[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/his/ - History & Humanities



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: Paradise-lost2.jpg (35 KB, 460x288)
35 KB
35 KB JPG
>did God make sin?
>no, sin comes from adam and eve using their own free will to disobey God
I've always heard Christians say this, but I've never once heard anyone challenge them on it. Sin didn't infect adam and eve first, it infected Satan. The big question is, if God created adam and eve perfectly so that they had no desire to sin until influenced by an outside force (satan) then why didn't God create satan with that same perfection? If he did, then what was the outside force that influenced satan? Sin rationally can't come from God because God is all-good and creating sin conflicts with his nature.
>>
File: demiurge.png (584 KB, 1400x2700)
584 KB
584 KB PNG
>>4993838
fucking demiurge
>>
>>4993838
Free will is the go to answer.
>>
>>4993838

The old testament clearly has God saying he creates both good and evil in order to give man the choice between them.

That's the thing with monotheism, that one god is responsible for ALL aspects of creation.
>>
>>4993901
>The old testament clearly has God saying he creates both good and evil in order to give man the choice between them.
proof? inb4 isaiah 45:7, thats a mistranslation in the kjv
>>
>>4993838
The point of humans is that they have free will. Think of it this way: you could create a computer simulation where everyone is hard programmed to love you, the creator; or you could create a simulation where the simulated beings have true sentience. The latter is far more interesting and worthwhile, even though they can choose not to love you.
>>
>>4993918
but adam and eve were made with a perfect "free will" right? meaning the capability was in their programming to commit evil but they'd always chose not to unless outside influence was there? Kind of like how we'll be in heaven.
>>
>>4993921
I don't think the serpent in Genesis was intended to be Satan. I believe that's a Christian interpretation.
>>
>>4993925
kind of outside the argument though, what caused the serpent to have the desire towards sin that adam and eve apparently weren't created with
>>
>>4993907

>mistranslation

Nice try, but no.

Douay-Rheims:

>I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.

NIV:

>I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the Lord, do all these things.

JSP Tanakh:

>I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am the LORD, that doeth all these things.

God creates evil, being the only god. This is a given in monotheism and any attempt to deny it is wrong.
>>
>>4993937
To be honest, I don't know. My original post was just parroting something I'd heard before. I'm going to go read into it more.
>>
>>4993942
http://biblehub.com/hebrew/7451.htm
it can be translated as simply "adversity" or disaster. Nobody argues that God creates trials or natural disasters or seemingly unfortunate situations, the question is specifically whether God causes people to sin.
>>
>>4993943
I respect you for the confession. You can share your thoughts on the serpent if you'd like, sounds interesting
>>
>>4993953
Calamity, disasters, all is evil in the world.

God, being the only god, is the source of everything. He by definition must be the source of evil as well.

This is not up for debate.
>>
>>4993961
>Calamity, disasters, all is evil in the world.
whats your definition of evil and where do you get the definition?
>>
>>4993838

The problem with Christians: They follow god's law to see their enemies in torment and to glorify their cohort. Even jews struggle with this as most of the religious are simple pain-pleasure seekers.

But, in the context of those religions, God's law is to be followed because it was created by a higher order being, not to bring pleasure and ward off pain on everyone else.*

* - Of course this leaves the priestly class with carte blanche to mistreat populations they're based in. But in a sense, a lot of religion is mistreating populations on the whims of men with schizophrenia and OCD.
>>
>>4993963
God's definition. Since everything that causes adversity is evil, God created evil. If God is the only god, is must, by definition, be the source of everything that exists. If evil exists, it is because God created it.
>>
>>4993968
james 1:13
Let no man, when he is tempted, say that he is tempted by God. For God is not a tempter of evils, and he tempteth no man.
>>
>>4993965
whats all this have to do with anything
>>
>>4993973
That in no way implies God did not create evil to begin with, which is what the thread deals with.

Try again.
>>
>>4993982
dude why are you being so snippy? nice try, not up for debate, try again. you sound like an insufferable euphoric woman
anyways, it literally says God does not tempt evil and for him to have created sin then that would mean hes tempted humans with evil at some point. so there
>>
>>4993986
God doesn't have to actively tempt you to have created it to begin with. If you deny that God created evil, you deny that he gave people free will, as the entire point of free will was to give people the choice between good and evil.

GG.
>>
>>4993838
Let me break it down for you OP. I sincerely hope this helps you, it seems you have a curious mind.

