Original Sin

[Kenny]

Hope this isn't too lengthy but the subject matter is more than a one liner.

1. I hadn't considered that some might believe that only Adam and eve were created. Is the bible not quite specific though? As in, god created light and then the seas and land etc etc before he created animals and humans etc. If you believe animals evolved but not humans, why not? I mean, there is plenty of evidence that humans evolved from a type of ape.
2. I'm not sure that children knowing right from wrong is necessarily evidence that God gave us a sense of right and wrong (I think that's what you meant, apologies if not). We're a social species and as such, we behave in a way which by and large is good for others of our species. Obviously there are exceptions, but as a general rule we follow that trend. This is also common in other great apes.
3. You kind of answered my question though, so thank you. The rest was just follow up.

Thanks for your demeanor and presentation.

Yes, there is no problem with animals capacity to think and feel. I have seen about the rats and other animals. Quite fascinating. As Christians, we would say they have souls but not eternal spirits. I deleted that portion since there is complete agreement there and no need to follow on that line.

Obviously there are many differences in the Christian community. That is indisputable.

1. Actually, the Bible isn't specific in the "how" He Created other than He spoke. In my study and talking to a scientist, I read that all matter consists of vibrations. Light and sound waves are vibrations. First Cause is another way of saying it and within the light/sound waves, at the very sub atomic level, is all the information to drive what we call Intelligent Design.

In that it was made within "light", time is a matter of perspective or, as one author put it, a day is as a thousand years (metaphorically speaking).

As far as man evolving. In the scriptures, there is mention of sanctuaries of worship that Satan was in charge of before Adam and Eve existed and before pride entered into his heart. (I'm just sharing, I'm sure there are people who disagree as there are disagreements in about anything one talks about).

Ez 28:13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created...
...18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.

So it is proposed that there were beings before Adam and Eve were created in the Eden which then was destroyed after he was cast out of Heaven.

The Bible really is about Adam and Eve mankind and Jesus. Not about the biology of every aspect that can be talked about.

2) Yes. It really is a matter of perspective (which can vary person to person). As Christians, we certainly would say that it is the DNA of God but it is our perspective. Certainly even when a Lion eats baby cubs we see that as abnormal. Saw a video clip on how one would sneak into a group of baby cubs while the lioness wasn't around. I assume that even the pride would not stand up to it.

So, yes, we would say it is a God DNA but someone else would say differently.

3) Thanks for the dialogue!

 

[Kenny]

Well, that makes no sense. Evolution entails that any Adam and Eve shared a common ancestor with chimps. And pigs. And trees. And everything else with a DNA. And that we are animals. Vertebrates, mammals and primates, to be precise.

My personal suggestion to Christian theists, in order to not ruin both science and the Bible, is to save the Bible at least, if it is really so important to them, and strictly believe in the literal account. Like Ken Ham and such.

Your best bet in the interest of intellectual coherence, really.

Ciao

- viole

yes, we have different boats that float. I personally don't think I am the grand-nephew of a chimp or pig or a stick in the mud. If I am wrong, I'll find out in about 55 years.

 

[Earthtank]

Original

To me, original sin can be dismissed if you don't believe genesis literally. If you dismiss literal sin, jesus died for nothing. If that's the case, Christianity is built on a falsehood.

If you believe genesis literally, that's a whole other discussion but one that I usually don't have the strength for...

Woohoo we agree on something lol

 

[viole]

yes, we have different boats that float. I personally don't think I am the grand-nephew of a chimp or pig or a stick in the mud. If I am wrong, I'll find out in about 55 years.

Right. And that is why I would not venture in things like science and evolution, if you believe in the Bible and cherish It.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kenny]

Right. And that is why I would not venture in things like science and evolution, if you believe in the Bible and cherish It.

Ciao

- viole

I'm a little more open minded that just eliminating a whole area of life and living.

Adios

 

[viole]

I'm a little more open minded that just eliminating a whole area of life and living.

Adios

So, does your open mind accept the possibility that you share a common ancestor with rats?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kenny]

So, does your open mind accepts the possibility that you share a common ancestor with rats?

Ciao

- viole

I do accept the possibility of evolution of animals.

Does your open mind accept the possibility that there is a God, that you are a spirit, that He sent His only son and that He wants to connect with you?

 

[viole]

I do accept the possibility of evolution of animals.

Does your open mind accept the possibility that there is a God, that you are a spirit, that He sent His only son and that He wants to connect with you?

Of course it does. My open mind accepts also the possibility that the Universe has been originated by Mother Goose burping because she ate too much. Among an infinity of possible things.

