The original sin ????

[nour elhoda]

The original sin


One of essence of the christian dogmas is the believe in the idea of " the original sin & the tonement" . Adam disobeid God by eating from the forbidden tree. The sin of Adam ingerited by all of his children, all human being are born sinful. According to this idea, God's justice requires a price to be paid for every sin ; and the only thing that can wipe out sin is the shedding of blood .
As ST. Paul puts it :
" Without the shedding of blood there is no remission" ------( Hebrews 9:22)
But this blood must be perfect , sinless & incorrupt blood
" As the original sin being directed, was infinite proportion, it demanded infinite recompense"
So Jesus Christ , the Son of God who had come from heaven , shed his blood, suffered indescribable agony , and died to pay the penalty for the sins of men.
Because Jesus was infinite God , he alone could pay the infinite price of Sin.
According to this Dogma noone can be saved from the eternal Hell unless he\she accepts Jeus christ as his redeemer.

The dogma is divided into 3 parts:
1- The original sin
2- God's justice requires blood to be paid as a penality for sins
3- The belief that Jesus has paid the price for the sin by his death on the cross, & that salvation is only for those who believe in this vicarious sacrifice .
As for the words of ST. Paul :
" As by the disobedience of one ( Adam) , many were made sinners , so also by the obedience of one ( Christ) many shall be made just" Rom " 5:18,19



1) The idea of the ingerited sin:
It has no support in th ewords of Jesus or the prophets who came beofre him. All prophets came with the dogma that everyman is accountable for his\her own actions; the children will not be punished for the sin of their father.
The dogma of the original sin states that all chidler are born sinners, while Jesus himself regarded children as being innocent & pure , & not born in sin:

" suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of God .
Verily , I say unto you whosoever , shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child , he shall not enter there in"
( Mark 10:14,15)

As for islam , it condemns this dogma of the oroginal sin .Sin is not ingerited , but it is something which each person acuires by himself by doing what he shouldnot do.
Man according to islam is born with the capability & inclination to do evil as well as to do good. When man grow up being able to distinguish between right & wrong , he is totally free to be a prey of temptation & make something wrong , or resist & live in harmoney with the will of God.

Rationally speaking, it would be the height of injustice to condemn the entire human race for a sin commited thousands of years ago by the first parents. Justice views sin as a wilful transgression of the law of God or the law of right & wrong, and the blame for it lies on the doer of the sin , and not on his children , every man has his own mind , has the free choice to be good or bad , so no one is to be blamed for other's faults.
​

wait for more (

 

[Grace Seeker]

Rationally speaking, it would be the height of injustice to condemn the entire human race for a sin commited thousands of years ago by the first parents.

You are right. But then we are not condemned because of a sin commited by our first parents. In fact condemnation is not something that is done to us at all. It is simply the inevitable byproduct of not accepting God's offer of grace and love found in Jesus Christ by which he seeks to restore us to the original relationship with us for which we were created and that our first parents spurned. What God has done is not act to condemn, but to save -- "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him" (John 3:17). We do however have to live with the consequence of their actions that have forever altered the world in which we live.

Our first parents were created to live in a perfect paradise where they could live in perfect fellowship with God. However, they were kicked out of paradise because of sinning, that was a just action on God's part. We have been born since that event. We were not kicked out. But we were born outside of paradise. We cannot blame that on God, but on our first parents who screwed up our chance to be born into the sort of fellowship with God that he wants to have with us.

The good news is that God doesn't want us to be left out in the cold just because we were born there, rather he wants to have fellowship with us too just like he wanted to have with our first parents. We err though if we think the way back is through our own efforts. The only way back is by invitation, and God offers that invitation to each and everyone of us in Jesus Christ. So, if people feel that they are being excluded from this relationship with God that they want to have, it isn't God who has made this so for the invitation has been made.

 

[M.I.A.]

you cannot inherit the sins of parents, but there ways are your ways.
what is right and wrong, not morally but according to gods law, that is/was or has been.

its not a coherent argument until you put something that has been debated from all angles into perspective.
the having of multiple wives is not tolerated by many in society within "civilised" society at least.. even if it is tolerated people inwardly are opposed or disgusted. this may help you understand where im coming from.

in our time original sin, is simply due to being conditioned to the laws of our time.
i understand that blood atonement is not required but many a wife would be willing lol. im kidding as a happily married family man.

