General Music Chat

Actually, what's "disturbing" is this thread getting 14 comments, with some people chomping at the bit to want to watch it.

It's all very interesting...

Until it's one of our family members being gawked at in their final moments, put up on the internet for everyone's "entertainment".

I told you guys.

3 years.

Each one worse than the one before.

We are living in Roman times again. And the wake up call is coming.

It's coming soon.

The most disturbing thing about this video is....everyone just stands there and does NOTHING!!!

Not true. Someone was doing something. Videoing it. And probably couldn't wait to get home and get it up on the internet for all to see. I'm not squeamish, but I didn't watch the whole thing, mainly because of the sadness of the situation. Didn't take long to see that no one was going to offer help or comfort. I understand the helplessness people would feel, knowing there was nothing they could do to save his life, but how is it that no one would even talk to him to comfort him?
I was in a situation almost like that once. I used to work on the railroad as a brakeman and part time conductor on freight trains. I was the conductor, riding by myself on the caboose and we were getting close to a town where we would be stopping to eat. The engineer had called me on the radio to see where we were going to eat and I had said, "Anywhere". Then the train went into emergency, meaning that the airbrakes went full on. I got on the radio and said, "Well, I didn't mean stop here." jokingly, and the engineer said, "We just killed a man." I grabbed the first aid kit and ran the length of the train to see what could be done. A guy in a pickup had tried to beat the train at a crossing and lost. The pickup was still upright and the engine was running. The guy was sitting upright but unconcious. I crawled in through the passenger side window and turned the motor off. The rest of the crew went walking to find a house where they could use the phone to call for help (this was about 30 years ago, no cell phones) and left me there with the guy. He never regained conciousness and had a rattle in his breathing. I figured that sitting up was the best position for him, so didn't attempt to move him. All I could do was stay there and watch him, checking the time occasionally so that I could be prepared to note time of death. He died before help came. When the paramedics got there and took him out of the pickup, they could see that the top of his head was busted open like a watermelon and said that when the train hit (it hit the passenger side) it must have thrown him over and hit his head on the passenger window, and then back to the driver side. I hadn't moved him, mainly because of seeing that his upright position was probably best, but also because of the implications of a lawsuit as everyone has gotten so "sue crazy" so to speak. I mentioned this to the paramedics and they assured me that there was absolutely nothing I could have done to save him and that I had handled the situation in the best way possible. But they also told me there was a law called the "Good Samaritan" act or something, that says that, if there is no professional medical help available in an emergency, and you move someone in an attempt to help, you can't be held responsible even if your actions caused more damage. If I had known that, I still wouldn't have done anything any differently, but it's good to know for future reference.
And, even if I had had a video camera handy, I wouldn't have even thought about filming that sad moment.

The breathing could have been the "death rattle" or possibly agonal breath (most common in the instance desribed) in any case he was for all intensive purpose DOA already.
I too have been in simular situations as I have spent many thousands of hours on the road and always stop for a recent crash to render aid.
Three years ago, on my way to work I discovered a young woman who had hanged herself with the flags at a firework stand.
Many people drove by and ignored her and me.
It is a natural human behavior to want to observe what is out of the ordinary and IMO in no way signals any degredation in behavior.
We are already evil of thought word and deed, we cant get worse.
Though the external expression of it changes with fluxuating social norms.

The GOOD SAMARATIN LAW does not protect you from civil action, only criminal.[/b]

It is a natural human behavior to want to observe what is out of the ordinary and IMO in no way signals any degredation in behavior.

Several points...

1) What is "natural" is not always what is "right" or "good". It is NATURAL for a man to sleep with every woman he can get his hands on, even when he is "married". Evolution directs men to spread their seed as far and wide as they can, for the survival of the species. But modern minds and hearts, generally reject this behavior as displaying a lack of self control. We are FIGHTING our natural urges for what we consider the greater good. Or the more important goal. Namely, honoring our commitment to our spouse. Sometimes, fighting what is natural, is the very evidence of what separates us from being merely animals.

2) While a bizarre event certainly attracts our attention, like rubbernecking on a highway where a car has just been totalled, still, this is not the same as seeking out such events. While these are merely degrees, degrees can be significant. Two people are having sex in a car, and you catch yourself staring for a few moments, but turn away, realizing it is an embarrassing situation, to be standing there watching people who don't know you are watching them. You turn away and go about your business. Contrast this, with someone who seeks out situations where they can watch people having sex, when they don't know they are being watched. We call these people "Peeping Toms". There is an important difference between these two.

We are already evil of thought word and deed, we cant get worse.

Oh yes we can. Yes we can, and yes we are.

