Sin Champion

[Gabe]

Many people struggle with understanding how Christ could really understand the power of sin, and often forget that He was tempted (while on earth in human flesh) as we were.

See Hebrews 4:15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%204:15&version=31)

What helped me understand this quite a bit three years ago was a discussion I had with a few fellow employees. One of them pointed out that sin is much like an Olympic weight lifting match. As a participant (one who is tempted - both us and Christ), we both approach the platform. It's our turn first. We lift the weight (without too much practice) and can't get too close to raising it above our heads. The weight that we are lifting is something we do not have much understanding of, simply because we haven't overcome it entirely. We understand some things about it, and have practiced quite a bit.........and lifting the bar (defeating the obstacle) higher each time hopefully.

Christ has been on the stage, and as in the verse above clearly states, was tempted (lifted the weight of sin) just as we are. Many think he couldn't understand the sin and struggles we go through because He never failed. A true understanding of something (just ask an Olympic gold medalist) is to overcome something and know what it takes to defeat it. It's a daily struggle, and the honest truth is that since Adam we have been born with a sin nature (human race was cursed at the time of sin then)......so completely overcoming it and wanting some sympathy for all we've gone through is a little far-fetched I think. Make sense?

[JDBLACK]

This is a very imaginative story, but is also a good example of the manufacturing of information Christians like to do to justify their beliefs.  There's simply no evidence or rational reason to accept what you are saying.  It makes for intertaining figurative stories, but nothing more.  In your story, "sin" is equivolent to temptation to do bad or selfish things, I suppose.  In reality, this is a purely natural thing for any human to experience.  Interestingly, we are compelled from evolutionary traits to do both selfish and selfless things to survive.  And in fact, some of those selfish things are very good for both us as individuals and society as a whole.  It is up to each individual to strike a balance between the two and this can be accomplished with our without religion.

[JDBLACK]

BTW, I'm curious to hear from other members on something.  I know my answer to this question, and many others, is to reject the christian assumptions and assert that there is a natural answer to how this (insert topic) works.  I try to do this in a respectful way (most of the time) and I try to hit as many points with objective evidence to back up my assertions, if I can find any.  Does anyone find this approach to be inappropriate or combative?  I'm just curious because I get a lot of nonsense responses on many of my own questions regarding science and the natural origins of man, so I just want to avoid doing the same thing to others.  I want to at the very least respond with an intelligent and thoughtful comment that addresses the other's post.

[Heather]

It is up to each individual to strike a balance between the two and this can be accomplished with our without religion.

religion I can live or do without. God I can not.

[Stephen Taylor]

Does anyone find this approach to be inappropriate or combative?

Er ... maybe, JD.  Just remember that this is obstensibly a Christian forum, set up by Christian folk to allow discussion of where "technology meets eternity".  My understanding is that it's to help subscribers to the Godsmac podcast with discussing issues pertaining to technology (Apple Mac specifically, and Apple generally) as well as issues pertaining to their faith in God and where their faith can be enhanced.  Whereas many of your lines of discussion are opposed to (at least) the intended 'flavour' to the forum (Gabe / Lee, correct me if I'm wrong on that score).  I think it's OK to challenge our theology in order that our theology can be refined, however your posts are generally anti-God and pro-atheism, and frequently antagonistic.  So sometimes you will get some of that antagosnism back at you. 

At best your posts help Christians develop a response to statements they consider negative to their faith, so that's a good thing.  Fortunately there's nothing in your topics that is that effective in persuading people towards atheism, as the topics you've initiated allow for considerable overlap (eg. genetic evidence for evolution is neither anti-God nor pro-atheism in itself, even though much of the discussion is.  The existence of theistic evolution, whether an individual believes in it or not, shows there is broader scope for co-existence of theories), or people don't find them particularly relevant to their faith (their choice of course).  The discussions are vigorous (in both directions), but alas we must soon concede positions are very entrenched.

Also, there's not a lot of terribly new discussion that's not covered by other websites - these are old topics, and not a lot of new facts are coming forward.  But as I said above, it helps people with how to respond if they haven't seen these other forums.

But Godsmac is a public forum, so readers should expect a variety of views, opinions and facts.

[Stephen Taylor]

BTW Gabe, I found your story to be a good allegory to demonstrate sin and temptation.  There are many posts now on Godsmac that are just as allegorical to demonstrate a point.  Maybe we should pull these apart also?   

I agree with JD about sin and temptation "is a purely natural thing for any human to experience".  That's the point of original sin and the fall of man (ie. the Adam and Eve account), and something everyone has to struggle with. And possibly / probably man's existence in the natural world draws us to be selfish and drawn to self-preservation.  It's what we do with it that counts.

[JDBLACK]

Stephen, I'm glad you see my point on selfishness being natural, but what about the fact that some degree of selfhisness is actually a good thing for humanity and society?

[Stephen Taylor]

Stephen, I'm glad you see my point on selfishness being natural, but what about the fact that some degree of selfhisness is actually a good thing for humanity and society?

I think that might be right, but not a general thing.  I think it depends on one's general methods and sense of social justice.  It's not immoral to make lots and lots of money - it's how you do it (eg. ethically) and what you do with it (eg. helping others through employment, donation or social welfare) that counts.  Money for money's sake, for instance, is not a good goal, and society generally pillories people who do that.  We might envy the very wealthy, but we're also very critical of how much they've accumulated and what they do with it.  But it is good to hear when one of the rich gives it away to the needy (eg. Bill Gates foundation).