>>did [the national deity of the Hebrews] make sin?
>>no, sin comes from [figures in a cultural story] using their own free will to disobey [the national deity of the Hebrews]

>I've always heard [Niceans] say this, but I've never once heard anyone challenge them on it. Sin didn't infect [figures in a cultural story] first, it infected [the Adversary]. The big question is, if [the national deity of the Hebrews] created [figures in a cultural story] perfectly so that they had no desire to sin until influenced by an outside force ([the Adversary]) then why didn't [the national deity of the Hebrews] create [the Adversary] with that same perfection? If he did, then what was the outside force that influenced [the Adversary]? Sin rationally can't come from [the national deity of the Hebrews] because [the national deity of the Hebrews] is all-[authoritative] and creating sin conflicts with his [status as chief deity].
>>
>>4993992
There are different authors from Christian Theology (Reformed, Protestant Tradition) that do not use the "free-will" defence to absolve God because of the existing evil while maintaining the fact that God is not the author of evil.

Try watching the videos (better if you can read their books) of John MacArthur, John Piper, James White, and RC Sproul.
>>
>>4994031
not the guy you're talking to, but don't reformed Christians basically just say "idk, its a mystery" regarding origin of sin
>>
>>4994033
No, a Reformed perspective is that God's glory was amplified through redeeming a broken creation as opposed to maintaining an undefiled one. The idea is that when Sin entered the universe it created a new opportunity for God to demonstrate His power thereby increasing His glory.
>>
>>4994045
but where did sin come from though
I mean specifically the desire in Satan to sin
>>
>>4994051
Ex nihilo.
>>
>>4994054
are you being serious
>>
>>4994060
Yes, everything was created ex nihilo.
>>
>>4994264
by God
so you're saying God authored sin
>>
>>4993973
>book of Job
>>
>>4993955

Not the guy you were talking to but...

Serpents represent wisdom in many eastern Mediterranean cultures. The serpent provided man with knowledge. Seems more of a Prometheus figure, defying the greatest god to improve man, rather than the embodiment of evil.
>>
>>4993838
satan means advesary and that could be anyone.
the devil was a stage play character the church eventually adopted and pushed as the Big Bad.
Lucifer refers to a babylonian king.

the fall from heaven was fanfiction
>>
>>4994316
that was Satan
>>
>>4994341

Except he's referered to as "the satan".
>>
File: 1487399644667m.jpg (46 KB, 499x1024)
46 KB
46 KB JPG
>>4994326

Manichaeism knew:

The snake, which according to Genesis 3.1-5 led Eve and Adam into temptation, actually opened Adam’s eyes to the divine truth, and Augustine maintains that it is Jesus the Splendor himself (Baur, 1831 = 1973, pp. 160-62). By eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge Adam gains Gnosis.
>>
>>4993838
>durr freee will
heres your answer.
>>
File: Jail_Free[1].jpg (306 KB, 980x641)
306 KB
306 KB JPG
>its due to satan
>>
>>4993838
The desire to sin is about the desire for death, decay, the death instinct.
>>
>>4993901
Also, since we are created in His image and likeness, we also have power to create good and evil, but unlike Him, we are choosing as we make them.
>>
>>4994299
>Jonathan Edwards answers, “If by ‘the author of sin,’ be meant the sinner, the agent, or the actor of sin, or the doer of a wicked thing . . . it would be a reproach and blasphemy, to suppose God to be the author of sin. In this sense, I utterly deny God to be the author of sin.”

>But, he argues, willing that sin exist in the world is not the same as sinning. God does not commit sin in willing that there be sin. God has established a world in which sin will indeed necessarily come to pass by God’s permission, but not by his “positive agency.”
>>
File: 1530577014667.png (164 KB, 540x371)
164 KB
164 KB PNG
>>4996800
>God does not commit sin in willing that there be sin
>>
>>4993977

You're insisting on what God can and cannot be. Even though, in the context of religion, he is the one who shapes Behemoth and Leviathan and the monsters if the world.

I think it's fair to say that arguments like the OP's are pure waste because... well... What are the values of a higher order being? Would it not embrace a bit of trickery, a manipulation of lower level systems in pursuit of a judgement that outshines billions of mortals?

