Importance of Original Sin

No one is denying that Christian dogma revolves around the notion of original sin. So any 'proofs' you provide are un-necessary. What we argue is that the concept is patently absurd and is indicative of an obvious scare tactic as a means to bring more followers into the fold through fear. This may come as a surprise to you, but most if not all of us are quite familiar with the bible. I myself grew up in a time when bible study still existed in public schools and I was inundated with scriptures and readings for years in my youth. So reading any passages from the bible in my adulthood will do nothing but reaffirm the conclusions I came to when I was, oh, twelve years old.

Its too bad that you came to the wrong conclusions. Why have a closed mind?

There is one entire book in the Bible dedicated to the angle that God is reluctant to have to judge anyone. That is the book of Jonah.In short, the prophet Jonah was very eager that God would come in and destroy Israel's enemies, the city of Nineveh. In spite of the prophet's self serving enthusiasm the last passage reveals the real heart of God in this -

quote:

---

" And I, should I not have pity on Nineveh, the great city, in which are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot discern between their right hand and their left, and may cattle ? " (Jonah 3:11)

---

That's how the book ends. Read it sometime. God knew the very count of the number of people He should exempt from punishment - ie. "more than a hundred and twenty thousand ...".So like Abraham, many of us have confidence in a perfectly righteous God - "Shall the Judge of all the earth not do justly ?" (Gen. 18:25c)

I think what someone says "Christian dogma revolves around" is often influenced by some attitudinal things.To a large extent what kind of Bible you have depends on what kind of person you are. I would say the Christian faith revolves around Christ.And it has been argued by some in the course of this discussion that inherited sin nature from Adam is nowhere found in Scripture. They probably would not agree with you that no proof or evidence be presented for that teaching.Just because this thread I devote time to the matter does not mean I think Christian dogma totally revolves around it. That's what we're talking about now. I recall in 5th grade a reading by the teacher of either the "Lord's Prayer" or Psalm 23 or one other Psalm. We certainly were not "inundated." It was a bit repetitious.If you want to stay there with your childhood Sunday School impressions of twelve years old, congratulating yourself that you're an expert on all things biblical, go right ahead.That's like me saying I am an expert on Astronomy. I heard it said "Twinkle Twinkle, little star." So you see? I know everything about astronomy !Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

The fallen sin nature is seen in God's rejection of Cain's offering.But first we should all admit that we cannot but help feel sorry for Cain.1.) We read of nothing explicit that tells him how to offer to God.2.) It reads as if he was the first to offer of the two. Abel appears to have followed Cain.3.) Cain was not stealing, committing adultery, or doing some other sinful thing. He was worshiping God. So what's wrong ?I have a theory. It may be wrong. But I think the majority of people who read the story probably feel sorry for Cain. I did and thought to argue with God on Cain's behalf.I think the usual reaction we have is to think that God was too hard on Cain. Cain may invoke our sympathy. Be honest now.Well, I think the typical Bible reader will at least initially have a sympathetic feeling towards Cain. WHY? WHY did God reject Cain's offering but receive Abel's?Do you know why many of us have such a sympathetic feeling towards Cain ? I believe it is because we have a sympathetic feeling towards ourselves too. We simply do not really understand the nature of the inherited sin.To begin with - a little illustration:Suppose I bring you a glass of clear water for a present. This could quench your thirst. And you would receive it and drink it.But suppose I brought you a glass of water from a sewage plant - dirty and stinky, murky and polluted. You would consider this an insult. You would reject this present.What I am going to attempt to get across is that Cain's offering was an insult to God - like me offering someone a glass of dirty water to drink. And this insult was based upon the failure of Cain to realize that he had a sin nature that was unacceptable to God.His fallen nature needed to be redeemed by a blood sacrifice, as Abel offered.
This is not explicitly told us in the book of Genesis.
But I believe in the whole revelation of the Bible we can ascertain that this must have been the case.To close, God's words to Cain were really filled with patience and love. But God does have His righteous way -

quote:

---

"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)

