Original Sin?

Page 2 of 342<12345>Last »
March 10th, 2014 at 12:45:56 AM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 105
Posts: 10356
To accept Christianity, you first have to accept original
sin. I cannot, it's poppycock. The universe is obviously
not a moral construct. I mean, c'mon.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
March 10th, 2014 at 12:50:03 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 114
Posts: 4537
The "missing rib" to make woman has been part of the debate. Maybe still is.

The Adam & Eve story was the first one I had a problem with as a child. So, was it possible that we never had to leave the Garden of Eden and we would still be there? That was a true possibility but for the "disobedience?" I don't get it. God originally planned for us to stay in the Garden and then punished us, as he was surprised by our actions?
No one has ever proven I am not God.
March 10th, 2014 at 1:28:38 AM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 47
Posts: 4135
Quote: FrGamble
This week is the first Sunday in Lent and the first reading from Genesis was about the original sin. What do you all think original sin is or do you even think there is some thing like original sin?
It smacks of ultimate power trip that gives the church jurisdiction over everyone and everything right from the start. And it reminds me of that Columbia freshman who said to her roommate: "Don't be ridiculous, I can't be pregnant; I'm not married".

>I'll start off by saying that in the Genesis story Eve and Adam eat from the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and therefore
>the temptation was so that they could be in charge, they could be like God.
Well, if they are created in the image of God then that is correct and proper, they must determine Good and Evil.

Does not the American "Indian" who states "Only the Beaver and the Great Spirit may alter the path of a river" acknowledge that he is acting with a proper respect for that Great Spirit? In defending his homeland is he acting selfishly? In acting according with his values, is he somehow acting contrary to what is Right, because it is contrary to what European immigrants believed was Right?

In societies where authority is granted, not seized, there is no need for a belief in Right and Wrong. A chief is someone who is accorded that title and followed until the people no longer call him chief. A pirate vessel elects a Captain but can remove him from office, a militia not only appoints their own officers, but holds their own elections to do so and fights only to defend their own territory.

Its always the institutions that try the power grab of extending service beyond the enlistment period and beyond the territorial limitation. Its always the institution that wants to court martial the mutineers and prevent the creation of new chiefs by the people.

The Church wants to legitimize their babblings by starting out with some ultimate wrong a person does and therefore he is not permitted to protest the wrongs perpetrated upon him. He starts out Guilty of sinful conduct an indelible stain that means the Church has power of him, he does not.
March 10th, 2014 at 2:25:01 AM permalink
odiousgambit
Member since: Oct 28, 2012
Threads: 70
Posts: 1492
Quote: beachbumbabs
to place permanent blame on women over men for human suffering and shame


Biblical Truths, Babs, Biblical Truths. If you've never heard that expression, turn on the radio in the part of the country I was driving through to get to The Meadows [between Morgantown WV and Winchester VA]

Tough crowd here, Padre, again I marvel at your persistence, it's admirable. Stick around, I'm starting a thread about Higher Criticism. My wife picked up a couple of books ... see new thread http://diversitytomorrow.com/thread/581/0/
Mustard:You like Kipling, Miss Scarlet? Sure, I'll eat anything [from movie]
March 10th, 2014 at 7:55:14 AM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 44
Posts: 4914
It's a good crowd and I wanted to just see what people thought about original sin and discuss it. There are some pretty powerful feeling about it. I was moved by Babs recent post and saddened about the interpretation that was presented to her. In all my studies, readings, and training I have never heard the story of Adam and Eve used in the two sad ways she described. I'm so sorry there is such poor teachers of the Scriptures out there.

Speaking of that let me just address s2dbaker's look at the story again. I think the question we have to ask is why were they now scared or afraid of God because they were naked? They had been naked all along and now after the fall they were afraid of God, was it because they were naked or rather did their conception of God change to now someone they viewed as frightening?

I also think there is a lot of speculation that somehow the Church came up with this idea, which predates it by centuries and centuries in the Hebrew Scriptures. I think original sin is the fruit of theological reflection on how we naturally seem to mess things up through our pride and selfishness. As the serpent so effectively tempted us with, we want to be God.
March 10th, 2014 at 7:59:48 AM permalink
chickenman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 0
Posts: 368
Quote: FrGamble
As the serpent so effectively tempted us with, we want to be God.


Does Genesis say the serpent was the devil (evil) or was that thrust upon it when Satan was invented? And, speak of the devil, isn't this the same thing that caused his downfall, i.e. wanting to be God?
He's everywhere, he's everywhere...!
March 10th, 2014 at 8:05:05 AM permalink
Wizard
Administrator
Member since: Oct 23, 2012
Threads: 130
Posts: 2879
What is the Christian position on the eternal fate of a baby who died one minute after birth? I would think the baby would not have had the opportunity to sin in that one minute and therefore wouldn't contaminate Heaven. Or does Adam's original sin contaminate all his offspring? Does the answer depend on whether the baby was baptized in that one minute?

I'm pretty sure the Protestant position is that the baby would be in hell for eternity, but what is the Catholic position?
Knowledge is Good -- Emil Faber
March 10th, 2014 at 8:28:56 AM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 44
Posts: 4914
Quote: Wizard
What is the Christian position on the eternal fate of a baby who died one minute after birth? I would think the baby would not have had the opportunity to sin in that one minute and therefore wouldn't contaminate Heaven. Or does Adam's original sin contaminate all his offspring? Does the answer depend on whether the baby was baptized in that one minute?

I'm pretty sure the Protestant position is that the baby would be in hell for eternity, but what is the Catholic position?


The Catholic position is that the baby would be in Heaven. If through no fault of their own someone is not able to be baptized; and this applies not only to infants but to those on deserted islands, or faithful Muslims who grew up and lived in countries where they could not and did not hear the Gospel, etc. The quote that I really like from the Catechism is this: "God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His sacraments" (CCC #1257)

One more very important point - there is no limbo! This was never an official teaching of the Church but that didn't stop the good nuns and sisters from doing such a good job drilling the idea, originally a theological theory of Augustine and others, into the minds of students and the culture. Just about everyone thinks this is an established teaching but I repeat it is not and you will not find it at all in the Catechism or official teachings of the Church.
March 10th, 2014 at 8:40:34 AM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 44
Posts: 4914
Quote: chickenman
Does Genesis say the serpent was the devil (evil) or was that thrust upon it when Satan was invented? And, speak of the devil, isn't this the same thing that caused his downfall, i.e. wanting to be God?


I think you answered your own question with a great observation. You are exactly right in that Lucifer, "the light bearer" wanted to be God and to be served and worshiped leading to his downfall along with the other angels, now demons, who followed him. Putting this thought on the lips of the serpent makes it clear who he is.
March 10th, 2014 at 9:25:49 AM permalink
Mosca
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 16
Posts: 385
Quote: FrGamble
The Catholic position is that the baby would be in Heaven. If through no fault of their own someone is not able to be baptized; and this applies not only to infants but to those on deserted islands, or faithful Muslims who grew up and lived in countries where they could not and did not hear the Gospel, etc. The quote that I really like from the Catechism is this: "God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His sacraments" (CCC #1257)


What about someone like myself, who cannot believe? I tried, but in my heart I know it isn't true. Is it my fault, or is it part of the way I'm wired?
Page 2 of 342<12345>Last »