Read here about the active, and abbrasive I might add, role that the cancer stricken Elizabeth Edwards is taking in her husbands campaign.
Here is a story from the Chicago Sun-Times challenging Al Gore's science. Yet another opponent of the "consensus" on global warming.
New research claims that infants begin lying as eary as at 6 months. This often takes the form of fake crying. This seems only to confirm the biblical notion that humans are born with Original Sin. From our earliest days we are depraved little beings. St. Augustine also believed this, pointing out the extreme selfishness of newborns as evidence for their inherent sinfulness. I would say this answers the question of whether or not people are born basically good, or basically bad. Read the fascinating research on infant lying here.
Sources say tha Newt Gingrich will only run for President if Fred Thompson's campaign proves to be innefective. He will decide in September. Meanwhile, it looks as if Newt may be a little bitter at Thompson jumping in the race and filling the void that he hoped to fill. You can read about some critical words he had for Thompson here.
British policehave arrested a fifth suspect connected to the recent attempted and successful car bombing efforts. Read a bit about it here. It will surely be only a matter of time before this makes it to the U.S.
Marraige rates in the U.K. are at all time lows since they started keeping records 150 years ago. Only 50.3% of the adult population is married. Read more here.
6 comments:
Do babies sin? I think it is more complicated question than determining if they lie. Just because one can prove that a bay will fake cry to get attention/food/whatever does not mean that the baby realizes that it is morally wrong to do so. One could argue that this is the exercise of the sinful nature at an early age or that this is the mere exercise of the survival instinct at an early age.
I am not a Theologian by trade, but I would argue (from a Biblical perspective)that humans are born with the sinful nature intact but a child is incapable of sinning until she comes to an understanding of good and evil (metaphorically: eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge). If this Means Rea (guilty mind) is not requisite for sinful behavior to be Sinful, than could this imply that babies who live short lives are doomed? I hope not.
-JB
JB,
I refer you to Psalm 51, v. 5.
5 Surely I was sinful at birth,
sinful from the time my mother conceived me.
John Calvin famously wrote, “Hell is filled with toothless babes.” Perhaps he based part of his thinking on Psalm 5. I will not argue with John Calvin or NT that babes are born (or conceived) with the sinful nature intact, no will I argue that the sinful nature does not exert itself over the will at the earliest stages of life. This would explain a baby’s “sinful” behaviors. The question that I think is more pertinent is whether bearing the sinful nature in its self is worthy of damnation?
Most people talk of sin as an action or as an omission (i.e. doing something wrong or failing to do something morally obligatory). In both cases sin is volitional. That is, it involves the will. From a biblical perspective two definitions of sin seem to emerge. The first is defined as active defiance. This would involve violating a commandment (e.g. Adam taking the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge). The second, and perhaps more robust, definition involves doing something that does not proceed from faith. From the New Testament, this is how it can be sinful for one person to eat food offered to idols while not constituting sinful behavior for another person. It seems to me that babies are incapable of understanding concrete commandments - in order to sin meeting the first definition - nor are they capable of understanding the abstract concepts such as faith and moral obligation. It seems at least one of these abilities would be needed to sin in order to meet one the biblical definitions put forth.
Thus, I think it is reasonable to view babies (and young children) as bearers of the sinful nature. However, the active ingredient in sin (that is the will or volitional assent) is absent. And if something as fundamental to sin is absent in sinful behavior, can it be rightly stated that the person in question has sinned against God? And if not, ho can God hold that person accountable?
-JB
JB,
I agree with what you've stated. Neither case is true of infants. Another case that I was having difficulty pondering regards its opposite - the non-sinful world provided premises are true.
Let me explain. Assuming that babies are sinning in their actions of "fake crying," kicking for attention, and the like, then the non-sinful world would mean that such actions (and intentions) would not exist.
This seems difficult to believe for a couple of reasons. Obviously, JB your arguments fit here. In addition, babies would only cry if they actually needed something, i.e. nourishment, attention (yes, this is a need), cleanliness, etc. Also, the development of trust is built through nurturing in the early stages of life. So, all the trust that is built through the expression of wants would be unnecessary.
Scripture encourages such ideas as these. Referring to the Psalms, we are called to cry out to God, especially in times of need. Referring to James and Hebrews, we are called to endure hard times by leaning on God.
Thus, I have difficulties with not only with the original premises but also the implications of such premises. Any other comments or thoughts?
Just to provide explicit agreement, I do agree that all mankind have been born with the sinful nature since Adam and Eve.
-AP
Guys,
I have to disagree with you. I will still argue that babies are in fact sinful, and in need of forgiveness. Selfishness in sin, even when we are wee. Of course, infant selfishness is more excusable, and understandable than adult selfishness.
That said, I think it is innacurate to say that no moral judgment can be made on children until they reach some concocted "age of accountability." This argument relies on a philisophical position that has slim biblical support in my opinion.
Rather, I believe the evidence points to the fact that we are all damned until we are saved.
Perhaps infants and children are saved, however, I believe it is folly to argue that they are not damned on account of them not knowing any better.
With all that said, I really don't know anything.
-NT
Jesus said in Matthew 18:3-5:
Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.
Post a Comment