If you're conservative,

[Aubrey]

do you believe people are basically good or basically bad?

 

Poll to follow for real.

 

ETA:

 

Whoa. I didn't expect to wake up to 6pp! :svengo:

 

1. What did I mean by "conservatives"? I wanted people who *define themselves* as conservatives. No strings attached.

 

I was having a conversation w/ a (liberal) friend, & his assumption was that ALL conservatives believe that people are basically bad. I wanted to see if this was generally true or not.

 

2. Yes, my terms were purposely muddy. Ime, we are taught as "conservatives" to really think, believe, hold as a core principle *something* regarding the basic state of mankind. It's generally not put in such simplistic terms as "good" & "bad," but anything beyond that might be too specific to a particular location. For ex, here, we'd probably say good vs evil, but some people might have balked at "evil."

 

Did I mean this in religious terms? Probably, but I decided to leave that out & simply let "conservative" be self-defining.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Aubrey

[dangermom]

How about "People basically have a mixture of good and bad impulses"?

[ShutterBug]

Why do they have to be predominantly one or the other?

 

In the words of one Sirius Black..

 

"Besides, the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters. We've all got both light and dark inside us. What matters is the power we choose to act on. That's who we really are."

 

I'm also curiously interested as to how being "conservative" plays into this query :) .

 

ETA: Conservative here, but I didn't vote in your poll because you've made the choices too narrow.

Edited April 13, 2011 by ShutterBug

[Spy Car]

:lurk5:

[Carol in Cal.]

I'm conservative, and I believe that people are by nature sinful--that's a pretty basic Christian belief.

 

But my basic personal beliefs are:

 

--What can go wrong will go wrong (so smile, take your time, and fix it)

--Done is good (so finish, already)

--Most people are really nice (and this is the expectation with which I approach them. My arms are open)

 

So I guess I'm one of those 'obligatory 'other'' answers!

[Spy Car]

I'm conservative, and I believe that people are by nature sinful--that's a pretty basic Christian belief.

 

But my basic personal beliefs are:

 

--What can go wrong will go wrong (so smile, take your time, and fix it)

--Done is good (so finish, already)

--Most people are really nice (and this is the expectation with which I approach them. My arms are open)

 

So I guess I'm one of those 'obligatory 'other'' answers!

 

Why "other" if people "are by nature sinful." Sinful by nature is "bad", no?

 

Bill

[ShutterBug]

Why "other" if people "are by nature sinful." Sinful by nature is "bad", no?

 

Bill

 

No. Sinful by nature is human.

 

Just because we're inclined by nature to sin, doesn't mean we have to.

[SonshineLearner]

I believe we all have a sinful nature, although some don't mind selfishness rule... and some try to rule over their sin nature. I like to think that... I try to live a life that is pleasing to God. :)

[Carol in Cal.]

Why "other" if people "are by nature sinful." Sinful by nature is "bad", no?

 

Bill

 

It's bad, but it's different from approaching everyone as if they are bad. I approach people as if they are good. So that's why 'other'. I approach people on their good sides, not really suspiciously--and 'suspiciously' is the description I would expect for a conservative who thinks that people are basically bad.

[jewellsmommy]

Why "other" if people "are by nature sinful." Sinful by nature is "bad", no?

 

Bill

 

 

Having a sinful nature and giving in to that nature are 2 different things. I believe that most people fight that nature desiring to be good and unselfish. Some fight it for the greater good of society, some fight it for the love of Christ, God, Karma etc. and some give into their selfish desires.

[susankenny]

"Basically Good" or "Basically Bad" are really quite broad. What that means to me could certainly vary from person to person. Is it bad to have yucky thoughts? Or is it "good" if we don't act on them?

 

Anyway. We have the capacity to be both good and bad. I think we see the evidence of that all around us. As for sin (which perhaps is more to do with your question, as you're directing this to conservatives?? Are we born sinful or not?)...well, imho, sin is not merely behavioral. It is a disposition we are born with.

 

Susan

[Heather in Neverland]

Well "good" and "bad" are such subjective terms. I believe we are born with a sin nature.

 

Does that mean we are "bad"? Well, yes.

