Thread: Flowers for Algernon.

I loved that book. But what's it got to do with religion? It's not like they killed a petri dish full of cells and thereby destroyed their souls or anything.

In the garden of eden the reason Adam and eve got thrown out of paradise was for eating from the tree of KNOWLEDGE, which god told them not to do. This made the human race aware of it's capacity to do evil and accordingly we have been sinners from that point on. Plus there is all that, "god made you the way he wanted you and if he wanted you to be diffrent from what you are he would have made you that way" stuff.

Not really, you know.

I see no reason why we, as humans living in a sinful world, should not attempt to better ourselves. Understand that God made us just as he wished, yes, and that we were corrupted through sin. The mental capacity we have now is far less than what we should have. The physical capabilities we have now are a shadow of what we could once do. Death and deterioration are described as enemies throughout Scripture, they are not natural.

Adam and Eve were removed from Eden not because they sinned, but to prevent them from eating from the Tree of Life and thus living forever in a sinful condition.

Adam and Eve already had all they needed, mentally, physically, spiritually, sociologically, etc. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil did not make them all-knowing, but it exposed them to the converse of good, evil. They had rebelled against God, who by nature, and the nature given to us, is benevolent. Thus, they experienced the opposite end of the spectrum.

BUT BETTERING OURSELVES GOES AGAINST GOD'S WILL! WE WERE CREATED JUST AS GOD WANTED US TO BE! WE SHOULDN'T CHANGE THAT!

Please understand the difference between personal appearance and harmful defects. God made you, yes, he assigned to you certain personal attributes. I, for example, have blonde hair, am about 5' 7'', and my left nostril is larger than my right. These are personal attributes God has granted me.

I am also bowlegged and slightly knock-kneed with incredibly tight hamstrings that prevent me from running as others do. I have a severe hearing loss in both ears and have no depth perception due to being born premature with crossed eyes that were not corrected in time. These are abnormal attributes due to the corruptive influence of sin on my body.

One should not agonize over personal attributes, but neither should one hesitate to correct the abnormalities in order to better themselves. Again, consider that God made you, and then sin corrupted you. It is not wrong to fight against the enemies of God's intended order: sin, suffering, death.

Note that Jesus Christ performed many miracles when He was with us. He "preached the good news of the kingdom, and healed every disease and sickness among the people." We have accounts of Christ healing a woman who suffered from internal bleeding for many, many years. His healing of a paralytic who could not walk. His healing of a man born blind, and accounts of Him raising people from the dead. He even healed people on the Sabbath, a day when, according to the custom, was not permitted for work.

Christ provides a model for His followers, for "a student is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for the student to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master." And He provided a very clear example through his teachings and his deeds: provide for the poor and alleviate the suffering of others.

If a man is born blind, would you say that God intended for him to be that way? Of course not! Since death exists in our world, does God intend for that to be the natural way of things? Of course not! Such things are brought about by sin. They are not intended, clearly shown through the account of Creation and the example of Christ.

There is no reason for a Christian not to better himself, physically, mentally, psychologically, etc.

Silvanus -

You claim that there exists something called 'sin' as do many other Christians.

Can somebody please give a convincing (yet brief) argument as to what is sin and what constitutes it?

If we take Christians in America (or all over for that matter, Im in Australia and not essentially christian) and say, a tribe in the middle of africa, you may tend to notice that the idea of sin is very different.

Does God just choose whichever he wants to believe? Assuming of course God is actually a consciouss entity?

Help me out here guys, the Christian argument in general is starting to become too easy to criticise.

Originally Posted by Silvanus350

I, for example, have blonde hair, am about 5' 7'', and my left nostril is larger than my right. These are personal attributes God has granted me.

If that doesn't make you doubt the existence of god, I don't know what would.

Originally Posted by Silvanus350

I am also bowlegged and slightly knock-kneed with incredibly tight hamstrings that prevent me from running as others do. I have a severe hearing loss in both ears and have no depth perception due to being born premature with crossed eyes that were not corrected in time. These are abnormal attributes due to the corruptive influence of sin on my body.

