It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do Christians value their moral sense?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Do Christians value their moral sense?

Was Eden, the fall or the elevation of mankind?
A moral sense is what is developed by our study of morals and ethics.
In Eden, this study came in the form of a tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Adam and Eve, as neophytes to life, were not aware of what was good or evil because they had yet to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and had yet to develop morals, until after absorbing the information set out by God for their consumption.
This assumes of course that God wanted man with autonomy and a moral sense.

This gain is clearly spoken of by God when he stated that A & E had become as God’s, knowing good and evil. The fact that he threw a sissy fit when we did elevate ourselves is why Christians call Eden the fall of man.

I find it strange that Christians see our gaining of a moral sense as a fall. Christians do not seem to give a high value to their moral sense and think that we were in Eden strictly to obey and not learn that we are autonomous beings.
Yet strangely, most Christians say that they would do exactly as Eve did and that they would not stop her. They value it yet call it a fall.

The Jews and Hebrew interpreted their scriptures as Eden being our elevation. Not our fall. They were quite surprised when Christianity began to read scriptures literally, even the Jewish ones, that the Jews never took literally.

Did Christianity get the story wrong?
Was Eden our elevation and not our fall?
Do you value your moral sense or would you stop Eve if you could?

www.youtube.com...

www.mrrena.com...

Regards
DL




posted on May, 25 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Hmm I take a different approach to this story, which I do classify as fiction......

Adam and Eve represent the primitive humans occupying earth. These "humans" were human in look only (well neanderthal whatever) and acted much like animals in the wild. They just lived.

This notion of them eating the forbidden fruit, I take, as the very first steps toward civilization.

The "garden" represents a time when 'man' was merely another animal in nature, the fall of man out of the garden represents the change from animal to what we consider sentient life. with that comes good and bad. Because we are no longer mere animals, we develop language, skills like farming instead of hunting, cooking, start to group together in tribes.

But because we are no longer just animals, all the trappings of humanity come into play, greed, lust, hate, war, all of that.

This is how I view that story, for us to move into the modern age of enlightenment, we had to give up the peace, pure peace, we would have enjoyed as merely another mammal on this planet.

just my thoughts



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I don't know, I can imagine a time when we did not have a concience, and acted only out of a sense of known purpose.

I think this is the chief thing that seperates us from the other life on earth, the moral delema's. If you could ask most critters "why are you here" they would asnswer to be a _____.(add whatever it is).

From what I gather the original plan was to retain our animal instict for action with a modified intelligence ratio so to make a devine animal, unfortunately we choose to add the contentment/fear as to have a choice as to how we "feel" about stuff.

I'm not sure the trade off is really worth it in the long haul, makes working together to a common purpose almost impossible,



Peace



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Hi DL.

Good questions here and this is something I've thought long about in the past ("How on earth could god want us ignorant...?").

In reflection on people and the bible, though, it sems to make sense to me. As Paul taught in Romans, "Sin is not imputed where there is no law", and christ teaches us in Matthew:

“Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.


Children and the ignorant are innocent of all guilt if they are ignorant of having committed offense, even in our own courts (age limitations and mitigating factors might be present in our system, based on certain details of course) - and thus free from judgement.

Just my thoughts, thanks.

Sidenote:
I do of course value my moral sense and directions...but to not have to worry about such things in the first place might be a blessing.

edit on 5/25/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Greatest I am
In Eden, this study came in the form of a tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Adam and Eve, as neophytes to life, were not aware of what was good or evil because they had yet to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and had yet to develop morals, until after absorbing the information set out by God for their consumption.
This assumes of course that God wanted man with autonomy and a moral sense.


Well you're making an assumption here that Theologians have been struggling with for generations.

Did Adam & Eve know the difference between good evil before eating of the Tree of Knowledge?

There is also the question if Eve would've eaten the fruit if she had not been tempted by the serpent, and also, how did Satan (Serpent) get into Eden when that location was pure?

Anyhow, my thoughts are that both Adam and Eve were already autonomous, and already knew the difference between right and wrong.
The serpent played on their egos to disobey God, and the "shame" and "knowledge" they gained was the realization of the consequences of their action.
I was always taught, that had they asked for forgiveness they would not have been (permanently) expelled from the garden, but instead tried to unload the blame and guilt.

Just my 2 cents...
edit on 25-5-2011 by Konstantinos because: Typos, woot!



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



I find it strange that Christians see our gaining of a moral sense as a fall. Christians do not seem to give a high value to their moral sense and think that we were in Eden strictly to obey and not learn that we are autonomous beings.


