any way harm him. So how is it this strange little invention, man, can

piss God off by performing according to its own nature?

"Here you human creature--I've given you a brain which requires knowledge in order for you to seek life-preserving actions--BUT WAIT! Don't use it to gain knowledge that requires distinguishing between good and bad. Oh no--just do as I say. Because if you don't--I'm going to murder you."

None of the Garden of Eden fable is moral in the least. Inside or outside.

Terry

myelaine: A&E didn't gain experiential knowledge of sin upon eating the fruit...the experiential knowledge occured after they were expelled...

Oh really.

Creator God is takin a walk in the garden in the breezy part of the day calling out for the human to come out come out wherever you are.

The human is hiding!

Why are you hiding?

Because my tallywacker is hanging out.

How do you know your tallywacker is hanging out--WHO TOLD YOU?

Doesn't the above heartwarming story indicate "experiential knowledge" BEFORE being expelled?

myelaine

dear Terry...

you said: "Was the tree a MORAL tree? Creator God had pronounced it "Good"."

the creation was pronounced good and then God warned about THAT tree...if it was still "good" then there wouldn't have been a need to warn against it, now would there?

you said: "So how is it this strange little invention, man, can piss God off by performing according to its own nature?"...

I'm sure that God sent His Son because He cared for mankind and there was no other way out of the predicament that he had gotten himself into.

you asked: "Doesn't the above heartwarming story indicate "experiential knowledge" BEFORE being expelled?"...

no, it indicates, as I've said before...some realisation of his fall from grace. he knew he was no longer "covered"...he hadn't experienced WHAT no longer being covered was. As that experience was realised outside the garden...where the toil and pain is.

love michelle

Terry

myelaine:

you said : "Was the tree a MORAL tree? Creator God had pronounced it "Good"."

the creation was pronounced good and then God warned about THAT tree...if it was still "good" then there wouldn't have been a need to warn against it, now would there?

Terry: I cannot comprehend your statement or the reasoning behind it. Sorry.

you said: "So how is it this strange little invention, man, can piss God off by performing according to its own nature?"...

I'm sure that God sent His Son because He cared for mankind and there was no other way out of the predicament that he had gotten himself into.

Terry: Hardly! God spent thousands of years sending floods, earthquakes, pestilence, locusts, curses, and fire from heaven on his "beloved" sinner humans and your going to tell me he suddenly had a personality shift? On what basis can you say God had "no other way out"? He's GOD--he makes the rules!!"

you asked: "Doesn't the above heartwarming story indicate "experiential knowledge" BEFORE being expelled?"

no, it indicates, as I've said before...some realisation of his fall from grace. he knew he was no longer "covered"...he hadn't experienced WHAT no longer being covered was. As that experience was realised outside the garden...where the toil and pain is.

Terry: Where does your imagination find compelling evidence of that assertion, pray tell?

NewYork44M

Morality and ethics fall into the same category. An event can be viewed as ethical or mora by one person and not by another.

That is just the complexity of life. It has nothing to do with an "original sin." If we all have the same definition of morality how are we different than an un-thinking robot?

I don't think that is what god wanted. I think he wanted man's "eyes to be open" and think beyond a restricted concept of morality.

Terry

Newyork44M says:

Morality and ethics fall into the same category. An event can be viewed as ethical or moral by one person and not by another.

That is just the complexity of life. It has nothing to do with an "original sin." If we all have the same definition of morality how are we different than an un-thinking robot?

I don't think that is what god wanted. I think he wanted man's "eyes to be open" and think beyond a restricted concept of morality.

From WiseGeek.org:

The difference between ethics and morals can seem somewhat arbitrary to many, but there is a basic, albeit subtle, difference .

Morals define personal character, while ethics stress a social system in which those morals are applied.

In other words, ethics point to standards or codes of behavior expected by the group to which the individual belongs. This could be national ethics, social ethics, company ethics, professional ethics, or even family ethics.

So while a person’s moral code is usually unchanging, the ethics he or she practices can be other-dependent.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You say: If we all have the same definition of morality how are we different than an un-thinking robot?

The problem with the MORALITY of the arbitrary doctrine of Original Sin is that we cannot escape our NATURE and yet are held accountable AS THOUGH we can.

A special doctrine called Prevenient Grace tries to jigger a wacky way around this problem. But, the obvious synthetic nature (they pulled it out of thin air) is too Ad Hoc to be taken seriously.

You state: I don't think that is what god wanted. I think he wanted man's "eyes to be open" and think beyond a restricted concept of morality.

I would reply : When you buy a new car there is an Owner's Manual in the glove box. Until humans are born with one--we are all just guessing and pretending we actually KNOW what we are only guessing at!

NewYork44M

So even if we agree that the application of morals is ethics, it still assumes that two people have different moral values and both can be considered moral people.

I was raised in a cult where there was only one definition of morality - all others were immoral. I no longer agree with that. My point is that the range of morality is wide.

I am not sure what you mean about the owner's manual, are you stating we need an owner's manual for living a moral life? The cult that framed all of my understanding about morality as a lad indicated that the bible is our owner's manual. Some how I don't think that is what you mean.

Terry

I was raised in a cult where there was only one definition of morality - all others were immoral. I no longer agree with that. My point is that the range of morality is wide.

I am not sure what you mean about the owner's manual, are you stating we need an owner's manual for living a moral life? The cult that framed all of my understanding about morality as a lad indicated that the bible is our owner's manual. Some how I don't think that is what you mean.

I like to remove superstition from life. Life has mystery but that is only ignorance. Morality is largely a PRACTICAL matter. There is no

necessity to reach into heaven imploringly to discover that we can't steal or murder and live a social existence.

By OWNER'S MANUAL I mean the recognition that all VALUES stem from one value: LIFE itself.

What is the purpose of life? To extend the pleasure of existence through knowledge and creativity.

When we refuse to be rational and practical we drift and stray and find ourselves easy prey for the pretenders claiming

to know the SECRETS!

Ahhhhh the hidden knowledge....how sweet---if only we OBEY!

Nope. Not for me. Been there; done that. No more.

I hiss like a cat when somebody claims special insights!

If there is such a thing as ORIGINAL SIN what does that do to "morality"?

Share this