I think that Mother Goose burping is equally plausible, and has the same evidence, of a god spawning a son so that he can sacrifice a weekend of his life for our sins, or whatever. Nevertheless, they are still logically possible.

Ciao

- viole

 

[paarsurrey]

Original Sin

Did Jesus or Moses mention "original" sin?
If yes, then please quote from Jesus and or Moses mentioning "original" in relation to sin.
I understand that this concept was invented by the "Church" to sell Christianity falsely to others. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I look at Christian myth with a mystic point of view. Adam and Eve eating the apple and covering themselves, shutting themselves off from God/Eden is symbolic of the individual losing their connection with their environment; no longer seeing themselves as a part of the greater whole (God, Nature, the Universe, etc.). This is "original sin."

Jesus represents the individual who overcomes preconceptions and sacrifices them by tasting the fruit of the tree of life and death: the cross that connects God and Jesus, the Whole and the Individual, "I" from everything else.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I was about to write one of my majestic treatises on religious ideas that I find unpalatable, until I discovered @It Aint Necessarily So had already written it for me.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

A person who sins, and every person sins, can only find salvation through Christ, period. We sin because we are born with the propensity to sin, it is our nature and none can avoid it.

The Genesis account of the fall may be literal, or symbolic, I don´t think it makes much difference.

The point is clear, humanity was created with a sinless nature, therefore to sin was a cold hard intellectual choice. At some point humanity became depraved through the the wrong use of free will, exercising those cold hard choices.

Children were born into this depraved situation, surrounded by sin at their birth. Generation after generation lived in a society where sin was embraced , and it was the norm. It could not be avoided.

In the Genesis story, in the beginning humanity had no knowledge of evil, thus no desire to do it.

Once that knowledge was obtained, there was no going back.

I believe in evolution, that is I believe that organisms have great ability to adapt to different environments over time. Micro evolution. I do not believe that types of animals become another type, i.e. dinosaurs becoming chickens, or a four legged relatively small land land mammals crawled into the ocean and became the largest animals on earth.

It is what I believe, and without more evidence, I will continue to believe it.

You want "more evidence" to disbelieve something that you already believe in the complete absence of any evidence whatever? How very odd.

For myself, I am afraid that I find such beliefs tragic almost beyond my imaging. "Children were born into this depraved situation, surrounded by sin at their birth?" Children, in the eyes of this poor atheist, are the very epitome of perfect innocence.

You also make it quite explicitly clear that all those people who were born before the Church even declared this nonsense are doomed to forgo salvation, for no reason whatsoever except God's rather poor timing. After all, there have been humans for 100,000 to 200,000 thousand years, and yet we only got this important message 2,000 years ago? An eyeblink. Not only that, this incredible message was delivered in such a way that the MAJORITY of the human race has still not received it.

That's pretty inept of your deity, in my view. I always expect my omnipotent and omniscient entities to perform so much better.

 

[paarsurrey]

Original sin is simply our inherent propensity to sin. It is part of our nature. A four year old lies instead of telling the truth, it is a natural response. If there was not so called original sin, it would be natural for that child to always tell the truth.

I agree with the above lines in the post.
One has beautifully expressed the concept of original sin but has missed to observe that Jesus had no authority to remove this original sin from anybody. Anybody who does have this "inherent propensity to sin" witnesses that Jesus could not and did not remove it from the followers of Pauline-Christianity.
Right, please?

Regards

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Thank you for asking

It really depends on how you define it since different people will have different perspectives.

You can believe in evolution as a whole and still believe Adam and Eve were created. It doesn't say how animals were created. There are many theories as the Bible isn't specific on that issue such as a pre-Adamic world which would account for "other beings".

I find that to be an utterly impossible belief, Ken. Surely, those "other beings" couldn't possibly be genetically compatible with these newly created humans, and yet there was nobody else around for Cain and Abel to do their begetting on. You are letting your extremely simplistic lack of understanding to allow you to imagine forth anything and everything.

Do we believe that Adam and Eve were the "original sinners"? Yes. And certainly we never have to teach our children to do wrong, they learn all by themselves.

You might believe that, I certainly do not, and from what I've read, quite a few others also do not.

And your notion of parenthood in this regard I find quite awful, really. Many, many animals, as we can easily observe, "teach" their offspring what is good to do and what is not, because this is essential for survival. Even casual observation at the zoo, or in nature films, or a walk through the forest, can show you a mother directing a child, or even cuffing it when it strays. Do you think they have "original sin?" No, they are higher animals, and the primary feature of higher animals is that they need more to survive than mere instinct -- they have things to learn.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I do accept the possibility of evolution of animals.