As I said, a lot of people are pain pleasure seekers who impose on God the duty of the cosmos to provide goodness and comfort. Without realizing that God would be beyond our notion of pain and pleasure!
>>
>>4998023
>Permitting is the same as committing
>>
>no one ITT has mentioned it

Romans 9
10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?
>>
>>4998770
thats more about why God doesn't save everyone, isn't it? not necessarily about the whole origin of sin. Using it in that context would sort of imply that God willed people to sin, but its okay because thats basically what he made their purpose to be...
>>
>>4993838
I'm not sure what would be the value of "free will" if you could only make the approved decisions...
>>
>>4998791
isn't that basically heaven though
>>
>>4993907
>mistranslation

>KJV

You may choose one.
>>
>>4998804
>God creates evil
>lel unicorns
>Mark 16 long ending
pick 3
>>
>>4993961
Whenever somebody says "This is not up for debate," it is a fairly sure sign that they are not confident about their ability to defend their position.
>>
>>4998067
>Racer X
>reX Racer

I just got that!
>>
>>4998817
As you of course know, but are hoping nobody else knows, the translators of the KJV were, at every step, sustained by prayer and created the perfect translation for the language as it existed at the time.
>>
>>4998788
It is my belief that everything happens as God wills it to happen. Only God can self-cause, everything else is subject to God. And I also believe that Heaven and Hell are simply representations of the lives of good and sinful people. Having a good soul is like being in Heaven. As Jesus said, the kingdom of Heaven is within you. Why does God will that some people live in Hell? The answer becomes much simpler if you do away with the idea that God is like us, that he has a mind and empathy and so on. God is truth, logic, the yearning for complete existence, and it therefore makes no difference whether everyone is good or everyone sins, so long as it’s a logical development. In this world it makes sense why people are different from each other. Would we really want to all be the same?
>>
>>4998883
so God is the author of sin?
>>
>>4993838
idk, but it seems one of the sins they forgot in 10 commandments was thou shalt not eat too much. No matter where you go in the world they make fun of fat people.
>>
>>4998919
Yes, God is the author of all things logical. It is sin that defines what is good, and vice versa. To have one but not the other would cause a deficiency in meaning. All is differentiation and the completion of potential. The world would not be beautiful, otherwise.
>>
>>4998954
wouldn't that mean God committed evil though by authoring sin, thus he isn't all-good
>>
>>4998023
Here’s an analogy: a developer designs a game in which the players can either make “righteous moves” or “sinful moves” and provides a rulebook to the game that explains good things will happen to the players if they make righteous moves and bad things with sinful moves. Now the developer is not responsible for the players choosing to make sinful moves simply because he designed a game in which they could be made.
>>
>>4998957
>>4998978
>>
>>4998978
but who put the desire to perform the sinful moves into the players mind? God is more than a developer of a game, he developed the players mind as well. All of the players minds
>>
Sweeties, god doesn't exist.
>>
>>4998957
What is the definition of good? When a thing fulfills its purpose, it is good. God is that which creates and gives life to existence. Good and evil are human measurements, and both of them must exist for God to be good. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t work to remove the evil within ourselves and those around us. The simplest way to explain it is that God is good but we are not.
>>
>>4998997
>When a thing fulfills its purpose, it is good
so the people who crucified Jesus did good? because they fulfilled their purpose in the redemption of humanity?
>>
>>4999003
>so the people who crucified Jesus did good? because they fulfilled their purpose in the redemption of humanity?
Yes. In one sense, everything that happens is good. It’s only when you take on a subjective approach that some things are good and others are bad. The ultimate goodness that anything can attain is first and foremost existence. Evolution produces good organisms based on their ability to live, to exist. Everything is a struggle for existence. For humans, evil is that which can hinder our existence. But it is not necessary that humans should exist. If aliens were to destroy us, then so be it, they deserve to exist by their nature. It is sin which tells us what to avoid and how to better ourselves so that we may continue to fight for existence.
>>
>>4999042
so why do people go to hell for sin, if ultimately the sin is good because its fulfilling its purpose
>>
>>4999052
because Hell is a metaphore for the familes that remain in sin and end up generation of generation in poverty and destitution.
>>
>>4999058
how do you figure that? Paul and Jesus taught that the poor and destitute are the ones most likely to be saved, and the rich were far less likely
>>
>>4999065
why would you save a rich man?
>>
>>4999071
because saving people is a good thing to do
>>
>>4999077
but don't you see? If getting saved meant upward social mobility to steal a more modern term for it, then a rich person is already saved. (A nobleman)
>>
>>4999052
>so why do people go to hell for sin
First, Hell is symbolic of suffering in this life. People must experience torment just as animals do. It is a necessary development within reality.
>>
>>4999083
thats not what getting saved is though
you've lost me
>>
>>4999086
when is hell ever used in the bible in the context of present time or present life?
>>
>>4999087
Getting saved just means to join the "God's chosen family. It is why you join by circumcision and then learn all the laws and rules of being a jew. Christ removed the need for most of the laws and defeated Hell so that all you simply have to do is Become christian to get saved. Saved by grace. You either become a Christian or burn in Hell for the coming eternity.
>>
>>4999089
Some people do not understand that sinning has bad consequences in this life. They need a warning that after this life they’ll experience the worst torture if they sin in this life. If the Bible tried to convey its truths literally, then we would not be having this discussion, and no one would know about Christianity.
>>
>>4999099
now sure how this all relates to origin of sin or your definition of hell
>>
>>4999108
not*
>>
>>4999105
again
where in the bible you getting this from
>>
>>4998985
Analogies cannot be perfect representations of what they gesture towards, especially so
in the case of the Divine.

