Born This Way

[Jesse Dornfeld]

Still comes off as victim-blaming.

How? People know doing drugs can lead to bad outcomes. That is all that is necessary to know you shouldn't do it. The problem is that the person's desire overrides doing what they should or shouldn't do.

 

[RileyG]

People who are from families with alcoholism in their histories are going to be a lot more prone to succumbing to the condition; holding them to the same normal moral standard with regard to drink for “normal people” is wildly optimistic.

Yes. I understand alcoholism is much more complicated than "just being a choice." Thank you for your input.

 

[partinobodycular]

If Adam knew what his sin would lead to, he would not have sinned either.

I'm not convinced that this is true. In fact, having the benefit of hindsight there's still a very good chance that I'd make the exact same choice that Adam made... even knowing full well what the consequences would be. And I'd venture to guess that there's a good chance that you'd make the same choice as well.

I'm not sure that you realize what you'd be giving up. In my opinion, Adam made the right choice and I for one am glad that he did.

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

I'm not convinced that this is true. In fact, having the benefit of hindsight there's still a very good chance that I'd make the exact same choice that Adam made... even knowing full well what the consequences would be. And I'd venture to guess that there's a good chance that you'd make the same choice as well.

I'm not sure that you realize what you'd be giving up. In my opinion, Adam made the right choice and I for one am glad that he did.

You are correct that you would have done the same thing Adam did... possibly. This is debatable. Of course, the difference is that through Adam we all inherited a sin nature. We don't know if Adam and Eve were tempted multiple times before they caved in. We don't know if they were able to eat the Tree of Life before the forbidden tree. There are a lot of loose ends, but this doesn't matter for the significance of the theological point Moses was making in writing about it.

 

[Pommer]

You are correct that you would have done the same thing Adam did... possibly. This is debatable. Of course, the difference is that through Adam we all inherited a sin nature. We don't know if Adam and Eve were tempted multiple times before they caved in. We don't know if they were able to eat the Tree of Life before the forbidden tree. There are a lot of loose ends, but this doesn't matter for the significance of the theological point Moses was making in writing about it.

In Christianity “sin nature”=using free will.
Why’d God imbue us with it if it was verboten to employ?

 

[Estrid]

In Christianity “sin nature”=using free will.
Why’d God imbue us with it if it was verboten to employ?

A non Christian and student of English as a second
language I miss subtleties sometimes.

But I don't think I am mistaken in seeing
some sort of attempt at deep arcane meaning
being made with the odd grammar that pops up
in Christian talk.

Like " used of god" not " used by god" the way
anyonecelsecwould talk.

Orc" sin nature".

But to your point making both, then setting the rules
and human nature in opposition, with grave penalties
attached, is a bit weird.

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

In Christianity “sin nature”=using free will.

That is not my definition of free will.

 

[partinobodycular]

You are correct that you would have done the same thing Adam did... possibly.

But the only reason that I can sit here now and contemplate this question, is because of Adam. Without the knowledge of good and evil how would I be any different than all of God's other creatures? Blissfully incapable of sin, not because I selflessly choose the nobler path, but simply because I'm too ignorant to know the difference.

That's what Adam's choice gave me, a gift, and a curse. The gift of a deeper understanding of the world around me, and the curse that with that understanding comes the recognition of the cruelty that I inevitably inflict upon it. Innocence was lost and and for all of our lamentations we cannot get it back. We know the evil that we do, in spite of the fervency with which we yearn not to do it.

Adam's choice didn't make him a sinner, so much as it made him a man who knew that he was a sinner. That's his burden... not that he sins... but that he knows that he sins.

Perhaps like all of God's other creatures it would be better if I lived and died in ignorance, and perhaps if I had been in Adam's shoes that's how it would be today. But that's a choice that I was never given. My choice is different. My choice is to do the nobler thing when I can, and to ask forgiveness when I can't. Even if there's no one there to grant it.

Do I fault Adam for the choice he made? No. Was it worth the cost? Knowing that it's the only reason that I can sit here now and contemplate this question I must reluctantly say yes... reluctantly, because what I have gained has cost so many so much that it seems unfair of me to say that it was worth the cost, because the cost wasn't just mine.

Well, this response certainly took on a life of its own...sorry.

 

[BNR32FAN]

"We are born this way. Therefore, it cannot be wrong."
Have you heard that before? Does the logic follow?

"We are born this way. Therefore, nothing is wrong with us. It's perfectly normal."

Spoiler

Normal
Anophthalmia
Müllerian agenesis

Hence, this must be wrong.
Treatments - Cosmetic surgery
Treatment - Lab-grown vagina
_

Does that logic follow?

No that logic is ridiculous unless someone thinks it’s acceptable to act like an infant all their life.

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

But the only reason that I can sit here now and contemplate this question, is because of Adam. Without the knowledge of good and evil how would I be any different than all of God's other creatures? Blissfully incapable of sin, not because I selflessly choose the nobler path, but simply because I'm too ignorant to know the difference.

That's what Adam's choice gave me, a gift, and a curse. The gift of a deeper understanding of the world around me, and the curse that within that understanding comes the recognition of the cruelty that I inevitably inflict upon it. Innocence was lost and and for all of our lamentations we cannot get it back. We know the evil that we do, in spite of the fervency with which we yearn not to do it.

