Why are fights so commonplace?

To you, maybe. In my faith, Christianity, it points toward the need for Jesus.

Oh, and no one gets off the hook for bad behavior. Just the opposite. They're on the hook even if, by your standards or whoever's standards - because who are you and I, and our standards? - they're really good.

That's the thing. You can't good your way out of your inherent sinful state. Or, at least, that's how the theology goes.

It tends to be very offensive, just as it was when Jesus first told the parable of the prodigal son, which is really about the moralism of the older brother.

 

Not least bc a woman is credited with bringing about the sinful state of man by tempting him with an apple -- and then gets repaid with the pain of childbirth.

 

Who is Jesus and his?

Are his standards better than those of the Buddha? More applicable than those found in the Code of Hammurabi?

There are lots of moral and ethical systems from which to choose.

But they are a choice.

 

If you want to have a theological discussion, we can, although I'm not sure it's the point. I'm very sure, in fact, it's not the point.

I answered the question with what I see to be the natural state of mankind: Fallen, broken, sinful. Why are there so many fights? Because it's our nature. That's my answer.

You think that lets the really bad people off the hook because it renders us all helpless. I say no, it's just the opposite, it reminds the "good" people their shit stinks too.

Now, if you wanna say there's good people and bad people, or that we all start out good and a complex goulash of...whatever...turns some people bad, fine by me. If Buddha has a take, hey, put his hat in the ring.

 

Adam is to blame for original sin.

 

Not if you ask him

 

I think the Western concept of 'sin' as some sort of ineluctable universal background radiation lets individuals off the hook. Same with 'evil.'

It puts goodness out of reach of humanity.

So it's a philosophical get out of jail free card.

"Your honor, I couldn't help myself!"

 

You're right, and I'm fine with it. Don't feel the need to stop on my account. More of us should do what you're doing, more often. I sometimes try -- just to think up good, open-ended threads/questions that might have different, varying answers, in that same hope: that people will be open, willing to share, so there's a real discussion and we, maybe, get to know each other a little bit, and have interesting threads.

 

What am I afraid of?
Whom did I betray?
In what medieval kingdom
Does justice work this way?
If you knew what would happen
And made us just the same
Then you, my Lord, can take the blame

 

Again, no. The NT is real specific - Romans 5 and 6 - in how sin works post-resurrection, and it doesn't have a "I can't help myself" loophole.

The radical nature of what I believe really has nothing to do with how it addresses or looks at bad people. I mean, think about it: Why do people fight? Because they prone to fighting is not a remarkable deduction. It's pretty straightforward.

The radicality of it has more to do with how it views good people. That there aren't any, that you can't earn it, and so on. Basically, that, even though you know good and evil - the one thing God didn't want man to know - you haven't the foggiest what's what or how to bring about moral order, and attempts to do so merely deliver chaos.

A friend of mine taught a class of kids and asked them to make up their own gods. And each one of them - down to the very last one - devised a deity that more or less worked on a rewards system, a being/doing/acting set of ideals (however rudimentary these ideals were, since they were kids). Our nature tends toward that kind of "good" and "bad" sorting.

 

I think we're posting at cross purposes.

Notions of "sin" and "salvation" - however specifically referenced in the NT - haven't prevented many fights across the years.

So I'm not sure how much good those concepts do us, as either carrot or as stick, when talking about improving human behavior, even incrementally.

 

It doesn't matter. The concepts do not do good. They are good. I mean, if you believe in that.

While the verses are designed for utility, they're either true or they're not, and how well mankind - or any individual person - uses them is immaterial to their value for the believers in them. God - any God, really - isn't a CEO who needs to turn a moral profit to keep the job. A moral system rooted in measuring payoff is situational and thus not moral at all, but commercial.

IMO, the Christian system is sound- the one true thing. It makes sense. I either keep the faith or not. It doesn't reflect on the maker of the system when I don't. It reflects on me.

At any rate, there are other theories on the fighting. I just happen to believe the easiest one.