---

Here is God's encouragement plus a warning. Though up to now we may feel sympathy for Cain, he rejects both the encouragement and the warning in the following passages. And he becomes the first murderer out of terrible religious jealousy.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Cain and Abel were born of fallen parents. Adam and Eve were not merely wrong with God. They were infested with an evil element that had been injected into them. This was the evil nature of Satan whose rebellion against God they joined.Satan's nature had penetrated Adam and Eve's nature, mind, and concept.These two first parents realized that they were thus poisoned with an evil sin nature. I think they realized that their being was wrong in the presence of God. They realized that they were now infected with an evil foreign element which estranged them from God.They also realized that God had been merciful to them in providing them robes made of skins to cover their nakedness. And the killing of the animals in order to provide a covering for them was a preview and type of salvation in Christ.They were expecting to die probably on the spot. Instead God slew some animals. I believe that they must have been lambs. But I don't know for sure. The covering skin of lambs makes good clothing. But there was death, there was the shedding of blood, and there was a covering to cloth the naked first couple.These things must have been told to their children. The history of their creation and failure and expulsion from the garden surely were told to their children. The story of them feeling ashamed and ill-clothing themselves must have been told to Cain and Abel. They must have told them how God killed life and clothed them with the skins of those animals.We are told in the book of Hebrews that Abel offered his sacrifice by faith.

quote:

---

"By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying to his gifts; and through faith, though he has died, he still speaks." (Hebrews 11:4)

---

Abel offered his offering by faith. Abel was justified as being righteous by faith.Cain offered his offering not in faith but in presumption.
Cain presumed upon his own invention a way to worship God.Cain and Abel must have heard something of God's word from their parents.
Abel had faith in that word. Cain presumptuously decided to invent his own way to come to God.We are told about faith that it comes from the hearing of the word of Christ:

quote:

---

"So faith comes out of hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ." (Rom. 10:17)

---

But hold on! Christ is not even around in those days of Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel. From the viewpoint of God Christ was slain from the foundation of the world. That means the slaying of the animals to cloth Adam and Eve was a shadow or type of the redemption of Christ. And Christ is God incarnate.

quote:

---

" ... the book of life of the Lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world." (Rev. 13:8b)

---

Something of God's word to the first family about offering to God must have been taught to them. Abel reacted in faith. Cain reacted in presumption ignoring God's way. He concocted his own way to come to God. And Cain became the inventor of the world's first man-made religion.Actually I would say he became the inventor of the first religion period. But some would not understand that. So it is sufficient to say Cain invented his own way to come to God.And this was an insult to God as bringing sewage water for someone to drink. It was rejected. We'll examine the difference of the two men and the two offerings shortly, I hope.

As the only unique and genuine theocratic nation on earth, Israel was representative of the rest of the world in many things.And the Apostle Paul teaches that the things which happened to them serve as examples to latter believers in Christ in the new covenant age:

quote:

---

"But with most of them [Israelites coming out of the Exodus] God was not well pleased, for they were strewn along in the wilderness.

​

Now these things occurred as examples to us, that we should not be ones who lust after evil things, even as they also lusted.

​

Neither become idolaters, as some of them did; as it is written, "The people sat down to eat and drink, and stood up to play."

​

Neither let is commiot fornication, as some of them committed fornication, and there fell in one day twenty-three thousand.

​

Neither let us test Christ, as some of them tested Him and were destroyed by the serpents.

​

Neither murmur, just as some of them murmured and perished by the destroyer.

​

Now the these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our admonition, unto whom the ends of the ages have come." (1 Cor. 10:5-11)

---

So you see, we are not at all dishonest. Though you may point to the context of any of these Old Testament incidents in protest as you have.We simply take Paul's lead that the things written concerning the Old Testament Jews were written for our adminition, in the age of the Christian gospel.And I hope you know. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I find it fascinating that Christians cannot accept that those that disagree with their faith and dogma MUST of course be closed minded. Because if I reached a different conclusion than you, I obviously cannot have approached the situation without bias?My friend. I spent many years growing up with Christian teachings around me. Religious classes were mandatory in my school. I would also like to point out that I also read about many other religions and their teachings as I found the subject intriguing. And my inevitable conclusion to the varied religions and their philosophies on life was simple: they were mechanisms that attempted to explain the various forces of nature in our world in a time long before the age of Reason. Nothing more. There was nothing profound nor unique to any of these varied faiths. Merely different views on the world all based on the opinions of men that had little to no working knowledge of the universe.

Some Christians. There is a very strong Interfaith movement within Christianity as well and there are those like myself that will readily admit that atheism and agnosticism are far more reasonable and logical positions than theism.

