Secular Nativity

[Gordon]

You can be morally perfect. That is how you begin/ were created/are. But you can also choose to remain in that state or choose to leave / lose that state.

That’s straightforward.

Nope - you are arguing that a morally perfect human can subsequently choose to act immorally, which would undermine their alleged moral perfection.

[Maeght]

Everyone inherits there moral environment going right back to the earliest moral humans.
We find though that door that Adam shut. The door to communion with God is still open. Thanks to Jesus. That some people don’t take it and yet others do is not evidence that it is Adam’s sin that causes rejection of God or that we will be judged only on Adam’s sin.

We know there is then an environment of alienation from God and moral imperfection. Could there be genetic or memetic inheritance too who knows

Don't understand a word of that!

[jeremyp]

Everyone inherits there moral environment going right back to the earliest moral humans.
We find though that door that Adam shut.

Adam didn't shut it. God shut it.

Adam made the mistake. God then chose to punish him, blame all of us for what Adam did and set up this crazy scheme that ostensibly allows us to escape our punishment. Why doesn't he just forgive us, if that's what he wants?

[jeremyp]

You can be morally perfect. That is how you begin/ were created/are. But you can also choose to remain in that state or choose to leave / lose that state.

That’s straightforward.

You need to tell us what your definition of perfect is. Judging by your usage of the word in this context, your definition likes the same as the definition of "imperfect".

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You need to tell us what your definition of perfect is. Judging by your usage of the word in this context, your definition likes the same as the definition of "imperfect".

I don’t think I introduced the word perfect to bear on the idea of morality on this thread but in case I’m wrong and in any case moral perfection is that which is morally acceptable to God.

How are you defining ‘Perfection’?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Adam didn't shut it. God shut it.

Adam made the mistake. God then chose to punish him, blame all of us for what Adam did and set up this crazy scheme that ostensibly allows us to escape our punishment. Why doesn't he just forgive us, if that's what he wants?

Your definition of forgiveness here is indistinguishable from turning a blind eye. How then is justice served in your scheme of things?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Don't understand a word of that!

The argument distilled imo is that we are all doomed because of Adam’s rejection of God. My argument and the bible’s is that is only half the story.
We do inherit the consequences of Adam’s sin but we are not all doomed and All those living can be saved.

[Nearly Sane]

The argument distilled imo is that we are all doomed because of Adam’s rejection of God. My argument and the bible’s is that is only half the story.
We do inherit the consequences of Adam’s sin but we are not all doomed and All those living can be saved.

Did Adam exist?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Nope - you are arguing that a morally perfect human can subsequently choose to act immorally, which would undermine their alleged moral perfection.

Unless they chose to change their moral state they maintain their present state.
That’s straightforward.

Example. You are not a murderer if you do not entertain the thought or act on it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Did Adam exist?

Do You mean was there a first complete human capable of breaking his relationship with God or did several such beings appear simultaneously?

[Stranger]

Everyone inherits there moral environment going right back to the earliest moral humans.
We find though that door that Adam shut. The door to communion with God is still open. Thanks to Jesus. That some people don’t take it and yet others do is not evidence that it is Adam’s sin that causes rejection of God or that we will be judged only on Adam’s sin.

And it was your God that decided that we would inherit a 'sinful' nature because of what Adam and Eve did. That is unjust, petty, and vindictive. The absurdity of Jesus's substitute pretend blood sacrifice, has already been covered and is also unjust, a morally repugnant. And people who accept all the insane nonsense do not go back to a state of perfection and stop 'sinning', so it doesn't even work as advertised.

[Maeght]

The argument distilled imo is that we are all doomed because of Adam’s rejection of God. My argument and the bible’s is that is only half the story.
We do inherit the consequences of Adam’s sin but we are not all doomed and All those living can be saved.

Nice story to explain the human condition.

[Nearly Sane]

Do You mean was there a first complete human capable of breaking his relationship with God or did several such beings appear simultaneously?

Dunno, it's your story. You're talking about someone called Adam doing something. What do you mean by 'Adam'?

[Gordon]

Unless they chose to change their moral state they maintain their present state.
That’s straightforward.

Example. You are not a murderer if you do not entertain the thought or act on it.

But if a human is created to be mortally 'perfect' and then elects later to change their moral state to 'imperfection' does that not imply that they were never 'perfect' in the first place?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

But if a human is created to be mortally 'perfect' and then elects later to change their moral state to 'imperfection' does that not imply that they were never 'perfect' in the first place?

No, why should it?
If they chose to do it then it wasn't an imperative. Secondly they were not, initially and for a time, alienated from God meaning they were morally perfect.

[jeremyp]

Your definition of forgiveness here is indistinguishable from turning a blind eye. How then is justice served in your scheme of things?

How is justice served in your scheme of things in which, if you turn to Christ, you evade God's justice?.

[jeremyp]

Unless they chose to change their moral state they maintain their present state.
That’s straightforward.

Example. You are not a murderer if you do not entertain the thought or act on it.

A morally perfect being wouldn't murder somebody. If humans are morally perfect, how come so many of them commit murders?

[Nearly Sane]

No, why should it?
If they chose to do it then it wasn't an imperative. Secondly they were not, initially and for a time, alienated from God meaning they were morally perfect.

And then acted morally imperfectly which means they weren't ever morally perfect.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

How is justice served in your scheme of things in which, if you turn to Christ, you evade God's justice?.

You didn't answer my question Jeremy. How is justice served by just turning a blind eye to something?

In Jesus the cost of the transgression is born by Jesus. You or I cannot settle the costs and consequence so Jesus settles the account, Putting himself up sacrificially  as a human. His life for yours and taking the costs on himself as God.

Sin you see spoils and ruins the self and destroys the divine image. Christ takes these consequences on himself by exchanging his life for the sinner's thus restoring the person to what they were meant to be.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And then acted morally imperfectly which means they weren't ever morally perfect.

No, They were acceptable to God, we're in a relationship with God, loved God and then...then...decided on another course, another state. I'm sorry you are wrong.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

A morally perfect being wouldn't murder somebody. If humans are morally perfect, how come so many of them commit murders?

They would not be a murderer until they murdered someone.
You also have the problem of the existence of non murderers.

[Gordon]

They would not be a murderer until they murdered someone.
You also have the problem of the existence of non murderers.

Since most of us are non-murderers why is our existence a problem?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Since most of us are non-murderers why is our existence a problem?

Beg pardon?

[Nearly Sane]

No, They were acceptable to God, we're in a relationship with God, loved God and then...then...decided on another course, another state. I'm sorry you are wrong.

but if they are perfect, they remain perfect, that's what perfection is. You have no grasp of the logic of your claims.

[Gordon]

No, why should it?
If they chose to do it then it wasn't an imperative. Secondly they were not, initially and for a time, alienated from God meaning they were morally perfect.

That makes no sense whatsoever - surely though in order to move from a state of being 'perfect' to a state of being "alienated from God" (is this 'imperfection'?) they make a choice which is immoral, which is surely an indication that they were never 'perfect' in the first place.