..some of the arguments for multiple wives include being able to support them.. i didnt realise it was a money thing.
of course my reasoning puts some doubt on my morality.
worse still would be people willing to accept a person that did the above.. most would consider it a stain on ones reputation.

 

[siam]

You are right. But then we are not condemned because of a sin commited by our first parents. In fact condemnation is not something that is done to us at all. It is simply the inevitable byproduct of not accepting God's offer of grace and love found in Jesus Christ by which he seeks to restore us to the original relationship with us for which we were created and that our first parents spurned. What God has done is not act to condemn, but to save -- "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him" (John 3:17). We do however have to live with the consequence of their actions that have forever altered the world in which we live.

Our first parents were created to live in a perfect paradise where they could live in perfect fellowship with God. However, they were kicked out of paradise because of sinning, that was a just action on God's part. We have been born since that event. We were not kicked out. But we were born outside of paradise. We cannot blame that on God, but on our first parents who screwed up our chance to be born into the sort of fellowship with God that he wants to have with us.

The good news is that God doesn't want us to be left out in the cold just because we were born there, rather he wants to have fellowship with us too just like he wanted to have with our first parents. We err though if we think the way back is through our own efforts. The only way back is by invitation, and God offers that invitation to each and everyone of us in Jesus Christ. So, if people feel that they are being excluded from this relationship with God that they want to have, it isn't God who has made this so for the invitation has been made.

I suppose crazy Christian arguments should not come as a surprise anymore---yet they still do...

We err on the side of idiocy if we underestimate God's capacity for Compassion and Mercy.
We err on the side of stupidity if we underestimate God's capacity for Equality in Justice.
We were created to be stewards of all of God's creations on earth. That is why we are here on earth and that is why all human beings are created inherently GOOD.

 

[Ramadhan]

I suppose crazy Christian arguments should not come as a surprise anymore---yet they still do...

I am sharing your sentiment
They always move the goalposts, just when their convoluted and elaborated "explanation" about a certain aspect of their theology get shredded to pieces, they'll move on and concoct an ever more elaborate, mentally-straining, verbally-acrobatic "explanations"

Professional christians are the best (or worse? depending on how you are looking at it ;D), they'll get more and more creative with words, rationals, logic, and being selective with certain verses and amnesiac with many other verses.

 

[Hiroshi]

​

​

As the original sin being directed, was infinite proportion, it demanded infinite recompense"
So Jesus Christ , the Son of God who had come from heaven , shed his blood, suffered indescribable agony , and died to pay the penalty for the sins of men.
Because Jesus was infinite God , he alone could pay the infinite price of Sin.
​

wait for more (

I cannot see any reason why Adam's sin should be viewed as infinite sin. Accordingly there is then no necessity for the sacrifice of an infinite God to pay the price for redemption.

The sin was committed by a man Adam (a perfect man before he sinned). And so the redemption price for the ransom sacrifice required also a sinless perfect man, Jesus. It did not require the sacrifice and death of God himself.

 

[Grace Seeker]

I suppose crazy Christian arguments should not come as a surprise anymore---yet they still do...

We err on the side of idiocy if we underestimate God's capacity for Compassion and Mercy.
We err on the side of stupidity if we underestimate God's capacity for Equality in Justice.
We were created to be stewards of all of God's creations on earth. That is why we are here on earth and that is why all human beings are created inherently GOOD.

You say my argument is crazy. Is there a particular part of it that you find as crazy or the whole of it?

Is it crazy to assert that we are not condemned because of a sin commited by our first parents?

Is it crazy to assert that what God has done is not act to condemn, but to save?

Is it crazy to assert that our first parents were created to live in a perfect paradise where they could live in perfect fellowship with God or that they were kicked out of paradise because of sinning? Or that kicking them out of paradise because of sin was a just action on God's part?


