Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Importance of Original Sin
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 31 of 1198 (633312)
09-13-2011 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by NoNukes
09-13-2011 11:25 AM


Re: Jesus and Paul Were Jews
So the need for salvation is universal even without blaming Adam and Eve.
The way I understand it is that had that dumb broad NOT eaten the apple, we'd all still be in god's image: no evil. The world would be as it was when the god character made it.
What does the doctrine of original sin add that personal responsibility for one's own sins does not already cover?
Like I said to PD: if we truly were personally responsible, why do we need some other person (jesus) to save us? Simplistic, yes. But then again, I'm not keen on the apologetics of the whole thing, since I take it all as bollocks anyways.
But my take on this Genesis story is that humans inherited free will (from Adam?)
I thought we got the free will from god?

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by NoNukes, posted 09-13-2011 11:25 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by NoNukes, posted 09-14-2011 9:47 AM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 32 of 1198 (633313)
09-13-2011 2:26 PM


Original Sin ? So what is the Original Sin ?
Before Adam and Eve sinned, Satan sinned. Had Satan not sinned he would not have been there to tempt Adam and Eve to sin.
Jesus says that Satan is the father of lies:
" You are of [your] father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks it out of his own [possessions;] for he is a liar and the father of it." (John 8:44)
So the devil, the father of lies can only speaks lies. There is little question that the murderer from the beginning does not mean Cain the first murderer. But it speaks to the evil one who prompted Cain to commit the first murder - the devil. From the beginning surely means from the history of man in Genesis, the beginning.
So whose is the so called Original Sin ? The father of lies spoke this lie to Eve -
"And the serpent said to the woman, You shall not surely die! For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing good and evil." (Gen. 3:5)
Of course the worse kind of lie is the lie which contains a little truth. Their eyes were opened. And in some sense they did become like God, for God Himself said that:
"and Jehovah God said, Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil ..." (Gen. 3:22)
That part was true. But that they would not die was the most damnable lie. And the devil, the father of lies, as a snake or through a snake or with a snake (it really doesn't matter) - somehow with serpent the lie was told.
Since the lie was a sin and it preceeded the sin of Adam and Eve, we might well describe "Original Sin" as originating in Satan sometime before the creation of man. I doubt that Genesis 3:5 was the first and original sin in God's creation.
Eve said " ... the serpent deceived me, and I ate" (v.13)
Before the serpent deceived Eve he had deceived one third of the angels of God to follow him in his rebellion against God -
"And the great dragon was cast down, the ancient serpent, he who is called the Devil and Satan, he who deceives the whole inhabited earth ..." (Rev. 12:9)
Only a fool cannot see the unity of the revelation of the Bible - that "the ancient serpent" must refer to the deceiving serpent in the Genesis account. He is the Devil and Satan. And in Revelation 12:1 his tail (probably representing deception) drags away one third of the angels of God:
"And another sign was seen in heaven; and behold, there was a great red dragon ... And his tail drags away the third part of the stars of heaven, and he cast them to the earth ..." (See Rev. 12:1)
So whose's really is the so-called "Original Sin" ? Satan sinned and seduced God's creature man, to sin as well.
Don't listen to the fools who try to divide Revelation from Genesis as if they have nothing to do with each other. And it really is not that important to locate the original sin. Sin has to be dealt with through God's salvation.
So Jesus also said that the devil was the murderer from the beginning. Satan as sin was crouching near the heart of Cain in order to capture him as prey for Satan's evil purpose:
" And Jehovah said to Cain, Why are you angry, and why has your countenance fallen?
If you do well, will not [your countenance] be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and his desire is for you, but you must rule over him." (Gen. 4:6,7)
God speaks of SIN here as a kind of personified evil person, crouching and with a desire. This evil personified sin is something which Cain must master.
This surely speaks of the Satanic nature of sinning entering into man. And the passage reminds of Roman chapter 7 where Paul lays bare the plight of man struggling to keep the law of God.
One should read Romans 7 to see how Paul speaks of sin dwelling in the members of our body, deceiving, seeking opportunity, making us captive, etc. How much Romans 7 is like Genesis 4:6,7.
The countenance of Cain was downcast. This is a humiliation to Cain. For man was created to express God in His glory, His splendour, and His majesty. But sinning soils man's expression. And when man is convicted by God as all sinners eventually must be, his countenance falls. This falling of the countenance is a defiling of the expression man is created to display. And it is a humiliation to man to be downcast because of the guilt of sinning.
Christ is the Savior to deal with both the guilt of sin and the power of sin. Christ is also the Savior to recover the glorious expression for which man was created. His redeeming blood cleanses the sinner from all sins, every sin, each sin. And His indwelling Spirit empowers man to learn to overcome sinning by blending with the Overcomer Christ - that is by abiding in Him as a living realm and sphere of divine life:
"Abide in Me and I in you" (John 15:4)
If you take a weak and sickly branch and graft it into a healthy tree, the healthy tree's life will flow into the branch and make it also healthy. So this analogy of Jesus is that the fallen man, having been redeemed and forgiven - justified through faith in Christ, should now ABIDE in Christ as a sickly branch is grafted into a wondefully healthy tree.
"Abide in Me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me."
Jesus Christ is ENTERABLE. Jesus Christ is an unusual Person within whom the believer can abide. We can have our life in communion with the resurrected and AVAILABLE Jesus.
There is no Christian life apart from abiding in the resurrected, living, and available Jesus Christ who became a life giving Spirit:
" ... the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)
Whoever has ears to hear, hear.

