Sins in general have tremendous consequences in the spiritual world, but even more so when a truly holy person sins. We take it for granted that G-d often spares us based on their merit. If they descend into sin, it could mean disastrous things for the rest of us.
The free will problem
- Thread starter ColoradoGuy
- Start date
- Status
Ruv Draba
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,114
- Reaction score
- 1,322
I'd agree, even from a material perspective. I think that the issue here isn't holiness (which for me is about taboo), but how trust shapes ethics.
Some people hold to ethics because it's moral to do so. Others hold to ethics because they try and emulate others. Yet others do so for fear of being caught by the ones who find it important.
The people whom we trust most anchor us, and we anchor others. If we hold a position of trust then spiritually we are in service to those who trust us -- I see no ethical choice about that. It's not enough that we do our job well, we need to do our job good.It's an adage that the ethical health of a group can never exceed that of its leaders. I've consulted to dozens of organisations and seen first-hand that this is true. I've done some work with a federal law enforcement agency (our equivalent of the FBI), for example and seen their Deputy Director-equivalent almost worshipped. Lots of people willingly lie to their boss, but I never met a federal agent who'd even consider lying to this guy. They believed in the standards he set because he held himself to those standards. They never doubted that he expected and demanded their best behaviour as human beings and that he set that example every day.
Sadly, I've seen the reverse occur too. When we believe that the boss is out for himself at the cost of everyone else, we play a very different game -- the 'look after number 1' game. That affects how we treat others.
When the people whom we respect betray us, we doubt ourselves, set a lower bar. Perhaps worse, when they betray themselves we start to think that self-betrayal is ordinary, inevitable. I think that we look to our leaders to remind us every day that it's not.
A very senior public servant once said that leadership can't be taught, only learned. I certainly feel that the ethics of leadership are built by practice far more than instruction.
I don't personally believe that one needs to fear a god to hold good in our hearts. One simply needs to understand the profound and prolonged consequences of not doing so.
I haven't read most of the posts before me in this thread (there's six pages of them, give me a break), so I hope I'm not just repeating things that were said earlier.
As far as free will goes, I don't think that pre-determinism really affects it at all as long as people aren't told of what is going to happen. Calvinists say that from before each person is born, God already knows whether they will go to heaven or to hell. If people actually knew whether they would or not, this would affect things, but they don't know. All they know is that God knows. So for those who just assume that it was pre-determined that they would go to heaven and therefore don't try to be a good person, it was probably already known that they would think this way and act accordingly. Therefore, it's likely that these people were pre-determined to go to hell. From the other perspective, if someone acted well their whole life, despite the fact that they "knew" they were going to go to heaven, it was probably know that they would act this way too, and it was pre-determined to go to heaven. It only gets messy if somebody on Earth knows who is and isn't going to hell (unless this knowledge is ever-changing based on the effect of telling people about their fate).
But what makes this more interesting to me is if we assume that God isn't omnipotent. What's always made little sense to many people is why God is said to only create good, and only advocate good, and yet he doesn't get rid of all evil on the Earth. (This is interesting to me as an atheist because Christianity and Islam are the only two religions that have these notions of absolute evil. But obviously, the idea is very popular, as these two religions are the most popular ever made.)
But assuming that there is a conflict in the fact that God did not abolish evil, contemplate this: Suppose that you are God. You have existed from the beginning of the universe, know everything that's ever happened and everything that ever will happen, but cannot directly affect the world. One day, you find that you have a spontaneous connection with someone on Earth, let's call him Joshua Christ. What would you say? I mean, if God did exist, and he was going to put one person in charge of transforming the world according to what was best for humanity, the only reason of why he would do this that seems likely to me is because he didn't have the power to go down there and do it himself.
If I've offended anyone with this, just ignore me and I'm sorry. I know that religion can be a very touchy subject.
-giusti
As far as free will goes, I don't think that pre-determinism really affects it at all as long as people aren't told of what is going to happen. Calvinists say that from before each person is born, God already knows whether they will go to heaven or to hell. If people actually knew whether they would or not, this would affect things, but they don't know. All they know is that God knows. So for those who just assume that it was pre-determined that they would go to heaven and therefore don't try to be a good person, it was probably already known that they would think this way and act accordingly. Therefore, it's likely that these people were pre-determined to go to hell. From the other perspective, if someone acted well their whole life, despite the fact that they "knew" they were going to go to heaven, it was probably know that they would act this way too, and it was pre-determined to go to heaven. It only gets messy if somebody on Earth knows who is and isn't going to hell (unless this knowledge is ever-changing based on the effect of telling people about their fate).
But what makes this more interesting to me is if we assume that God isn't omnipotent. What's always made little sense to many people is why God is said to only create good, and only advocate good, and yet he doesn't get rid of all evil on the Earth. (This is interesting to me as an atheist because Christianity and Islam are the only two religions that have these notions of absolute evil. But obviously, the idea is very popular, as these two religions are the most popular ever made.)
But assuming that there is a conflict in the fact that God did not abolish evil, contemplate this: Suppose that you are God. You have existed from the beginning of the universe, know everything that's ever happened and everything that ever will happen, but cannot directly affect the world. One day, you find that you have a spontaneous connection with someone on Earth, let's call him Joshua Christ. What would you say? I mean, if God did exist, and he was going to put one person in charge of transforming the world according to what was best for humanity, the only reason of why he would do this that seems likely to me is because he didn't have the power to go down there and do it himself.
If I've offended anyone with this, just ignore me and I'm sorry. I know that religion can be a very touchy subject.
-giusti
That's only if you accept that A) the god in the New Testament (who never actually refers to himself as G-d by the way) is the same as the G-d in the Jewish Bible, B) that the Satan was actually cast down into some sort of "Hell", and C) that "Hell" exists.
Additionally, accepting B) means you accept that G-d is not perfect and is subject to both error and temptation, which is blasphemy and completely goes against the concept of a Perfect G-d.
As far as I know, there is no mention whatsoever in the NT of the type of Hell and Satan that Chr-stians currently believe in, but please correct me if I'm wrong. In fact, J-sus was Jewish, so his knowledge of Satan and Gehenna would match the Jewish belief at that time, which is the same as it is today. If I recall correctly, Satan even attempts to tempt J-sus at one point. This is not far off the Jewish belief, and it has no contradiction whatsoever to Satan's position as an angel of G-d exercising His will alone.
Break given.
A good example is one I have heard and used many times. You have the ability to travel into the future. You see that tomorrow your friend will try to decide between a red shirt and a blue shirt; he thinks about it, but eventually chooses the red shirt. You travel back to the present and let the day play out. The next morning, you know he is going to wear the red shirt, but it doesn't make it any less of a choice for him.
G-d knows what we are going to do, but that doesn't mean we didn't choose. It simply means He knows the storyline before it unfolds for us. Remember, G-d existed before time, and He exists outside it. The same rules don't apply to Him.
I won't address the Heaven and Hell thing, because depending on your beliefs, it either makes sense or not. I'll just say that in Judaism, everyone goes to Heaven, but everyone goes through a cleansing first in Gehenna, which is often equated to the Hell of other religions. That's not necessarily true though.
G-d told us very clearly through the prophet Isaiah that He created both good and evil. Why some other religions choose to ignore that is beyond me.
You've now completely left the bounds of Judaism and the concept of G-d in general. That's a completely hypothetical situation that really has no basis in reality. I'm not really even sure of your point here.
If you get offended easily, this room is not for you.
- Status