You must have sinned a lot as a fetus, to deserve that kind of treament from god. But you got off easy; did you hear about that little girl in India, with eight arms and eight legs? I wonder what kind of horrible thing she must have done before she was born. Probably bit the head off her twin, so god stuck it's body onto hers as punishment, the sinner.

Originally Posted by Silvanus350

He even healed people on the Sabbath, a day when, according to the custom, was not permitted for work.

That naughty boy.

Originally Posted by Swank

Help me out here guys, the Christian argument in general is starting to become too easy to criticise.

I wonder why. Am I helping?

Sin is simply anything antithetical to God's nature. Since God is the creator, and He has "created us in His image," or imbued us with His nature, it pains Him when said creation acts in a way that contradicts said nature.

I am not sure how to present a "convincing" argument for sin, since you do not profess to be a Christian, there is no reason for you to acknowledge a Christian worldview.

Sin is not cultural, it is universal. There are no sins which apply to certain people, but not to others. Sin affects everyone, and everyone sins. If you study anthropology, you will note that a basic moral code permeates every culture. Mutilating and humiliating a dead body is universally offensive. Nobody likes it when you steal their stuff. Nobody likes it when you abuse them. Nobody wants to die.

Whether the tribe in Africa acknowledges this specifically as sin, or simply something bad, I cannot say. There are many tribes, after all, like yourself, which do not acknowledge the Christian God. Why, therefore, should they acknowledge the Christian notion of sin?

*Warning - aggressive post*

Originally Posted by Silvanus350

Sin is simply anything antithetical to God's nature. Since God is the creator, and He has "created us in His image," or imbued us with His nature, it pains Him when said creation acts in a way that contradicts said nature.

I'm sorry, I think we all missed the memo from God, actually stating what 'his nature' is. Ever asked him? no, didnt think so. And apparently it pains him when said his creation contradicts said nature. Im not sure how something can pain a presence. So I'll therefore assume now that God is an actually person. Judging by your male references Ill assume hes a bloke.

I am not sure how to present a "convincing" argument for sin, since you do not profess to be a Christian, there is no reason for you to acknowledge a Christian worldview.

It makes no difference what I believe in. Using your argument therefore, the only people sin applies to is Christians. In that case, the best solution for Christians is to not believe in Christianity. No sin, no problem, right?

But wait, then you wont go to heaven. Yeah, because heaven exists only for one religion. I dont think so.

Sin is not cultural, it is universal. There are no sins which apply to certain people, but not to others. Sin affects everyone, and everyone sins. If you study anthropology, you will note that a basic moral code permeates every culture. Mutilating and humiliating a dead body is universally offensive. Nobody likes it when you steal their stuff. Nobody likes it when you abuse them. Nobody wants to die.

Maybe so, but thats an attempt at preaching absolutism: and there is no absolute code. The absolute opposite of that is relativism. In relativism, there is no absolute truth, EVERYTHING is relative, even things like justice and freedom. In going down the relativist path, you cant give special consideration to things you believe is right, even if it is extremely right to you.

So therefore YOU WILL NOTE, that although you may think there is a basic moral code, there will always be grey areas that differ from society to society. So who decides you goes to heaven? does this male entity called God employ assistants to constantly update their list of sins? He would have to, seeing as in the 1950s wearing a bikini was probably a sin. Dont make me refer back to Christianity earlier in this late millenia, you should be getting my drift.

Whether the tribe in Africa acknowledges this specifically as sin, or simply something bad, I cannot say. There are many tribes, after all, like yourself, which do not acknowledge the Christian God. Why, therefore, should they acknowledge the Christian notion of sin?[/QUOTE]

Fair enough. But, this brings me back to the original notion of why be a Christian if you have to try really hard to get into some sort of happy place in the afterlife called 'heaven', or go to hell if you slip up.

Not to completely tear apart Christianity, but I dont even understand the premise of joining organised religion - step away for a minute or two and think to yourself, are what these people all telling me actually true, or should i use my own reason to decipher what is right and wrong?

/rant

I almost forgot. Moonbeam = yes you are, nice post

And this is why I do not post in R/S.

Originally Posted by Man of Steel

And this is why I do not post in R/S.

Hahaha, probably.