I think we have have a survival instinct, but depending on one's personal values and self-esteem, this might be outworked in either postive or negative ways. If the survival instinct is weak, and self-esteem is low, then suicide becomes a viable option for many.  I hope that makes sense.

[JDBLACK]

Well, you just went overboard.  You didn't need to go that far.  Selfishness is the driver for capitalism and even democracy, and those are certainly not altogether bad.  There should be a balance to everything, any rational person should understand that.  No one needs religion to understand that.  So, selfishness does have its pluses.  Selflessness does not necessarily make the world go round.  It's good to have, but not the whole pizza pie.

later...

[Gabe]

The issue of selfishness (having its pluses - but only for yourself) directly contradicts what the Bible teaches us with doing nothing out of selfishness or vain conceit. You can believe selfishness is alright, but not if you place your faith in Christ and follow in His example. Here's the verse to provide some basis for this discussion. It seems to me that as parents we strive for our kids to be kind and unselfishness (respecting others), but somehow we think when we reach adulthood that goal is torn down and we're free to do as we please.

Philippians 2:3
Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=57&chapter=2&verse=3&version=31&context=verse

[Stephen Taylor]

Well, you just went overboard.  You didn't need to go that far.  Selfishness is the driver for capitalism and even democracy, and those are certainly not altogether bad.  There should be a balance to everything, any rational person should understand that.  No one needs religion to understand that.  So, selfishness does have its pluses.  Selflessness does not necessarily make the world go round.  It's good to have, but not the whole pizza pie.

Where did I go overboard?  Selfishness is a driver for a lot of things, capitalism, socialsim, communism, nazism, fascsim ... a whole lot of isms ...  I'm just saying the value of selfishness should be judged by what it achieves.  Which is what, I think, you are saying.   But the world could do with a whole lot more selflessness.  Which is what Gabe is saying.

[JDBLACK]

Where did I go overboard?  Selfishness is a driver for a lot of things, capitalism, socialsim, communism, nazism, fascsim ... a whole lot of isms ...  I'm just saying the value of selfishness should be judged by what it achieves.  Which is what, I think, you are saying.   But the world could do with a whole lot more selflessness.  Which is what Gabe is saying.

No, selfishness is not the driver for socialism or communism.  Those two philosophies are based on communal ownership, not individual ownership, of property.  Nazism/fascism is something altogether different, more akin to meglamania.  And I agree that selfishness must be judged by its actions & results.  But this is not what Gabe is arguing, not by a long shot.  Here's his latest post to prove my point:

The issue of selfishness (having its pluses - but only for yourself) directly contradicts what the Bible teaches us with doing nothing out of selfishness or vain conceit. You can believe selfishness is alright, but not if you place your faith in Christ and follow in His example.... It seems to me that as parents we strive for our kids to be kind and unselfishness (respecting others), but somehow we think when we reach adulthood that goal is torn down and we're free to do as we please.

Emphasis added by me and that was abreviated as well.  But I think it's clear that here, Gabe is defining "selfishness" as a bad thing that is not supported by Christianity and should not be practiced by Christians.  Yet, there is clear evidence that this approach is flawed.  Capitalism is the epitomy of selfishness, democracy is rooted in it as well, not to mention many other modern traditions and cultural norms.  If we practiced complete selflessness, our world would look quite different.  I'm not saying it would be altogether bad, just different.  And I don't view our world as completely bad now.  So, I still think that a balance to selflessness and selfishness is appropriate in the world we live in.  To completely do away with one is not really possible, I don't think.  Certainly, in the society we now live in (USA, anyway), ignoring your own needs is a very dangerous path to take.  It's possible you might survive, but its also very likely you could end up in an early grave.  You have to look after yourself.  It is your own responsibility.

[Gabe]

I think we're confusion selfishness with being independent here? It's one thing to be able to do something or do it a certain way because you can, and another to go about it not only because you can, but only for your own good. Doing things solely for your benefit is the issue that God's Word has with the world. It's a little obvious (hollywood, wealth, etc.) what happens when you do everything for your own benefit these days. People who live life this way get to a wall and then either go insane or missing in action. Hello Paris Hilton?

[JDBLACK]

I think we're confusion selfishness with being independent here? It's one thing to be able to do something or do it a certain way because you can, and another to go about it not only because you can, but only for your own good. Doing things solely for your benefit is the issue that God's Word has with the world. It's a little obvious (hollywood, wealth, etc.) what happens when you do everything for your own benefit these days. People who live life this way get to a wall and then either go insane or missing in action. Hello Paris Hilton?

I don't think the equation is nearly that simple.  You are using exaggerated examples.  Sure, Paris Hilton is living an out of control lifestyle.  But then again, she may have donated millions of $$ to charities.  Living a risky lifestyle has little to do with selfishness in general.

But persuit of wealth is a selfish act.  It is an act that millions of people around the globe have done for ages.  Within the confines of capitalism and democracy, it is not only a healthy thing for people to do, but good for society as well.  For a wealthy entrepreneur to become more wealthy, many others will benefit as well.  The entrepreneur could have chosen to merely sit on his weath instead of risk it in new industries.  So, what is better, to hold it or to risk increasing it and helping others along the way?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending selfishness as a philosophy here.  I'm promoting the idea of balance.  Evolutionary theory suggests that we thrived as a specie at least partly because we adapted to tribal living, which suggests that, while we are driven to self-preservation, we are also dependent upon communal living.  Had homonids never adapted to tribal living, we might not be here to talk about it.

[Gabe]

Balance doesn't really work out so well when the only negative side of the equation is selfishness. The chances of unselfishness doing harm to an individual or the world far outweigh those of unselfishness. That shouldn't need to be explained.