• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Original Sin

So then why would humans need pages and pages of commands and laws in the Old Testament? Why do we need the Ten Commandments?

Insight into God's beauty. To better know Him.

And why would we need God to tell us now? You have to make up your mind: either we humans DON"T know right and wrong, and just have to rely blindly on divine command, in which case anything, including slashing your own son's throat or blowing up a café full of innocent people are all possibilities, or we do, in which case I am not sure what role divine command would have in any of this.

This is basic stuff that you need to know before a meaningful discussion can be had. Free will, the discerning of right and wrong began with Adam and everyone since then has it. If you don't have that concept, you have no basis for discussion.
 
If he wanted to say faith, he would have said faith, not law. And if he really wanted to say moral law and not ceremonial law, he would have said that too. It seems like an important enough distinction to make. So unless you can quote me scripture which shows that is indeed the distinction Jesus clearly wanted to make, I am forced to conclude you are just making stuff up, or following a tradition of thinking which has falsely accrued over the centuries and millennia around the original scripture. Knowing such traditions does not necessarily make you an "insider" immune to any further questioning or criticism.
 
Judging by how he's portrayed, he's a giant asshole, who wants people to "love" him by threatening them with eternal torture. Sounds more like coercion than love.

A needy lover is such a pain.
 
There have always been a minority group, usually religious, who point out the moral degradation taking place due to a lack of religion. They have always been mistaken.

Moral behavior ebbs and flows through history with very little causal relationship to the amount of religion being followed in the world. In general, the world is better off today than it has ever been, relatively speaking. There are no big wars engulfing large chunks of the globe, there is less slavery and oppression, there is more material comfort. All of this, of course, is generally speaking. It all depends very much on where you live.

Mostly in spite of religion and not because of it but, I know of reformers that appeared to have religion who made huge contributions.
 
True, but God never said, don't sin. And who says the garden was supposed to only be a temporary home?

So, question...if you don't know you are sinning when you do something, are you guilty of sinning? Without the knowledge of right and wrong, there can be no sin, because the nature of sin is that one must know that it's wrong.

A child is born on an island were no religion has ever existed, and is taught the island people's ways. Which include coveting, envy, greed, stealing, etc. Child lives and dies as they were taught. Do they go to hell? Are they to be judge on their ignorance?

I have no idea, I have never sinned in my life.
 
Closing thoughts of the day....humans did not know right from wrong until satan conspired to have us eat fruit from the tree of knowledge, which God forbade.

Now, lately, religion has been dropping in popularity, and all but fading, slowly. Much to the chagrin of the faithfull, who claim that as a distinctly possible reason for the increased violence, vicious nous, and all around evil in the world today. Because religion helps to provide a moral cumpas.

But.

God did not want us to have knowledge of right and wrong in the first place....soooo.....are we, as a society, not...returning to our original state, prior to eating the forbidden fruit? Imagine a human who doesn't know right from wrong.

Food for thought.

God must of wanted it or one of two things, he is not omnipotent, or he did not give us free will.
 
Actually Adam and Eve were already sinning before they ate of the Tree. They were supposed to be "taking dominion and being fruitful and multiplying" which would have placed them outside of the Garden (which was supposed to be a place of rest and communion with God). Instead, they were hanging out in the middle of the Garden, directly contrary to what God asked of them. What Satan did was show them that they were sinning by giving them knowledge of good and evil.

Did this garden have a picket fence and a gate?
 
One needn't be religious to understand Biblical themes, motifs, metaphors, etc. I'm not religious, never have been, and I understand those things. It's like reading and analyzing a fictional novel. One needn't believe the fiction to understand themes. I don't need to believe the world in 1984 is Big Brother to study the novel.



Idiocy. A scholar studies the Bible as a work of literature. Most religious believers don't study the Bible as literature at all.

My understanding is that you are not capable of interpreting the Bible if you are not in the spirit? If that is so then all that you are doing is literary critique.
 
My understanding is that you are not capable of interpreting the Bible if you are not in the spirit? If that is so then all that you are doing is literary critique.

All I am doing is a literary critique, informed by time spent studying and debating with various denominations; a scholarly exploration of the Bible informed by hundreds of years of scholarship by others.

It's really not so different than knowing all the ins and outs of a novel. But it's a lot more useful for communication than a random novel (especially when one is a stranger in a strange land in need of common ground for understanding and conveying values).
 