I'm no theologian or philosopher, merely a christian laymen learning to think like one (hopefully, as I've given this question and its corollaries a lot of thought). Here's my .02¢ ...

Adam and Eve didn't come to learn that they were autonomous beings, they knew a priori to the fall. By logic, had they not (knowingly) possessed free will, they could not have eaten of the tree.

Genesis describes a trial of obedience which, had Adam chosen to follow, would have demonstrated his willing submission to the command of God. It was their act of disobedience (and not their moral awakening) which caused the fall. As Augustine eloquently puts it, "Pride was the beginning of all evil, because, had not man’s ambition carried him higher than he was permitted, he might have continued in his first estate."

Hope that sheds some light on your question.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Konstantinos
Did Adam & Eve know the difference between good evil before eating of the Tree of Knowledge?

Not surprisingly, I agree with your comments. ;-)

This of course is an excellent question. They were made in the image of God, in whom there is no evil. So we can't take the statement "like one of us, knowing good and evil" as bad in itself. But it did seem to give them a perspective they would not be able to handle, since the next statement is that "the man" (the Hebrew is specific and singular) must not take from the Tree of Life and live forever. Lots of unanswered questions there, but evidently nobody thought it important enough to explain.

But I think the point to note there is that it requires a free will in order to choose, and there must be choices. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (TKGE) was certainly a test, but one for which God did not cause a particular outcome. To choose to listen to God would have meant perpetual paradise for them and their offspring, and they would truly never have known what evil was. But they chose to defy God, yet God did not simply concede mankind to the serpent and walk away. A plan was set in motion, one that would redeem whoever wanted to be redeemed, and simultaneously prove to the serpent (as in Job) that God cannot be outsmarted. Who knows what else might be involved, but I am convinced that there is more to all this than we know.



There is also the question if Eve would've eaten the fruit if she had not been tempted by the serpent, and also, how did Satan (Serpent) get into Eden when that location was pure?

There's no indication in the text that Eve had any interest in the TKGE until the serpent came along. As for how the serpent got in, we do have a few clues.

In Gen. 2:15 God says that Adam is to cultivate and guard the garden. (The word is typically rendered "keep" but this means to guard, protect, watch over, not simply to manage or maintain. We have support for this in the later account of Cain's sarcastic retort to God, "Am I my brother's keeper?") But guard it from what or whom? We aren't told at that point, but the later appearance of the serpent is the only threat mentioned. We can only speculate about what may have transpired between "everything is very good" and this point. But note that after Adam was to guard Eden, that is when God said it wasn't good for him to be alone, and that he would need "a strong one facing him", very badly rendered "help meet" and horribly translated "helpmate". This phrase indicated a strong ally, and was used later also for God aiding mankind. So God makes Adam, tells him the garden needs protected, then sees that he can't do the job alone.

Now the plot thickens!

If Adam has already shown an inability to do the job alone and has been assigned a guard for him (he guards the garden, she guards him), then if the serpent wanted to bring Adam down he first had to take out his bodyguard-- hence the target is Eve. But she has to be tricked, and the word the NT uses for this means more than simply being fooled, but possibly "mesmerized" or entranced. Whatever it was, it had to get her to doubt God's motives-- a ploy that would have been completely unnecessary had she already harbored sin in her heart and lusted after godlike power. The serpent knew she had one fatal weakness: inexperience. Adam had seen God's creative power; after all, he knew when he woke up from that divine anesthesia that God had done something incredible that he could not do. But Eve was the very last creative work of God; she had no direct experience with this. That's why only she could be convinced that she could become like God.

Once that was done, scripture simply reports that she handed the fruit to Adam who was there with her and heard the whole thing go down--- and did nothing. Nada. Zilch. He was a wuss. He went down without a fight.

And what happens when God confronts them all? The serpent gets cursed directly, and told that this woman he had hoodwinked would be his ultimate undoing. Note that it is only the woman's "seed" that would accomplish this. The woman is told that she would make a terrible decision: to "turn" (big debate on whether "desire" is the proper rendering) toward her husband, and as a result he would rule over her. This was not a command or curse but a foretelling. But Adam, instead of mentioning the serpent at all, blames God for giving him "that woman"! Adam thereby added another dimension to his sin: while both of them ate the forbidden fruit, only Adam rebelled to the point of blaming his sin on God. Eve at least blamed the serpent, who in fact was guilty of tempting her to do something she had had no interest in before, but Adam ignored the serpent and made no effort to stop it from tempting Eve.

God then cursed the earth. Why? Because that's what the man had been made from. The animals were made from it too, and all of nature was now in "travail" because of Adam. "The man" was then driven out of the garden, and as God knew she would, Eve chose to follow him out instead of staying in Eden. Had she stayed, it isn't unreasonable to think she may have been the one to give "virgin birth".