Does your open mind accept the possibility that there is a God, that you are a spirit, that He sent His only son and that He wants to connect with you?

Wonderful! And since He's God, there's nothing I could do to stop Him connecting with me, right?

Oh, right, I forgot, it doesn't work that way. It all has to be about me doing something -- opening a valve or whatever to "let Him in." So, I can make a holy sign on my forehead (or wherever it's needed), then let my imagination go to work, right? And whatever, in my own imagination, feels really, really good and important, that's my God Connection, eh?

Is it any bleeding wonder there are so very many versions of Christianity out there?

 

[Brickjectivity]

...and yet there was nobody else around for Cain and Abel to do their begetting on...

A really good question for literalists.

One has beautifully expressed the concept of original sin

Maybe in Islam but not in Paul's writings which are the canon for Christians.

 

[shmogie]

I agree with the above lines in the post.
One has beautifully expressed the concept of original sin but has missed to observe that Jesus had no authority to remove this original sin from anybody. Anybody who does have this "inherent propensity to sin" witnesses that Jesus could not and did not remove it from the followers of Pauline-Christianity.
Right, please?

Regards

Who says that is what Christ did ? The second covenant provided a better way for forgiveness of sin, and through positional justification a way to be covered by Christs cloak of righteousness before God.

Original sin will be removed when those justified ones come forth from the grave, or are transformed at the second coming. They will have new bodies, hearts, spirits and original sin will not exist in them.

There is no Pauline Christianity, only Christianity. To deny Paul is to deny Christ, to deny Christ means the ultimate and final death.

 

[Prometheus85]

What are your views on original sin? This is both for hard-line literalists and those who believe it's all metaphorical

For the believers in the literal interpretation: I assume you reject evolution - otherwise the Adam and Eve story can't really be a thing. Who's to say when the first 'humans' walked the earth, considering we all have varying amounts of neanderthal DNA still floating around.

For the metaphorical believers: unless Adam and eve literally gave us original sin, jesus' martyrdom was pointless. If you believe Jesus was a mythical character, how can you assume God is different?

Thanks for indulging me

I thinks it’s full of absurdities and contradictions

• We (Humans) are punished for sins committed before we are even born.
• It was the sin that made Adam and Eve aware of good and evil, so they couldn't know that what they were doing was a good or evil act until they had done it. (Why didn't God want them to know anyway? And didn't he already know they were going to disobey his instructions? What kind of sin is that?
• The real reason for banishing them from the Garden wasn't even so much that they sinned or that they had knowledge of good and evil. It was actually out of the fear that they might find and eat the fruit of another dangerous tree! the Tree of Life and become immortal like God. So what's the real message here? God does not like to share power and wants it all to himself and is quite possibly afraid of man's potential. This seems to be a recurring theme in many Old Testament stories.

 

[shmogie]

You want "more evidence" to disbelieve something that you already believe in the complete absence of any evidence whatever? How very odd.

For myself, I am afraid that I find such beliefs tragic almost beyond my imaging. "Children were born into this depraved situation, surrounded by sin at their birth?" Children, in the eyes of this poor atheist, are the very epitome of perfect innocence.

You also make it quite explicitly clear that all those people who were born before the Church even declared this nonsense are doomed to forgo salvation, for no reason whatsoever except God's rather poor timing. After all, there have been humans for 100,000 to 200,000 thousand years, and yet we only got this important message 2,000 years ago? An eyeblink. Not only that, this incredible message was delivered in such a way that the MAJORITY of the human race has still not received it.

That's pretty inept of your deity, in my view. I always expect my omnipotent and omniscient entities to perform so much better.

Wow, talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.

Where did I make any statement about anyone being doomed to forgo salvation ?

You really haven´t a clue, just spout nonsense you cling to like a rock sinking in the ocean.

BTW what you find tragic means Jack to me, like your plethora of diatribes based in ignorance and anger.

I get it, you hate Christianity, it really rattles your sense of self. Fine, you are free to do so.

At least try to understand a conversation before you chime in with your always powerfully unpowerful comments.

 

[Prometheus85]

Thank you for asking

It really depends on how you define it since different people will have different perspectives.

You can believe in evolution as a whole and still believe Adam and Eve were created. It doesn't say how animals were created. There are many theories as the Bible isn't specific on that issue such as a pre-Adamic world which would account for "other beings".

Do we believe that Adam and Eve were the "original sinners"? Yes. And certainly we never have to teach our children to do wrong, they learn all by themselves.

So what exactly is your question on original sin?

Yes u can believe in creation and evolution.
But one is backed up by science and the other is a copy and paste version of other cultures myths and full of contradictions and other nonsense