Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 68

Thread: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

  1. #21
    Himster's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Dublin, The Peoples Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    9,838

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Original sin is blatantly arbitrary and irrational. It is particularly incompatible with, utterly alien to, and even disgusting to typical modern thought patterns.
    But the same can be said about most religious doctrines. If it were otherwise, it would hardly be religious. Something that can be neatly calculated and proven does not require faith.
    It is hardly a criticism of a doctrine to say that it requires faith in the face of reason. That is what a doctrine is meant to do.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.
    -Betrand Russell

  2. #22

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    Original sin is blatantly arbitrary and irrational. It is particularly incompatible with, utterly alien to, and even disgusting to typical modern thought patterns.
    But the same can be said about most religious doctrines. If it were otherwise, it would hardly be religious. Something that can be neatly calculated and proven does not require faith.
    It is hardly a criticism of a doctrine to say that it requires faith in the face of reason. That is what a doctrine is meant to do.
    Nor it is true. It can require faith in the face of reason for some doctrines but for many others it doesn't have to.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  3. #23
    Himster's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Dublin, The Peoples Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    9,838

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    It can require faith in the face of reason for some doctrines but for many others it doesn't have to.
    Due to their inter-related and co-dependent nature, I posit that all doctrines require a suspension of reason.
    One doesn't get reasonable fruit from an unreasonable tree.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.
    -Betrand Russell

  4. #24

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    Due to their inter-related and co-dependent nature, I posit that all doctrines require a suspension of reason.
    You're passing a lot of judgment as premise to make that true. A doctrine based on a topic with a particular conclusion that is not based on knowledge but possibility of it doesn't necessarily suspends reason.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  5. #25
    Tribunus
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,245

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    I don't think there's an agreed position on Original Sin even in the Churches that have enduring doctrinal positions. I think there's a mess of thought that hasn't been hammered straight, and the scriptural source material seems to me innocent of the interpretations being forced onto it.

    "Doctrine" is literally "teaching", and does not require a suspension of reason IMHO. Reason is itself highly over-rated.

    The idea of collective guilt does seem an unreasonable one. As the Bible was collated and edited over many centuries it has a number of versions of Gods adhering to various moral norms that later generations found uncomfortable. When something was too uncomfortable I think it was glossed as secret wisdom and new situations not covered in the old texts required some imaginative exegesis etc etc
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  6. #26
    basics's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    10,189

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    If Adam's fall in the garden was not the " original sin, " then what was? The world from then was filled with violence up until the days of Noah and the flood and it still is. Men enjoy violence even if only in the head, why even this website was built on it. Oh I can see the cries already as members rush to call that rubbish but before you do, think about it. Jesus Christ Who is God said that even to think something bad is as good as doing something bad and that my friends comes as second nature to us men and women. We are a sin laden people.

  7. #27

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    If Adam's fall in the garden was not the " original sin, " then what was? The world from then was filled with violence up until the days of Noah and the flood and it still is. Men enjoy violence even if only in the head, why even this website was built on it. Oh I can see the cries already as members rush to call that rubbish but before you do, think about it. Jesus Christ Who is God said that even to think something bad is as good as doing something bad and that my friends comes as second nature to us men and women. We are a sin laden people.
    Yet, the kind of sin you're talking about there is not the original sin. It's directly tied to the actions or thoughts of individuals. You need to stay coherent and consistent.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  8. #28
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,260

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    Original sin is blatantly arbitrary and irrational. It is particularly incompatible with, utterly alien to, and even disgusting to typical modern thought patterns.
    Meh, not really. Children following in their parents footsteps even when those were missteps is observable in real life. I'll go ahead and quote a psychology teacher of mine (whom I hated, who was a pink & short haired men hating feminist who was not in the slightest religious), who went on a tangent once and started talking about this: "When I went to Catholic school I used to give the teachers a hard time about it. But in this case they were right. Children do inherit the sins of their fathers."