I'm sorry, I think we all missed the memo from God, actually stating what 'his nature' is.

Actually, if you read Scripture, it's perfectly clear what his nature is. The memo is the Bible.

Ever asked him? no, didnt think so.

When He tells you Himself, asking isn't really needed.

And apparently it pains him when said his creation contradicts said nature. Im not sure how something can pain a presence. So I'll therefore assume now that God is an actually person. Judging by your male references Ill assume hes a bloke.

Yes, He is. Again, Scripture.

It makes no difference what I believe in.

Actually, it does. I'm not about to speak English to someone who only knows French. I'm not about to use Scripture in a debate against an atheist. Frenchmen don't speak English or understand any of it, atheists don't acknowledge Scripture or any of its authority, why, therefore, should I use it?

Or, in your case, how am I to convince you when you can just point to the Bible and say "Sorry, I don't believe anything the Bible says. You're gonna have to use some other source?"

Using your argument therefore, the only people sin applies to is Christians.

Read what I posted again, that's not at all what I said. I've already stated before that sin applies to everyone. I simply said in this instance that I was confused by your desire for me to use Christian terms and concepts to convince a non-Christian. Typically, that's not how things go.

In that case, the best solution for Christians is to not believe in Christianity. No sin, no problem, right?

Truth is irrelevant of belief. Something is not true because people believe in it. People believe in it because it is true. Although there are exceptions, I am simply saying that there are absolute truths, and that sin is one of them. Denying the existence of gravity does not release you from its influence. Denying Christianity and its notion of sin does not release you from its influence.

But wait, then you wont go to heaven. Yeah, because heaven exists only for one religion. I dont think so.

Did I say that? I didn't say that. You're veering this discussion into an entirely different topic. Nevertheless, if we take your logic and deny Christianity, then the Christian notion of heaven does cease to exist.

Of course, if we use my notion of truth, then heaven will continue to exist whether you believe in it or not.

Maybe so, but thats an attempt at preaching absolutism: and there is no absolute code.

And thus we reach the actual difficulty of the issue. I acknowledge absolutes, I believe in absolute truth. Christianity itself is based upon absolute truths, it claims to be the absolute truth. You do not acknowledge that, however, ergo it was somewhat futile to explain my "absolute truth beliefs" to you without first addressing the very issue of absolutes themselves.

Do you see now why I was confused as to how I could "convince you" of the concept of sin?

The absolute opposite of that is relativism. In relativism, there is no absolute truth, EVERYTHING is relative, even things like justice and freedom. In going down the relativist path, you cant give special consideration to things you believe is right, even if it is extremely right to you.

And that is why Christianity does not acknowledge relativity in that sense. In Christianity there is an absolute arbiter, an absolute moral code, there are absolutes.

I am not attempting to give "special consideration" to my beliefs, any more than I give special consideration to my belief in gravity or inertia. I am trying to explain Christian concepts from a Christian worldview. And Christianity claims absolutism over everyone, whether they acknowledge it or not.

Christianity is a religion of absolutes, therefore, in order to understand Christian principles (like sin) you must understand the Christian worldview.

So therefore YOU WILL NOTE, that although you may think there is a basic moral code, there will always be grey areas that differ from society to society.

I know, not everyone has been exposed to Christianity, and yet God is perfectly capable of determining where people end up. The idea of law and salvation in Christianity (and thus, sin) is a multifaceted concept. There are very simple formulas one can use to determine whether something is sin. We do not use the relative laws of each culture. However, since that is a Christian concept, and a complicated one at that I did not go into the matter with you.

And since you do not see things from a Christian worldview, you cannot understand Christian concepts. So I saved myself some effort.

Fair enough. But, this brings me back to the original notion of why be a Christian if you have to try really hard to get into some sort of happy place in the afterlife called 'heaven', or go to hell if you slip up.

Christians do not enter heaven based upon their deeds. In fact, according to Christian teaching, that is impossible, because no one can match God's standards. And He knows that, and so He provided a means to paradise which does not adhere to the Law of the Old Testament. To enter heaven, you must simply "believe in the one He has sent," that is, Christ.