College kids today, put videos of themselves up, having sex at parties for the world to see. No thought about how they will feel about this in the future, or their children one day finding these videos online. They are completely lacking in any sense of shame or discretion. Other people are putting up videos of the most gruesome deaths they can find. And the world is becoming more voyeuristic as a result, which dimishes our sense of decency, and begins to immunize us against the most shocking of events. When you become IMMUNE to the most shocking things, you begin to ACCEPT them as normal or routine. This opens the floodgates to more of the same. And even worse, because it becomes more difficult to shock people effectively, and the stakes have to be raised to accomplish this. Which people are all too willing to accomodate to get their millions of views on sites like YouTube.

So yes, things CAN get worse, and they ARE getting worse.

Millenia ago, the Romans expected such entertainment at the Colosseum. Part of a Caesar being accepted well by the people, and keeping them happy and paying taxes, was to provide HUGE entertainment for them weekly at the Colosseum. The people made their displeasure known vocally, when they were bored, by the spectacle not being shocking enough.

A Caesar would up the stakes to keep them satisfied.

The crowds wanted spectacle. But most of all, they wanted blood.

This is the state that we are now, 2000 years later, returning to.

Just as surely as Rome collapsed from the weight of their own debauchery, self centeredness and apathy, so too, will be our fate, unless we turn ourselves away from the brink.

LOL
Just as surely as Rome collapsed from the weight of their own debauchery, self centeredness and apathy, so too, will be our fate, unless we turn ourselves away from the brink.

I think you just proved my point that we cannot get worse.
Surely behaviors can improve or worsen, but the basic evil is there as planted at the fall from grace.

We agree on much. We also could discuss semantics for hours!

Ok, got the clarification.

Original sin.

I have revised my system of thought on that. (In fact, I just now revised it in the last two minutes. LOL. Your comment kind of forced me to contemplate this for a few seconds.) I don't believe it is possible for sin to be passed on physically. Like you, I used to believe that sin is inherited, that we are born in sin. But does this really make sense? You and I would likely agree on the biblical verses which indicate that there is an "age of accountability" for which we are held responsible for our sins, and that should a child die before this time, he would have a place in Heaven. Yes?

But what about the verses which indicate that sin cannot be in the presence of God? If this is true, and it is also true that we are conceived in sin, as if born with a disease, then how is it that one can have sin, not be redeemed (because he has not accepted a savior) and yet also be counted holy in spite of all that? If this can be done for children, why not for adults? In other words, if a child is truly born connected to the root of sin, why would they not be held to the same spiritual laws as anyone else?

The only available answer: Because they are too young to be held accountable.

Which really leads to the conclusion that sin is spiritual and not physically based. Because when something physical exists. It EXISTS. Period. An adult has cancer. A child has cancer. There are NOT separate laws of physics being applied, because one is a child, and the other an adult. The reality is, that we are held accountable when our conscience has developed and we UNDERSTAND that certain things are sinful or wrong, and yet continue in them anyway.

Sin CANNOT be a physical reality. It is a spiritual reality.

And as we know, God imparts the spirit into a living being, NOT satan or anyone else. God alone provides the spirit. So... unless God can impart EVIL or SIN when he breathes that breath of life into us, then... THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS INHERITED SIN.

No, your first cry in anger is an expression of sin.
We are born in sin at first of infancy we only have the original sin that is forgiven through baptism. The rest we are resposible for ourselves.
Difficult to understand, yes.
Even more difficult to accept, yes.
But let it all be adjudicated by this.
Our Father will be the judge, not you or I.

Babies cry when they are born because:

1) They have been taken out of the only world they knew for 9 months. A nice warm safe place. And pulled out by strange hands into a room pierced with bright lights.

2) Doctors tell us they are testing out their lungs. They didn't have to breath through their mouths on their own for 9 months. Suddenly they are made to gasp for air to fill their lungs. It is a shocking change from how they lived for the previous 9 months.

Many animals cry when they are born as well. They don't "scream" but their eyes fill with tears. And like babies, animals also moan and scream when they are separated from their mothers. Birth is usually the FIRST separation between a mother and an infant, whether human or animal.

Do animals have original sin?

Additionally, you say that we are BORN in sin. And that crying is an expression of this sin. Was there no sin as a fetus? If sin is PHYSICAL then how is this possible? Is sin contracted from the outer vaginal lips? If sin is physical, wasn't the sin imparted BEFORE birth, at CONCEPTION?

Sans,

The fact is, that much of long held Christian theology, is an INTERPRETATION of scripture originally issued by early church fathers and then enshrined by later church leaders, as it was accepted and passed down as FACT. What many Christians are believing as Gospel, is not necessarily what the Bible itself says, but what early theologians BELIEVED it said.

