Comments on: The Blessing of Original Sin http://nowthinkaboutit.com/2009/12/the-blessing-of-original-sin/ Avoiding Hackneyed...Making Sense Wed, 11 Jan 2012 06:25:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: EnnisP http://nowthinkaboutit.com/2009/12/the-blessing-of-original-sin/comment-page-1/#comment-2250 EnnisP Sat, 09 Jan 2010 07:58:35 +0000 http://nowthinkaboutit.com/?p=751#comment-2250 Should be interesting. Let us know when you write it up. Should be interesting. Let us know when you write it up.

]]> By: Mark Gomez http://nowthinkaboutit.com/2009/12/the-blessing-of-original-sin/comment-page-1/#comment-2248 Mark Gomez Sat, 09 Jan 2010 05:32:35 +0000 http://nowthinkaboutit.com/?p=751#comment-2248 The fact that Satan received no "second chance" is not an indication that his sin was worse than A&E's sin, but simply illustrates the fact that God is not obligated to redeem. God certainly could, in His sovereign good pleasure, provide redemption for fallen angels. He chooses not to. They have sinned. They deserve judgment. Same with humanity. Adam sinned. Adam deserved and received serious judgment. God took his sin absolutely, <em>deathly</em> seriously. In Adam, all died. But God in His grace provided redemption. Christ died for the ungodly. It doesn't say Christ died for the people who had kind of messed up and didn't really think through the consequences of their actions. They transgressed the law of God. You can't sugar coat Adam's sin, because God takes it absolutely seriously. Anyway, this is a side argument. An intramural argument, I guess we could say. I'm still waiting to hear TL's justification for his moral pronouncements of evil. Should be interesting. Maybe I'll do some blogging to answer his top ten from a more reformed perspective. The fact that Satan received no “second chance” is not an indication that his sin was worse than A&E’s sin, but simply illustrates the fact that God is not obligated to redeem. God certainly could, in His sovereign good pleasure, provide redemption for fallen angels. He chooses not to. They have sinned. They deserve judgment. Same with humanity. Adam sinned. Adam deserved and received serious judgment. God took his sin absolutely, deathly seriously. In Adam, all died. But God in His grace provided redemption. Christ died for the ungodly. It doesn’t say Christ died for the people who had kind of messed up and didn’t really think through the consequences of their actions. They transgressed the law of God. You can’t sugar coat Adam’s sin, because God takes it absolutely seriously.

Anyway, this is a side argument. An intramural argument, I guess we could say. I’m still waiting to hear TL’s justification for his moral pronouncements of evil. Should be interesting. Maybe I’ll do some blogging to answer his top ten from a more reformed perspective.

]]> By: EnnisP http://nowthinkaboutit.com/2009/12/the-blessing-of-original-sin/comment-page-1/#comment-2245 EnnisP Sat, 09 Jan 2010 04:51:08 +0000 http://nowthinkaboutit.com/?p=751#comment-2245 The use of the word "sin" is technically correct but the common use of the word compared to the actual meaning (missing the mark) is quite different. The word could apply to anything from careless mistakes to pure evil but the unqualified use of the word implies only evil intent. So qualifying it is the right thing to do: sin by rebellion, sin by stupidity, sin by carelessness and so on. Not every sin was treated the same. Satan sinned and was condemned. A & E sinned and got a second chance. Good point about TL remarks. The use of the word “sin” is technically correct but the common use of the word compared to the actual meaning (missing the mark) is quite different. The word could apply to anything from careless mistakes to pure evil but the unqualified use of the word implies only evil intent. So qualifying it is the right thing to do: sin by rebellion, sin by stupidity, sin by carelessness and so on. Not every sin was treated the same. Satan sinned and was condemned. A & E sinned and got a second chance.

Good point about TL remarks.

