Locker wrote:Cook wrote: I agree with your viewpoint here. Almost entirely at least. From Jesus' parable of the prodigal son and other teachings I don't limit "His children He loves" to only "us who love God". Fatherly love not having this quid pro quo quality in my view.
Cook this is interesting - how do you define this quid pro quo quality? Covering everyone? How would this effect everyone now??
For me the parable of the prodigal son perhaps demonstrates it best. Even though the son is separated from the love of the father, and even though he does this on purpose and goes into wasteful, riotous, sinful living, the father doesn't stop scanning the horizon for the son and wanting his return. The father doesn't love or not love the son based on whether the son loves him -- what would be "quid pro quo" -- but the love is in the father's nature whether the son knows it or not (or wants it or not). As I see it, the Father never closes his heart to anybody, but it only is his children that close their hearts to him. In how this affects everyone, I would say He accepts all who come to Him, that God is "no respecter of persons." Or, He "is not willing that any should perish."
Locker wrote:Cook wrote:No, not at all. I'm saying that since God is a Father to us, being a parent perhaps helps in the ability to see as God sees, especially in terms of realistic judgment and forgiveness. "The wages of sin is death." Well the wages of a kid stealing a piece of candy from a store is certainly not a death sentence, much less death dealt from a loving parent. What is the type of sinfulness that brings about those wages? B.W. seems to say that it is by becoming "irredeemably corrupted" that people send themselves to such judgment. I would agree with this.
Okay great answer, and next, would becoming "irredeemably corrupted" be original sin in your opinion??
Well, becoming irredeemably corrupted seems like more a process to me, the end of the line, and not so much the beginning. I'm still not sure about that seed that starts it all.
B.W. wrote:Response: Locker, that post on the Heart is very interesting — How did God design the heart? To Explore? To be intelligent? To learn?? That is a great observation Cook!!!! Can you and Locker elaborate more?
I've thought about this a little more, in terms of what sin "teaches" us, and remembered an aspect of Jesus' teachings that I don't know is stressed so much, but which shows up a lot of times in the four gospels. When we think of God forgiving sins, we think in terms of the wages of sin being death, and us being in the dog house. But Jesus, he also had some turning-lemons-into-lemonade attitudes in his teachings about sin and he went over them a lot.
For instance, read
Matthew 18:21-35, the parable of the servant who is forgiven by a master, but refuses to forgive a fellow servant. Jesus teaches in this lesson that us being sinful and finding forgiveness should induce us to be more merciful and more forgiving toward those who sin against us. Sin teaches us about mercy.
I have this additional thought: imagine a hypothetical universe where there is perfection everywhere. God still would have this quality of being merciful, but how would anybody know? Nobody would need it and it would remain unknown perhaps. Mercy seems to me directly a quality of love, that part of justice which is conditioned by love. So does a universe in which sin comes into existence allow for an arena where God's love is revealed and expressed in ways it wouldn't be otherwise? Though He does not want people to sin, when it does happen, He is able to utilize it for wisdom and for revealing greater depths of his goodness?
Also see
Luke 7:36-47, the parable about a creditor who forgives one person with a 50 denarii debt and another with a 500 denarii debt. Who is more grateful? Jesus illustrates that the "sinner" washing his feet with her tears and hair, she has much love. A person who has sinned much is able to love much. "But he who is forgiven little, loves little."
In
Luke 18:9-14 is the parable of a Pharisee and tax collector praying in the temple. Jesus shows in this lesson that an acknowledgement of a sinful nature brings a person to a humble, meek, sincere attitude toward God. Sin softens people up and makes us look outward to God perhaps (whereas the Pharisee was only looking in at himself essentially).
You can also go back to the prodigal son story, the other brother was dutiful and always trying to adhere to his father's way of doing things, but he lost sight of the depth of the father's love. The sin and repentence of the prodigal son led to a display of how powerfully the Father loves his children. Here again a revelation of goodness that would have been unknown without the contrast of sin. Not just that he said, Ok, you can be like a servant (all the son dared hope for), or ok, sin is forgiven, but he overflowed with happiness and joy that the son was back and safe in the family, so happy he killed the fatted calf, put the best robe on the son, gathered everyone for a celebration. At another time Jesus says that the angels in heaven have a bigger party over 1 sinner who repents than over 99 righteous people who don't need to. So sin can lead to a more dramatic demonstration of God's love than you would otherwise likely see?
I looked at the four gospels in depth and Jesus teaches much about what can come from sin in a positive way when people are repenetant, I think mainly it's that sin teaches people to be humble, and to treat other people with understanding and forgiveness. Jesus repeats over and over "Forgive and you will be forgiven". Other parts of the New Testament say blood was needed for God's forgiveness, but Jesus almost exclusively says that forgiveness comes from forgiving others. Have other people noticed this? That seems like a big deal but I'm sure it's another topic altogether.
Locker, just had another thought. You asked, "Could this corruption have come from the act of rebellion - something in the design of the heart - or did it come from the Tree of Knowledge itself?"
The serpent's actual temptation to Eve was that if she'd eat the fruit, her eyes would be opened and she would be like God, knowing good and evil. She wanted to do that and so ate the fruit... it's interesting to me now to consider that this was the opposite of being humble. She wanted to be like God. If sin and its afflictions teach us to be humble, maybe there is a connection? I would have to think about that more, but maybe you two (or anybody else) have ideas.
Locker wrote:What I was trying to say in above quote was does anyone think original sin is a heart issue? If so - then Maybe, that was what it affected - the heart.
I have been looking at the heart as termed in the bible and it seems to me it was affected by something and spread to humanity.
The other night, I realized that perhaps another tactic to help try and grasp things is to consider, what are the known possible ways to transmit any characteristics from one generation to another? I only know of two, to be honest, inheritance through genes, and what is picked up from surroundings as a kid grows up (culture, parents' attitudes, etc.). Can anybody think of other methods of transmission of anything from one generation to another? B.W., from your CARM links (thanks for those), I think I'm most likely to agree with the Pergias person on this, "Adam's sin influenced the human race only as a bad example and that all people are born in the same state as Adam was before his fall." Locker... since it doesn't make sense to me that genes were physically changed, if those are the only two means of transmittal, I would say yes, I'm with you on this one, it's the heart that is affected and is how sin gets around.
Locker wrote:One more thing - why did God place the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden to begin with? From Theology - I know it was placed as a test but why did God see a need for such a test unless He knew something about the Heart and design of humankind???
I can't say I know.
I probably have said enough for now.