They may have been right, but they may have also been wrong. It was an early held church belief that the Sun revolved around the Earth. Science has proven this false. This bellief has now been abandoned for the most part. But the age of the cosmos? Not abandoned by many faiths, which still hold that the Earth is only thousands of years old, and not billions.

Likewise, many Christian disciplines, still believe in a literal and PHYSICAL hell. A place God created to TORTURE, for all eternity, those who reject Him.

Of course, many of them also claim that the Lake of Fire, mentioned in Revelation is synonymous with hell. Not seeming to remember that the Bible promises that one day, death and hell are to be cast into the Lake of Fire.

Can hell be cast into hell? What would the purpose of that be? Hotter flames? Better torture?

What I am expressing, is that MUCH of traditional Christianity is an inaccurate portrayal of what the Bible is really saying. And as science progresses, much of this has already been exposed. But it doesn't end with science. In my opinion, early church fathers have also gotten much of the SPIRITUAL content wrong. They did the best they could. Well meaning theologians debated these issues for decades, before finding some general consensus. The fact that they were so confused in the first place, illustrates that they were unclear on the meaning of MANY biblical passages. There would not be THOUSANDS of denominations of Christianity now, if the general consensus agreed upon in the past by many theologians, was accepted even today.

And because Christianity clings to outdated interpretations handed down over nearly 2000 years, they are losing their moral influence.

I want to see Christianity revitalized, and become again, the powerful faith it was always meant to be.

I cannot explain it any farther than I have Craig.
We bear the sin of our fathers in original sin.
It is washed away at Baptism.
That is why Missouri Synod Lutherins baptise at infancy.
We also practice an age of accountability. After the educational process the youth may participate in the sacrement of Holy Communion, also for the forgiveness of sin. Usually that is about the age of 13.
You my recall my story about the purchase of an AR15 for my son at his confermation. ( the younger son chose a really nice Browning 308 )
And no sin is not physical it is spiritual, though it's expression is often physical.
I do not know at what point actual sin inters our psychie. The cry of anger was a mere example.
I am never free of my own sin, I lust, I hate, I murder, etc.
Thank God for the free gift of forgiveness that is mine from Jesus Christ by his grace alone. This is what I desire to share through my music.
The rest is but conversation.

Well Sans,

If it were an easy matter, it is unlikely there would be so many denominations of Christianity (or any other religion for that matter).

But as long as you don't mind me thinking out loud...

I agree that there are verses that "indicate" that sin is inherited. But apparently we agree that sin is NOT physical. If not, then it is spiritual. When God alone imparts our spirit to us, it would appear that God is imparting the sinful nature to us, which we could agree MUST be impossible. Therefore, the only other option is that some evil force, IMMEDIATELY tarnishes what God has imparted to us. But when a fetus is conceived, what sin could have been committed? Why then would a fetus be worthy of having his perfect spirit, imparted by a holy God, immediately tarnished, when no sin had been committed?

I can't find any logical or moral justification for that.

Which then leads me to conclude, that either the Bible verses indicating that sin is inherited, are WRONG or MISUNDERSTOOD.

For example, when the Bible states that the sins of the father are visited upon the sons, unto the third and fourth generations, does this mean, that sin is inherited? Or does it mean something else? When Bible verses "seem" to contradict on a point such as this, then it is important to understand each verse in it's own context and on it's own merits.

Case in point:

Numbers 14:18
Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.

And yet...

Ezekiel18:20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.


In one verse, it seems to say that the father's sins are passed down to the sons, and yet the other verse seems to indicate the opposite.


Our hearts would lead us to believe that everyone is responsible for their own actions. That it would be grossly unfair, to punish a child for his father's crimes. This is born out by the second verse.

But what about the first?

Maybe in saying that the iniquities of the father is passed onto the third and fourth generation, it is meant more in the sense of "The children SUFFER for the iniquity of the father unto the third and fourth generation"

In other words, children tend to follow the examples of their parents, whether good or bad. In setting such a bad example, maybe the Bible is suggesting that it could take several generations to turn that around, where a new path is finally forged and the cycle is broken. It may also be that the literal suffering that sin leaves behind, can exist for several generations.

For example, a father embarks on a criminal lifestyle and is then incarcerated. His son then grows up without a positive male role model, and rebels against the single mom, leaving home early and also committing crimes himself. He has a son out of wedlock, and this child (now the second generation from the father) also grows up without much of a father, but his mother then marries a decent fellow, providing a positive male role model.