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 33 of 1198 (633314)
09-13-2011 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by purpledawn
09-13-2011 12:01 PM


Re: Jesus and Paul Were Jews
IMO, the implication is that we cannot control ourselves without the help of Jesus.
Control ourselves from what? That implication gets shot down when you have perfectly good atheists who are more moral than people who claim to "have the spirit of the lord" or whatever.
We do forget that religions are not immune to outside influence.
That is true. However, I am coming at this topic as a skeptic and with the viewpoint that they all claim to be "the truth". Once one sees religion for what it is, it's kinda hard to take any of it seriously.... I would have to assume those that continue to believe after seeing "the light" stop being christian and become deists of sorts, but that is strictly my opinion.

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by purpledawn, posted 09-13-2011 12:01 PM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 34 of 1198 (633317)
09-13-2011 2:38 PM


Now that I've gotten around to replying to most everyone, I'll add a bit more to my own understanding. I admit (again) that I have a very basic understanding of xianity, and that is all the more understanding I care to acquire. I apologize if that comes off as dishonest, but I feel as though I know enough about it to call shenanigans and it's just not a subject I care to look into as deeply as a lot of the rest of you already have. That is not to say I won't check out links provided to understand the current subject matter, I will. I hope you don't take that as me being a dishonest debater, I would just rather hear individual takes on it. It's just that there are sooooo many different interpretaions of even what I feel are basic tenets that it's difficult to get as full an understanding.
That said; the reason I have the view that I do is because every church I've been to, every religious person I have asked, every time I have seen the question arise: "why is there evil if god is so good and loving", the answer is "the fall". Now, I always assumed "the fall" to be the subject in question because, well, that's what I've learned.

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 35 of 1198 (633323)
09-13-2011 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by ICANT
09-13-2011 2:06 PM


Re: A question
There is no discussion of original sin in the Bible.
Orly?
The man formed from the dust of the ground in Genesis 2:7 that God breathed the breath of life into was a perfect man without sin.
No sin...
The woman was deceived and she ate the fruit. Her eyes were not opened at that time. She then gave to her husband and he chose to eat the fruit, he was not deceived. After the man ate the forbiden fruit
their eyes were opened and they realized they were naked.
The only way you can come up with the term original sin is that this was the first sin that was ever comitted by mankind. Up until this time God walked with mankind and talked with them.
From the time God sent them out of the Garden man was separated from God because of that first sin. According to Paul that initial separation caused the separation of all mankind that followed and all are under the penalty of death.
Now there's sin. All because of the eating of an apple. How can you preced this by saying there is no discussion of original sin?
I will add that this is precisely the thinking I had coming into this topic: makind was created without sin. Then, sin was introduced after they ate the apple. If that tiny event didn't occur, we would have no need for the jesus character.