 

Does that mean we are all as "bad" as we COULD be? No. Some are more "bad" than others (like a pedophile for instance).

 

Does that mean we never do anything good? Of course not. We (as in humans) do good deeds all the time.

 

But do good deeds mean we are "good"? It depends on your perspective. From my conservative christian perspective, the defintion of "good" is GOD. So without Him I am not good. Even with Him I am only good because of the righteousness of Christ and not because of anything I have done.

[staceyobu]

I believe we are made in the image of God... which would be good.

 

But we are also fallen and born into sin... which would be bad.

 

So, I think it can be summed up as both. We are all good and bad. Some people may be more of one than the other.

[buddhabelly]

Hi,

 

Not being snarky. Really, really, not. I truly do not know what "conservative" means. Is this just the opposite of liberal? Because one can be politically liberal and religiously conservative, or vice versa.

 

Buddhism rests on the premise of our inherent goodness. Talk about "good news!" It's almost as exciting as tea and cookies after meetings, no? But I didn't answer the poll because even though I don't know what conservative means, I'm pretty darn sure I'm not that.

 

Unless it means someone that conserves our natural resources! Heh.

 

Julie

[Jean in Newcastle]

If you mean that people are born enslaved to sin, then yes, I believe that. That would be "basically bad." The thing is, though that people can also have human good - a basic morality that everyone can have. That human good could be qualified as "basically good". The problem is that all the human good in the world isn't as good as God's righteousness and cannot get you a relationship with God. It falls short.

[AngelBee]

Good :)

 

Gets me in trouble at times because I ALWAYS give people the benefit of doubt and think good of them.

[Spy Car]

If people are basically good and can chose (of their own accord) to be moral then how in the world could they be enslaved to sin? This does not compute.

 

If people can choose to be good (of their own accord) then it is not true that that are enslaved to sin.

 

Bill

[staceyobu]

If people are basically good and can chose (of their own accord) to be moral then how in the world could they be enslaved to sin? This does not compute.

 

If people can choose to be good (of their own accord) then it is not true that that are enslaved to sin.

 

Bill

 

Hmmm. Perhaps you would say that people are enslaved to sin because no one can be perfectly good. You are going to do bad eventually no matter how hard you are trying to do good. It is inescapable.

[Spy Car]

Hmmm. Perhaps you would say that people are enslaved to sin because no one can be perfectly good. You are going to do bad eventually no matter how hard you are trying to do good. It is inescapable.

 

There is a huge chasm (at least in my mind) between believing people may be less than "perfectly good" and believing humans are born with a "sin nature" or "enslaved by sin" or otherwise in a fallen sinful state.

 

I don't see how one can conflate imperfect (but basically good) with enslaved by sin.

 

Bill

[jewellsmommy]

If people are basically good and can chose (of their own accord) to be moral then how in the world could they be enslaved to sin? This does not compute.

 

If people can choose to be good (of their own accord) then it is not true that that are enslaved to sin.

 

Bill

 

 

the same way an alcoholic is still an alcoholic even when they are not drinking. The desire, temptation, tendency is still there.

[8circles]

There is a huge chasm (at least in my mind) between believing people may be less than "perfectly good" and believing humans are born with a "sin nature" or "enslaved by sin" or otherwise in a fallen sinful state.

 

I don't see how one can conflate imperfect (but basically good) with enslaved by sin.

 

Bill

 

I believe that humans are both enslaved by sin & basically good. But I don't believe in total depravity & it seems that's how you're defining "enslaved by sin". I am conservative & voted "basically good".

[Crimson Wife]

There is a huge chasm (at least in my mind) between believing people may be less than "perfectly good" and believing humans are born with a "sin nature" or "enslaved by sin" or otherwise in a fallen sinful state.

 

I don't see how one can conflate imperfect (but basically good) with enslaved by sin.

 

Bill

 

You don't feel that it's human nature to feel temptation frequently and to struggle to resist it?

[Jean in Newcastle]

If people are basically good and can chose (of their own accord) to be moral then how in the world could they be enslaved to sin? This does not compute.

 

If people can choose to be good (of their own accord) then it is not true that that are enslaved to sin.