Adam's choice didn't make him a sinner, so much as it made him a man who knew that he was a sinner. That's his burden... not that he sins... but that he knows that he sins.

Perhaps like all of God's other creatures it would better if I lived and died in ignorance, and perhaps if I had been in Adam's shoes that's how it would be today. But that's a choice that I was never given. My choice is different. My choice is to do the nobler thing when I can, and to ask forgiveness when I can't. Even if there's no one there to grant it.

Do I fault Adam for the choice he made? No. Was it worth the cost? Knowing that it's the only reason that I can sit here now and contemplate this question I must reluctantly say yes... reluctantly, because what I have gained has cost so many so much that it seems unfair of me to say that it was worth the cost, because the cost wasn't just mine.

Well, this response certainly took on a life of its own...sorry.

Just one correction: Adam's choice didn't give you the ability to do the right thing. It made you susceptible to doing the wrong thing.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I agree. Adam and Eve were created to live. Not die.
However, since all mankind were born alien to God - Ephesians 4:18, because of being born in sin - Romans 5:12, we all are born with defects - Psalm 51:5, and we all die.
Do you think God created people with sin and defects?

The Bible says, God "made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth".
So, rather than God creating each and every one of us, we were made - that is, we came to exist, through the gift of procreation, which God created in Adam.
That's true, isn't it?

So, God did not create gays. Nor did God create disabled people. Nor sick people.
Jesus, demonstrated this, and even taught it, when he was on earth.
John 9:1-3; John 11:4

In both of Jesus’ statements there He specifically used the words “this man”, so those statements can’t be applied to everyone. Also nobody is born gay, babies are completely oblivious to sexual orientation and preference.

 

[Tinker Grey]

In both of Jesus’ statements there He specifically used the words “this man”, so those statements can’t be applied to everyone. Also nobody is born gay, babies are completely oblivious to sexual orientation and preference.

They are oblivious to religions, gods, demons, angels, santa clauses, heaven, and hell.

The cognitive state of a newborn is irrelevant.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I believe you meant, everyone sins - is born a sinner - regardless of what they are born with. I can agree with that. Psalms 51:5

That verse isn’t saying that David had sinned in the womb it says that his mother sinned during his conception.

“Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.”
‭‭Psalms‬ ‭51‬:‭5‬ ‭NASB1995

 

[BNR32FAN]

I don’t know if it’s logical. But that’s what gay people say. To them it follows, but to the Christian mind it’s not true. Maybe they studied logic. I didn’t. But Jesus said and did Gods will. I think these people just want to have sex. So now the gov, let’s marriage. But it’s still not right. You cannot have God and such a sin too. Because of what He said. Repentance is the way to God. If they want to be justified they are not going to get it from God without it and they can change. If I say I was born a fornicator, I had to change I had to repent to win Christ.

I was a fornicator too and I agree if I hadn’t repented and stopped I wouldn’t be saved. But if I say that about a homosexual person then all the sudden I’m accused of being hateful and intolerant when in reality I’m simply stating the word of God, the same word that applies to me and every other person out there.

 

[BNR32FAN]

But the only reason that I can sit here now and contemplate this question, is because of Adam. Without the knowledge of good and evil how would I be any different than all of God's other creatures? Blissfully incapable of sin, not because I selflessly choose the nobler path, but simply because I'm too ignorant to know the difference.

That's what Adam's choice gave me, a gift, and a curse. The gift of a deeper understanding of the world around me, and the curse that within that understanding comes the recognition of the cruelty that I inevitably inflict upon it. Innocence was lost and and for all of our lamentations we cannot get it back. We know the evil that we do, in spite of the fervency with which we yearn not to do it.

Adam's choice didn't make him a sinner, so much as it made him a man who knew that he was a sinner. That's his burden... not that he sins... but that he knows that he sins.

Perhaps like all of God's other creatures it would better if I lived and died in ignorance, and perhaps if I had been in Adam's shoes that's how it would be today. But that's a choice that I was never given. My choice is different. My choice is to do the nobler thing when I can, and to ask forgiveness when I can't. Even if there's no one there to grant it.

Do I fault Adam for the choice he made? No. Was it worth the cost? Knowing that it's the only reason that I can sit here now and contemplate this question I must reluctantly say yes... reluctantly, because what I have gained has cost so many so much that it seems unfair of me to say that it was worth the cost, because the cost wasn't just mine.

Well, this response certainly took on a life of its own...sorry.

Technically the angels fell before Adam did.

 

[partinobodycular]

Adam's choice didn't give you the ability to do the right thing. It made you susceptible to doing the wrong thing.

I respectfully disagree. But as this discussion is off topic, and I've said more than enough already... carry on as you were.

 

[Estrid]

But the only reason that I can sit here now and contemplate this question, is because of Adam. Without the knowledge of good and evil how would I be any different than all of God's other creatures? Blissfully incapable of sin, not because I selflessly choose the nobler path, but simply because I'm too ignorant to know the difference.