The attitude of leveraging my cerebral cortex to analyze all that around me. Not my fault that there are umpteen versions of that book. When you all agree on which version is the 'right' one, please let me know. Perhaps I missed a post or two, but my suspicion is that they are rejecting your 'proofs' of the inherent sinful nature of man but not denying that the notion exists in your bible. As Tangle and I already stated, this is one of the main marketing ploys leveraged by Christians. You are inherently 'flawed' and you need our help to be 'fixed'. By the way, the Church of Scientology uses the exact same tactic with their personality 'test'. *patting myself on the back*And for the record, I was not referring to childhood Sunday school. I indicated these were religious classes taught in PUBLIC school. I grew up in Canada and we did not eliminate religious classes from our schools until the late 80s. I had bible study in school all the way until the Eighth grade. Actually, no. What I stipulated is that I took classes on the subject all the way until the eighth grade. So no, it was not just reciting the lords prayer; it was full fledged analysis of the bible and daily readings and interpretations from its versus. And despite all of that, I still somehow came to the same conclusions that I have now.

No it didn't. Adam and Eve lived for centuries after. Again, you're directly contradicting God:

quote:

---

Genesis 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

---

"Thou shalt rule over him" (the personification of sin) if you do well. There's no implication that you can't do it. In your own words, Cain succumbed; he let sin in the door. He didn't have to; he did. He didn't inherit sin; he chose it. Nice metaphor. The descendents of Adam inherit the poison from him but they don't have to drink it. They can leave it outside the door. Original sin would be inheriting a disease that you can't avoid. Man went from innocence to responsibility. Man went from childish ignorance to understanding his mortality. Exactly. His righteous acts were what counted. Apparently they outweighed his sinful acts. The ability to do evil was countered by the ability to do good.

There is an entire chapter of The Lord of the Rings dedicated to Bilbo Baggins's leaving of the Shire.So what?I really mean, so what? Why should anyone care what is written in the book of Jonah? Please explain its authority on the matter of collective punishment and it's moral foundation.

Where's Shire ?What archeological studies have been conducted there ? No. Not right now. You don't seem to be too sober minded about a fictional book written by one author obviously for entertainment purposes and a library of books written over a period of 1,600 years by forty different diverse authors with a uncannily strong common historical and theological theme.I'd be wasting my time.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

What you need to do is explain why you are preaching a vile and immoral idea.One of the things children learn very early in life is what is fair and what is not and one of the most obviously unfair things is to be punished for something you did not do.We find the idea of collective punishment to be so utterly wrong that the entire world has agreed that it is a deep enough wrong to have been made into an international law.So I'd like to hear why you think it fair and reasonable. You'd certainly be wasting your time quoting passages from ancient myths, but you might attempt a humanitarian explanation of this inhuman idea.

Diomedes, My responses to your paragraph will sound to you forced in the direction of continuing what I wish to study in Genesis. This is intentional.Right now I have more to write about Cain and Abel. So you are going to get more explanation than you probably wish. To one degree or another I think we ALL reject the idea of our having a fallen sin nature.The "eating" of something wrong by Adam seems not to be a big deal. What could be wrong with just eating a little wrong food ? But the revelation of God is conveying that something entered into Adam's makeup that was necessarily passed on to all his descendents.

quote:

---

"Therefore just as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin, death; and thus death passed on to all men because all have sinned - " (Romans 5:12)

---

Through Adam's disobedience and eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, sin entered into humanity. Human death followed sin in man.Darby's careful New Translation tells us that all men were constituted with sin as a constituting nature -

quote:

---

"For just as through the disobedience of one man the many were constituted sinners, so also through the obedience the One [Christ] many will be constituted righteous." (Romans 5:19)

---

The principle that worked against us in Adam is reflected in Christ to work on man's behalf. This dual and reflexive mechanism of ONE man's life constituting many after him is used much in \[b\]Romans 5:12 - 21[ /b].I might add that the Apostle John speaks of Christ being imparted to believers as a Divine Seed planted in them. The very nature of this seed is that it does not sin in contrast to the fallen nature of man.

quote:

---

"Everyone who has been begotten of God does not practice sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been begotten of God." (1 John 3:9)

---

Now I am going to ask you to work hard on understanding. Don't work on misunderstanding me here. I am not putting forth, and John is not putting forth a teaching that Christians attain to sinlesss perfection SIMPLY because they are believers. Obviously John could not have meant this for he encourages his audience to confess their sins (1 john 1:9,10)And he says that if the Christian audience says they do not have the sin they lie and the truth is not in them (1 John 1:8)Having explained that we see that a SEED of divine life has been born into the believer in Christ. This seed is a Person who imparts and mingles Himself into our innermost being. He does not sin. He does not do anything contrary to the will of His Father.The believer's part is to abide in Him. The believer's part is to allow this perfect life in seed form to develop and grow. Then His influence will deepen and spread throughout the believer's personality, rendering him or her also an overcomer of that fallen sin nature.