 

Bill

 

Even your human good is a product of your sinful nature. It is basically self-serving at its root. Our human good at it's best, can only lead to a self righteousness. It is tainted and can't reach perfect righteousness no matter how hard we try. Since it's rather obvious that my standard for these answers is the Bible, the Bible says in Isaiah 64:6 that "all of our righteousnesses are like filthy rags."

[Spy Car]

Even your human good is a product of your sinful nature. It is basically self-serving at its root. Our human good at it's best, can only lead to a self righteousness. It is tainted and can't reach perfect righteousness no matter how hard we try. Since it's rather obvious that my standard for these answers is the Bible, the Bible says in Isaiah 64:6 that "all of our righteousnesses are like filthy rags."

 

So people (at bottom) are "bad". I can accept this as being part of a conservative worldview. What I find it very hard to accept is than men are sinful by nature and basically good (of their own accord), as these two things are inherently contradictory.

 

Bill

[Plucky]

I tend to believe people are basically good. I'm proven wrong often, but I still believe. :)

[jewellsmommy]

So people (at bottom) are "bad". I can accept this as being part of a conservative worldview. What I find it very hard to accept is than men are sinful by nature and basically good (of their own accord), as these two things are inherently contradictory.

 

Bill

 

 

Sin and no sin are black & white, you are or you aren't. People are sinful. No in between. Good and bad are gray scale, degrees. No matter how good my desires, intentions, attempts, thoughts and actions, I am still sinful. But I am certainly a good person in the eyes of humans and the world at large.

 

 

ETA: In God's eyes, I am not "good" but I am forgiven :) The poll didn't ask what I thought God thought about people though.

Edited April 13, 2011 by jewellsmommy

[EthiopianFood]

There is a huge chasm (at least in my mind) between believing people may be less than "perfectly good" and believing humans are born with a "sin nature" or "enslaved by sin" or otherwise in a fallen sinful state.

 

I don't see how one can conflate imperfect (but basically good) with enslaved by sin.

 

Bill

 

I agree. I think this is especially true in light of the original question, which was whether people are basically good or bad. It seems like there are people who believe in a sin nature, but don't believe people are basically bad in the way I think the OP meant, yet they voted "basically bad" anyway. :confused:

 

I have my theories as to why the OP posted this question to conservatives in particular, but I don't feel like typing it out, so I'll just wait and see what she says. :tongue_smilie:

[Heather in Neverland]

So people (at bottom) are "bad". I can accept this as being part of a conservative worldview. What I find it very hard to accept is than men are sinful by nature and basically good (of their own accord), as these two things are inherently contradictory.

 

Bill

 

Oh I get it... So you are asking "If you believe in humans having a sin nature AND you also believe that humans are basically good, how do you reconcile the two?"

 

At first I was confused as to what you are asking. Is that it?

 

That question doesn't apply to me as I believe that having a sin nature means that humans are basically bad (but still do things that appear to be good sometimes). But my answer to the question above would be... I can't reconcile the two because I don't believe that to be true. :D

[Jean in Newcastle]

So people (at bottom) are "bad". I can accept this as being part of a conservative worldview. What I find it very hard to accept is than men are sinful by nature and basically good (of their own accord), as these two things are inherently contradictory.

 

Bill

 

I think I did a bad job of explaining my particular worldview. It is in a nutshell - people are (at bottom) basically bad. So bad that even what we think of as "good" isn't considered good by God because it misses the mark by so much. And because what we think of as "good" is our own effort to do for ourselves when God had already provided for us perfect goodness that doesn't use any of our own effort in it's achievement. The problem is in who is defining what is good or not.

[EthiopianFood]

Sin and no sin are black & white, you are or you aren't. People are sinful. No in between. Good and bad are gray scale, degrees. No matter how good my desires, intentions, attempts, thoughts and actions, I am still sinful. But I am certainly a good person in the eyes of humans and the world at large.

 

Right, but aren't you speaking in terms of God/religion? If you mean well most of the time, most will consider you basically good. The question wasn't if you believe in a sin nature.