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by ICANT, posted 09-13-2011 2:06 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by NoNukes, posted 09-13-2011 5:45 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 41 by ICANT, posted 09-13-2011 10:18 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 1198 (633350)
09-13-2011 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by hooah212002
09-13-2011 3:11 PM


Re: A question
Now there's sin. All because of the eating of an apple. How can you preced this by saying there is no discussion of original sin?
The doctrine of Original sin is not about who broke God's rules first. It has to do with whether any bad karma has attached or whether man is otherwise in a fallen state directly because of Adam's wrong doing. I think it is pretty clear that Judaism does not honor the concept, so simply citing the Genesis story would not seem to be enough. The Biblical support being cited here comes from the New Testament.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by hooah212002, posted 09-13-2011 3:11 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by jaywill, posted 09-15-2011 4:55 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 37 of 1198 (633353)
09-13-2011 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by hooah212002
09-13-2011 2:13 PM


Re: Jesus and Paul Were Jews
I didn't find the other thread when I searched either. I thought I remembered one. It was mostly played out anyway.
quote:
Ok, I can dig that. However, why do we sin in the first place? How were we able to sin? If we were created "in god's image", why is there evil? Or were we not created in god's image? Were we created with sin? If we were, then that means god has sin/evil.
IMO, it is questions like that that caused people to come up with stories to answer the question. There really isn't an answer to that question and you should know that. I'm not sure why you keep asking questions like that. If you've attempted to read any story in the OT where God displays temperament, you'll see he has the same emotions we do. He has both inclinations, just as we do.
God does not have sin. Sin is an action, not something to have. The Jews break sin up into three types. Sins against God, sins against mankind, and sins against oneself.
quote:
Now, if you can say were weren't "created" and are a theistic evolutionist: why did god take so fucking long? Humanity has been around for a long damned time, but he waited until just 2000 years ago to send himself to save us from himself?
It is amazing how well you mush totally incorrect ideas together for one big mess and then expect an answer. If you really want to understand, really read the book.
quote:
Then I see no need for this jesus character. I don't need a third party to absolve me of my wrong doings. I can just say "damn, I screwed up. Lesson learned, better not do that again.". ya know, the way millions of people do every day that live just fine without religion or god.
Exactly! Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins
That's basically what God told the Israelites in the OT. Ezekiel 18:21-24
21But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live. 23Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked, declares the Lord GOD, rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
Jesus was a Jew who taught the lost among his people how to get back on track. Some people need help correcting destructive behavior, whether through counseling, religion, or meds.
quote:
His teachings? Perhaps not. But his necessity? I think so. Did he not come to "wash the world (that means EVERYONE, no?) of sin?
Nope. Again, do some research if you really are interested. Jesus was concerned with his own people, not everyone else on the planet. Not The Planet
Sin is not a thing to be washed away. You just stop doing wrong behavior.
quote:
Perhaps I am coming at this a tad basic, but I see it this way: take someone who is a good person and has never heard of the bible. If we "choose" whether or not to do bad things ("sin"), why does this person need redemption or salvation? From what?
They don't. We ask for forgiveness from the person we wrong or suffer the consequences if we break the laws of the land. It's really the same for Christians, they just feel they have an added afterlife to prepare for.
IMO, the doctrine of original sin was an unnecessary addition. That's what happens when people over think a simple story.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by hooah212002, posted 09-13-2011 2:13 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by hooah212002, posted 09-13-2011 6:24 PM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 38 of 1198 (633358)
09-13-2011 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by purpledawn
09-13-2011 6:01 PM