]]> By: Mark Gomez http://nowthinkaboutit.com/2009/12/the-blessing-of-original-sin/comment-page-1/#comment-2244 Mark Gomez Sat, 09 Jan 2010 04:22:32 +0000 http://nowthinkaboutit.com/?p=751#comment-2244 I have a hard time making excuses for Adam and Eve when God seemed to take their actions pretty seriously. Plunging all of creation into futility for a semi-innocent act of curiosity? Seems harsh. If I explained the rules of my house to my child and then he allowed his friend to talk him into disobeying me, I would consider it an act of rebellion and he would be responsible for his actions. Same with A&E. They tried to pass it off on the servant and God would have none of it. Perhaps instead of the term rebellion, we should just use the word "sin". That's what it was. That's what the Bible calls it several times. Adam sinned. And so death passed upon all men. On another note, I'm interested to see what TL means by "evil" or "wrong". I thought he was trying to make the case that man is the arbiter of his own morality and then he goes and calls someone's actions evil. By what standard is it evil? By his own conscience? Why should anyone care what he thinks is evil if we all make our own morality? I have a hard time making excuses for Adam and Eve when God seemed to take their actions pretty seriously. Plunging all of creation into futility for a semi-innocent act of curiosity? Seems harsh. If I explained the rules of my house to my child and then he allowed his friend to talk him into disobeying me, I would consider it an act of rebellion and he would be responsible for his actions. Same with A&E. They tried to pass it off on the servant and God would have none of it.
Perhaps instead of the term rebellion, we should just use the word “sin”. That’s what it was. That’s what the Bible calls it several times. Adam sinned. And so death passed upon all men.

On another note, I’m interested to see what TL means by “evil” or “wrong”. I thought he was trying to make the case that man is the arbiter of his own morality and then he goes and calls someone’s actions evil. By what standard is it evil? By his own conscience? Why should anyone care what he thinks is evil if we all make our own morality?

]]> By: EnnisP http://nowthinkaboutit.com/2009/12/the-blessing-of-original-sin/comment-page-1/#comment-2214 EnnisP Wed, 06 Jan 2010 05:59:57 +0000 http://nowthinkaboutit.com/?p=751#comment-2214 Hey Mark, Nice to hear from you. It's been a while. Hope you and fam are well. No worries about disagreeing. This is a friendly debate/discussion/exploration so chiming in with a different perspective is welcome. Your comment together with TL's perspective on the tree, however, has sparked a new thought. You refer to A & E as "rebelling" and TL refers to them as "deciding" what is right and wrong for themselves. Maybe we should see what they did as somewhere in the middle of those two. Rebellion implies premeditation and making a choice for yourself implies deliberation. These are very strong words and the way the story unfolds, even if legend, describes it more as an impulse. They were very much in the moment and they had outside influence anyway. We can't say they were completely unfettered by peer pressure or public opinion. A & E may have been curious about the tree before hand, especially E, but I doubt they had thought through all the issues sufficiently to commit to "rebellion" or "deliberate" choice, although she was vulnerable to misleading answers to the nagging questions they had entertained, even innocently, about things disallowed. You might check out TL's original remarks on his blog to get his perspective on the issue. Don't stay away. I am preparing a post now dealing with three more of TL's criticisms regarding slaves, rape and gays. It would be interesting to get your perspective. Hey Mark,
Nice to hear from you. It’s been a while. Hope you and fam are well.

No worries about disagreeing. This is a friendly debate/discussion/exploration so chiming in with a different perspective is welcome. Your comment together with TL’s perspective on the tree, however, has sparked a new thought.

You refer to A & E as “rebelling” and TL refers to them as “deciding” what is right and wrong for themselves. Maybe we should see what they did as somewhere in the middle of those two. Rebellion implies premeditation and making a choice for yourself implies deliberation. These are very strong words and the way the story unfolds, even if legend, describes it more as an impulse. They were very much in the moment and they had outside influence anyway. We can’t say they were completely unfettered by peer pressure or public opinion.

A & E may have been curious about the tree before hand, especially E, but I doubt they had thought through all the issues sufficiently to commit to “rebellion” or “deliberate” choice, although she was vulnerable to misleading answers to the nagging questions they had entertained, even innocently, about things disallowed.

You might check out TL’s original remarks on his blog to get his perspective on the issue.

Don’t stay away. I am preparing a post now dealing with three more of TL’s criticisms regarding slaves, rape and gays. It would be interesting to get your perspective.

]]>