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  9. #29

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    Meh, not really. Children following in their parents footsteps even when those were missteps is observable in real life. I'll go ahead and quote a psychology teacher of mine (whom I hated, who was a pink & short haired men hating feminist who was not in the slightest religious), who went on a tangent once and started talking about this: "When I went to Catholic school I used to give the teachers a hard time about it. But in this case they were right. Children do inherit the sins of their fathers."
    Fathers? Maybe, in the psychological sense at least. Not that a son has a murderous nature because his father turned out to be secretly a murderer, but the son would definitely carry the phycological and public burden that comes with it. That, however, does not translate to regular humans today carrying the responsibility for Adam and Eve's sin.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  10. #30
    Tribunus
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,245

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    If Adam's fall in the garden was not the " original sin, " then what was?
    Nothing was. Sin means debt and the term has been crafted into a theological con job to enforce obedience.

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    The world from then was filled with violence up until the days of Noah and the flood and it still is.
    So the flood was ineffective? All those people God made and then drowned, and no positive result, it seems so pointless. BTW all this violence was created by God. If he is all powerful and all knowing then its all part of his plan.

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    Men enjoy violence even if only in the head, why even this website was built on it.
    God too, he commands and blesses the slaughter of women, children and animals (eg Joshua 6-8). Remember God ordered snake to bite people and people to kill snakes. He arms two angels with flaming swords, he invents so many ways to kill and even orders the killings.

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    Oh I can see the cries already as members rush to call that rubbish but before you do, think about it.
    I thought about it and its rubbish. If any of us do enjoy violence (by which I imagine you mean slaughter) isn't it because God made us this way, and we merely fulfil his plan?

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    Jesus Christ Who is God said that even to think something bad is as good as doing something bad and that my friends comes as second nature to us men and women.
    Wait are you saying Adam and Eve were already damned for even thinking about eating the fruit? God doesn't mention that in Scripture though but he's pretty confused. I mean he doesn't know where Adam is, then after threatening Adam (not Eve) with death "in that day" (we're using the Authorised Edition, vulgarly terms the KJV, aren't we?) he instead expels them from a garden, and gives the man a job and the woman labour pain. Oh and he makes snakes bite us. That's weird to.

    Now in Revelations Satan is described as a serpent, but there's no clear connection to Eden: in fact the serpent in Eden is unequivocally one of God's created beasts (the term used for all the terrestrial animals AFAIK). In fact he's the cleverest of beasts but if you know anything about animals (which its obvious the author of Genesis does not) you'd know snakes a re a lot stupider than say corvids or parrots, or most primates. I mean if we;re going full creationist here then they haven't evolved, so the sakes must be playing dumb.

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    We are a sin laden people.
    In a just society there are no Kings and no collective punishment nonsense. Original Sin is a post-Jesus invention, almost as phoney as Papal Infallibility.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  11. #31
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,260

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Fathers? Maybe, in the psychological sense at least. Not that a son has a murderous nature because his father turned out to be secretly a murderer, but the son would definitely carry the phycological and public burden that comes with it. That, however, does not translate to regular humans today carrying the responsibility for Adam and Eve's sin.
    No, a child does not reenact their parents behaviour out of simple psychological burden. Whilst the nature vs nurture debate is still ongoing there's a wealth of information available on the subject already, and both causes do fine in this context. Children inherit their parents traits and patterns of behaviours. Children can break free, but doing so requires a fight and often a lifetime one. We don't even have to look at crime, we can also look at selfdestructive patterns, such as addictions. There are also studies on adopted children in that regard.

    And finally we can even move on to normal children and just look at them. The first thing you see them develop is the capacity to do bad things. E.g. taking the ball away from another kid just because that other kid started playing with it. Or whacking him out of nowhere. It's only later on that the normative part is learned - Freud's Über-Ich. It's the norms that are unnatural, the capacity to sin aka original sin is in all of us. The view of children as something innocent is the myth, and fun fact that one's also borne out of Christianity.

