Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Religion  > original sin      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Rug Doctor
Joined: 11/2/2005
Msg: 1
view profile
History
original sinPage 1 of 6    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
another interesting subject- the origin of the original sin doctrine.
the law of the old testament made sure that the son was not necessarily held guilty of crimes committed by the father. the son could suffer as a result, of the father's guilt, but the son would not be convicted.

Then all of a sudden we have church people telling children that sin is inborn, that every one is guilty of the cause of Jesus' crucifixion. The child might question this, as children are pretty clear about such nonsense.This "guilt" is against the law of any civilization we know of, for obvious reason,and clearly is nonsense to anyody with any fairness.

So they are reminded of the time they went into the cookie jar without permission. oh yes. Isn't it normal and a wanted trait to seek food, as a child?

Those creeps who prey on children to get a self-conviction on them , without good representation on the conviction, are despicable.
 c note
Joined: 12/24/2005
Msg: 2
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 1:46:49 PM
The original sin - when Eve bit the apple. It has nothing to do with Jesus' crucifixion.

I agree wholeheartedly regarding your view of pedophiles, but...is there a question here?
 Rug Doctor
Joined: 11/2/2005
Msg: 3
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:04:17 PM
The doctrine of original sin, hmmm...so if it was Eve that did the original, that means the devil is not sinful.

Pedophiles? I see the preachers and sunday school teachers as messing with the kids' minds, but not of course necessarily doing anything to the body...unless they are wards of the church - then it could be a bad situation.
 FitBrit
Joined: 12/22/2005
Msg: 4
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:06:11 PM
SOme religions teach that children are spiritually scarred by Eve partaking of the fruit. It is of course nonsense. Children are born innocent. Our only inheritance from Adam and Eve is that we live in a mortal world. And so become subject to temptations. And as a result invariably we do sin BUT to suggest that a little child can sin is to suggest they have the knowledge of what is good and what is bad. They most definitely do not. That is why they have parents who teach them the difference between good and bad. It is only once they understand the difference that they become capable of sin.

Any other doctrine really is false and illogical.

Not sure how paedophiles got a mention in here though? lol
 c note
Joined: 12/24/2005
Msg: 5
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:09:36 PM
'Original sin' refers to original HUMAN sin. The Devil wasn't human...in the book of Genesis, evil was represented by the serpent (at least in the begining, so to speak).
 Rug Doctor
Joined: 11/2/2005
Msg: 6
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:14:35 PM
FB,
That would be the reasonable and fair way...too bad it is not the way things happen.
When the child is asking questions about the topic, they get this false information in most cases, most churches that I've seen.

C note,
The "saint" Augustus has some very interesting theories, he's the original sin guy.
Some of his theories are used in an attempt to explain how god could hate an unborn child.
 FitBrit
Joined: 12/22/2005
Msg: 7
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:26:36 PM
actually RIO it IS the way things happen...just too many false religions claim otherwise. Infant baptism started as a way to gain "lifelong" converts rather than because of any true doctrine. The idea being "if you baptise them before they understand, then they will be cultivated before they are aware"

The truth is out there! Just have to know where to look. lol
 rose44
Joined: 5/15/2005
Msg: 8
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:33:56 PM
What gets me is that some religions still teach that the original sin was eating a apple. There is no apple in the Garden of Eden...the sin was not eating fruit. God did hate Esau....even tho he wasn't even born yet. It was because of what Esau did in the 1st earth age. That is kind of hard to teach children, especially if they were brought up believing in the apple story. It is still taught to this day but you won't find it in the bible.
 c note
Joined: 12/24/2005
Msg: 9
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:37:02 PM
^^^^The apple story is in my Bible.??? I didn't come across any sin before that event, so what's the original sin, according to your Bible?
 laurelee
Joined: 1/10/2006
Msg: 10
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:39:00 PM
What gets me is that some religions still teach that the original sin was eating a apple. There is no apple in the Garden of Eden...the sin was not eating fruit. God did hate Esau....even tho he wasn't even born yet. It was because of what Esau did in the 1st earth age. That is kind of hard to teach children, especially if they were brought up believing in the apple story. It is still taught to this day but you won't find it in the bible.
********************************************************************** You can find that in the Dake`s bible.

Footnotes according to Dake`s interpretation. The bad angels getting another chance via humans. Some God hated to start with.
 Rug Doctor
Joined: 11/2/2005
Msg: 11
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:44:10 PM
here's a quote that shows a really sick mind:

Infants are here designed by the apostle: who have not sinned actually and in their own persons as Adam did, and yet are liable to temporal death. Wherefore, then, do they die? Is not death - the wages of sin? Most certainly. And seeing it is incontestibly clear that not any individual among the numberless millions who have died in infancy was capable of committing actual sin; it follows that they sinned representatively and implicitly in Adam. Else they would not be entitled to that death which is the wages of sin, and to those diseases by which their death is occasioned, and to that pain which most of them experience in dying.