Re: Jesus and Paul Were Jews
There really isn't an answer to that question and you should know that.
Oh, I should? Why should I know that? He's your god, not mine.
I'm not sure why you keep asking questions like that.
Questions "like" what?
If you've attempted to read any story in the OT where God displays temperament, you'll see he has the same emotions we do. He has both inclinations, just as we do.
Forgive me if the god character I've been fed isn't a human construct. It is through my atheism that I have learned that he is, but not from christians. Forgive me if I been told, by countless chrisitans, about god's perfect nature.
It is amazing how well you mush totally incorrect ideas together for one big mess and then expect an answer. If you really want to understand, really read the book.
It's amazing how much of a condescending cunt you can be. I'm here asking questions. If you don't have an answer, or if my question is off the wall: correct me or say "I don't know". how hard is that?
Exactly! Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins
Apparently, quite a few christians believe he was.
Why did jesus die for our sins?
Jesus died for all our sins

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by purpledawn, posted 09-13-2011 6:01 PM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by jar, posted 09-13-2011 6:32 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 40 by AdminModulous, posted 09-13-2011 6:35 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 39 of 1198 (633362)
09-13-2011 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by hooah212002
09-13-2011 6:24 PM


Re: Jesus and Paul Were Jews
hooah212002 writes:
It's amazing how much of a condescending cunt you can be. I'm here asking questions. If you don't have an answer, or if my question is off the wall: correct me or say "I don't know". how hard is that?
Lots of folk are simply unlearned when it comes to much of the actual history of Christianity and some folk, even atheists, can at times show that trait conclusively.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by hooah212002, posted 09-13-2011 6:24 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
AdminModulous
Administrator
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


(2)
Message 40 of 1198 (633364)
09-13-2011 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by hooah212002
09-13-2011 6:24 PM


not acceptable
It's amazing how much of a condescending cunt you can be.
Take some time off and reassess what being respectful to other members really means. How's that for condescension?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by hooah212002, posted 09-13-2011 6:24 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 41 of 1198 (633403)
09-13-2011 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by hooah212002
09-13-2011 3:11 PM


Re: A question
Hi hooah,
hooah writes:
Now there's sin. All because of the eating of an apple.
Where in the story found in Genesis chapter 3 does it mention an apple?
hooah writes:
How can you preced this by saying there is no discussion of original sin?
Where in Genesis chapter 2 and 3 does it mention eating the fruit to be a sin?
quote:
Genesis 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
The man was simply given a rule not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
God said nothing about sin, just disobedience.
The man was told that if he ate of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil he would die. That was the consequences for not obeying God.
As you know I believe the man died the same day he ate the fruit.
hooah writes:
I will add that this is precisely the thinking I had coming into this topic: makind was created without sin.
The man formed from the dust of the ground that God breathed the breath of life into was perfect, yet he had the ability to disobey God's command by his own freewill.
That was the purpose of the tree and it makes no difference what kind of tree it was as it was the one God specified.
hooah writes:
Then, sin was introduced after they ate the apple. If that tiny event didn't occur, we would have no need for the jesus character.
And that man and woman would still be in the Garden walking and talking with God and you and I would have never existed.
Disobedience was introduced.
We have been conditioned to call disobedience sin. But disobedience to God is just disobedience to God regardless of what we call it.
Since we are under the New Testament of Jesus Christ so called by His disciples who could not understand that He was God in human flesh.
God came down to the Earth and was hung on a cross where He willing gave His life so mankind could be restored to the position the man He formed from the dust of the ground occupied in the Garden. That man could walk and talk with God in right relationship.
quote:
John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
These verses tell us that the Son of man must be crucified that mankind would not perish if he believed in Him.
Verse 16 gives the reason that death had to occure which was God's love for His creation.
Verse 17 tells us that God the Son did not come to condemn the world. Mankind was condemned already.
Verse 18 tells us mankind is condemned because he has not believed in the only begotten Son of God.
So nobody has to do anything in order to spend eternity in the lake of fire that was prepared for the devil and his angels.
That is a fact unless mankind will receive the free full pardon offered by God of eternal life with Him.
Mankind has a choice that they can exercise their freewill and obey God and live with Him forever or they can say no to His offer. The consequences of not accepting God's offer is eternal separation from God.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by hooah212002, posted 09-13-2011 3:11 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 1198 (633477)
09-14-2011 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by hooah212002
09-13-2011 2:24 PM