So the "fall" itself was not something needed or desired or planned by God, and the only penalty he had specified for eating the forbidden fruit was mortality-- they would die. But all the curses and suffering came about because Adam added to his sin, and Eve chose to stay with him. Fatal attraction, and all that.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Why are you speculating about a fictional event? I'm really just wondering because...well...we have more than enough evidence to conclude that such an event never happened.

As for moral sense, Christianity is devoid of such a concept. It has an idea of obedience for fear of punishment from an all-powerful dictator, but that is not an idea of morality. It also begs the question of what is or is not good.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 





As for moral sense, Christianity is devoid of such a concept. It has an idea of obedience for fear of punishment from an all-powerful dictator, but that is not an idea of morality.


May I ask you your basis for naturalistic morality? I've tried to understand the basic platform but it honestly escapes me, probably because I haven't really heard it adequately presented. I am genuinely interested in hearing what you have to say; this isn't some sort of evasive attempt to goad you into an unfriendly interchange. I am, as they say, all ears.

I also hasten to add that "it has an idea of obedience for fear of punishement..." You failed to include love in your reduction of the matter. As a christian theist, I am joyfully obedient to our Creator because I love our Creator. Freedom isn't just about freedom TO..its also a matter of freedom FROM. Selah.


edit on 25-5-2011 by followtheevidence because: word change



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Hmm I take a different approach to this story, which I do classify as fiction......

Adam and Eve represent the primitive humans occupying earth. These "humans" were human in look only (well neanderthal whatever) and acted much like animals in the wild. They just lived.

This notion of them eating the forbidden fruit, I take, as the very first steps toward civilization.

The "garden" represents a time when 'man' was merely another animal in nature, the fall of man out of the garden represents the change from animal to what we consider sentient life. with that comes good and bad. Because we are no longer mere animals, we develop language, skills like farming instead of hunting, cooking, start to group together in tribes.

But because we are no longer just animals, all the trappings of humanity come into play, greed, lust, hate, war, all of that.

This is how I view that story, for us to move into the modern age of enlightenment, we had to give up the peace, pure peace, we would have enjoyed as merely another mammal on this planet.

just my thoughts


And well put. I agree that it is a right of passage myth.

Regards
DL



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by treespeaker
I don't know, I can imagine a time when we did not have a concience, and acted only out of a sense of known purpose.

I think this is the chief thing that seperates us from the other life on earth, the moral delema's. If you could ask most critters "why are you here" they would asnswer to be a _____.(add whatever it is).

From what I gather the original plan was to retain our animal instict for action with a modified intelligence ratio so to make a devine animal, unfortunately we choose to add the contentment/fear as to have a choice as to how we "feel" about stuff.

I'm not sure the trade off is really worth it in the long haul, makes working together to a common purpose almost impossible,



Peace


Huh?

Do you see other non-feeling animals working toward a common purpose?

Have a look at life for man without a moral sense. It starts from about the 2 minute mark.
Let me know what you think and if I have it about right.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL
edit on 1-6-2011 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Hi DL.

Good questions here and this is something I've thought long about in the past ("How on earth could god want us ignorant...?").

In reflection on people and the bible, though, it sems to make sense to me. As Paul taught in Romans, "Sin is not imputed where there is no law", and christ teaches us in Matthew:

“Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.


Children and the ignorant are innocent of all guilt if they are ignorant of having committed offense, even in our own courts (age limitations and mitigating factors might be present in our system, based on certain details of course) - and thus free from judgement.

Just my thoughts, thanks.

Sidenote:
I do of course value my moral sense and directions...but to not have to worry about such things in the first place might be a blessing.

edit on 5/25/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)


Really?

Perhaps we should all have frontal lobotomies.

Seriously though, care to comment on the vid I linked just above?
It shows what you have described at play by those without the moral sense that you say you value.
You cannot have it both ways friend.

Regards
DL



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Hi DL.

Good questions here and this is something I've thought long about in the past ("How on earth could god want us ignorant...?").

In reflection on people and the bible, though, it sems to make sense to me. As Paul taught in Romans, "Sin is not imputed where there is no law", and christ teaches us in Matthew:

“Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.


Children and the ignorant are innocent of all guilt if they are ignorant of having committed offense, y]


I just remembered to add this for you.

It may be that there is no such thing as children who do not know good from evil. it seems that it may be hard wired in us from birth.

edmonton.ctv.ca...