Now, this son, has a clear comparison between a bad father figure, and a good father figure. But feeling abandoned, even with the positive influence, he works to keep himself on track, but suffers feelings of abandonment or inadequacies, which continue to haunt him emotionally, some of which are endured by his own son (the third generation).

However, this third generation has already separated quite a bit from the completely poor example of the original father, and this third generation son, is raised in a far better manner, and also by his own natural father. When that child then has a son of his own, who will know his natural grandfather as well as his father, it may be that the tide has completely turned around by then. But it took three generations or more for this to occur.

I suspect that a holy and FAIR God, had this more in mind, than LITERALLY making someone pay, for another person's sins.

It is one thing to willingly suffer on behalf of another, as Jesus did. Than to basically say "Your father was a piece of crap, so, like it or not, I'm going to FORCE you to be one too!"

Maybe this will clear things up about generational sin.

Deuteronomy 5:9 and 5:10

"You shall not bow down to them or serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate Me,
But showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments"

The key part there is, 'those who hate me'.

Meaning, I believe, that if you become a monster because your parents turned you into one... you lose.
But if you turn to God and break the cycle, then you win.

We are born 'into' sin.
Born into the knowledge of good and evil. Born under the influence of good and evil.
One part of the world and one part of the spirit.

For some personal speculation,
The kabbalists believe that the soul joins the body upon the first breath, and I think that notion makes sense.

Why do babys get a free ticket to heaven? Because God says so.
Gods rules to make, anyway God sees fit.

Anyways, the answers are available to any questions you might have.
Just ask him.
Something none of us do enough of. Just ask.

gtZip,

Very good reference and also, I believe, a very good theological position.

While not in the same words, you are confirming that sin is a personal responsibility and NOT something passed down, as if through DNA, WITHOUT OUR CHOICE.

If we CHOOSE to love God then the iniquity is NOT imparted.

If we CHOOSE to hate God then it is.

I also agree with the other part of the equation, that being born into sin, is not being born with a defect, as if born with an incurable disease, but instead, it is being born into a world where iniquity exists. Being born into a world where, as you rightly say, we are under BOTH the influences of evil as well as goodness.

It is my personal belief that our physical world is a nursery of sorts, where good and evil are allowed to play out, so that we have a CHOICE what path we take, whether to pursue evil or goodness, whether to accept God's love and return it, or reject that love.

Unlike most however, I believe this was BY DESIGN, and not a cosmic accident, resulting in an UNITENTIONAL FALL OF MAN. God knew what would happen when he gave us the gift of FREEDOM or FREE WILL. He knew that some would use thiis freedom to love, and others use this freedom for evil or selfish gain.

Without a CHOICE, there is no real freedom. Without the FREEDOM to CHOOSE to love, there is no real love. If we were PROGRAMMED to only love, then the love would not be REAL, because we were merely being manipulated by a program. We would be robots. Robots cannot engage in relationships of love and hate. They are merely programmed to behave in the ways assigned.

For God to have us love him honestly and freely. He had to give us the gift of freedom. But freedom can be very dangerous and destructive, when used for evil purposes.

To limit the destruction and dangers that were possible, he created a physical universe to allow these freedoms to play out. It is the PRECISE reason that everything in the physical cosmos, is designed to be temporal. To have a time limit. In this way, all our good and all our evil, as HUMAN BEINGS becomes limited to THIS time and space alone. We have more than enough time, to witness good acts and evil ones, side by side. To understand what the nature of good is, and what the nature of evil is, and to then choose. But the harm we can do, by using that freedom improperly, is then limited to the confines of a physical reality.

To a nursery of sorts.

When you read what the Bible says of the SPIRITUAL WORLD, and then you see what the nature of the PHYSICAL WORLD is, you find EXACT opposites.

The spiritual world NEVER decays.

The physical world is in in a CONSTANT state of decay.

The natural state of the spiritual world is light. The Bible explains that there are not even shadows there.

The natural state of the physical world is darkness. Light here, is only temporary, and only produced because of chemical reactions. Take away the burning sun, and our galaxy is utter darkness. Darkness is it's basic nature.

This world is the mirror opposite of the next.

It is here, so that we have a place where we can be given freedom, and that freedom is allowed to play out, to give us the room to make a choice. A choice to develop a relationship of oneness with God's love, leading us to life, or to reject God's love and condemn ourselves to death.

.....................................

Good thought provoking conversation gents. Thank you both for that.
At the risk of repeating myself.

Thank God for the free gift of forgiveness that is mine from Jesus Christ by his grace alone. This is what I desire to share through my music.
The rest is but conversation.