Original sin

[JimL]

We do not believe men are completely evil, but we have an inherent bent towards wrongdoing. Have you ever raised kids? You don't have to teach a 3 year old to lie or a 4 year old to thump his little sister. You have to train them, really train them, to be good.

You're assuming that morality, i.e. that what is good and what is bad, are objective realities again seer. Besides that, if god decides what is good and what is bad, then there is nothing inherently good or bad about anything. Answer this. Is that which is good inherently good, or is it good simply because god says so?

[JimL]

"Able to fall" is not the same is "unavoidably destined to fall."

Right, and Adam and Eve, lets assume for the sake of argument they existed, were no less human than are we. We didn't inherit their so called fallen nature, we inherited their human nature and we would have inherited the same whether they disobeyed god or not.

[Cow Poke]

It would seem that Paul was full of malarkey...

Now you're our resident subject matter expert on malarkey?

[Teallaura]

It would seem that Paul was full of malarkey. There is no such thing as "the sin" which lives in you. When you do that which you know to be wrong, it is you who do it.

Why? You know its wrong and are trying to be a good person - so why do you do it anyway?

If Man is basically good, this should not happen - but does. If not, Paul's a smart cookie.

[Teallaura]

Right, and Adam and Eve, lets assume for the sake of argument they existed, were no less human than are we. We didn't inherit their so called fallen nature, we inherited their human nature and we would have inherited the same whether they disobeyed god or not.

And what makes you think the two things aren't the same?

[Tassman]

Why? You know its wrong and are trying to be a good person - so why do you do it anyway?

Because we are programmed by our genes and environmental pressures to think and behave in such a way that our species survives as cooperative intelligent social animals.

[seer]

You're assuming that morality, i.e. that what is good and what is bad, are objective realities again seer. Besides that, if god decides what is good and what is bad, then there is nothing inherently good or bad about anything. Answer this. Is that which is good inherently good, or is it good simply because god says so?

So you don't think murder, or rape, or lying are objective wrongs? And I'm not sure what you mean about God - if man decides what is good or bad then nothing is inherently good or bad. It is only good because man says so.

[seer]

They are separate realities in the Baha'i writings, and I provided references describing this.

You persist in being an absolute litralist, not only with the Bible, but the Baha'i Faith and other religions when it suits you to justify your agenda. I cited Baha'i writings that openly contradict your biased assertions, but you choose to ignore them. Based on the citations. The Baha'i writings describe both a cyclic spiritual evolution in Revelation, but also an evolving physical evolution, in particular specifically of the evolution of humanity from the animal kingdom.

the Baha'i writings do not date the physical prehistory of the evolution of humanity, but based on the citations I provided that describe human evolution in the animal kingdom it relies on science for th knowledge of the physical history and time frame of our existence and the evolution of life and humanity, because of the belief in the Harmony of Science and Religion.

Shuny, what the hell are you talking about? Your religion teaches that all humans today are the direct offspring of Adam. Your quotes do not contradict that, they don't even speak of Adam. If they do contradict my quotes then there is serious contradiction in your religion.

[JimL]

Why? You know its wrong and are trying to be a good person - so why do you do it anyway?

No, nothing is objectively good or bad in and of itself. A thing is either good or bad based upon reason with regards to the best interests of the community as a whole.

If Man is basically good, this should not happen - but does. If not, Paul's a smart cookie.

Who said man is basically good? Man is neither good or bad, it is what he/she does with respect to society that is defined by us as either good or bad.

[seer]

Man is neither good or bad, it is what he/she does with respect to society that is defined by us as either good or bad.

Who says?

[JimL]

So you don't think murder, or rape, or lying are objective wrongs?

Objective in the sense of objectively existing laws, no. Objective in the sense that 'being wrong" they serve the best interests of human society of which we are all members, yes.

And I'm not sure what you mean about God - if man decides what is good or bad then nothing is inherently good or bad. It is only good because man says so.

Right, nothing is inherently good or bad apart from their effects upon human society.

[JimL]

Who says?

I just did, the same way you said man is inherently bad.

[seer]

I just did, the same way you said man is inherently bad.

I said man has an inherent nature to do bad (and good BTW) - no one would disagree with this.

[Adrift]

Shuny stop being deceitful, I did not say that humans (in some form) did not exist before Adam, but that all humans alive today are descendants of ONE MAN ADAM.

Again: The important thing is to realize that all are human, all are one progeny of Adam. Inasmuch as they are all one family, why should they be separated

There is no living man on earth whose blood line (progeny) does no go back to Adam.

Pretty sure he's wrong anyways. Abdu’l-Bahá had pretty strong views on evolution.

"We have now come to the question of the modification of species and of organic development—that is to say, to the point of inquiring whether man’s descent is from the animal.
This theory has found credence in the minds of some European philosophers, and it is now very difficult to make its falseness understood, but in the future it will become evident and clear, and the European philosophers will themselves realize its untruth. For, verily, it is an evident error."

[seer]

Pretty sure he's wrong anyways. Abdu’l-Bahá had pretty strong views on evolution.

"We have now come to the question of the modification of species and of organic development—that is to say, to the point of inquiring whether man’s descent is from the animal.
This theory has found credence in the minds of some European philosophers, and it is now very difficult to make its falseness understood, but in the future it will become evident and clear, and the European philosophers will themselves realize its untruth. For, verily, it is an evident error."

So they don't believe in evolution!