the evil

[juldea]

I figured it out, and it scares me.

I was thinking about religious fundimentalists and those who seek to impose restrictions on other's life choices..
And isn't it better to have the choice to be good or bad and choose good, than to live a good life because that's all that's available to you?
Following down this path will lead to people raised in ignorance of the fact that they could, theoretically, choose evil. Ignorant of evil at all, even.
...and then it hit me.
What is that state but the state of the Garden of Eden before the original sin?
This is what people want? People in power? How immensely frightening.

...because, you see, I don't at all consider eating from the Tree of Knowledge to have been a bad thing.

Comments

Re: As a "religious fundamentalist"

[anitra.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry you feel that way.

I do try to stay out of other people's "religious space" as much as possible. I know my beliefs offend. But I am concerned because so many people are (as far as I can tell) making a grave mistake. I don't want to give out a free license for immorality. I also don't want to shove Jesus down everyone's throat. But I am called to "Go... and make disciples of all the nations... teaching them to observe all I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:18-20)

It's a hard road to walk, and I don't pretend I'm doing a good job of it.

Re: As a "religious fundamentalist"

[rufinia.livejournal.com]

Why are you sorry? Honestly, I think you're wrong. I am Christian (but rarely describe myself that way because of the reactions i get. I say I'm Lutehran, and a very liberal one at that. And for an ELCA Lutheran, that's saying something) but I don't beleive that there is any benefit of forcing people to convert or preaching. If people want to come into the church for thier own reasons, wonderful, fabulous. But I am *not* going to tell my pagan, jewish, muslim, hindu, Buddisht, atheist, agnostic or spiritual firends that they are going to hell, or even that I'm concerned for their souls just because they don't beleive as I do. I am not concerned for anyone's soul. Your afterlife is one of your own making, and is decided by the choices you make in this life. If people (me, you, anyone) can't accept the consequences of their own actions, that's their problem.

I am also not arrogant enough to believe that Lutheranism in particular and Christianity in general have it right. I seriously doubt *any* religion has it right. Or maybe they all do. I don't know.

Live your own life as the example you want to set, and accept that people have free will and will do as they choose. (I almost put "want" here, but that isn't quite right. I *want* to not pay my rent. But if I make that choice, there will be unpleasent consequences that I do not want to deal with.) The Wiccan... creedo isn't the right word, but it sorta works... applies here: "Do as thou wilt, as it harms none." This is a basic philospoical social contract: I have the right to do whatever I want, as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of anyone else. And you have that same right.

Re: As a "religious fundamentalist"

[anitra.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry because... well, because the more people who feel that way, the harder my life becomes. (Selfish, I know.) I don't generally go around telling any of my friends that I am concerned for their souls. That doesn't stop me from being concerned, and praying for them; I just don't think that telling them (forcing it on them) would have any purpose.

Regarding choices: I'm a Calvinist. I believe there is precious little free will in this world, but that (most of) our choices have been laid out for us ahead of time.

I do try to live my life as an example. I know each person will do as he/she sees fit, and I'd be a fool to think that legislation would make much of a difference in anyone's behavior. However, I view marriage as a privilege, not a right. Marriage is not guaranteed to us in the Constitution. Therefore, I don't think marriage has to be granted to everyone. In fact, the country would probably be a better place if it were harder to get married.

(As I stated earlier, this wouldn't be as much of an issue if "marriage" was not both a religious and a state-recognized union.)

Re: As a "religious fundamentalist"

[rufinia.livejournal.com]

I'm still not sure why my choices regarding religion and morality have any bearing on your life at all. Except that you make it a concern, but you still can't do anything about it, so the end result I see again is you with an ulcer and me communing with God in the Public Garden happy as a clam. (this presumes clams can be happy.)

(As I stated earlier, this wouldn't be as much of an issue if "marriage" was not both a religious and a state-recognized union.)

Amen to that.

Okay, so if there is not much in the way of free choice, then why be concerned about anything at all? If our choices hve alreayd been made for us, then... why be concerned about anyone's morality? Things will happen as they will whether you do anything or not, so why bother to get out of bed in the morning?


On the other hand, if there *is* Free Will (and lets just say, for the next paragraph, there is), you want people to follow the correct path. OKay. So you seem to be saying that you want the "Wrong" branch of the path blocked off so people are less tempted to make the wrong turn, yes? Isn't a more rightous thing to have the option to take the wrong turn and choose to not take it, then not have the option at all?