So you're saying that because a person sin's, that causes them to feel uneasy, even though they may not know the reason why? If so, I agree with that. In the case of the people living together, you spoke of their "ignorantly living in sin." I agree with this too.

"People know naturally, instinctively it is morally wrong to do things that violate the last six commandments." I agree with this too. Actually I agree with everything you wrote in this post. I would have also agreed if you had written: ""People know naturally, instinctively it is morally wrong to do things that violate the last ten commandments."

Tom, forgive me, but when you say you agree with me, I initially, instinctively suspect something is horribly wrong. I know that doesn't sound very nice, but I don't mean it to sound mean. For example, are you 100% certain you believe no one can violate one of the last six commandments without naturally, instinctively feeling rotten to a lesser or greater degree, without realizing it is morally wrong to indulge those types of thoughts, words, and deeds? Or, do you think it is possible for people to violate one or more of the last six commandments and feel no sorrow or shame? Of course, I'm talking about normal people, healthy people who have not hardened their hearts beyond feeling sorry or shameful when they sin.

Also, yes, I believe people feel a sense of loss and emptiness when they ignorantly violate the first four commandments. However, the difference is that they cannot identify the source of their loss and emptiness without learning about it from the Bible or from someone who believes in the Bible. They are not born with an instinctive ability to discern the source and cause of their feelings of loss and emptiness.

I didn't take it as mean. I took it as humorous, which I thought it was, and I think is how you intended it.



In general principles, I agree with this regarding all 10 Commandments. That is, I wouldn't necessarily word it the way you did, but I agree with the idea your stating.



I believe that sin is bad, and makes people feel bad, even though they may not know why. The human brain is very complicated, so exactly how this might be manifest is impossible for mere mortals to specify exactly, but the part above where you talked about people feeling rotten to a lesser or greater degree isn't bad.



I would agree with this in regards to the last six as well. As Paul stated, he would not have known "thou shalt not covet," but by the Bible.



I agree with this, in regards to all 10, like Paul states.

Thank you for reiterating your beliefs. I'm pretty sure, fairly certain I understand them. It looks like we agree on the fact people are wired to feel rotten when they violate the law of God. But we disagree as to whether or not unchurched people can pin point misrepresenting God as the origin of their unrest and emptiness when they unwittingly violate one or more of the first three commandments. I believe people must learn about it through Bible study, whereas you believe people know it naturally.

Do you agree with my summary?

No, not quite. Here's the last part of my previous post:



In your summary, you said



whereas I said I agreed with what you said about the first three commandments, but would not limit it to that, but include the others as well. Rather than include all the commandments in your summary in what I was saying, you eliminated them all.

Here is my summary again with clarification:

1. We agree people are wired from birth to feel empty and unrestful when they violate any one of the ten commandments.

2. We agree people can name dishonoring their parents, murder, adultery, stealing, lying, and coveting as the origin of the unrest and emptiness they feel when they do such things. They instinctively know it from birth. Unchurched people cannot, however, name them as commandments; whereas, born again believers can.

3. We seem to disagree as to whether or not unchurched people can name having having gods, idolatry, and taking God's name in vain as the origin of the unrest and emptiness they feel when they do such things. I believe to name them as commandments they must learn about it through Bible study and prayer; whereas, you seem to believe they can instinctively name them as commandments from the time they're old enough to articulate it.

4. We both agree people are not born with an instinctive knowledge of the fourth commandment, and that they cannot name Sabbath-breaking as an origin of unrest and emptiness until after they learn about Sabbath-keeping through Bible study and prayer.

1, yes.

2, no. Paul said he would not have known coveting, except for the law, so he would not have been able to identify coveting except for the law.

3. I'm not making a distinction between the 10 commandments. I'm saying that breaking any one of the results in bad things, although the person breaking them may not be able to identify what the cause of their unrest is. Regardless of the commandment, the sinner needs divine help to identify what is wrong, as spiritual things are spiritually discerned, and the commandments are all spiritual. The Holy Spirit is needed; instinct is not enough. The natural man does not comprehend the things of God, and the commandments, all of them, are things of God.

4.I think my comments for 3 covers this as well.

2. How do you explain the fact people who know not the law can name coveting as a source of unrest?

3. How do you explain the fact people who know not the law can name lying, stealing, coveting, murder, adultery, and dishonoring their parents as sources of unrest but they cannot name Sabbath-breaking as a source of unrest?

PS - I agree with you that people who know not the law, who know not Jesus, cannot name the spiritual source of their unrest. But all of them can name thoughts, words, and deeds that violate the last six commandments as sources of unrest, and not one of them can name thoughts, words, and deeds that violate the first four commandments as sources of unrest.

2.Paul said he wouldn't have known coveting, except for the law. He didn't say no one could know it without the law.

3.Why do you think people cannot name Sabbath-breaking as a source of unrest? Also, people cannot always identify the source of unrest, just sometimes.



I understand you assert this, but I have no idea why. I don't know why you make this distinction between the two books of the law. My understanding is that sometimes people can identify the source of unrest, and sometimes they can't, and this holds true for commandments which are in the first book and commandments in the second.

2. Your answer seems contradictory. Please explain it further. Thank you.

3. I do not understand how your response answers my question. Please elaborate. Thank you.

PS - Are you referring to people who know not the law, who know not Jesus? Are you saying these kinds of people can sometimes name Sabbath-breaking as a source of their unrest? How would they make the connection?