quote:

---

"Everyone who abides in Him does not sin; everyone who sins has not seen Him or known Him. (1 John 3:6)

​

Little children, let no one lead you astray; he who practices righteousness is righteous, even as He is righteous. (v.7)

​

He who practices sin is of the devil, because the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. (v.8)

​

Everyone who has been begotten of God does not practice sin, because His [God's] SEED abides in him; and he cannot sin because he has been begotten of God. (v.9)

​

In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifested." (v.10)

---

1.) Fallen man has this sin nature.2.) Fallen man needs to be begotten of God to receive the divine SEED - Jesus Christ.3.) By patience and practice the receiver of the sinless divine SEED needs to learn to LIVE another way. That is to abide in Christ. That is to bring his mind to the indwelling and sinless Christ to learn to linger in His realm and live out from His sphere.Jesus is today resurrected and in a form in which He can be received into our innermost being. He is in the form of "a life giving Spirit"[quote] 'So also it is written, "The first man, Adam, became a living soul"; the last Adam became a life giving Spirit.' (1 Cor. 15:45) After shedding His blood for our redemption He ascended to the right hand of God in the highest peak of existence. I don't know where that is. But He also transfigured Himself to a form of "a life giving Spirit".The divine SEED that the Apostle John spoke of is also the "life giving Spirit" that the Apostle Paul wrote of.Life giving actually means GOD giving. For God is the uncreated and eternal life. This life giving Spirit is also the second Head of a new race of humanity. Adam was the first head and called the first man. Jesus Christ in resurrection, who is also the life giving Spirit, is the second man. He is also called "the last Adam". He is a man which joins Him to all previous men. Yet He is a new beginning of a new humanity. So He concludes one realm and opens up a new realm.

quote:

---

"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit. The first man is out of the earth, earthy; the second man is out of heaven." (1 Cor. 15:45,46)

---

Sometimes seekers of the truth are able to overcome their suspicions. I did.
Many of us have negative experiences with religious people.
Religion has been with us even from Christ's time and fought against Him.Please do not expect me to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
I have too many positive examples of Christians to confirm for me that I am on the right track to believe. "Self control" is one of the fruits of the Holy Spirit. So any kind of warning that if I believe the word of God I will automatically become one who will lose control and become like the leveraging marketeers for questionable motives, is a false alarm.Now the fallen nature of man and its God sent salvation came out of the mouth of Jesus Christ. Here is one place where He emphasized man's poisoned nature and Himself as the Redeeming, Devil destroying Cure.

quote:

---

"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, That everyone who believes into Him may have eternal life." (John 3:14)

---

The backround of this allegory is in Numbers 21:4-9.The grumbling Israelites were being bitten by poison serpents - fiery serpents. They were dying. God commanded Moses to make a bronze serpent and hang it on a pole. He was to lift up the pole so that all the snake bitten people could see it. Those who looked at the bronze serpent on the pole would not die. They would be healed miraculously of the snake bite poison.Bronze in the Bible often speaks of judgment. And Jesus likened Himself on the cross of Calvary to the bronze serpent lifted up in Numbers 21:4-9.
Whoever would believe in this Godman dying in the form of the Devil - judging sin, destroying the works of the devil, would have eternal life. And by believing into Jesus Christ the Triune God can begin to administer the cure for man's fallen nature.We are all "bitten." We are all poisoned. We are all dying and could perish. Jesus came as a man and though He had no sin He was judged for our sins on His cross. He actually died in the form of the Satanic man yet without the poison.So Paul says that He came in the likeness of the flesh of sin and concerning sin. He came only in its likeness. He was incarnated in the likeness of a fallen descendent of Adam. Yet he had not the SIN nature of Adam.

quote:

---

" ... God, sending His own Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin and concerning sin, condemned sin in the flesh,

​

that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the spirit." (Romans 8:3b-4)

---

The brass serpent lifted up on the pole was a prefigure of the crucifixion of the Son of Man. Christ came from God as the man in the likeness of the flesh of sin inherited from Adam. He came not only to die a redemptive death but a Devil terminating death also. Much needs to be said about this elsewhere.This much I submit to show that Christ coming to save the fallen descendents of Adam from the inherent "poison" of the fall, is seen in the allegory Jesus taught in John chapter three.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.