I agree with the essence of what you said. It is wrong to underestimate God's capacity with regard to anything be it compasison or mercy or equity or justice. I don't believe we should believe that God is in anyway limited on those fronts, nor did I present him that way. So, in what way does the assertion of "crazy" apply to what I wrote?

 

[nour elhoda]

You say my argument is crazy. Is there a particular part of it that you find as crazy or the whole of it?

Is it crazy to assert that we are not condemned because of a sin commited by our first parents?

Is it crazy to assert that what God has done is not act to condemn, but to save?

Is it crazy to assert that our first parents were created to live in a perfect paradise where they could live in perfect fellowship with God or that they were kicked out of paradise because of sinning? Or that kicking them out of paradise because of sin was a just action on God's part?


I agree with the essence of what you said. It is wrong to underestimate God's capacity with regard to anything be it compasison or mercy or equity or justice. I don't believe we should believe that God is in anyway limited on those fronts, nor did I present him that way. So, in what way does the assertion of "crazy" apply to what I wrote?

Grace seeker ...first iam so sorry for that word " crazy"


what iam saying in this article is that , to forgive our sins , God needs no blood , its only repentance , there is no mediation between God & people .

if we have to believe in the sacrifice of Jesus Blood ( peace be upon him) , so what about those people who were born and died before Jesus ??.......... would they go to hell ???

if we said that God left those people between Adam & Jesus without salvation , unlike those who came with & after Jesus , so God was unjust ...

to be saved from Hell one needs nothing but a pure relation with God and sinless life , to be good & benevolent , to be a great person in your relation with God as well as with people
Every person is totally responsible for his\her deeds , & its unfair if we said that one person " Jesus" is sacrificed for other people sins


this is what am trying to clarify in this article , its not blood that saves us , but God's person first , then our good deeds in life

 

[M.I.A.]

i think in the case of jesus pbuh is he saved his people, the people he was sent to.

much the same as the other prophets, peace and blessing be upon them.

also there have been a lot of prophets pbut.

they were the mediation between god and the people..and each had a different story by which they did it.
gods never changing word expressed in an ever changing people.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Grace seeker ...first iam so sorry for that word "crazy"

It's OK, but thank you for apologizing anyway.

what iam saying in this article is that , to forgive our sins , God needs no blood , its only repentance , there is no mediation between God & people .

Forgiveness is to say that the wrong doing is not held against a person. On that basis, forgiveness doesn't even require repentance as to repent means to turn around and change direction. Can God forgive apart from the shedding of blood? Absolutely!!

But we have to understand that apart from repentance such forgiveness would still leave a person doing the wrong thing. So, forgiveness by itself is not enough. It also needs repentance. I would argue that even that is not enough, there is also the need for reconciliation to actually bring the parties back together. And it is in the process of reconciliation that we need Christ as our mediator.

if we have to believe in the sacrifice of Jesus Blood ( peace be upon him) , so what about those people who were born and died before Jesus ??.......... would they go to hell ???

Well, first note that you are the one who has presupposed a condition that I do not. You begin by asserting that we have to believe in the sacrifice of Jesus' blood. I make no such assertion. (I do myself believe that Jesus sacrificed his life, but I don't assert that it is a necessity for others to so believe.) What I have asserted is that Jesus is our mediator.

As for those who were born and died before Jesus, the result of their eternal destiny is in God's hands, not mine. Scriptures tell us that Jesus went to the resting place of the dead (both righteous and unrighteous, for hell is where the unrighteous are cast at the end of time) to minister to those who had preceeded him. So, there isn't a problem with regard to those who were born and died before Jesus. All humanity has the opportunity to hear the Gospel proclaimed to them and are judged according to the degree of revelation they received and are capable of receiving.

if we said that God left those people between Adam & Jesus without salvation , unlike those who came with & after Jesus , so God was unjust ...

But we haven't said that. The only unjust thing is to assert that we believe something that we actually don't.

to be saved from Hell one needs nothing but a pure relation with God and sinless life , to be good & benevolent , to be a great person in your relation with God as well as with people

Oh, that's the only thing? Then we are all doomed, for I know of no person who can be described that way other than Jesus himself.

