Good rabbit, bad rabbit: Simple experiments involving babies have
shown that we have a strong morality instinct from an early age
When
it comes to the controversial concept of Original Sin, also referred to
as "Hereditary Total Depravity" or "Born with a Sinful Nature," a
common argument in its favor goes like this: "Babies don't need to be
taught to be selfish, self-centered, or demanding." Those who support
this doctrine often use babies as examples to argue that we are
inherently sinful. They label a baby crying for their mother, being
hungry, needing a diaper change, or seeking comfort in their mother's
arms as acts of sin. It's important to consider the validity of these
claims. In reality, a crying baby communicates distress and discomfort
– it's a natural way for them to seek attention, just as even
Jesus cried as an infant to get his mother's attention.
Why embrace such complete absurdity
when the Bible unmistakably states that committing sin means violating
God's law? According to Scripture, no one becomes a sinner until they
transgress God's law (1 John 3:4) and becomes guilty when yielding to
temptation (James 1:13-14).
The Bible is also clear that sin is not passed onto
others. Sin is not a substance. It is not in the DNA.
Sin cannot be transferred from one person to the next. This is
silly. Think about it. Ezek. 18:20 is clear that no one
bears the guilt of the father nor the father bear the guilt of the
son. No one inherits Adam's sin, but we do suffer the
consequences of Adam's sin. Big difference. Mankind suffers
the consequence of Adam's sin as in pain, sickness, and eventually
physical death. However, no one inherits Adam's guilt. If a
man is arrested for stealing, they do not put the parents on
trial. The man is guilty for his own transgression.
Since sin is moral issue which is a
transgression of the law and conscience (1 John 3:4; James 4:17), and
babies are not able to make moral decisions, they are morally neutral!
(2Kings 14:6; Deu. 24:16; 2Chr. 25:4; Eze. 18:2-4; Eze. 18:19-20)
Babies are innocent. Children are not guilty of evil, nor worthy
of praise until they are able to make their own decisions (Rom.
9:11). They have to come to the age of maturity where they know to
do right and do wrong....thus sin. (Jas. 4:17) This sin is not by
necessity, but rather by choice. (Jas.1:13-15). This is why every
human is responsible for the "things done in the body" and is
judged "according to what he/she has done, whether it be good or bad."
(2Cor. 5:10)
The Bible is clear that it is "YOUR
iniquities" and "YOUR sins" that separates you from God (Isa.
59:1-2). It was not your birth. Moral character, whether it be good or evil, can never be inherited.
Scripture states in Romans 2:14-15,
For when the Gentiles, which have not
the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having
not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law
written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and
theirthoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
God made us with a nature to do those
things contained in the law, even for those Gentiles who did not have
the written law (moral law). This passage proves that
if a person lives his/her life according to the precepts of God’s
‘Law’ they have, in effect, BECOME a ‘law unto
themselves.
God gives every man a conscience. Our
conscience is the voice of the Holy Spirit speaking to our human
spirit. Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would convict us of
sin. That is the job of our conscience. God gives us an
inner awareness of what is evil and good. But people can ignore
their conscience and therefore sear their conscience (1 Tim. 4:2).
The following is a study that was
done which showed that even babies know the difference between good and
evil at the age of six months. Now I would not say that babies
have the knowledge in the sense that they have the ability to reason, to compute, and to analyze, but God makes us with a nature
that is good and upright (Ecc. 7:29) and the law written upon our
hearts (Rom. 2:15), and everyone faces the day when they have to make
moral decisions with the knowledge that they actually know when it is
right or wrong. To me, this study shows that babies already see
the difference because of the innate nature God has given them even though they do not have the understanding yet. (Isa. 7:15-16)
But notice how some researcher urge caution because it may be what the baby preferred.
There will always be denial from those who refuse to look at the
Creator who made us and who instilled in each of us a nature that
starts out upright and made in His image. It is when we go astray
that we go against our nature!
The Following is that article:
Babies know the
difference between good and evil at the age of 6 months, study reveals.
At the age of six months babies can barely sit up - let along take their first tottering steps, crawl or talk.
But, according to psychologists, they
have already developed a sense of moral code - and can tell the
difference between good and evil.
An astonishing series of experiments
is challenging the views of many psychologists and social scientists
that human beings are born as 'blank slates' - and that our morality is
shaped by our parents and experiences. Instead, they suggest that
the difference between good and bad may be hardwired into the brain at
birth.
In one experiment involving puppets,
babies aged six months old showed a strong preference to 'good' helpful
characters - and rejected unhelpful, 'naughty' ones.
In another, they even acted as judge
and jury. When asked to take away treats from a 'naughty' puppet, some
babies went further - and dished out their own punishment with a smack
on its head.
Professor Paul Bloom, a psychologist
at Yale University in Connecticut, whose department has studied
morality in babies for years, said: 'A growing body of evidence
suggests that humans do have a rudimentary moral sense from the very
start of life.
'With the help of well designed
experiments, you can see glimmers of moral thought, moral judgment and
moral feeling even in the first year of life.
'Some sense of good and evil seems to be bred in the bones.'
For one study, the Yale researchers
got babies aged between six months and a year to watch a puppet
show in which a simple, colourful wooden shape with eyes tries to climb
a hill. Sometimes the shape is helped up the hill by a second toy,
while other times a third character pushes it down. After
watching the show several times, the babies were shown the
helpful and unhelpful toys. They showed a clear preference for the
helpful toys - spending far longer looking at the 'good' shapes than
the 'bad' ones.
'In the end, we found that six- and
ten-month-old infants overwhelmingly preferred the helpful individual
to the hindering individual,' Prof Bloom told the New York Times.
'This wasn't a subtle statistical trend; just about all the babies reached for the good guy.'
Two more tests found the same moral sense.
In one, the researchers devised a 'one-act morality
play', in which a toy dog tries to open a box. The dog is joined by a
teddy bear who helps him lift the lid, and a teddy who stubbornly sits
on the box.
They also made the babies watch a
puppet cat play ball with two toy rabbits. When the cat rolled the ball
to one rabbit, it rolled the ball straight back. But when the cat
rolled it to the second rabbit, it picked up the ball and ran off.
'In both studies, five-month-old
babies preferred the good guy - the one who helped to open the box; the
one who rolled the ball back - to the bad guy,' said Professor Bloom.
When the same tests were repeated
with 21-month-old babies, they were given a chance to dish out treats
to the toys - or take treats away. Most toddlers punished
the 'naughty rabbit' by taking away treats. One even gave the miscreant
a smack on the head as a punishment.
Although the studies appear to show
that morality is hard-wired into babies brains, some psychologists
urged caution. Dr Nadja Reissland, of Durham University, said
babies started to learn the difference between good and bad from birth.
'Everything hinges on who decides
what is normal,' she said. 'By saying pushing the ball up the hill is
helpful, the researchers are making a moral judgement. The babies might
just prefer to see things go up rather than down.
'In the other test, perhaps the bear
closes the box to prevent the dog from getting in there because there
is something dangerous inside. It is like a mother keeping children out
of an area where there is something harmful.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1275574/Babies-know-difference-good-evil-months-study-reveals.html