Re: Jesus and Paul Were Jews
The way I understand it is that had that dumb broad NOT eaten the apple, we'd all still be in god's image: no evil. The world would be as it was when the god character made it.
That is the way you would understand it if you subscribed to one particularly silly version of the original sin doctrine, and you were a particular type of inerrant literal fundy. You could also chose to read it that way if you wanted to demonstrate that Christians were idiots.
Like I said to PD: if we truly were personally responsible, why do we need some other person (jesus) to save us?
I don't see the inconsistency you are trying to point out.
Convicts are responsible for their own crimes, but they have no legal way to escape the state's punishment without following the state's rules for doing so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by hooah212002, posted 09-13-2011 2:24 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 43 of 1198 (633696)
09-15-2011 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by NoNukes
09-13-2011 5:45 PM


Re: A question
The doctrine of Original sin is not about who broke God's rules first. It has to do with whether any bad karma has attached or whether man is otherwise in a fallen state directly because of Adam's wrong doing. I think it is pretty clear that Judaism does not honor the concept, so simply citing the Genesis story would not seem to be enough. The Biblical support being cited here comes from the New Testament.
In establishing the teaching that all mankind is under condemnation for sin Paul quotes the Old Testament Psalms and prophets of Judaism:
"What then? Are we [Jews] better? Not at all! For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.
Even as it is written,
"There is none righteous, not even one;
There is none who understands, there is none who seeks out God. All have turned aside; together they have become useless; there is none who does good; there is not so much as one.
Their throat is an opened grave; with their tongues they practice deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips;
Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.
Swift are their feet to shed blood,
Destruction and misery are in their ways,
And the way of peave they have not known.
There is no fear of God before their eyes"
Now we know that whatever things the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may fall under the judgment of God;
Because out of works of the law no flesh shall be justified before Him; for through the law is the clear knowledge of sin." (Romans 3:10-20)
Paul underscores that the whole world is under condemnation and judgment because of sin by quoting a combination of passages from the Psalms and the prophet Isaiah.
Psalm 14:1-3 - Rom. 3:10
53:1-3 - Rom 3:10
Psalm 5:9 - Rom 3:13
Psalm 140:3 - Rom. 3:13
Psalm 10:7 - Rom. 3:14
Isa. 59:7-8 - Rom. 3:15
Psalm 36:1 - Rom. 3:18
In Old Testament Judaism David, after his failure in the adultery and murder involving Bethsheba and her husband, speaks of his conception and birth as being intimately connected to SIN.
"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." (Psalm 51:5)
The Psalmist in Old Testament Judaism also declares that no man can redeem himself or his brother because of his sins:
"None can by any means redeem [his] brother or give to God a ransom for him for the redemption of their soul is costly and must be given up forever, that he would yet live always [and] not see corruption. "
In Old Testament Judaism Solomon explains that God created man upright but man somehow became morally crooked with devices and tricks. This amounts to a realization of a FALL of mankind from uprightness into sin:
" See, this alone have I found, that God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
The oldest book in the Bible, Job, also speaks of man's nature of sinning:
"How then can a man be righteous with God ? And how can one born of a woman be pure ? " (Job 25:4)
And the prophet Jeremiah emphasizes that as natural to the leapard are his spots and to the Ethopian his dark complexion is the nature of sinners to sin:
"Can the Cushite change his skin, Or the leopard his spots ? [Then] you also may be able to do good, Who are accustomed to do evil." (Jeremiah 13:23)
The point in all this is not to make everyone feel bad.
Not is the point that God did not create a marvelous being in humanity.
The purpose in its proper perspective is to prove that the Old Testament Judiasm and before, furnished ample ground for Paul to develop the concept of man's sinful nature rendering ALL under condemnation and causing ALL to be in need of divine redemption, let alone sanctification and transformation.
This is as much virtual "Original Sin" concept as needed right from pre New Testament Judaism.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by NoNukes, posted 09-13-2011 5:45 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by purpledawn, posted 09-16-2011 8:06 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 50 by jaywill, posted 09-17-2011 1:52 PM jaywill has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 44 of 1198 (633760)
09-16-2011 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by jaywill
09-15-2011 4:55 PM