This is against any just system of law. Failure of parents and ancestors may affect children, as in losing property, but GUILT is not transferrable to someone not even born.
 Rug Doctor
Joined: 11/2/2005
Msg: 12
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:53:49 PM
Wheee ! Rose,
did you say the first earth age? let's explore that a bit !
 rose44
Joined: 5/15/2005
Msg: 13
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 2:56:15 PM
I have never heard of Dakes bible? I have about 6 different bibles and not one of them says apple in it. And the eating of the fruit is just a metaphor. Metaphors are used all thru the bible. Eating of the forbidden fruit is not eating fruit literally...it means you have followed satan...the serpent in the garden. I would check out the authority of how this bible was printed. Anyone can write their version of the bible. Most bibles have a long list of biblical authorities so you kinda know it isn't written by a quack. If you want to believe that mans original sin was eating a apple..go for it. Please read up further.
 laurelee
Joined: 1/10/2006
Msg: 14
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:01:09 PM
Dakes speaks of Esua being hated before his birth and he used that to base his belief that we were a part of the first age. But it wasn`t me who brought it up so I`ll let you ansmer further , Rose , on how you see the 1st age.
 Rug Doctor
Joined: 11/2/2005
Msg: 15
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:06:39 PM
every discussion always ends up in "literal vs. figurative". However, I have never seen Eve's "apple" written in scripture of any kind. Fruit of the tree of knowledge..of good and evil...sounds figurative.
Like in having free will, and knowing the difference between good and evil.
Kinda like the children...not knowing the difference, so NOT GUILTY.
 Rug Doctor
Joined: 11/2/2005
Msg: 16
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:10:36 PM
And who are the descendents of Esau?
 c note
Joined: 12/24/2005
Msg: 17
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:15:01 PM
Whether or not the word 'apple' appears in the Bible, tradition has long identified the forbidden fruit as an apple, seemingly as a metaphor for Eve's breast. There is a book entitled 'Eve's Apple', an alcholic drink with the same name, the opening credits of 'Desperate Housewives' depicts Eve catching an apple falling from a tree...lol. Clearly I have been influenced by the media on this one, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Regardless, it doesn't change the ability to pinpoint the time and place of the original sin.
 rose44
Joined: 5/15/2005
Msg: 18
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:18:20 PM
I have said my beliefs about the 1st earth age here several times and I just get laughed at. But here goes. I believe in 3 earth ages, we are on the second. The 1st had dinosaurs ..lol...and spiritual men..this is where satan decided he wanted to sit on mercy seat, not protect it. A third of God's children followed him. Instead of destroying his kids God destroyed that age and brought us all back in flesh,no spiritual powers, to have free will. Esau did not love God in the 1st age. It doesn't mean he is sentenced to hell but God knew him before he was even born. Esau did not care about his heritage in this earth age...sold it for a bowl of mush...and he did not care about it in the 1st earth age...and that heritage was God. Thats what I believe.
 rose44
Joined: 5/15/2005
Msg: 19
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:21:10 PM
The sin Eve did in the Garden of Eden created Cain....hows that to blow your minds..lol
 laurelee
Joined: 1/10/2006
Msg: 20
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:23:06 PM
I believe in 3 earth ages, we are on the second. The 1st had dinosaurs ..lol...and spiritual men..this is where satan decided he wanted to sit on mercy seat, not protect it. A third of God's children followed him. Instead of destroying his kids God destroyed that age and brought us all back in flesh,no spiritual powers, to have free will. Esau did not love God in the 1st age. It doesn't mean he is sentenced to hell but God knew him before he was even born. Esau did not care about his heritage in this earth age...sold it for a bowl of mush...and he did not care about it in the 1st earth age...and that heritage was God. Thats what I believe.
********************************************************************** I have to second that. That`s not speaking at all about the 8 dispensations of this time except in reference to the last one. The one to come.
 twobits45
Joined: 12/4/2005
Msg: 21
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:25:47 PM

Message: What gets me is that some religions still teach that the original sin was eating a apple. There is no apple in the Garden of Eden...the sin was not eating fruit. God did hate Esau....even tho he wasn't even born yet. It was because of what Esau did in the 1st earth age. That is kind of hard to teach children, especially if they were brought up believing in the apple story. It is still taught to this day but you won't find it in the bible.
Though I agree that the Bible doesnt say "apple," I can't agree with the other stuff.
 Rug Doctor
Joined: 11/2/2005
Msg: 22
view profile
History
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 4:09:36 PM
I might not agree either, if I knew what they were talking about !
there is mention of meeting places while there were only Adam and Eve in the garden,, so that certainly suggests other humans.
So these others, they were not sinning, they were not the first sinners, hmmm?
Then why were they not in the garden?

Many theories about various rises and falls of civilizations exist, and there seems to be some elements pointing to this. But the 1st earth stuff is new to me !
 laurelee
Joined: 1/10/2006
Msg: 23
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 4:16:06 PM
there is mention of meeting places while there were only Adam and Eve in the garden,, so that certainly suggests other humans.
So these others, they were not sinning, they were not the first sinners, hmmm?
Then why were they not in the garden?
********************************************************************** could you give us a little more info on this?
 twobits45
Joined: 12/4/2005
Msg: 24
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 4:20:02 PM

Message: I might not agree either, if I knew what they were talking about !
there is mention of meeting places while there were only Adam and Eve in the garden,, so that certainly suggests other humans.
So these others, they were not sinning, they were not the first sinners, hmmm?
Then why were they not in the garden?

Many theories about various rises and falls of civilizations exist, and there seems to be some elements pointing to this. But the 1st earth stuff is new to me !
Some people use more than just the Bible to come up with theories.
 laurelee
Joined: 1/10/2006
Msg: 25
original sin
Posted: 2/8/2006 4:28:37 PM
The theory mentioned was an original on e where no other theory had been offered before so it`s not in conflicked with anything. I can`t really say I believe the bit about being angels previously, but to my opinion the theory is not based on thin air.
It says that Satan had his kingdom in the first age. I think most people agree with that. He took it one step further and said that the reason Esue was hated before he was born was because he was pre known as a previously living being. There is nothing to back that about an angel.
The question arose who are Esua`s decendents. That has nothing to do with it. Good kings came from some of the worse.


Edit I believe the first age was Satan`s kingdom, it went down in a flood,and the earth was rebuilt after. And that is bible based.

The rest is a theory where there is no other theory.

I would like to know where Rose gets her info?
Show ALL Forums  > Religion  > original sin