Importance of Original Sin

Phat writes:if I didn't have this important concept known as God to talk about, I would be rather bored and hollow---not to mention feeling as if my purpose in life was not that big a deal in the grand scheme of reality.

Phat writes:Ayn Rands biggest problem, apart from her atheism, was that she felt that humans--consigned to be all bad, could never then be good again.

Jaywill writes:Man can never afford to be so grown up that he is independent from God.

Man can never graduate from dependence upon God.

Phat writes:Hardly an ignorant man.

Phat writes:Do we really have to know where it comes from before we can believe in it?

Phat writes:I cant say that CS Lewis had any knowledge of God apart from what anyone has

On The Fall
The doctrine of the Fall (both of man and of some gods, eldils or angels) is the only satisfactory explanation. Evil begins, in a universe where all was good, from free will, which was permitted because it makes possible the greatest good of all. The corruption of the first sinner consists not in choosing some evil thing (there are no evil things for him to choose) but in preferring a lesser good (himself) before a greater (God). The Fall is, in fact, Pride. The possibility of this wrong preference is inherent in the v. fact of having, or being, a self at all. But though freedom is real it is not infinite. Every choice reduces a little one’s freedom to choose the next time. There therefore comes a time when the creature is fully built, irrevocably attached either to God or to itself.This irrevocableness is what we call Heaven or Hell. Every conscious agent is finally committed in the long run: i.e., it rises above freedom into willed, but henceforth unalterable, union with God, or else sinks below freedom into the black fire of self-imprisonment. That is why the universe (as even the physicists now admit) has a real history, a fifth act with a finale in which the good characters live happily ever after and the bad ones are cast out. At least that is how I see it.From The Collected Letters of C.S. Lewis, Volume II

Phat writes: I dunno...

Phat writes:But I don't consider arguments valid based only on the discipline of science anyway so I do not recognize your definition of credibility.

In fact, I could almost say that you do like the Bible says in that you suppress the truth...you refuse to consider it...

but why quibble over things we likely will never agree on anyway?

Phat writes:I might add that if by doing good works one had the right spirit, they couldn't help but accept Jesus Christ

Jaywill writes:The reason some of you guys HATE the teaching of an inherited sin nature is because of not appreciation how thorough a remedy God has for the problem in the Savior the Son of God.

Jaywill writes:This is not a good reason for me not to believe the Bible, love God, and be a follower of Jesus Christ.My conscience would inform me that this rationale is an excuse and exposes a double standard.Plenty of charlatans, exploiters, fear mongers pedal stuff to the naive in other areas of your life. I bet you do not have NOTHING to do with those things because of that.Besides, ONE - I look for POSITIVE examples of other disciples. I look for those who will HELP my faith rather than those who will HURT my faith.And TWO - It is not that Christ did not give His followers heads up that religious people can bring disrepute to the word of God and the Gospel.I am seated here at a turkey feast. I do not hunt for bones to choke on.

Collective punishment is the punishment of a group of people as a result of the behavior of one or more other individuals or groups. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions. Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (e.g. destroying entire towns and villages where such attacks have occurred).

jaywill writes: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.

Jaywill writes: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.

Jaywill writes:I don't think there is anything "vile" or "immoral" about the Lord Jesus Christ.

God does not hold you and I responsible for HAVING the sin nature. That we had no part in. But we are responsible for the transgressions of His law, our sins, our iniquities, our wrong doings, our judging others while we ourselves are guilty and a host of other moral failures.

According to a Christian theological doctrine, original sin, also called ancestral sin,[1] is humanity's state of sin resulting from the fall of man,[2] stemming from Adam's rebellion in Eden. This condition has been characterized in many ways, ranging from something as insignificant as a slight deficiency, or a tendency toward sin yet without collective guilt, referred to as a "sin nature", to something as drastic as total depravity or automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt.[3]

I think these days to be a follower of Jesus Christ is to be automatically branded as immoral and vile - intolerant and hateful. This is an interesting development. I expect it to increase as we approach the second coming of Christ to establish His kingdom over the earth.