Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Tell me you deny it!
EVERYONE has sinned. That would include you, me and epecially TVOR. 
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Original Sin (again)
- Thread starter Rex
- Start date
EVERYONE has sinned. That would include you, me and epecially TVOR. 
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
True? Original sin a theological term. However it's defined is what is "true." (whether it actually exists is another matter.) Since you prefer to use scripture as the basis of argument, what evidence do you have that Eve's punishment did not end with her? The only scripturally based evidence that I see of an "inherited punishment" is a dislike of snakes.Deut. 32.8 said:
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Pain during childbirth would be a more concrete example, in my opinion.
There is no need to be needlessly contentious, lilithu. The text clearly speaks of the pain of child-baring and the Judeo-Christian tradition of the subordination of women.lilithu said:
lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
I'm not trying to be contentious, Deut. I'm saying that if you prefer to use scripture as the basis of argument rather than the musings of theologians, then I will use scripture. Instead of repeating the definition, I will base my arguments on the level that you wish.Deut. 32.8 said:
The pain of child-bearing for Eve and her subordination to Adam. The text says nothing of that being inherited by subsequent generations of women. That is interpretation. The fact that that interpetation was used by men to subsequently subordinate women is not evidence of God's continued punishment. As I said, the only thing that I see in the text that goes to the next generation is a tendency to dislike snakes.Deut. 32.8 said:
addendum:
I think it's significant to add that the only time God uses the word "curse" in this story is while meting out punishment to the serpent. Adam and Eve are never cursed, which supports the position that original sin is not an inherited punishment.
Rex_Admin said:
For since death is through a man,(Adam) resurrection of the dead is also through a man,(Jesus)For just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive. (1 corinthians 15;21-22)All humans are suffering the effects of Adams sin because we all die.
Well A&E ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Adam was "one of them", knowing of good and evil. So the big problem there was that A&E had godly knowledge and this was, for one or another reason, wrong. (This is why it's called Satanism, eating from the tree of knowledge, being your own God).
I think I'm in the same boat as you, Rex. But I think for me it's not JUST why you're punished for the actions of A&E, but why that certain action was wrong to begin with. Yeah, A&E had knowledge of good and evil, so why is this bad? Okay, they found out they were naked, better sooner than later in my opinion but that's off topic. If God put the tree there, they were going to eat it at some point whether the serpent came by or not. Just because they have knowledge of good and evil doesnt mean they're automatically going to ruin your big plan. Just because A&E did it doesnt mean some other two people might. Why punish the little kids for what the big kids have done?
I think I'm in the same boat as you, Rex. But I think for me it's not JUST why you're punished for the actions of A&E, but why that certain action was wrong to begin with. Yeah, A&E had knowledge of good and evil, so why is this bad? Okay, they found out they were naked, better sooner than later in my opinion but that's off topic. If God put the tree there, they were going to eat it at some point whether the serpent came by or not. Just because they have knowledge of good and evil doesnt mean they're automatically going to ruin your big plan. Just because A&E did it doesnt mean some other two people might. Why punish the little kids for what the big kids have done?
For just as through the disobedience of the one man(Adam) many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person ,Jesus] many will be constituted righteous. (Romans 5;19)So its all to do with obedience,and obedience is always proper
We are left in no doubt that God views obedience as a requirement for enjoying his approval. Yes, obedience is an indispensable ingredient for building a relationship with Jehovah .for he is the source of life.obedience saves lives
We are left in no doubt that God views obedience as a requirement for enjoying his approval. Yes, obedience is an indispensable ingredient for building a relationship with Jehovah .for he is the source of life.obedience saves lives
Scott1
Well-Known Member
It is not a punishment..... our origins do not begin with a personal sin. It is a condition..... we all will sin. This condition we are born with.... unlike the nature of Adam and Eve before the fall.... is a broken one, prone to sin. I compare original sin to a disease (if that analogy helps).... we are all born sick.... and Christians believe that Jesus Christ was the remedy.Deut. 32.8 said:
Peace,
Scott
That is certainly a strong argument, lilithu. I find myself both surprised and embarrassed that I've neither encountered nor considered it in the past, and can think of no counter argument other than tradition.lilithu said:
But the weight of tradition is not wholly unimportant. Certainly Jewish tradition reads Genesis 3:16 as referring to childbirth in general. The Etz Hayim Torah commentary, for example, simply notes that "Intense pain in childbearing is unique to the human species."
In fact, I find absolutely no talmudic interpretation suggesting that the verse referred solely to Eve, nor does the Torah hint at anything unique about the birth of Cain or Abel. What I do find is the sense/recognition that the section imposes a profound transformation in the condition of the species: in very short order are introduced fear, enmity, pain, subservience, longing, toil, and death.
Having said all this, I must admit that I see little reason to adopt your interpretation. To suggest that the text on child-bearing applies only to Eve because only Eve is mentioned seems no more worthy a position than it would be to suggest that the text on eating dust and crawling on one's belly applies only to the offending snake because none other are referenced in this dictum.
So, having first insisted on a somewhat unique ultra-literalism, you now decide to simply invest in the word "cursed" whatever might support your position? Where is there any indication that to be cursed necessarilly implies that your progeny are cursed? Is that what you find in Deuteronomy 27? Furthermore, the absence of the term implies nothing - it is used in neither Exodus 25:5 nor 34:7.lilithu said:
Parenthetically, while Adam is never cursed, the ground is. NET Bible suggests: "For the ground to be cursed means that it will no longer yield its bounty as the blessing from God had promised. The whole creation, Paul writes in Rom 8:22, is still groaning under this curse, waiting for the day of redemption."
All in all, while you make a formally correct observation, the position seems more wishful than warranted in my opinion.
Obedience to Gods requirements leads to lifedisobedience to his law leads to sure disappointment and death. This simple but powerful lesson we learn from the experience of Adam and Eve. By continued obedience they could have lived forever, yet they chose to disobey God and died as a result
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
It sorta puts us "having a bad day" in perspective, eh?
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
God is looking for us to love him. No more and no less. We choose heaven when we choose to love him. We chose spiritual death when we first loved ourselves more.
"I will greatly multiply your pain ..."SOGFPP said:
To be sure, the Catholic Encyclopaedia writes:
Note that it acknowledges "a life of sorrow and travail" as punishment ("a sentence"), while equivocating on the rest with its references to "the nature of things". Perhaps we are suppose to forget that, according to the theology being defended, it is in fact God who defines "the nature of things", so the caveat doesn't really buy you much.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
I am impressed Lilithu,
No matter how many eons of "tradition" pass by, we can still see where people just want to add words to God's mouth. Then when the tradition gets challenged, many rely on the tradition to PROVE the tradition. They just don't get it!
No matter how many eons of "tradition" pass by, we can still see where people just want to add words to God's mouth. Then when the tradition gets challenged, many rely on the tradition to PROVE the tradition. They just don't get it!
And deservedly so!NetDoc said:
Doesn't that just singe your socks? I mean, for example, take Leviticus 12:NetDoc said:
- And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
- Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.
- And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
- And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.
- But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.
- And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest
- Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This [is] the law for her that hath born a male or a female.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Just glad that Jesus did away with all of that for the Christians.