Every person is totally responsible for his\her deeds , & its unfair if we said that one person "Jesus" is sacrificed for other people sins

I agree. I'm very glad that rather than being fair with me, God has chose me grace.

 

[Predator]

Jesus tells The parable of the Prodigals son which explains the relationship between God and his creations .This itself shreds to pieces the concept of a God dieing for other sins

It begins with a young man, the younger of two sons, who asks his father to give him his share of the estate. The parable continues by describing how the younger son travels to a distant country and wastes all his money in wild living. When a famine strikes, he becomes desperately poor and is forced to take work as a swineherd. When he reaches the point of envying the pigs he is looking after, he finally comes to his senses:
But when he came to himself he said, "How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough to spare, and I'm dying with hunger! I will get up and go to my father, and will tell him, 'Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight. I am no more worthy to be called your son. Make me as one of your hired servants.'"

He arose, and came to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him, and was moved with compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.

— Luke 15:17-20, World English Bible

The son does not even have time to finish his rehearsed speech, since the father calls for his servants to dress him in a fine robe, a ring, and sandals, and slaughter the "fattened calf" for a celebratory meal. The older son, who was at work in the fields, hears the sound of celebration, and is told about the return of his younger brother. He is not impressed, and becomes angry:
But he answered his father, "Behold, these many years I have served you, and I never disobeyed a commandment of yours, but you never gave me a goat, that I might celebrate with my friends. But when this, your son, came, who has devoured your living with prostitutes, you killed the fattened calf for him."

— Luke 15:29-30, World English Bible

The parable concludes with the father explaining that because the younger son had returned, in a sense, from the dead, celebration was necessary:
"But it was appropriate to celebrate and be glad, for this, your brother, was dead, and is alive again. He was lost, and is found."

— Luke 15:32, World English Bible

This is echoed by

"But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. Ezekiel 18:21

Grace seeker dont be a coward trying to look for someone to pass the buck on to . , You dont need a Jesus or a Muhammad to die for your sins,all you need to do is change like the Prodigal's son.

 

[M.I.A.]

so i thought of a concept which id like to share with you,

i know its a bit abstract but its an idea anyway.

imagine if you were your brothers keeper,
and all the rules of scripture applied.

so that your anger were manifest on them, even if it was not directly against them.

so the way they treated a stranger is how you were treated and the way you treated a stranger is they way they were treated.
there sins were manifest to you and yours to them.

this would put the fear of god into me for sure, responsibility of action knowing that its an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.. but not necessarily your eyes or your teeth.

the quran says the only that in this world the only thing you can wrong is your own soul.. to think that it resides in your own body is wrong.

dont know how it would fit the concept of atonement but im sure you can relate.

 

[siam]

You say my argument is crazy. Is there a particular part of it that you find as crazy or the whole of it?
---the whole of it
Is it crazy to assert that we are not condemned because of a sin commited by our first parents?
---ofcourse we are NOT condemned---but Christians think otherwise---at least those following Agustine...?...
Is it crazy to assert that what God has done is not act to condemn, but to save?
---Yes, as per yr explanation.
Is it crazy to assert that our first parents were created to live in a perfect paradise where they could live in perfect fellowship with God or that they were kicked out of paradise because of sinning? Or that kicking them out of paradise because of sin was a just action on God's part?
---Yes.....by the way, some interesting assumptions here......

I agree with the essence of what you said. It is wrong to underestimate God's capacity with regard to anything be it compasison or mercy or equity or justice. I don't believe we should believe that God is in anyway limited on those fronts, nor did I present him that way. So, in what way does the assertion of "crazy" apply to what I wrote?

GS, you assume we were created to live in Paradise---but I say we were created from the first to be stewards (vicegerents) of earth. As such---we were created with a "nature" that would help us do so.

Now consider the story of (Prophet) Adam (pbuh).....where did his desire come from if not from the "nature" created by God. Had desire not been present in his nature, Satan could not have tempted him....because one needs to have desires in order to be tempted.

