This topic contains 6 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
One of the things that keeps liberal Christianity going is the classic struggle between good and evil. Even though there are ways of treating the bible allegorically there still is the need to rationalize Jesus dying on the cross for sins. There are a number of creative ways to describe this that are more acceptable to our modern way of thinking, but they all rely on the assumption that sin came into the world and that somehow the world at its basic level is flawed.
I think there is a profound misunderstanding of the genesis story. What I finally realized was that the only character telling the closest thing to the truth was the serpent. It was true that eating the fruit would make them as gods knowing good from evil. This was evidenced by the emergence of shame and the need of the gods to cast them out of the garden before they ate of the tree of life. And they didn’t die when they ate the fruit. So god lied.
There is also the issue of pitting the smartest being in the universe against the most innocent. When I look at how easy it is to fool most people I think it really wasn’t a fair test if you read it in that manner. What often comes out of the story is the morality lesson that one just needs to obey and everything will turn out better. There is also the issue of motivation.
If Adam and Eve were created perfect the idea that they would experience greed, covetousness, or ambition wouldn’t happen unless they had sinned already since these are characteristics of a sinful nature, one they supposedly did not have yet. This would have made temptation impossible since there would be no sinful desire to appeal to.
Then there is the idea that they were simply tricked, but this would bypass even the most primitive ideas of justice. You don’t punish people for ignorance and you don’t punish their offspring for all time for simply being born on the planet. And you don’t present this strange notion that to give yourself permission to forgive all humanity by having your “son,” who is actually yourself, sacrificed in a cruel manner to pay for the original sin committed by Adam and Eve. I know there are an almost infinite amount of theological explanations that try to make this seem fair, just, and reasonable. I think I have read many of them. None of them can explain why anyone in a perfect world would sin in the first place. Yes, there is the power of choice, but this doesn’t explain why.
This would go back to Satan himself. Why would Satan, supposedly the most advanced created being in the universe, choose such an idiotic path?
I still find some usefulness for the Genesis story because it really is a rather brilliant explanation of the emergence of consciousness. It provides the observation that one is unable to experience shame until one can distinguish between two polarities. And once you have that power it may have seemed like having god like powers and along with those powers came consequences. And those consequences are, for some, a need to derive meaning from life. Once one enters into any kind of judgment a tension emerges that wasn’t there before. It would make sense that religion would be a bi-product of such an awareness.
And yet Jesus recognized the relationship between judging others and the feedback loop of being judged. As soon as you enter into that awareness then the standards you place on others become your own burden as well. Hence, judge not, that ye be not judged. If we remove all the layers of superstition we have something quite similar to Buddhism. It is interesting that Buddha taught in his “sermon on the mount” that the meek would inherit the earth about 500 years before Jesus showed up.
The meaning of Nirvana is “to extinguish.” And the object to be extinguished was karma. This included both “good” and “bad” karma. When one extinguished karma all together, then one could enter into Nirvana. In modern terms the process of evaluating one’s goodness is a product of ego. Do I make good or bad karma? And, unfortunately, Christianity in the mainstream is almost completely focused on the “goodness” or “badness” of people. Nirvana and maybe Jesus’ term, “the kingdom of heaven” were referring to an inner experience where one stepped away from this constant judgment chatter.
I think the next stage of human development is finding out how to be fully conscious and compassionate without the burden of guilt and shame, both forms of fear and ego. I think this is both a highly rational and empathetic process.
AnonymousPerhaps the first step in getting away from guilt and shame while retaining compassion is to start developing a realistic view of human nature. We are not good or bad. We are. And we are what our genetics and environment have made us. When we remove the component of good and evil and look at the reasons why someone may or may not behave in a certain manner, we can begin to form a much more pragmatic approach to humanity rather than just rewarding good and punishing evil.
AnonymousJEB – I totally agree with you. We need to remember neutrality, the middle, the gray – which I find over 90% of life to be found within.
Anonymous“This would go back to Satan himself. Why would Satan, supposedly the most advanced created being in the universe, choose such an idiotic path?
I still find some usefulness for the Genesis story because it really is a rather brilliant explanation of the emergence of consciousness. It provides the observation that one is unable to experience shame until one can distinguish between two polarities. And once you have that power it may have seemed like having god like powers and along with those powers came consequences. And those consequences are, for some, a need to derive meaning from life. Once one enters into any kind of judgment a tension emerges that wasn’t there before. It would make sense that religion would be a bi-product of such an awareness.
