Original Sin - Do You Understand What it Means?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by novastrike81
 



Which isn't far off base. If we are all born into sin, and we have to accept Jesus Christ as our Savior, then technically all babies and those that are unable to make a decision on their own go to Hell. I can't recall if there is a scripture referring an age of accountability.


David talks about one day he will go to his dead infant. Jesus tells His disciple to suffer the children to come to Him because such as them is the kingdom of heaven. If a person has not mental capacity ti understand their sin they are not responsible. The "age of accountability" isn't a set in stone age according to calendar age, it's a metaphor speaking of maturity. Some young children understand the concept of sin, and some mentally retarded adults never can understand that.

Original Sin doctrine teaches anyone not baptized goes to Hell, irregardless of their ability or lack thereof to understand sin and accept or reject the gospel of Jesus Christ.




posted on May, 2 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 


So you understand the reasons behind it. But the reason I came onto this thread is because I don't like the way Christians in general explain the whole process of original sin and tie it to Jesus shedding blood on the cross.

To me, the reasoning behind creating mankind with imperfections was to allow man to see that s/he is not Lord of things. That s/he HAS to depend on God and find humility and reason to worship God. But I have a problem with the way Christianity explains it as: it was necessary so we believe in Jesus's shedding blood on the cross. Whereas in Islam it is said that it was necessary so mankind could ask for forgiveness the minute s/he err'ed or went against the orders of God. Which is what Adam did, so we're told. In this I believe Christians leave debate material for atheists who having seen the time difference between Jesus's blood shed and the creation of Adam, have the right to ask you: so WHY did God wait so long to shed blood? get my drift? There are other debates going on as well, in reality I believe these inconsistencies turn people from God simply because what they are told, within Christianity, does not make sense.

The atheist propaganda has very strong tools working for them right now, among them is the belief some Christians have that God is a dude sitting in heaven, that God preferred to have a son and not a daughter, that God somehow came down and shed blood to cover what He created Himself. These are all one and tied to the same thing I believe. And its the kind of 'lost or twisted information' we Muslims refer to when we speak of Christian teachings.

I haven't actively started a debate on this since most people consider it an attack on their faith, but this is an open debate and something I'm trying to understand when conversing with Christians in general.

Thanks for reading!
edit on 2-5-2012 by nusnus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by nusnus
 


Dear nusnus,



To me, the reasoning behind creating mankind with imperfections was to allow man to see that s/he is not Lord of things. That s/he HAS to depend on God and find humility and reason to worship God. But I have a problem with the way Christianity explains it as: it was necessary so we believe in Jesus's shedding blood on the cross. Whereas in Islam it is said that it was necessary so mankind could ask for forgiveness the minute s/he err'ed or went against the orders of God. Which is what Adam did, so we're told. In this I believe Christians leave debate material for atheists who having seen the time difference between Jesus's blood shed and the creation of Adam, have the right to ask you: so WHY did God wait so long to shed blood? get my drift? There are other debates going on as well, in reality I believe these inconsistencies turn people from God simply because what they are told, within Christianity, does not make sense.


Oh, why limit the logic to Christians. There is certainly no conformity in the teaching of people who proclaim to be either Muslims, Jews, Hindu or even atheists. Conformity and agreement do not mean truth. Most people who proclaim any belief usually do so because they don't care and merely want to be accepted by those around them. As for the time gap between original sin and Jesus, they had to learn their ABCs before they could learn to write whole words. They had to see that they were incapable of living the rules perfectly to see that they would never attain individual perfection and will always be works in progress.

Now, as for your statement regarding what turns people away from believing Christianity. Most are turned away because it says that we are flawed and that things we do are wrong. People prefer to be told that they are lovely and wonderful and are not guilty of any sins; but, that is a false belief not backed up by fact or history. Consider how I began my OP, I discussed people who couldn't accept Christ because they dislike the idea of original sin; but, the real question is about how they are living their lives, that is what we are held accountable for. They don't wish to address that issue so they make it about original sin.

As to why most believers cannot respond with well thought out answers, it is because they never went to the trouble to learn. If one is not in service to others and does not have a heart of forgiveness, then, they are not a true believer and I tell that to the people when I preach.





new topics
 
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join