There is None Righteous
quote:
In establishing the teaching that all mankind is under condemnation for sin Paul quotes the Old Testament Psalms and prophets of Judaism:
The Jews break sin into three categories. Sins against God, sins against another person, and sins against oneself.
The fact that people will "miss the mark" at least once in their life is not in question. Once a society has rules they are going to be trespassed at some point and people suffer the consequences.
I disagree that Paul is saying that "all" mankind is under condemnation because we misbehave to varying degrees. He can only refer to the inhabited part he knows. Odds are it is an exaggeration anyway.
The creation story is not the foundation of his argument. His argument would be the same whether he mentioned Adam later or not.
Paul pulled various lines from hymns that suited his purpose. We can take line from the same hymns and support that there are righteous people and the songs are speaking of the wicked and not all of mankind.
Fools say in their hearts, "There is no God."
They deal corruptly, their deeds are vile, not one does what is right.
Don't they ever learn, all those evildoers, who eat up my people as if eating bread and never call on Adonai?
There they are, utterly terrified; for God is with those who are righteous.
For you, Adonai, bless the righteous; you surround them with favor like a shield.
The righteous will surely give thanks to your name; the upright will live in your presence. etc.
There are people who are considered righteous.
Paul pointed out at the beginning of Chaper 3:
So are we Jews better off? Not entirely; for I have already made the charge that all people, Jews and Gentiles alike, are controlled by sin.
We know that sin is not a thing that can actually control.
In my opinion he is being rather dramatic to make the point that if Jews who have the Torah to follow are facing judgement, then those without the Torah are no better off. IOW, that is his way of getting the Gentiles on board.
The creation story has no bearing on any of this. When people ask questions like: "Why do people misbehave, why do people hurt others, or why do elephants have long noses, etc...."; people come up with stories to answer those questions.
From a Biblical standpoint, the doctrine of Original Sin isn't necessary. Good way to lay a guilt trip on people, but not really necessary for belief.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by jaywill, posted 09-15-2011 4:55 PM jaywill has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by ICANT, posted 09-16-2011 11:45 AM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


(1)
Message 45 of 1198 (633777)
09-16-2011 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by purpledawn
09-16-2011 8:06 AM


Re: There is None Righteous
Hi PD,
purpledawn writes:
From a Biblical standpoint, the doctrine of Original Sin isn't necessary. Good way to lay a guilt trip on people, but not really necessary for belief.
Can you point to any verse in the Bible that says mankind is condemned for their sins?
John recorded a conversation Jesus had with Nicodemus in chapter 3 where He tells Nicodemus he had to be born of the spirit to see the kingdom of heaven.
Jesus in this conversation tell Nicodemus that mankind is condemned already.
He did not say mankind was condemned because of sins (bad things he had done).
Jesus did say:
quote:
John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
So mankind is not condemned because of his sins.
Jesus said mankind was condemned because of unbelief.
Jesus did not say mankind was condemned because of their behavior.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by purpledawn, posted 09-16-2011 8:06 AM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by jar, posted 09-16-2011 12:08 PM ICANT has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024