Original Sin?

[sky]

Originally Posted by ThatMan

2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

If you do some real research, you will find out that even the NT contains information about the original sin.By the way, look at this verse, it uses the word "corrupted", to make a comparison between what the serpent did and the simplicity of Jesus, so, in other words, the serpent corrupted the minds of man.In other words, the minds of Adam and Eve were perfect and pure but they were corrupted by the serpent, so God really made things right ( they were perfect ), but they became corrupted because of the serpent.

How do you corrupt the mind of a child? By teaching that child bad things, I am pretty sure that the serpent had a very long time at disposition to corrupt their minds, it's not something that you do in one meeting.

The serpent is a very powerful symbol used in the Bible, I don't think I found until now a good explanation, you know, sometimes it refers to the devil and its subjects ( Matthew 12:34 "O generation of vipers..", Matthew 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers", John 3:14 "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up" ) and sometimes to the things of God ( remember the rod of Moses ).

This would be an interesting discussion and we are at the subject of the original sin.

(1) Scripture plainly teaches that sin is not inherited. “[T]he son shall not bear the iniquity of the father” (Ezekiel 18:20); every person is responsible for his own conduct (Romans 14:12).

(2) Human sinfulness commences in that period of one’s life that is characterized as youth (Genesis 8:21; Jeremiah 3:25).

(3) A child must reach a certain level of maturity before he is able to choose between evil and good (Isaiah 7:15, 16).

(4) The qualities of little children are set forth as models for those who would aspire to enter the kingdom (Matthew 18:3; 19:14) and for those already in the church (1 Corinthians 14:20). Surely the Lord was not suggesting that we emulate little, totally corrupt sinners!

(5) The human spirit is not inherited from one’s parents; rather, it is given by God (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Hebrews 12:9). Hence, at birth it must be as pure as the source from whence it comes.

Clearly, babies are not born in sin.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Corrupting the "word of God" by taking certain verses together to try to prove something that is not so seems to me to be a pretty good definition of what one hears preached by modern right wing evangelicals (as well as ancient roman ones I suppose).... or at least it was until I stopped bothering to listen to them.

Anyway, I don't believe in this concept of original sin myself, but I am curious as to why it was created in the first place. What did the church hope to gain from creating such a doctrine? To what advantage did they use it? Is it really as simple as locking all human beings to a dependency on the church to avoid damnation from it?

You are condemned to hell because of original sin. Only Christ can save you from this so you better get right with him. Only we can get you right with Christ. So you better pony up and fly right or your headed for hell.

Even if that is the case, there is usually some other theological justification that such an extortion would hide behind. Does anybody know that that is? Or is it really just as simple as the sins of the father are the sins of the son and so on down the line to me.

By the time the 4th century came about, a lot of new doctrines were in the process of becoming 'Christian' doctrine.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by ketzer

What is the full story behind this concept of "Original Sin"?

I remember being taught this as a child but I don't think I ever bought into it.
Just what is this, and how is this supposed to work in the Christian tradition?
Is this part of the other Abrahamic traditions as well?

The 'doctrine' seems to claim Adam committed the original sin. Eve, who already ate from the tree is apparently innocent and the serpent, somehow also received immunity.

The Jews never believed in the 'Original Sin'.

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

The 'doctrine' seems to claim Adam committed the original sin. Eve, who already ate from the tree is apparently innocent and the serpent, somehow also received immunity.

The Jews never believed in the 'Original Sin'.

.....
They had more sense


It's not mentioned in the NT so I presume Jesus didn't either.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Morpheus

Independent study brings out what I've posted a'lot about.

In the paradise of God, time, with it's effects and consequences were not a factor.
The situation was an angelic one. See Revelation 12:4.

Original sin involves this material, organic situation in which we find ourselves in, "space/time".
This situation may be seen to align with interdimensional, multi-world theories, in science.

The devil is called the, "god of this world".

There is no "apple" mentioned in scripture, concerning the fall.

There's no original sin mentioned in the NT either.....




(1) Scripture plainly teaches that sin is not inherited. “[T]he son shall not bear the iniquity of the father” (Ezekiel 18:20); every person is responsible for his own conduct (Romans 14:12).

(2) Human sinfulness commences in that period of one’s life that is characterized as youth (Genesis 8:21; Jeremiah 3:25).

(3) A child must reach a certain level of maturity before he is able to choose between evil and good (Isaiah 7:15, 16).

(4) The qualities of little children are set forth as models for those who would aspire to enter the kingdom (Matthew 18:3; 19:14) and for those already in the church (1 Corinthians 14:20). Surely the Lord was not suggesting that we emulate little, totally corrupt sinners!

(5) The human spirit is not inherited from one’s parents; rather, it is given by God (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Hebrews 12:9). Hence, at birth it must be as pure as the source from whence it comes.

Clearly, babies are not born in sin.

How does original sin fit into the above verses ?

It doesn't

[Dargor]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Yeah, I got your meaning, I was making a joke. I should probably use more emojis.

Anyway, if Morpheus is equating the "fall" to the incarnation of man (or something like that), then there is reason to say that space time began/begins with that. Spacetime may not be something that exists independently of consciousness, but rather is something created by consciousness. This is related to the whole "is time real" debate that goes on between theoretical physics types, but I suppose that is a thread of a different color.

Life already existed millions of years before Homo habilis, the earliest known humans, walked the plains. And the universe is about 13 billion years old. So it's pretty obvious that space and time existed long before humans entered the stage. I also doubt space and time have anything to do with consciousness or a so-called fall. Sorry, but trying to link religion with science just doesn't work.

[Honza]

Originally Posted by SlayerOfLight

Life already existed millions of years before Homo habilis, the earliest known humans, walked the plains. And the universe is about 13 billion years old. So it's pretty obvious that space and time existed long before humans entered the stage. I also doubt space and time have anything to do with consciousness or a so-called fall. Sorry, but trying to link religion with science just doesn't work.

Our scientific perception is that the Universe is 13 billion years old. However it is difficult to try and prove anything without perception and consciousness just falling apart. We might be in Disney world for all we know. The more you know the more you realise how little you know. Reality is truly mysterious.

[Honza]

I think it is logical to assume something like Original Sin because of all the badness and suffering in the world. If this level of badness and suffering is the norm then we are screwed.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Honza

I think it is logical to assume something like Original Sin because of all the badness and suffering in the world. If this level of badness and suffering is the norm then we are screwed.

There is no badness in the world, the world is a beautiful place. The actions of the people of the world create the suffering.

Original sin means that even New Babies are sinful and this is not true....

[Dargor]

Originally Posted by Honza

Our scientific perception is that the Universe is 13 billion years old. However it is difficult to try and prove anything without perception and consciousness just falling apart. We might be in Disney world for all we know. The more you know the more you realise how little you know. Reality is truly mysterious.

Eh, no... If this was Disney World then everyone would get a happy end, but let's not talk about that. The fact that the universe is about 13 billion years old isn't a scientific perception but truth based on studies and research. On the other hand, there's zero evidence for a sky-wizard that created everything 6000 years ago in merely six days. That's not to say god isn't real (even though I very much doubt his existence) because for all we know he didn't do anything but just sat down and watched the universe develop on it's own after the big bang. But this too, is highly unlikely.