Original Sin?

Originally Posted by SlayerOfLight

Sin is purely a man-made concept, just like morality is.

Well, I suppose all concepts are man made, or at least such abstract concepts such as these. But, does sin and morality as man made concepts have value nonetheless?

[Dargor]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Well, I suppose all concepts are man made, or at least such abstract concepts such as these. But, does sin and morality as man made concepts have value nonetheless?

Sin? Not exactly. But I'd say morality does.

Originally Posted by Morpheus

"You're fooling yourself and you don't believe it".

Wow, now there is a line that takes me way back to jr high, lps, skippin class, and smoking bad skunk weed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvrNT8aGgKE

Are you trying to say you can tell SOL is an angry troubled young man?

BTW, I am pretty sure the fruit was in fact a Red Delicious Apple. If I was in God's orchard, that may be the only variety of apple I would not want to eat. It certainly was not an Orange Cox Pippin as that would be cruel to have those and not allow them to be eaten. Just sayin, God is not that mean.

Originally Posted by davidmartin

i see it very simple. the concept of 'original sin' we know and love in it's full calvinist expression is not found in scripture. by taking certain verses together you can try to prove it. so long as others are ignored, i think it's over emphasised so much it actually loses it's value as a teaching and can actually corrupt things, in an odd way

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.

Originally Posted by SlayerOfLight

Or maybe you are the one fooling yourself? I don't believe in your holy book because I know as a fact that we evolved from life forms that had no knowledge about good or evil. The one and only thing that is responsible for the creation of sin is our advanced level of intelligence.

Whooa partner, slow down. It seems to me you are giving us a good bit of charity there. I am not so sure our intelligence has advanced that much from those primitive life forms who couldn't tell good from evil. What happened to our cynical angry young man.

Originally Posted by ImthatIm

I think it should be called (The original separation)

It is also my belief that through this separation from God
is where one builds the EGO.(EGO being the sin)

So we are on a path of destroying the EGO(Denying Self) and reuniting with God which in turn reunites us with our Brothers and Sista's.

Perhaps, but we are not born with these EGOs, we develop them during our lifetimes. If that is the case, then it seems to me we keep going in the wrong direction.

I once took a river boat cruise where they served a massive southern (as in the American South) buffet while the brothers and sista's from the local african american baptist church choir sang Gospel music. It was pretty cool. I couldn't really tell from the singing whether they had EGOs or not, but I can say they sure had soul..... so did the food for that matter.

[Dargor]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Whooa partner, slow down. It seems to me you are giving us a good bit of charity there. I am not so sure our intelligence has advanced that much from those primitive life forms who couldn't tell good from evil. What happened to our cynical angry young man.

I simply mean that animals can't think about stuff like sin and morality because that requires an advanced level of intelligence which they obviously lack. But don't get the wrong idea here... Having advanced intelligence is one thing, but not knowing how to use it is something totally different and approaches the border of downright stupidity.

[Morpheus]

When you say "evolve", S.O.L., you're referring to space/time. Which began at the fall.

Time is not a factor in Paradise.

[Dargor]

So space and time didn't exist before said fall? When exactly did this hypothetical fall happen according to you?

Originally Posted by SlayerOfLight

I simply mean that animals can't think about stuff like sin and morality because that requires an advanced level of intelligence which they obviously lack. But don't get the wrong idea here... Having advanced intelligence is one thing, but not knowing how to use it is something totally different and approaches the border of downright stupidity.

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.