Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!aplcen!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: tbvanbelle@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Terry Van Belle) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Strangers in a Strange World Message-ID: Date: 11 Dec 89 08:54:57 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 121 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (The Electric Sol) writes: >In article tbvanbelle@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Terry Van Belle) writes: >>Don't forget that, while God made the world, it isn't going according to >>the way it should have. > >yes it is. How could it be otherwise? Are you suggesting that somehow >God had an "idea" or a "plan" for how the history of the world would >go, and somehow everything that happened instead was somehow a "suprise." Actually what I meant was that God created the world perfect and good, but gave man the option of operating in a way which is not perfect. When I said 'should have', I didn't mean the way God expected it to go, but the optimal way. >Of course, the classic arguement against this, if nothing is going the >way God planned, it is certainly within His capacity to see that it does. And it's still within his capacity to force us all to be good. But it really wouldn't mean much. Instead, we're promised that one day we'll have the capacity to be good (and be close to him). >Yes, we're a real credit to our Maker ;-). Actually, the real credit to our Maker is the fact that we had the choice. The rest is our doing. >Of course God wants us >to sin, because he wants us to learn, and you learn by making >mistakes. Why did God create "sinners" in the first place? First of all, while we might learn correct behaviour, the real problem seems to be in following what we have learned. I can't speak for others, but I find it notoriously hard to condition myself out of a sin, even when I know it's wrong. Secondly, I might ask why we should learn when one day we will know? As for why God created sinners in the first place, he didn't in the way you're suggesting. He created man & gave them the ability to to choose whether to serve him or not. If we chose yes, beautiful. If we chose no, he could send Jesus. >>In any case, we aren't simply beasts who are destined to operate in fixed >>instinctual patterns. We can, and should, supress those impulses that harm >>others. Better still would be to reach a state where damaging instincts don't >>arise; a laudable goal, but not terribly realistic. Still, it gives something >>to aim for. >Who created "instincts."? Results of the fall? >I agree that we aren't simply beasts, but >beasts with a God given consicous-awareness, a soul, if you will. Still >the bio programming that is built into us, our nature, is not something >we invented. That we struggle against our nature is a indication that >we are striving for a higher order, an order that transcends the limited >natural world. Sounds good to me. We realize our present sinful nature & strive to act in the ways God wanted us to act. But here's the problem: our 'nature' makes us act in extremely unnatural ways when you compare us with the animal world. What other animal fouls its own nest? Destroys others of its kind for no good reason? I realize some animals band into groups & attack other groups, but if they had the intelligent means to work out their difficulties and didn't, what excuse would they have? >>Ironically, the Taoists seem to be the ones who have caught on to >>this the best. > >Whats so ironic about that? Is this a plug for Taoism? My apologies. I didn't mean to offend. >Much of what >I practice is akin to Buddhism, another Eastern path. I once said that >Buddhism helps me be a better Christian, because it helps me to not sin, >much more so, than any Christian "method." Christianity is by no means a method to stop sinning. It is a realization that we cannot help but sin & need help. Incidentally, I'm interested to know if Buddhism has helped you to completely avoid sinning. If so, I'm in the wrong religion. While anything that helps you to reduce the number of sins you commit is all well and good, do you really think you should be relying on it totally? >>As for your second statement, Christians have already avoided eternal >>punishment. That's why they're Christians. > >So they saved themselves? No more than a book saves itself from getting wet when someone brings it inside.It has still avoided becoming a soggy paperback at the next rain. >Have you saved yourself? No. >Do you know for a fact that you are "saved?" Yes, for as long as I want it. >Have you ever entertained a temptation, >but resisted it because you "feared" God? Are you certain that you >did so only because you're grateful to God for saving you, and not >because deep inside you feared the consequences of disobeying God. I can't recall ever having this problem, but it's possible. In any case, I see it as a sin. >The reasons for this are that I know many Christians who resist things >because, as they have stated, they fear Hell. I don't think your Christian friends are feeding you Biblical Christianity. Christianity by definition is a state of being in which you don't have to worry about Hell because Jesus has already gone in your place and won. >-jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov "Constantly choosing the lesser of two evils >-ames!elroy!jato!jrossi is still choosing evil." -Cptn. Trips Terry Van Belle tbvanbelle@watcgl.Waterloo.edu ...!watmath!watcgl!tbvanbelle