And yet Jesus recognized the relationship between judging others and the feedback loop of being judged. As soon as you enter into that awareness then the standards you place on others become your own burden as well. Hence, judge not, that ye be not judged. If we remove all the layers of superstition we have something quite similar to Buddhism. It is interesting that Buddha taught in his “sermon on the mount” that the meek would inherit the earth about 500 years before Jesus showed up.”
This, Richard. So much this.
AnonymousRichard – you always give me a lot to think about! I love your superb intellect and thinking processes that can actually put meat on the bones of ideas, even if my brain can’t grasp all of what you are saying.
I have been struggling with the concept of good vs. evil for quite awhile now. I have read in Scripture and books that since everything comes from God, (God is all in all, etc.), then God is also responsible for creating evil. Almost like good and evil are some kind of Divine Ying and Yang which provide humans with contrasts necessary to realize what goodness and beauty are (because it takes seeing ugliness and evil to recognize when we see beauty and goodness.) Or so we don’t become unappreciative spoiled brats. Or because God is creating evil (like hardening Pharaohs’ heart) in order to work out some ultimate far-reaching plan that will benefit everyone in the end. But I just can’t wrap my brain around the idea that God would deliberately create ANYTHING that is evil! I don’t even want to wrap my brain around that! I just cannot see HOW or WHY a God who is pure love and all-encompassing light would even think of or be capable of creating evil of any kind?? Doesn’t Scripture say that “in Him is NO darkness at all?”
On the other hand, I really want to believe that man is basically good (because we were created in God’s image), instead of basically bad (like so may churches teach), and yet we all do fall short and do evil things. So does that mean we are not created in God’s image, or that we are just not living up to our spiritual potential? Or maybe we really are basically sinful, evil people from the get-go???
Here’s another thing that really bothers me. If sin did enter the human race though the “fall of Adam and Eve,” how can a just and fair God hold every single human being accountable for a sin someone else committed? That would not be just at all, and yet God is supposed to be a just God! Go figure! If “the fall” of Adam and Eve isn’t a literal story, yet people obviously sin, then where and how did sin come into the picture and contaminate and ruin so many “God-breathed” lives???
I know no one can give me a definitive answer on this, it’s just stuff I wonder about lately, that’s all. But I welcome any and all input, ideas and theories.
Jo,
You may find it interesting that in the Old Testament it is god who brings evil to the world.
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. Isaiah 45:7
You won’t find a Satan character. Satan doesn’t really emerge as the anti-god being until the New Testament, which was heavily influenced by Greek, particularly Platonic, ideas on duality. The earliest Christians were gnostic Christians. They were the first to produce gospels. The proto-orthodox writings which became the basis for the modern New Testament were written in response to these earliest gospels. In these early gnostic gospels the Old Testament god was an evil god, quasi bastard child of the goddess of wisdom Sophia and Jesus came to free us from this evil god as a being of light who dwelled within us. This spirit Jesus would re-unite us with our true nature.
I think JEB64’s statement that we need to “start developing a realistic view of human nature.” is spot on. She goes on to say, “We are not good or bad. We are.” To expound on this idea I think we can establish a rational basis for what it means to be human outside of a good/evil narrative. I think if we look at a pragmatic view of being human we can use the idea of cause and effect to set our values. One of the aspects of being human is that we don’t have all knowledge. We have to learn through a process of trial and error. This brings with it the possibility of creating harm from ignorance. I have noted that maturity brings with it more knowledge and people that have a strong value of internal honesty tend to mature faster.
The people that I have observed who we might deem evil tend to do these things either from fear and ignorance or are mentally damaged. The vast majority of things that Christians tend to label as evil are matters of preference and in of themselves wouldn’t cause harm. Examples include not going to church, using swear words, sex, greed, etc. And many of these within the context of human interaction only cause pain to others who have a certain internal investment in their ego. And this type of thing is covered by love your neighbor as yourself. This is a value system based on compassion and the desire to reduce emotional pain. All of these function quite well without labeling people as good or evil. They function quite well in our cause and effect world.
If you don’t have a pony in the ego race, there is nothing to lose and nothing that other people say or do short of physical attack will cause pain. This is each person taking responsibility for their own experience of life. We no longer have to blame evil because evil is an illusion of our ego.
AnonymousRichard – I really like what you said about not having to label people as being good or evil. It makes perfect sense that since we don’t have all knowledge, we are going to make mistakes as we learn through trial and error – which means any pain our “personal learning curve” may cause others is unintentional. That is a concept I can wholeheartedly embrace, as opposed to believing most people deliberately make evil choices with the intent to hurt others. Perhaps a very small percentage do (like psychopaths and sociopaths), but they have mental issues.
As usual, you have given me much food for thought.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.