And "slipping up" does not mean you go to Hell. Everyone slips up, I slip up on a daily basis. But though I sin, my salvation is still assured because it was never based upon the concept of obeying law.

Not to completely tear apart Christianity, but I dont even understand the premise of joining organised religion - step away for a minute or two and think to yourself, are what these people all telling me actually true, or should i use my own reason to decipher what is right and wrong?

That is a totally valid, basic point. If a worldview cannot be verified by reality (if it is not logical) and if it has no relevance (it has to mean something important) then why believe it?

Christianity is no different. Even Christianity itself acknowledges those needs, a need for logic and reason. Many, many times the authors of the Bible stress testimony, Luke testifies to the truth, John testifies to the truth, Peter stresses to his audience that they know the things he speaks of for they witnessed the events for themselves. Objective fact is absolutely tantamount to Christianity, as Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 15:12-19. Read it if you like, it's pretty simple to understand. It stresses that if Christianity does not match reality, then Christianity is totally worthless.

If you meet any Christian who says to you "I don't need to prove the validity of my beliefs, they're just my beliefs!" Take that passage and beat him over the head with it.

And of course, that segues into the whole other topic of apologetics. Does Christianity hold up?

I think so. But this is not the topic for such discussion.

Originally Posted by Man of Steel

And this is why I do not post in R/S.

Would you care to elaborate on that contradictory statement?

Ceci n'est pas une pipe.

Im too tired to put any thought into my next response. All I can say is, we both have different thought modes and will just continue arguing based upon our individual thought processes.

I guess I can acknowledge that Christianity tries to create absolutes within its own belief system. As long as Christians at all times realise that that is all it is - one belief system amongst many, where no one system is absolutely correct.

I just cant understand why anyone would think God doesnt like them or hates them, or anyone can be born into sin. God loves us all, regardless of anything. We are born into perfection.

I think we should stop the discussion for now, I don't want to derail Lucid_Boy's topic any further.

Originally Posted by Silvanus350

I think we should stop the discussion for now, I don't want to derail Lucid_Boy's topic any further.

Why can't you just accept that The bible was written by men, to control men. And to be a book of law for the culture. By your logic, every religion in the world is wrong except Christianity. Why is that? Why can't the atheists be right? Why can't the Hindus be right?

This is not to say that i do in fact endorse those religions

You also claim that sin is universal, yet is clear that is changes with culture, and religion!

std::

Originally Posted by Silvanus350

I think we should stop the discussion for now, I don't want to derail Lucid_Boy's topic any further.

It would have been a much more interesting topic if we had just discussed the book, which really is an excellent story for those who haven't read it.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Ceci n'est pas une pipe.

Magritte!

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

It would have been a much more interesting topic if we had just discussed the book, which really is an excellent story for those who haven't read it.

The movie based on it is awesome too. It is called Charlie, and Cliff Robertson plays the lead role. Robertson is very good at playing Charlie as a retarded person and as a genius. (I assumed he was retarded. I haven't seen it since I was in the seventh grade.)

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The movie based on it is awesome too. It is called Charlie, and Cliff Robertson plays the lead role. Robertson is very good at playing Charlie as a retarded person and as a genius. (I assumed he was retarded. I haven't seen it since I was in the seventh grade.)

Yea it was a good movie, but the book was really good. Was that Cliff Robertson? I'm not remembering that right.

The guy was retarded, then they made him smart. I don't want to say anything else because it will ruin it. The book is not very long, so I recommend reading it.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Was that Cliff Robertson? I'm not remembering that right.

http://www.amazon.com/Charly-Claire-...4669552&sr=1-1

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Would you care to elaborate on that contradictory statement?

Ceci n'est pas une pipe.

Whoops, I actually posted that? Well, as a rule, I don't. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, that was my first post here. And this, hopefully, is my last.

Ceci n'est pas une message.

So it was, UM. I read the little synopsis; I really don't remember the mouse being retarded too.

I think I'm retarded, I can't remember anything.

Anyway--it's a really good book! I give everyone here the assignment of reading it. :teacher:

I wouldn't go for the option of brain-enhancement because:

1. My current brain is more than sufficient
2. It all ended very very badly in the book, so I don't see why it would work for me.

Poor Algernon...