That's what Adam's choice gave me, a gift, and a curse. The gift of a deeper understanding of the world around me, and the curse that within that understanding comes the recognition of the cruelty that I inevitably inflict upon it. Innocence was lost and and for all of our lamentations we cannot get it back. We know the evil that we do, in spite of the fervency with which we yearn not to do it.

Adam's choice didn't make him a sinner, so much as it made him a man who knew that he was a sinner. That's his burden... not that he sins... but that he knows that he sins.

Perhaps like all of God's other creatures it would better if I lived and died in ignorance, and perhaps if I had been in Adam's shoes that's how it would be today. But that's a choice that I was never given. My choice is different. My choice is to do the nobler thing when I can, and to ask forgiveness when I can't. Even if there's no one there to grant it.

Do I fault Adam for the choice he made? No. Was it worth the cost? Knowing that it's the only reason that I can sit here now and contemplate this question I must reluctantly say yes... reluctantly, because what I have gained has cost so many so much that it seems unfair of me to say that it was worth the cost, because the cost wasn't just mine.

Well, this response certainly took on a life of its own...sorry.

Interesting take.
Worth reading again.

Of course i dont believe there was
an Adam, garden, or God but I'd agree
with everything else.

 

[Estrid]

I was a fornicator too and I agree if I hadn’t repented and stopped I wouldn’t be saved. But if I say that about a homosexual person then all the sudden I’m accused of being hateful and intolerant when in reality I’m simply stating the word of God, the same word that applies to me and every other person out there.

Not everyone is a Christian so it comes across
as being your chosen opinion about both God and
what his purported word really means.

Your opinion that it applies to all is rejected.
Same as I reject " Allah" saying I must conceal my
hair in public.

There's not a real clear or well observed line between
" hate what I do" and " hate me".
Especially for those who thunk "God" is with them
in hating what I do.

The " all of a sudden I'm accused of being
hateful" is redolent with " persecuted for being a good
Christian by those rotten hypocrites".

Of course those who are accused of said hypocrisy are your fellow Christians.

But when you aim your condemnation at me too.
well a bit of pushback is in order.

 

[partinobodycular]

i dont believe there was an Adam, garden

Neither do I, except as a metaphor for mankind and the life altering emergence of self-awareness, with all the social and psychological conflicts incumbent therewith. Christians invariably read the Old Testament as if it contains a set of God given rules and laws about how we should live, but I don't think that that's what the OT is about at all. I think that the OT is among other things, a history book, and that part of that history is the often unflattering portrayal of how humanity came to refine their newly found sense of morality.

No omnibenevolent God could ever condone the slaughter of innocent children, but in His name men could and did. That's what the OT is about. It's not a story about God. It's a story about us. We made those rules. We killed those children. That was us.

But that's not to leave the Christian with nothing, nor to judge them by those who came before them, for theirs is a greater law, to love thy neighbor as thyself. Therein lies morality.

The problem is that today's Christians often look back to a time when men were still more beast than benefactor and they naively think that those are the people and laws that we should emulate... but they're not. There's a phrase that Christian apologists often use... that "all of the bible was written for you, but not all of it was written to you." The morals and laws contained in the OT are there for us to learn from, not because they're the epitome of righteousness, but because often times they're not. They're part of the harsh reality of how humanity grew from a naive beginning in a metaphorical garden to a bunch of disparate tribes frantically trying not to destroy themselves.

The OT is not supposed to be the standard for morality. It's a history book. The purpose of which is to teach us that the only true standard of morality is... "love thy neighbor as thyself".

Sorry... another post that got away from me.

 

[Estrid]

Neither do I, except as a metaphor for mankind and the life altering emergence of self-awareness, with all the social and psychological conflicts incumbent therewith. Christians invariably read the Old Testament as if it contains a set of God given rules and laws about how we should live, but I don't think that that's what the OT is about at all. I think that the OT is among other things, a history book, and that part of that history is the often unflattering portrayal of how humanity came to refine their newly found sense of morality.

No omnibenevolent God could ever condone the slaughter of innocent children, but in His name men could and did. That's what the OT is about. It's not a story about God. It's a story about us. We made those rules. We killed those children. That was us.

But that's not to leave the Christian with nothing, nor to judge them by those who came before them, for theirs is a greater law, to love thy neighbor as thyself. Therein lies morality.

The problem is that today's Christians often look back to a time when men were still more beast than benefactor and they naively think that those are the people and laws that we should emulate... but they're not. There's a phrase that Christian apologists often use... that "all of the bible was written for you, but not all of it was written to you." The morals and laws contained in the OT are there for us to learn from, not because they're the epitome of righteousness, but because often times they're not. They're part of the harsh reality of how humanity grew from a naive beginning in a metaphorical garden to a bunch of disparate tribes frantically trying not to destroy themselves.

The OT is not supposed to be the standard for morality. It's a history book. The purpose of which is to teach us that the only true standard of morality is... "love thy neighbor as thyself".

Sorry... another post that got away from me.

No, you're good.

Ud not, despite what conclusion- jumpers want to think,
out to defame or destroy Christianity. Far from it.

But Christianity is far far from " perfect" or in any evident
way "God given".