gad cannot exist - original sin, free will, and god

[Cheerful Charlie]

ORIGINAL SIN, AND FREE WILL AND GOD


Epicurus:
If god is all powerful and god is all good, evil should not exist.
Evil exists.
God is not all powerful or not all good or neither.

Theist. - But god gave us free will. God values our free will
more than he values eliminating all evil.

Alledgedly when Adam ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil,
original sin came into the world. Original sin inclines man to evil and sin.

God is defined as being all good and all powerful.
God hates evil.

1. If God hates evil, he would destroy original sin from the begining as it
creates evil.
2. If as some theists say, god values free will (ignoring Romans) then
God would destroy original sin as in destroys man's precious free will.

In a world with a good god that hates evil and/or values man's free will
original sin would have been eliminated at the beginning and would
not be a major part of Christian theology.


3. Why would god who is all powerful and hates evil wait 4000
years to attempt to destroy original sin that creates evil?
A good god that is all powerful and hates sin would not wait.
He would destroy original sin on that first day.

4. If god truly hated evil as created by original sin, why would
God do a sloppy job of it as per the atonement which still leaves
many people damned because of original sin?

5. Calvin and Luther both claim original sin makes man hate god
and refuse to obey god, which means asking people to believe in god
and Jesus will not happen for these, leaving a lot of sin and evil not eliminated.
A truly all powerful and good god who hates evil would not use
such a poor method that does not destroy all evil and sin.


In a world where a god that is all powerful, all good, hates sin and
wants man to have free will original sin cannot possible exist.

The bible claims it does so a god so defined cannot exist.


QED.


Cheerful Charlie

[Atheos]

I find myself in the rare position of playing Yahweh's advocate in this case. The problem with your QED is that it relies on one particular interpretation of the bible, something impossible to enforce.

The problem of evil only applies to an interpretation of "God" that has the qualities of "All-Good", "All-Knowing" and "All-Powerful". In this case it's airtight. The free will argument means nothing as it doesn't account for "heaven", a perfect world with free creatures who do not suffer.

Regarding your particular argument, original sin is a concept not accepted by a large number of adherents to the bible. The problem is that the bible is a book filled with contradictory passages. Some passages clearly teach one concept, other passages clearly teach the opposite. Apologists give it a pass by claiming that it's their "interpretation" of the bible that's at fault, not the bible itself.

As an example of these contradictory passages, consider two of them that appear to apply to the concept of original sin:

Ezekiel 18:20 - The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.This passage would seem to teach that we cannot "inherit" sin, which ostensibly would go all the way back to the original sin. Many protestants hold this view.

Romans 5:12 - Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:This passage is one of the bedrock passages that seem to support "original sin", but it could be interpreted in a number of ways, including the possibility that the writer is suggesting that only the "death" consequence of sin is shared by all men. It could also be interepreted (if one were so inclined) to suggest that if a person never committed a sin that person would not ever die. Of course that's an unfalsifiable claim as nobody gets a free pass when it comes to the "sinning" business.

However, strangely enough, two verses later the writer contradicts himself by suggesting that some folks never sinned:Romans 5:14 - Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.So go figure.

[flyspray]

ORIGINAL SIN, AND FREE WILL AND GOD


Epicurus:
If god is all powerful and god is all good, evil should not exist.
Evil exists.
God is not all powerful or not all good or neither.

Theist. - But god gave us free will. God values our free will
more than he values eliminating all evil.

Alledgedly when Adam ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil,
original sin came into the world. Original sin inclines man to evil and sin.

God is defined as being all good and all powerful.
God hates evil.

1. If God hates evil, he would destroy original sin from the begining as it
creates evil.
2. If as some theists say, god values free will (ignoring Romans) then
God would destroy original sin as in destroys man's precious free will.

In a world with a good god that hates evil and/or values man's free will
original sin would have been eliminated at the beginning and would
not be a major part of Christian theology.


3. Why would god who is all powerful and hates evil wait 4000
years to attempt to destroy original sin that creates evil?
A good god that is all powerful and hates sin would not wait.
He would destroy original sin on that first day.

4. If god truly hated evil as created by original sin, why would
God do a sloppy job of it as per the atonement which still leaves
many people damned because of original sin?

5. Calvin and Luther both claim original sin makes man hate god
and refuse to obey god, which means asking people to believe in god
and Jesus will not happen for these, leaving a lot of sin and evil not eliminated.
A truly all powerful and good god who hates evil would not use
such a poor method that does not destroy all evil and sin.


In a world where a god that is all powerful, all good, hates sin and
wants man to have free will original sin cannot possible exist.

The bible claims it does so a god so defined cannot exist.


QED.


Cheerful Charlie

The main problem with your post is that the idea of Original Sin is not found in the Bible. The idea originated in the mind of St Augustine.

[Cheerful Charlie]

The main problem with your post is that the idea of Original Sin is not found in the Bible. The idea originated in the mind of St Augustine.

Wrong, the idea of original sin starts with Paul.