    As such there's nothing wrong whatsoever with the original sin as a very nice philosophical, psychological and anthropological concept. Nota bene I'm intentionally disregarding the religious angle entirely because there's zero point in religious debate on the internet (and most of the time - elsewhere as well).

    It is obviously in conflict with our more modern belief that everyone starts out with an equal blank slate. Thing is though that for one, just because it's more modern, doesn't make it more right, and secondly there's from my point of view no problem with that presumption being the necessary myth. That myth, we could also call it a doctrine or dogma, is in the European world however equally based in Christianity.

    In short - himster in his OP is thoroughly wrong except that conflict with the moral doctrine of children having to be unburdened by their forefathers past, but even with that he contradicts himself, since that "thought pattern" is per definition a doctrine, so this juxtopposition doesn't work. Not by definition, and worse still not in the deeper sense in that any set of beliefs always requires paradigms to rest upon.

    EDIT: I just got informed per rep that himster wasn't the OP. And only now did I realise that I was on page 2. That's quite the level of stupidity on my part, lol.
    Last edited by Cookiegod; September 26, 2021 at 06:53 AM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  12. #32
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    14,225

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    days of Noah and the flood
    Just to clarify you are young earth creationist correct? And the flood happens rather after the 6000 year ago of creation (10,000 or whatever). So why is not genetic bottle neck in every creature what 4000 years ago all simultaneously.

    --------

    Whilst the nature vs nurture debate is still ongoing
    Err You bit off here there is no debate. First the proper way to say what I think you are saying that would be Genotype vs Phenotype (plus Epigenetic factors). All 3 matter and of course the 4th is on Phenotype - environmental factors.

    You are not born a person with antisocial personality disorder for example. You may have a Genotype that is more likely to to allow you to become one. But it remains for the environmental and Epigenetic factors to push you into that Phenotype. Yes in more simple things it is just Genotype - your eye color, skin color etc...
    Last edited by conon394; September 26, 2021 at 10:32 AM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  13. #33

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    If humans aren't sinfully inclined by nature then that raises the question of why 100% of human beings choose to sin.
    Ignore List (to save time):

    Exarch

  14. #34
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    14,225

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodromos View Post
    If humans aren't sinfully inclined by nature then that raises the question of why 100% of human beings choose to sin.
    How do define sin and when was this non sin time?
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  15. #35

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    No, a child does not reenact their parents behaviour out of simple psychological burden. Whilst the nature vs nurture debate is still ongoing there's a wealth of information available on the subject already, and both causes do fine in this context. Children inherit their parents traits and patterns of behaviours. Children can break free, but doing so requires a fight and often a lifetime one. We don't even have to look at crime, we can also look at selfdestructive patterns, such as addictions. There are also studies on adopted children in that regard.

    And finally we can even move on to normal children and just look at them. The first thing you see them develop is the capacity to do bad things. E.g. taking the ball away from another kid just because that other kid started playing with it. Or whacking him out of nowhere. It's only later on that the normative part is learned - Freud's Über-Ich. It's the norms that are unnatural, the capacity to sin aka original sin is in all of us. The view of children as something innocent is the myth, and fun fact that one's also borne out of Christianity.

    As such there's nothing wrong whatsoever with the original sin as a very nice philosophical, psychological and anthropological concept. Nota bene I'm intentionally disregarding the religious angle entirely because there's zero point in religious debate on the internet (and most of the time - elsewhere as well).

    It is obviously in conflict with our more modern belief that everyone starts out with an equal blank slate. Thing is though that for one, just because it's more modern, doesn't make it more right, and secondly there's from my point of view no problem with that presumption being the necessary myth. That myth, we could also call it a doctrine or dogma, is in the European world however equally based in Christianity.

    In short - himster in his OP is thoroughly wrong except that conflict with the moral doctrine of children having to be unburdened by their forefathers past, but even with that he contradicts himself, since that "thought pattern" is per definition a doctrine, so this juxtopposition doesn't work. Not by definition, and worse still not in the deeper sense in that any set of beliefs always requires paradigms to rest upon.

