People: Inherently good or Inherently evil? - Page 5

bogeydogg · #61 May 3, '08, 10:32 pm

As far as man's nature being good evil, I think it is worth pointing out that the "good" which God saw in man was before the fall. After all, just a few short chapters later the Bible says God repented in His heart that He had made man because violence had filled the Earth. I think its safe to say God didn't really have the warm fuzzies going for man just then.

However, and again I refer to St. Augustine, we are born with he imprint of our Creator. As such, we inherently have a sense of what is right and wrong. A small child knows what is right and wrong because they know that if they are want a cookie ten minutes before dinner, they have to sneak it because they know they are acting countermand to edicts of their parents. Some may look at this and say, "Ah-hah! Even small children are devious and wicked.", and some may look at it and say, "Ah-hah! This proves we are born good because the child tries to hide his action because he knows its wrong." Personally I think kids like cookies and have very little conscience about the way they get them.

However, I do think that this inherent understanding of good and evil is the imprint of God on our natures, and is this which causes us to recognize that we are lacking in some fashion. St. Augustine said it is this inner sense which creates the longing of the human soul because it longs to be reunited with it's Maker.

I think this longing is universal and is part of the manifest reality of God of which every human has knowledge whether they want to admit it or not. I think misappropriating this longing is what leads to things like addiction and compulsive behaviors in people and I think it is only by meeting this basic need that people are able to break the bondages of sin and suffering in their lives.

The proof?

As a person in recovery, I can tell you all without fear that those who get and stay sober are the ones who come to know Jesus as Lord, God and King, and all those who refuse to do this go back out the door eventually because that inner longing only deepens with time and is never made better by addiction or by trying to catch sobriety by standing near to those who are sober. I had to leave a few times before I figured that out BTW.

Starwynd · #62 May 4, '08, 4:35 pm

Neither. I feel that people are inhrently selfish, because all actions are done with a person thinking about "how can this benefit me?" or "how can this make me feel good"?

Archus · #63 May 6, '08, 9:32 am

why is there even a discussion on this? It's in the Catechism!

374: The first man was not only created good, but was also established in friendship with his Creator...

Some further arguments:

Man is created in likeness of God
God is good
Therefore Man is good

'Inherently' implies the state of the object at it's core. We were created sinless, THEN the fall happened, which means we were created as a good being.

If we were inherently evil, then why is there so much effort to save us, if all we are is evil?

Christ assumed our humanity for what it is. If it was evil, then he would not have saved us, but destroyed us because Christ would have been evil too.

Our moral compass would be reversed (no remorse over say murder, but over helping a lady across the road)

And oh yea, we wouldn't belong to the Church of Christ, but the Church of Satan....

So why is there a discussion????

bogeydogg · #64 May 6, '08, 2:50 pm

That's what I was saying.

Yes man is fallen but the imprint of our Creator is born by all of us and it is this imprint which causes us to feel the inner longing common to all humanity. It is the longing for God which is felt because of our separation caused by our fallen nature. However, a thing can have one essence and yet show a different nature. Which is why saved people sin and lost people feel the inner yearning toward God.

JTBT · #65 May 8, '08, 9:39 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bogeydogg

Not to be a Calvinist or anything here, because I'm not, but Calvin never taught Total Depravity. That doctrine of Protestant Faith was concocted after his death in reply to the followers of Arminius during the Remonstrance.

this is really a good point about Calvin no one really knows where he would have stood; but Total Depravity is the 1st of 5 points that Calvinist teach today. BTW Arminius considered himself a Calvinist which adds fuel to the "would Calvin be a Calvinist today?" question.

bogeydogg · #66 May 8, '08, 3:32 pm

Actually, I very seriously doubt that Calvin would be a Calvinist. I most definitely doubt that his teachings would be welcome in Protestant Churches today. Especially the ones about the perpetual virginity of Mary and the different levels of sin before God and the presence (although figurative to his thinking but still real) of Christ in the Eucharist and infant baptism and the necessity of baptism for the salvation of the believer. Well to be fair, Calvin did not teach that Baptism saves, but he did teach that every believer must be baptized so ya'll figure it out.

**whatevergirl** · #67 May 8, '08, 3:34 pm

I think we have the propensity to go either way. With free will, we can choose to sin, or choose to follow God. I don't think that a person is inherently good or bad--it's a choice to do good as opposed to bad. I think a better question is...'are people inherently immoral or moral?' Because really 'good' and 'bad' in this culture has become subjective.

Feanaro · #68 May 8, '08, 3:59 pm

For a more philosophical take on this, I would recommend a book I just read. It's by Peter Kreeft and is called " Socrates meets Machiavelli- The Father of philosophy cross examines the author of The Prince".

Machiavelli starts with the premise that all people are evil and bases his "philosophy" off of this. Socrates critiques this premise as well as Machiavelli's other false notions.

It may be helpful.

AndyF · #69 May 9, '08, 5:23 am

James:

Being inherently bad should be placed in perspective with our reality.

What is significant is that other beings don't jump in with offers to take on our yoke to prove it can be different. Other than Christ who knew he was deity, and angels who while in circumstances a billion times more favorable than our earth, proved they can "inherit" bad behavior similar to later humans, were deliberately beatified, thus conveniently locked out of the burden of further making risky wrong choices. These along with humans who later were deliberately made perfect to suit some purpose, no one has reached perfection on his own volition.

Humans expecting something we can aspire to is not unreasonable. Nowhere can it be said that we can find inspiration even amongst our own kind even after hundreds of generations, but that is seen as an unreasonable expectation.

So we can be told we are inherently bad, but in a celestial realm of a true justice, we have a hidden card we can play at any time that will trump any argument against us.

Justice systems need be effective in applying measure for wrongs and rights committed, but they have "Inherent" obligation to prove to those who it applies to that it works without bias and makes reasonable demands.

So those in the celestial bleachers of criticism will go on and chastise us for our failings and fumblings reassured they are untouchable, but not to worry, we have one last card to play and it is the best any being can hold and a TRUE justice will ensure it gets in as a valid argument.

Andy

Ghola5 · #70 May 15, '08, 9:35 am

Aside from man's creation account in genesis which states that like all creation man is good Gen 1:35, I believe that man is inherently good because most people, if not all, believe that they are GOOD people.

In most circumstances if asked any person will say "Yes I think I'm a good person." or "I am trying to do my best." Even bad people who are clearly doing something unlawful or outright evil in most cases believe that they are in fact doing something good, or at least they always try to justify their own bad behavior.

I think objective morality and inherent goodness of man is supported by the fact that man only acts for the sake of goodness of an act, even an act like stealing. Stealing is unlawful and sinful, but the product of theft which is ownership of something is in itself a good product of an unlawful and sinful act. In other terms, bad acts and even sin is only a twisted goodness or corrupted virtue.

This is how I form an opinion that man is inherently good, just in philosophical sense, as apposed to inherently bad or sinful.

If someone can comment in case my thinking does not make sense I would appreciate it.

fhansen · #71 May 15, '08, 10:01 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghola5

Aside from man's creation account in genesis which states that like all creation man is good Gen 1:35, I believe that man is inherently good because most people, if not all, believe that they are GOOD people.

In most circumstances if asked any person will say "Yes I think I'm a good person." or "I am trying to do my best." Even bad people who are clearly doing something unlawful or outright evil in most cases believe that they are in fact doing something good, or at least they always try to justify their own bad behavior.

I think objective morality and inherent goodness of man is supported by the fact that man only acts for the sake of goodness of an act, even an act like stealing. Stealing is unlawful and sinful, but the product of theft which is ownership of something is in itself a good product of an unlawful and sinful act. In other terms, bad acts and even sin is only a twisted goodness or corrupted virtue.

This is how I form an opinion that man is inherently good, just in philosophical sense, as apposed to inherently bad or sinful.

If someone can comment in case my thinking does not make sense I would appreciate it.

It seems that believing we're good while doing something bad would be no argument in itself for man being inherently good. Like you say the motivation is always from a desire for good but our goodness comes from the Creator who can only create good and evil actually comes from the choice to decide what's good for ourselves. Maybe it could be said that we start out good and can choose to sin and remain in sin and therefore to reject and forfeit goodness.

bogeydogg · #72 May 15, '08, 6:40 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by fhansen

It seems that believing we're good while doing something bad would be no argument in itself for man being inherently good. Like you say the motivation is always from a desire for good but our goodness comes from the Creator who can only create good and evil actually comes from the choice to decide what's good for ourselves. Maybe it could be said that we start out good and can choose to sin and remain in sin and therefore to reject and forfeit goodness.

I don't think you can really say that doing evil is good for ourselves. I think, as has been stated elsewhere, the evil is the absence of good. When we do evil we are doing other than what God would have us do. I don't know if our doing evil makes us evil or if we do evil because we are evil but I do know that my Redeemer lives and that I must be conformed to His image.

And if I do not then that will be bad for me in every possible way.

fhansen · #73 May 15, '08, 7:46 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bogeydogg

I don't think you can really say that doing evil is good for ourselves. I think, as has been stated elsewhere, the evil is the absence of good. When we do evil we are doing other than what God would have us do. I don't know if our doing evil makes us evil or if we do evil because we are evil but I do know that my Redeemer lives and that I must be conformed to His image.

And if I do not then that will be bad for me in every possible way.

It's generally held that all evil is committed by a motivation towards or a desire for a perceived good. So Adam & Eve coveted a greater independence from God which they thought would benefit them and a murderer desires to avenge a perceived wrong or remove an obstacle in his way of improving his lot in life and an adulterer thinks they need more pleasure, etc. But these are all desires which are outside of Gods' order and so evil.

Swan · #74 May 17, '08, 3:43 pm

I think that people are "loaded" so to speak when they are born. Having said this, however, I want to add that I am not saying they are inherently evil because there are many variations on the concept of what "evil" actually is.

When I think of an example of "evil" I usually end up with some lunatic sadist who tortures and murders people. But even with the small amount of knowledge I have about psychology I realize that in many cases the individuals brain in faulty, it doesn't work right. And this is usually not the fault of the individual. Some like to suggest that we all have the same ability to choose freely. However, an alcoholic will have a much more difficult time making a rational decision regarding drinking than someone with out that problem. There are many circumstances that impare our ability to see clearly. In many cases they are completely out of our control. But the concept of evil is evasive which leaves questions such as these somewhat academic. Interesting and worth pursuing, but academic.

Greg27 · #75 Jun 9, '08, 4:42 am

I think the notion that people in general are inherently evil can be a very toxic one. To me such an assertion is not sustained by the evidence (many people, including those with no religion, do morally good acts) and can also cause a lot of psychological harm (people may believe they have no power to choose the right course of action in a situation, to have the courage to fight and stand up for a worthy belief or according to conscience, or can do nothing about some evil or bad habit). Encouraging people to hate themselves and think of themselves as utterly worthless is also arguably a form of psychological abuse.