Regards
DL



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by CuresRiches


post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions





I guess I missed a good laugh then. it must have been a fundamental or literalist B S answer.

Regards
DL



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Konstantinos

Originally posted by Greatest I am
In Eden, this study came in the form of a tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Adam and Eve, as neophytes to life, were not aware of what was good or evil because they had yet to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and had yet to develop morals, until after absorbing the information set out by God for their consumption.
This assumes of course that God wanted man with autonomy and a moral sense.


Well you're making an assumption here that Theologians have been struggling with for generations.

Did Adam & Eve know the difference between good evil before eating of the Tree of Knowledge?

There is also the question if Eve would've eaten the fruit if she had not been tempted by the serpent, and also, how did Satan (Serpent) get into Eden when that location was pure?

Anyhow, my thoughts are that both Adam and Eve were already autonomous, and already knew the difference between right and wrong.
The serpent played on their egos to disobey God, and the "shame" and "knowledge" they gained was the realization of the consequences of their action.
I was always taught, that had they asked for forgiveness they would not have been (permanently) expelled from the garden, but instead tried to unload the blame and guilt.

Just my 2 cents...
edit on 25-5-2011 by Konstantinos because: Typos, woot!


Can you know of the taste of an apple before eating of it?

How then can you know of good and evil without learning of it?

Further, if they already knew of good and evil, WTF is God doing punishing them for knowing what they already knew?

As to autonomy, can you know you can be autonomous without ever doing, and recognizing that you are doing, something autonomously?

You cannot know you have free will till you actually do your will and not God's.

Regards
DL



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by followtheevidence
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



I find it strange that Christians see our gaining of a moral sense as a fall. Christians do not seem to give a high value to their moral sense and think that we were in Eden strictly to obey and not learn that we are autonomous beings.


I'm no theologian or philosopher, merely a christian laymen learning to think like one (hopefully, as I've given this question and its corollaries a lot of thought). Here's my .02¢ ...

Adam and Eve didn't come to learn that they were autonomous beings, they knew a priori to the fall. By logic, had they not (knowingly) possessed free will, they could not have eaten of the tree.

Genesis describes a trial of obedience which, had Adam chosen to follow, would have demonstrated his willing submission to the command of God. It was their act of disobedience (and not their moral awakening) which caused the fall. As Augustine eloquently puts it, "Pride was the beginning of all evil, because, had not man’s ambition carried him higher than he was permitted, he might have continued in his first estate."

Hope that sheds some light on your question.




Not a bit.

Is desire to learn pride?

Further, scripture urges us to emulate God and reach his perfection.
That is exactly what A & E did according to God's own words.

They in essence graduated from school and for that elevation, God is shown as throwing a sissy fit.
It also shows a God who lacks a sense or morals as he added on a whole bunch of consequences for the act that no one knew of and did not ever tell A & E of the benefit of learning of good and evil.
Quite an A hole God FMPOV.

Regards
DL



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Why are you speculating about a fictional event? I'm really just wondering because...well...we have more than enough evidence to conclude that such an event never happened.

As for moral sense, Christianity is devoid of such a concept. It has an idea of obedience for fear of punishment from an all-powerful dictator, but that is not an idea of morality. It also begs the question of what is or is not good.


I want to debunk the notion of a literal Eden and A & E because way too many read it as real and use it to keep women subjugated to man and without true equality as well as the fact that this story has also been used to justify Gay discrimination and denigration.

It is also quite stupid to think that God, or any father, would deny their children knowledge of any kind.

As you indicate, Christians do not see the tyranny of O T God.

Regards
DL



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by followtheevidence
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 





As for moral sense, Christianity is devoid of such a concept. It has an idea of obedience for fear of punishment from an all-powerful dictator, but that is not an idea of morality.


May I ask you your basis for naturalistic morality? I've tried to understand the basic platform but it honestly escapes me, probably because I haven't really heard it adequately presented. I am genuinely interested in hearing what you have to say; this isn't some sort of evasive attempt to goad you into an unfriendly interchange. I am, as they say, all ears.

I also hasten to add that "it has an idea of obedience for fear of punishement..." You failed to include love in your reduction of the matter. As a christian theist, I am joyfully obedient to our Creator because I love our Creator. Freedom isn't just about freedom TO..its also a matter of freedom FROM. Selah.


edit on 25-5-2011 by followtheevidence because: word change


Free will from God says----Do it my way or burn forever.
That is a threat and has nothing to do with free will.

In the case of A & E, exercising that free will, even to educate themselves and become as Gods with a moral sense meant that they were bound for hell.

No same person would ever repent from becoming as God.

Regards
DL
edit on 1-6-2011 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join