Did God create sin ?

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Love G-d with all your heart (and all your soul, and all your strength) is of course from Devarim (what you heathen call Deuteronomy). The Golden rule is also in the Torah.

Back to the usual pointless arguing.

Christ was providing an interpretation of scripture... We Christians follow the Christ (and Paul) brand of interpretation.. modern Jews follow the rabinical interpretation.

Christ's scripture was the OT.. and what Christ came for was to die on the cross. The rest is just clarifying what had already been said because most/all had lost the way.

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

The big change about Christ is that the laws of sacrifice/etc dealing with the temple got fulfilled by Christ. What the Jews had been doing/given was symbolic of Christ's sacrifice, and pointed towards it.

He didn't come to destroy or do away with the law, he came to fulfill the law. The Jews before Christ's death who were saved, were saved through Christ just like the Christians (and Jews and etc.) who are saved after Christ's death.

Jon Miller

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Elok
Should, you say. Towards what end?

An innate ordinal preference. Possibly influenced by evolutionary imperative, too.

[Elok]

Originally posted by LordShiva
An innate ordinal preference. Possibly influenced by evolutionary imperative, too.

I was asking KH, but if you want to jump in, fine. I just hope I don't get swamped with interlocutors. You've described the nature of the preference and what shaped it. But what's its end? Aristotle would say, what's its telos? You eat for nutrition, you play games for amusement. Presumptively nothing is done without purpose, so what's the purpose--what goal is in mind--for moral actions?

[LordShiva]

Like I said, an innate sense of right and wrong hardwired into (most) human minds. There's no "goal" per say; that's what differentiates us from animals (though some higher mammals may display similar "moral" behaviour).

I guess if I must specify a goal, I would say: the avoidance of the feeling of guilt one would get by not undertaking the moral action.

[Elok]

So, why do we have that feeling? Or is it just a freak of our psychology, like a mental appendix--without use?

[LordShiva]

More likely evolutionary.

[Elok]

Okay, so what do you mean by evolutionary? That it's advantageous for the propagation of our genetic material? In what way?

[LordShiva]

Several species exhibit behaviour like "you regurgitate food for me when I can't find it, I'll do the same for you when you can't" - those individuals that don't follow this code are eventually found out and ignored when they come begging. Similarly, herd mammals band together to protect their young, no matter the parent, and the injured. Human morality probably evolved from these less sophisticated reciprocal arrangements.

[Cort Haus]

A sense of morality is inbuilt into humans and varies according to our social programming. It's what guilt is for.

[Cort Haus]

dp

[Cort Haus]

As LS says, it's evident in the animal kingdom. Merkats, for example, have a social structure and 'rules' that benefit the whole tribe.

[Elok]

So, morality is law backed by social approval or lack thereof rather than force? Is that fair to say?

[LordShiva]

I think so. Though, the fact that social disapproval may manifest itself as force probably enters the calculation as well.

EDIT: Actually, no. More accurately, the evolutionary pressure that gave rise to morality is rooted in social approval, or lack thereof. Morality itself has transcended those concerns, and is now a thing of itself.

[Elok]

So, is the morality of a given action determined by majority decision, or what?

COUNTER-EDIT: So, how is morality measured/determined? If I want to know whether a planned course of action is moral or not, do I just consult what feels right?