Tertullian picked up on that.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14520c.htm
Tertullian
He did not care for philosophy: the philosophers are the "patriarchs of the heretics". His notion that all things, pure spirits and even God, must be bodies, is accounted for by his ignorance of philosophical terminology. Yet of the human soul he actually says that it was seen in a vision as tender, light, and of the colour of air! All our souls were contained in Adam, and are transmitted to us with the taint of original sin upon them, — an ingenious if gross form of traducianism.

Romans 5

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Paul hangs the atonement on this.

Of course Genesis says god tossed Adam out the garden to keep him from eating the
friut of the tree of life and becoming immortal.

The idea of original sin went many changes and modifications until, Augustine.
But it was hardly new then.

But in all of this, a good god would not tolerate sin caused by original sin for 4000
years. Paul, "All have sinned".

Romans 5:19
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the
obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

If god hates sin, he is all powerful and all good and must by those attributes, eliminated
original sin on day one, not waited 4,000 years.

Paul predates Augustine by about 350 years.

Cheerful Charlie

[Cheerful Charlie]

I find myself in the rare position of playing Yahweh's advocate in this case. The problem with your QED is that it relies on one particular interpretation of the bible, something impossible to enforce.

The problem of evil only applies to an interpretation of "God" that has the qualities of "All-Good", "All-Knowing" and "All-Powerful". In this case it's airtight. The free will argument means nothing as it doesn't account for "heaven", a perfect world with free creatures who do not suffer.


Free will argumenst here are not about heaven but thais world.
It a counter to the free will defense of Epicurus's PoE.

Augustine: God gave us free will, evil is our doing, not gods.
god values our free will over elimination of all evil.

Romans 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

Thus we are all sinners due to original sin. Thus this set of verses shows
original sin makes our free will, less than totally free.

This guts the usual free will defences.


Regarding your particular argument, original sin is a concept not accepted by a large number of adherents to the bible. The problem is that the bible is a book filled with contradictory passages. Some passages clearly teach one concept, other passages clearly teach the opposite. Apologists give it a pass by claiming that it's their "interpretation" of the bible that's at fault, not the bible itself.



But just because the bible sometimes contradicts itself does not mean
a claim in the bible gets a free ride.
If it makes a problem for other claims, that is the point.

And here, original sin is an important assertion. It just clashes with a god that
likes free will and hates sin and is all powerful.




As an example of these contradictory passages, consider two of them that appear to apply to the concept of original sin:

This passage would seem to teach that we cannot "inherit" sin, which ostensibly would go all the way back to the original sin. Many protestants hold this view.

This passage is one of the bedrock passages that seem to support "original sin", but it could be interpreted in a number of ways, including the possibility that the writer is suggesting that only the "death" consequence of sin is shared by all men. It could also be interepreted (if one were so inclined) to suggest that if a person never committed a sin that person would not ever die. Of course that's an unfalsifiable claim as nobody gets a free pass when it comes to the "sinning" business.

However, strangely enough, two verses later the writer contradicts himself by suggesting that some folks never sinned:So go figure.


Ezekiel 18:20 - The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Yes, this is a bad contradiction, but that should not mean Paul gets a free ride.
The problem is, which do you chose, Paul or Ezekial?
The RCC, Calvin and Luther ignore Ezekial.

Because original sin is a rather key part of Christianity, being the hook
for the Atonement and Jesus, it gets debunked. Whether you take if from
RCC viewpoint or Calvin, its a rotten idea. Self debunking in two ways, a good
god that hates evil, and a god that loves man's free will, ala Augustine.

This shows that being fairly easy to debunk, its not a good idea.
This of course does not mean Ezekial is neccesarily, but that is another issue..

Romans 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men
to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon
all men unto justification of life. Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience
many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

Here, sin is made explicit "Men were MADE sinners"

This is the verse that gets criticqued.

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the
world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Here we have sin and death.

This is what most people in Ameica get taught in Sunday school
sooner or later, or have taught to them from some sermon.
Original sin is dogma by overwhelming numbers of churches.
Its not some obscure llittle nothing like hares chewing cuds, or
a molten cauldren making pi = 3. its the heart of Christianity,
Jesus dies to remove original sin from Christians.

Fine, lets see where that claim leads.

Nobody much overthrows all of this for a verse in Ezekial.
Since its a basic idea used to make Jesus a necessity, it makes it
a ready target for debunking by considering claims god is all
powerful and hates evil.

A good god that hated evil would have scrubbed Adam and Eve of that like we
scrub down a dog that had a run-in with a skunk with tomato juice.



Cheerful Charlie

[cixelsiD]

Ezekial is refering to how those who enforce laws (religious and secular) are to administer justice amoung the population. Paul is refering to the condition of all men/women who are sinners, 1. by relationship to their representative head (Adam), and 2. by their actual sinfullness. This is not a contradiction of any kind for the following reasons: They are not talking about the same thing in the same way. One may not like the idea of original sin, but the scriptures you have quoted are not a contradiction.

[Sven]

Of course "gad" can not exist - but "to gad" can.

Sorry, someone had to say it. :Cheeky:

[Cheerful Charlie]

Of course "gad" can not exist - but "to gad" can.

Sorry, someone had to say it. :Cheeky:

Original sin made me do it.




Cheerful Charlie