One way to think about it is that the impulse towards disobedience is a necessary outcome of sapience; what I mean is curiosity is part of what makes us intelligent but it also drives us to pursue things simply for the sake of novelty even when we rationally know better. Human curiosity is generally a tremendous blessing but it does make us vulnerable to temptation.
>>
>>4999120
>One way to think about it is that the impulse towards disobedience is a necessary outcome of sapience; what I mean is curiosity is part of what makes us intelligent but it also drives us to pursue things simply for the sake of novelty even when we rationally know better. Human curiosity is generally a tremendous blessing but it does make us vulnerable to temptation.
how about in heaven? will we still have that impulse towards disobedience?
>>
>>4999116
Matthew 13:10
>>
>>4999131
the context specifically of Jesus teaching method of parables, hell isn't mentioned at all
>>
>>4999124
I don’t know but if so I do know that resisting that impulse would no longer be a struggle.
>>
>>4999137
just like adam and eve
they had no struggle with sin until an outside force influenced them. ie satan
so I'm wondering why wasn't satan created also without that internal struggle, the way adam and eve were
>>
>>4999135
If you take the Bible literally, you have no chance of understanding it. Questions about God and “why does He do this” are unanswerable because they rely on literal interpretation.
>>
>>4999140
Satan is an angel and the fact is very little had been revealed about angelic natures but then again it doesn’t really concern us either.
>>
>>4999152
certain parts are literal and certain parts are metaphorical
if you choose to interpret it all as metaphor then you can choose to interpret it however you please
all I did was point out the proper context of the verse, and the fact that hell isn't mentioned at all. you're moving goal posts
>>
>>4999160
this is honestly the best answer I've gotten so far
>>
>>4993838
Sin is the act of going against or disobeying god it's free will that allows us to do it
>>
>>4998067
>a parent isn't responsible for their kid fucking up when they don't teach them right and wrong
>>
File: 1493992354470.png (100 KB, 400x400)
100 KB
100 KB PNG
>>4994341
>the fall from heaven was fanfiction
John Milton is essentially a gospel-writer as far as most Christians are concerned. Even clearly among Christians in this thread
>>
File: image.jpg (166 KB, 800x1024)
166 KB
166 KB JPG
>>4995262
Personal highlight.
Great thread in general
>>
>>4999389
>>4994341
luke 10:18
>>
>>4999445
You and I both know that when most Christians think of Satan's fall from God's grace, the Paradise Lost story is how they think it went down.
>>
>>4993942
This NIV is more accurate to contemporary English here. The word "evil" didn't used to have exclusively moral connotations, it could just mean anything bad or unpleasant.
>>
>>4998791
What's the value of free will if you can only make the approved decisions OR suffer eternally?
>>
>>4993838
Unironically being religious.
>>
>>5000047
thats a dumb quote and you're dumb
>>
File: 1528065208280.jpg (42 KB, 540x312)
42 KB
42 KB JPG
>>4993843
>Le sad demiurge
>>
>>5000067
Are you a 2nd grader?
>>
>>4993838
I think the thing with Lucy is that he was jealous of Jesus and not being the main chick anymore
>>
>>4993968
But evil doesn't exist.
>>
>>5000088
no u
>>
>>5000155
At least you didn't call me a poopeyface.
>>
>>5000047
Friendly reminder that the """religion""" Seneca refers to was basically a cult to the emperor at that point. His words doesn't necesarily apply to modern religions.
>>
>>5000189
>poopey
>e
low IQ
>>
File: c4a.jpg (23 KB, 600x484)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
>>5000209




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.