[nd293]

Interesting question, but from previous threads here, I'd say that what people use to define themselves as conservative or liberal varies too much for the label itself to be used in the poll without being defined

 

I think people are basically weak (in my generous moments) or useless (in my less kind moments). Good or bad are not really words I'd use.

[jewellsmommy]

Right, but aren't you speaking in terms of God/religion? If you mean well most of the time, most will consider you basically good. The question wasn't if you believe in a sin nature.

 

 

I realize that the poll did not ask this. But Bill did and I was responding to his query.

[Spy Car]

Oh I get it... So you are asking "If you believe in humans having a sin nature AND you also believe that humans are basically good, how do you reconcile the two?"

 

At first I was confused as to what you are asking. Is that it?

 

That question doesn't apply to me as I believe that having a sin nature means that humans are basically bad (but still do things that appear to be good sometimes). But my answer to the question above would be... I can't reconcile the two because I don't believe that to be true. :D

 

Yes, and I believe yours is the "honest" conservative position.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

I think I did a bad job of explaining my particular worldview. It is in a nutshell - people are (at bottom) basically bad. So bad that even what we think of as "good" isn't considered good by God because it misses the mark by so much. And because what we think of as "good" is our own effort to do for ourselves when God had already provided for us perfect goodness that doesn't use any of our own effort in it's achievement. The problem is in who is defining what is good or not.

 

So you voted "basically bad"?

 

Bill

[jewellsmommy]

Right, but aren't you speaking in terms of God/religion? If you mean well most of the time, most will consider you basically good. The question wasn't if you believe in a sin nature.

 

Also, depending on your religious views, some cannot separate the two. By asking this of conservatives (which I took to mean faith wise as she did not state otherwise) I believe she was allowing for the muddling of the two.

[8circles]

Yes, and I believe yours is the "honest" conservative position.

 

Bill

:confused: Am I not honest then? I don't want to argue but I'm confused...

[Jean in Newcastle]

So you voted "basically bad"?

 

Bill

 

Yes, Sir.

[merry gardens]

I'd answer both. We are made in the image of God (very good) yet fallen from grace due to original sin and its effects (bad).

[Spy Car]

:confused: Am I not honest then? I don't want to argue but I'm confused...

 

I have no doubt you are honest, maybe less convinced that you are "conservative" ;) :D

 

Bill

[Plucky]

nm, not worth it

Edited April 13, 2011 by True Blue

[8circles]

I have no doubt you are honest, maybe less convinced that you are "conservative" ;) :D

 

Bill

 

Aha. We need to define some terms then to get down to the bottom of this. :D I've never in my life been described as liberal anything... maybe liberal use of butter on my popcorn. :tongue_smilie:

[EthiopianFood]

I realize that the poll did not ask this. But Bill did and I was responding to his query.

 

Gotcha.

 

Also, depending on your religious views, some cannot separate the two. By asking this of conservatives (which I took to mean faith wise as she did not state otherwise) I believe she was allowing for the muddling of the two.

 

I took it to mean the common definition, i.e. not necessarily religious. In everyday life, when a person makes a choice to act, do they USUALLY have good motives? I think this is different than saying "good enough motives to please God" and/or "PERFECT motives." I am interested to hear the OP clarify a bit, of course, because I could be way off base. It seems many on this thread do believe humans make overall "well-meaning" choices, even though though their religious beliefs say that is not good ENOUGH. If your beliefs don't allow the separation of the two, then you would be saying that your sin nature causes people to make most of their choices based on selfish/bad/whatever motives.

[Spy Car]

You don't feel that it's human nature to feel temptation frequently and to struggle to resist it?

 

If people are "tempted" and successfully act according to what is moral, rather than what is immoral, and they do so of their own accord and free-will, that is powerful evidence that men (and women) are not of a "sin nature."

 

Bill

Edited April 13, 2011 by Spy Car

[Peela]

If people are "tempted" and successfully act according to what is moral, rather than what is immoral, and they do so of their own accord and free-will, that is powerful evidence that men (and women) are not of a "sin nature."

 

Bill

 

Love it! :iagree:

[Jean in Newcastle]

Gotcha.