So why did God create Mankind with a nature that desires?(a question that even the angels asked of God in Surah 2--Quran)---because if we(self) are to be stewards on earth, we need a vehicle of interaction with our environment--which is the body---and for the body to survive, it needs to have desires---such as the desire to eat, sleep, seek shelter, mate....etc

If we were to be stewards on earth, why did God put us in Paradise first?---God created us for the purpose of being his stewards on earth and for this he gave us intelligence and a "nature" that would help us on earth. But----he also gave us one more thing....free-will. However, look at our development---do we come fully equipped with these 3 things (nature, intelligence and free-will) or do we develop them over time?---One needs only to observe children.....

Paradise was a time of nurturing and development....(like our time in our mother's womb.) Our ("first Parents")choice was simply a maturing of the 3 gifts of ---nature, intelligence and free-will----whatever the choice, once our "first Parents" matured enough to make their choices and be accountable for them, they would have been given the responsibility of the stewardship for which they were created. To do so before they were capable would have been unjust.

So why did God not create us "fully equipped" but required a state of development?---It is an interesting point---one might say it is because such a flexible state equips us to deal with the changes brought by time and circumstances better than a fixed "nature"/state would.....but perhaps there is something more....?

God creates----and interestingly, mankind also has this ability on a miniscule scale---through the use of "nature", intelligence and free-will---we can make use of our imaginations and CREATE !!! ----If we so chose---we could create a "Paradise" on earth.... one only needs to look at the magnificient creative power of the human imagination throughout history to realise this.....yet so far, we have used this power only for ego....not for the purpose God created us......

God did not create us without thought or plan. Nor has his plan gone awry because of human free-will. ---and because his plan has not gone wrong---it needs no fixing through sacrifice of God, Man, demi-God or anything else.

 

[siam]

By the way, upon comming to earth, God gave a 4th gift to (Prophet) Adam (pbuh)/Mankind...that was Islam/Guidance---the path to Submission to God's will through which we can fulfill the purpose for which we were created.....

 

[Amigo]

God created us for the purpose of being his stewards on earth

I think you are assuming that God needs us.

God needs no blood

Yes, God needs no blood, but man needs it to live.



peace

 

[siam]

@ Amigo---God needs us? No.
One(human) has "needs" because of a perception of lack. God does not lack.....

Does God have need of the Sun, the Planets, the Universe?....Yet he created them.....

 

[M.I.A.]

so the question arises, why god created us?

if he does not need us?

it feels like anybody that does not actively remove themselves from the religion, will be included in the religion.
ie if you follow the path of transgression then you follow the path of a constant misleader

so maybe it is not our test in entirety but for something that would not submit to adam pbuh and those that are mislead by him.

 

[Amigo]

so the question arises, why god created us?

if he does not need us?

it feels like anybody that does not actively remove themselves from the religion, will be included in the religion.
ie if you follow the path of transgression then you follow the path of a constant misleader

so maybe it is not our test in entirety but for something that would not submit to adam pbuh and those that are mislead by him.

I am not understanding what you are trying to say. Could you please clarify further? Thanks.

peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

I am not understanding what you are trying to say. Could you please clarify further? Thanks.

peace

It's a simple question. If God does not need us, then why did he create us. For purpose do we exist?

The classic answering in orthodox Christianity is "to glorify and praise God;" this is what all of creation does including stars, moons, planets, rocks, and trees. God has no need of this from us or any of his creation, but he nonetheless created us and all of creation for this purpose.

 

[Grace Seeker]

GS, you assume we were created to live in Paradise---but I say we were created from the first to be stewards (vicegerents) of earth. As such---we were created with a "nature" that would help us do so.

I don't see a conflict between those two assumptions.

But one conflict we do have is our presumption as to where "Paradise" was. If one accepts the Genesis account, then the "Paradise" that I was speaking of was the Garden of Eden and it was on earth.

I do agree that people were to be stewards of the earth. I do believe that God created us with the ability to do so. I don't believe that there was any necessity of desire as you describe it to accomplish that task. I believe that it was enough to have been created the image of God within us to do all that God needed us to do. But that we also have free will to make the decision to submit or not submit to God's will in our lives. This submission is one of the ways in which we would glorify God at a higher level than those elements of creation that are subject merely to the laws of nature and have no free will to chose to do what God desires, but do so by their nature rather than their free choice.