Importance of Original Sin

It is only after Adam & Eve had eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that either could sin. So let's look at what those transgressions were.They hid because they realized they were naked.Yup. That does seem pretty serious.

Sorry but Job is not Genesis in case you hadn't noticed. The writers of Job make claims but don't provide any evidence but when you actually read the Bible, it never shows Adam sinning.Now I don't doubt Adam did sin but it is not something that is mentioned in the story.Read the Bible. In fact, just learn to read. What sin or transgression of Adam is mentioned in the Genesis 2&3 story?Unlike you, I actually read the Bible and question what is actually written.

Learn to read. That says Job hid his problems like Adam hid.Adam hid from God because he was naked.Read what it says.No, it does not sound like Adam sinned by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.It is only after eating the fruit that Adam or Eve could even have a concept that they should obey the God character in the story. Again, you resort to misrepresentation. I have never made a claim that I alone can read the Bible although the evidence is that Biblical Christians either cannot or will not honestly read the Bible.

Yeah, very true. But remember they just learned about naught and nice. But they may have gotten coal that Christmas.

jar claims that eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was not a sin and cannot be considered a sin by anyone who honestly reads the story.jar claims that disobeying God cannot be a sin if the capability of knowing right from wrong is withheld.Being disobedient can only be a sin once a person has the capability to know right from wrong and the not all that bright God character found in Genesis 2&3 is actually the sinner in that specific case.

If the god character did think it was a sin, then the god character was simply wrong. If that was the case then the god character was just plain stupid. Correct. The god character in the story was wrong to charge Adam or Eve with the transgression based on eating the fruit. That should be one of the first clues that the story really has nothing to do with god or obedience.Satan is not even in the story so I have no idea why (actually, I do have an idea, you have never actually read the story) you bring Satan up. But in the story it is the serpent who tells the truth and the God character that lies.And Satan only does what God tells Satan to do. Satan is God's servant. Learn to read what is actually written.

It's not what I assert, it is what the story actually says.Have you ever actually read the story?Do they die the very day they eat from the tree? Do they become more like God and get their eyes opened? Again Phat, it's not what I assert it is what the story actually says, what is written.They ought to be a clue that Genesis 2&3 are not about creation or God and sure as hell not about Jesus or Satan.The serpent is ... a serpent; another plot device for the "Just So" story.It's about people, about why we fear snakes, why we have to farm and not just hunt and gather like the other animals, why we wear clothes unlike any other critters, why we build a moral society, why childbirth seemed more painful for humans than for other animals and most importantly, why women must be subject to the men.The same can be said about Genesis 1; it's not about creation, it's about why there is a seven day week and a Sabbath.The issue is why do so many Christians seem unable to actually read what is written and instead seem to believe what the Nees and Lees and all the other snake oil salesmen claim the stories mean?

What the hell does any of that have to do with what I said or more importantly, what the stories actually say?And remember, Jesus was a Jew not a Christian.

Oh, crap jaywill.Sin nature is a joke, word salad, meaningless, of no relevance. And no, that passage from whoever wrote nJohn has nothing to do with the evil nature of sin from the beginning of mankind. You're just making shit up or repeating what other just made up.But your posts do garner a laugh, well maybe only a chuckle.

Too funny.Please show where Adam or Eve are mentioned in Genesis 1?You are like so many so called Biblical Christians, unable to even read what is written.

Too funny.For the same reason the god character in Genesis 1 is not the god character in Genesis 2&3. For the same reason they were created in a totally different manner. For the same reason Adam & Eve were created hundreds if not thousands of years before the man and woman in Genesis 1.They are totally different stories written by totally different peoples from totally different eras.

LOL.What does the evidence show?Of course God has little or nothing to do with the Bible, any of them.

He is a Christian, not loosely called a Christian, but a Christian from a long line of Christians.Try truth and honesty Dawn, you might even learn to like it.

Again, try honesty Dawn.Did I say (and you even quote):

quote:

---

What does the evidence show?

​

Of course God has little or nothing to do with the Bible, any of them.

---

You have no point Dawn and simply continue to misrepresent, tap dance and play silly games.Why did you misrepresent my position and what I said in your [msg=715041]?Why do you continue to misrepresent my position in Message 1715071[/msg]?Did I ever make any claim that my assertion was evidence.Do you even know what the "?" symbol means? Bullshit. Only an ignorant fool or a totally dishonest con-man would even make such a silly assertion. Asked and answered repeatedly. I am a Christian because I am a confirmed member of a recognized chapter of Club Christian. The same place any knowledge comes from; personal experience.