    EDIT: I just got informed per rep that himster wasn't the OP. And only now did I realise that I was on page 2. That's quite the level of stupidity on my part, lol.
    I'm wasn't talking about the child reenacting parents' behavior. I was talking about the effects of growing up with someone showing murderous actions and intentions. Then again, inheriting nature of your father and mother is very different from inheriting their sins all together.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  16. #36
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    14,225

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    If humans aren't sinfully inclined by nature then that raises the question of why 100% of human beings choose to sin.
    Do they please provide a detailed example.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  17. #37
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,260

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    I'm wasn't talking about the child reenacting parents' behavior. I was talking about the effects of growing up with someone showing murderous actions and intentions.
    Ah, but then that's hardly relevant to what you were responding to with that. Plus few generalisations are possible there. By far not all children of parents who commit crimes do experience trauma, and those who do have vastly different traumata.
    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Then again, inheriting nature of your father and mother is very different from inheriting their sins all together.
    Where is it stated that all sins are inherited by children from their parents? I feel like you missed the point all together.
    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    Do they please provide a detailed example.
    Kids stealing balls from one another or whacking each other out of random.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  18. #38
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    14,225

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Kids stealing balls from one another or whacking each other out of random.
    Those are a sin. Man if petty childhood infractions committed by non adults are who still have immature brain development are sin you are going to have a very full hell.

    "If little faults, proceeding on distemper,
    Shall not be wink'd at, how shall we stretch our eye
    When capital crimes, chew'd, swallow'd and digested,
    Appear before us?

    The Bard nuff said.
    Last edited by conon394; September 26, 2021 at 12:43 PM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  19. #39

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    Ah, but then that's hardly relevant to what you were responding to with that. Plus few generalisations are possible there. By far not all children of parents who commit crimes do experience trauma, and those who do have vastly different traumata.
    Where is it stated that all sins are inherited by children from their parents? I feel like you missed the point all together.
    Was it? You pointed at your teacher saying that children do inherit their father's sins which sounds quite absolute. So, I pointed at a possible (not absolute as you are suggesting now) connection between children and their father's sins while dismissing the suggestion you implied. Perhaps you didn't make your point clear enough?
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  20. #40
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,260

    Default Re: Original Sin and the Nature of Christ

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    Those are a sin. Man if petty childhood infractions committed by non adults are who still have immature brain development are sin you are going to have a very full hell.
    I assume you meant to say "aren't a sin". Your second sentence shows you pretty much missed the point entirely, which has pretty much nothing to do with hell. During a child's development the first part that gets developed is his ability to act on desires and impulses. What is only learnt only later on, and yes, it's learnt as opposed to preinstalled, is the child's ability to first distinguish between right and wrong and then also to not do the wrongs. A child is thus with sin from the start. When we say a child is innocent, the child's inability to know what actions are wrong are what is actually meant by that. Same goes with animals. We don't usually call animals evil, except when we're anthropomorphising them in some sense, with the exception of some reptilians as an evolutionary response.

    Fun fact: The norms (simplified: ability to discern right and wrong) is one possible interpretation of the apple of Eden, one which I like very much. What's the first thing Adam and Eve feel the need to do after biting said apple? OMG I'm naked I need to cover up!

    Anyway, standard scenario and I'm sure we've all done this when we were young: Playing with one toy, a child walks by, sees a ball that we hitherto were completely uninterested in, but the moment that child starts to play with it, all of a sudden we want it and we take it away from him. Replace child with grown-ups and the toy with power or money or something else and you get the picture.

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    "If little faults, proceeding on distemper,
    Shall not be wink'd at, how shall we stretch our eye
    When capital crimes, chew'd, swallow'd and digested,
    Appear before us?

    The Bard nuff said.
    Read post #31, the innkeeper replied.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •