Original Sin?

Quote: FrGamble

What?!? Can you give an example of this?

I explained it in the original reply.

Quote:

The biggest problem with this analogy however is that the knowledge of what is morally good or bad is already given to us, it is ingrained in us.

No, it isn't. perhaps we're not born exactly tabula rasa, but we're pretty close to that. Children are little, near-powerless barbarians who must be raised and educated to become civilized beings. Some aspects of ethics seem self-evident because we can deduce them quickly and easily, because we have empathy and can relate to other people.

But we don't know from birth that murder is wrong any more than we know from birth who wrote "Yesterday" or that f=ma.

I think we do know murder is wrong from birth. As the old saying goes you have to be taught to hate. However, we also come quickly to know that we are incredibly free and independent. Both this ingrained morality and radical freedom are given to us by God. The key is to use our freedom to do the good and not to abuse it to do whatever we want. This is where being raised and educated to become civilized comes into play.

Quote: FrGamble

human beings do not always do what they know or feel is right. This is sin.

From the Oxford dictionary: 'Sin. An immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.'

I can find no definition that says it's going
against your 'feelings'. Sin is defined as an
insult to god. If you don't don't believe in
god, you certainly don't believe it's possible
to insult him. That would be the ultimate in
narcissism, to think you're so important you
could actually insult a god. But then, religion
is all about me me me, isn't it.

Quote:

Look at the disgusting bobbles you collect and the other ways in which whites had to constantly try to degrade and dehumanize black people.

I don't collect them, I don't collect anything. I bought
them to sell at antique shows to Black customers. They
love stuff like that.

Were you purposely not also giving definition 1.1 from the Oxford Dictionary that says, "An act regarded as a serious or regrettable fault, offense, or omission:"

Since this definition does not reference God will you agree that this definition of sin exists.

Quote: FrGamble

Were you purposely not also giving definition 1.1 from the Oxford Dictionary that says, "An act regarded as a serious or regrettable fault, offense, or omission:"
.

So it's not an offense against god, then? It's
just a 'regrettable offense'? If that's sin, Jesus
died on the cross for our 'regrettable offenses'.
Really? Is that the story you're going with?

If that's all sin is, who cares, it's no big deal. You
aren't offending god, you just made a boo boo,
as my 3 year old granddaughter says. They started
a whole religion over this? Ridiculous.

Quote: Dalex64

So, if people's perception of what is moral has changed,

just like people's perception of the shape of the world has changed,

but what is actually moral has not changed,

just like the actual shape of the earth has not changed,

how do we know we now have it right?

The earth was thought to be flat. Then spherical. Then more egg-shaped. But really, it is basically round but more lumpy.

How do we know we now understand the true unchanged morality?

it sounds a lot like the revelation of god and stuff, where everyone before had it wrong, but as things were revealed to us, well, we've got it right this time. don't we?

Thank you. Because much of this makes sense separately, but cannot make sense as a whole.

You can say slavery is never right. I'd agree, which kind of throws our entire government and its tax system into question, but let's not muddy the waters. All those slavers, those Christian slavers, must have been committing mortal sin. They would have no idea they were, because slavery was neither illegal nor immoral back in the day. So they pray and tithe and confess and... go to Heaven? Of course they did. All one must do is confess and repent and recognize the one true God and you're in. But how did they repent of this serious sin when it wasn't even looked at as a faux pas back then?

Are they in Heaven? They were staunch Christians, did all the rituals, gave their life for the church. If they are in Heaven, then morality must shift to allow them to do so. Or are they in Hell? Because ignorance of the law is no excuse, and they were committing atrocities, and could have never repented because they had no idea. If this is the case, then morality is indeed some concrete force outside of us and there is absolutely no way possible to know if we have it right now.

Perhaps one day we will find that technology is a scourge, and so much time spent on devices has broken down our social structures and our humanity and made us coarse and callous. Perhaps in 2230AD a smart phone will be looked at the way we do tobacco and alcohol and asbestos and other things that we used daily without a clue. And here I am, condemning myself to Hell, all because my boy enjoys a spot of Angry Birds.

Quote: Face

And here I am, condemning myself to Hell, all because my boy enjoys a spot of Angry Birds.

I've said before, Christianity is a Parker Bros
board game that has constantly changing
rules. The game comes with instructions,
but every so often they print new ones
and we don't hold it against those who had
nothing but wrong old rules to go by. It's
insanity, but many feel compelled to play
anyway. Their loss..

I was going to use an example of eating animals as something that might be revealed as immoral.

Maybe killing dolphins or whales. Trophy hunting. Hunting things to extinction. Web surfing.

Quote: Dalex64

I was going to use an example of eating animals as something that might be revealed as immoral.

Already covered.

Quote: Deuteronomy 14

Do not eat any detestable thing. These are the animals you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat, the deer, the gazelle, the roe deer, the wild goat, the ibex, the antelope and the mountain sheep. You may eat any animal that has a divided hoof and that chews the cud. However, of those that chew the cud or that have a divided hoof you may not eat the camel, the rabbit or the hyrax. Although they chew the cud, they do not have a divided hoof; they are ceremonially unclean for you. The pig is also unclean; although it has a divided hoof, it does not chew the cud. You are not to eat their meat or touch their carcasses.

Of all the creatures living in the water, you may eat any that has fins and scales. But anything that does not have fins and scales you may not eat; for you it is unclean.

You may eat any clean bird. But these you may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, the red kite, the black kite, any kind of falcon, any kind of raven, the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the great owl, the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, the cormorant, the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

All flying insects are unclean to you; do not eat them. But any winged creature that is clean you may eat.

Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to the foreigner residing in any of your towns, and they may eat it, or you may sell it to any other foreigner. But you are a people holy to the Lord your God.

Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.

Quote:

All flying insects are unclean to you; do not eat them. But any winged creature that is clean you may eat.

Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to the foreigner residing in any of your towns, and they may eat it, or you may sell it to any other foreigner. But you are a people holy to the Lord your God.

Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.

I had forgotten that, or hadn't heard that part before.

Not exactly "do unto others" is it.

Roadkill for the weary traveller.