All I am doing is a literary critique, informed by time spent studying and debating with various denominations; a scholarly exploration of the Bible informed by hundreds of years of scholarship by others.

It's really not so different than knowing all the ins and outs of a novel. But it's a lot more useful for communication than a random novel (especially when one is a stranger in a strange land in need of common ground for understanding and conveying values).

That's kind of the problem here eco, you are conveying meanings explained to you by people invested in the contents of the book. You can say that this is what people believe it says and means but, unless it is literally there in writing all that you are doing is acting as a middle man for apologetics and that simply would not be a neutral literary position. I have no idea, I have said before that I have no interest in reading the Bible because it is of no literary or spiritual interest to me whatsoever but, I do listen intently to what people say about it and how they act from it.

I commend your knowledge but, you are mistaken in how what you are saying is coming across in here.
 
That's kind of the problem here eco, you are conveying meanings explained to you by people invested in the contents of the book. You can say that this is what people believe it says and means but, unless it is literally there in writing all that you are doing is acting as a middle man for apologetics and that simply would not be a neutral literary position. I have no idea, I have said before that I have no interest in reading the Bible because it is of no literary or spiritual interest to me whatsoever but, I do listen intently to what people say about it and how they act from it.

I commend your knowledge but, you are mistaken in how what you are saying is coming across in here.

That's why I engage many denominations and study deeply with them. The best I can do is make the study diverse and robust. Most of the interpretations are the same. Where there are differences, I delve into the why and how of those differences. This allows me to come to my own conclusions, but I only put forth the commonly accepted and universal interpretations in general discussion.


One of the most rare and interesting churches/denominations I've spent many hours with:

Baba Johane & the Gospel of God Church - Kenya Africa - WORSHIP
 
Last edited:
That's why I engage many denominations and study deeply with them. The best I can do is make the study diverse and robust. Most of the interpretations are the same. Where there are differences, I delve into the why and how of those differences. This allows me to come to my own conclusions, but I only put forth the commonly accepted and universal interpretations in general discussion.


One of the most rare and interesting churches/denominations I've spent many hours with:

Baba Johane & the Gospel of God Church - Kenya Africa - WORSHIP

I belong to the church of whats happening now, formerly inspired by lots of shrooms, I believe in Christ as my savior and friend but I am not a "Christian" that is a tall order!
 
That's why I engage many denominations and study deeply with them. The best I can do is make the study diverse and robust. Most of the interpretations are the same. Where there are differences, I delve into the why and how of those differences. This allows me to come to my own conclusions, but I only put forth the commonly accepted and universal interpretations in general discussion.


One of the most rare and interesting churches/denominations I've spent many hours with:

Baba Johane & the Gospel of God Church - Kenya Africa - WORSHIP

Just out of curiosity, have you ever studied Biblical scholars like this?

How Jesus Became God: Professor Bart D. Ehrman, The Great Courses: 9781598034042: Amazon.com: Books
 
I'm an atheist, always have been (and I reject anything supernatural), but I've spent a lot of time studying the Bible (as a literary work) with various denominations. I find spiritual works facinating and they serve as a tool of communication. The Bible serving as a tool of communication (values and other deep issues) is especially important when one is living as a stranger in a strange land.

I'm agnostic. I've been a skeptic since they tried to sell me on Santa (never bought that one, either).

Studying religion is a minor hobby for me. I read apologetics and books meant to debunk religion, plus do online reading. That's all I really have time for. I mostly focus on Christianity (that's our pseudo state religion in the U.S.) but have read a little on Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam.
 
I belong to the church of whats happening now, formerly inspired by lots of shrooms, I believe in Christ as my savior and friend but I am not a "Christian" that is a tall order!

Church of Slightly Altered Reality?

Works for me!
 
Closing thoughts of the day....humans did not know right from wrong until satan conspired to have us eat fruit from the tree of knowledge, which God forbade.

Now, lately, religion has been dropping in popularity, and all but fading, slowly. Much to the chagrin of the faithfull, who claim that as a distinctly possible reason for the increased violence, vicious nous, and all around evil in the world today. Because religion helps to provide a moral cumpas.

But.

God did not want us to have knowledge of right and wrong in the first place....soooo.....are we, as a society, not...returning to our original state, prior to eating the forbidden fruit? Imagine a human who doesn't know right from wrong.

Food for thought.

The biblical God gave us free will without giving knowledge of our other choices. The devil was willing to share knowledge and let us come to our own decisions. Who is the real bad guy in this scenario?
 
Back
Top Bottom