 

 

 

I took it to mean the common definition, i.e. not necessarily religious. In everyday life, when a person makes a choice to act, do they USUALLY have good motives? I think this is different than saying "good enough motives to please God" and/or "PERFECT motives." I am interested to hear the OP clarify a bit, of course, because I could be way off base. It seems many on this thread do believe humans make overall "well-meaning" choices, even though though their religious beliefs say that is not good ENOUGH. If your beliefs don't allow the separation of the two, then you would be saying that your sin nature causes people to make most of their choices based on selfish/bad/whatever motives.

 

I sort of hemmed and hawed at first because I was not really sure how the OP meant it. I still don't know how the OP meant it, but chose to answer it in the way that I see human goodness or badness - against the backdrop of God's own goodness. I know that I'm reading a lot into the question by doing so but I can't really define it for myself any other way. Of course I realize that many people, perhaps even the majority of people will define it quite differently.

[silliness7]

Aha. We need to define some terms then to get down to the bottom of this. :D I've never in my life been described as liberal anything... maybe liberal use of butter on my popcorn. :tongue_smilie:

 

There does seem to be confusion over the definition of good and bad.

 

Is it good/bad according to God's standard? or according to society's standard?

 

If it's God's standard then we're basically bad seeing as how he sent a Savior to redeem the world from our badness. "For ALL have sinned..."

 

If it's society's standard then we're basically good seeing as how the majority of us are not in jail. :D

 

...can't vote til that is cleared up.

[silliness7]

Gotcha.

 

 

 

I took it to mean the common definition, i.e. not necessarily religious. In everyday life, when a person makes a choice to act, do they USUALLY have good motives? I think this is different than saying "good enough motives to please God" and/or "PERFECT motives." I am interested to hear the OP clarify a bit, of course, because I could be way off base. It seems many on this thread do believe humans make overall "well-meaning" choices, even though though their religious beliefs say that is not good ENOUGH. If your beliefs don't allow the separation of the two, then you would be saying that your sin nature causes people to make most of their choices based on selfish/bad/whatever motives.

 

Yeah...but the OP used some loaded terms.

Conservative

Nature (as it pertains to man's core being not trees and grass)

It tends to make the religion come out in religious folk. :001_smile:

[Rosy]

I'm with Jean and Heather. For me the question is whether sin originates in the human heart/soul/etc. or whether people are made sinful by outside influences. I believe the former. I believe that people are basically bad but not utterly bad--our bent is to turn away from God, who is good and the source of all goodness.

 

I consider myself conservative. For me, there is a strong link between these. I do not believe that improving a person's circumstances causes them to be less sinful, though it may change the way in which they sin. So while I believe in helping the poor (for example), it is not because I believe that poverty causes sin and alleviating poverty will make people less sinful. The government can (and should at times) restrain one's sinful impulses, but it can not provide salvation from sin--only God can do that.

[Miss Sherry]

If people are "tempted" and successfully act according to what is moral, rather than what is immoral, and they do so of their own accord and free-will, that is powerful evidence that men (and women) are not of a "sin nature."

 

Bill

But then who decides what is "moral" and what is "immoral" ? Some people in prison for certain crimes have been known to "judge" others in prison for doing "worse" crimes than they have committed. If I'm someone who has only robbed a bank but didn't kill or rape someone then I'm more moral and those rapists should be the one's to be ostracized in prison, they reason. But the one who robbed the bank has committed a crime and so has the one that raped or killed someone. They both have guilt even though they didn't commit the same act.But it doesn't really even matter what some other person has done, in regards to how "sinless" we are.God says we are not to compare ourselves to others.

By God's standard, each and every person is a sinner. We each have not committed the same exact sins, but we ALL fall short of Gods perfect, holy standard. By our own standard, we may very well call ourselves righteous and sinless. But we don't stand up to God's holy, perfect standard. It's not just about outward actions. It's about the condition of our heart. We have a heart with a sin nature. If we don't see that it's because we haven't let God shine enough of His light into our life to show us. People tend to hide from the light when they don't love God. I'm sure others could say it better.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Miss Sherry

[Miss Sherry]

About the op's question. I think we all have a sin nature. We have the potential to do evil but we are made in the image of God and so also have the potential to do good.