Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Was "original sin" removed after Jesus' sin-sacrifice?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Christianity teaches the idea that the "original sin" perpetrated by Adam and Eve in the garden, was inherited by mankind.

Yet, Christianity also teaches that Jesus' execution crucifixion removed the worlds sins. Which means babies born after the crucifixion are innocent.

Keeping this in mind, is it theologically sound to teach that babies are still born in "sin" today.... when considering Jesus supposedly died to remove all sin?

I'm not saying the baby would grow up to be sinless (that depends on what he/she does in life)... but can the doctrine of "original sin" exist alongside that of "sin sacrifice"?

Discuss.


edit on 31-12-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


It can if you believe like me that original sin is just a way of saying moving into the flesh.. We were born, into the physical reality, ie born into sin.. In this way we are all still in sin, and if the Jesus thing is true then it would mean that we will die here, but move on in spirit, instead of being suck in sin (reincarnation).. I don't give Sin a negative connotation, and there is no judgement as such.. A personification of a process, a choice, that picks a destination.. Move toward or away from flesh, or move toward or away from spirit. Both are Top notch gigs I think.

This is my view, and I'm pretty sure it's not a Christian view haha...
edit on 12/31/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   
i was a child once.
i'm sure i wasn't born into sin.
that came later.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Scripture speaks of an age of accountability, not precisely but generally - around the age of 12 or so. God understands that the human mind and heart develop and mature at different rates, according to experience and ability.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


I think the idea of original sin is misunderstood...

We're born into sin because of our past life actions or lack there of... Not because of some mythical person born thousands of years ago...

We're born into what we created for ourselves...




posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Original sin was judgment. When they ate from the tree of knowledge, they learned to see things as good or bad. They learned to label things according to their own emotions, rather than according to the actual nature of being. This prompted judgment, which is an enormous pitfall for humans.

That was original sin. Not sex, not disobedience. The tendency to judge based on our desires and fears. And metaphorically, it's no wonder that Eve is told to have been the first. Women are commonly seen are far more emotionally compelled than men. They are also far more intuitive and connected to the unseen energies of the world. It makes perfect sense that women should be demonized to keep their gifts hidden.

Jesus didn't remove original sin. He tried to make us comfortable with it. Unfortunately, politicians used his words to create a rift. They divided imperfect from the perfect, those who are comfortable with their flaws from those who cannot stand to be flawed. They created a war that would never end, because perpetual chaos keeps people distracted. Distraction serves wonderfully for manipulating the drones that power your machine. And that is the truth.
edit on 31-12-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 



Original sin was judgment. When they ate from the tree of knowledge, they learned to see things as good or bad.


Point being, christianity teaches that this sin was inherited by all of mankind.
Meaning, a newborn baby is tainted with this "sin" and needs to accept Jesus died to remove this sin... or it will burn in hellfire for all eternity.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
double post. Please delete.
edit on 31-12-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Here's how I view original sin:
  1. God told Adam and Eve to never touch the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil because it would kill them.
  2. Satan comes along and wants to screw up God's creation, so he tells Eve that God forbade it because eating it would make them "like God." (Adam was standing right there too, by the way, and heard all of that.)
  3. They believed Satan and ate it because their self-interest in becoming like God outweighed their desire to obey God.
That was the original sin. They chose to annoy God by disobeying him, knowing that annoying God was wrong. That disconnected them from God in the spirit by angering him; they weren't acting out of love but selfishness. He threw them out into the cold hard world, and then they started having kids. But Adam and Eve had always had within them the ability to sin, just like their kids did. Abel probably sinned a few times too. God created Adam and Eve with the capacity for sinning built right into them... but they didn't "die" until they chose to sin.

So here's the main point. Sin always requires conscious intent. You cannot sin accidentally, or without fully understanding what you're doing. Newborns do not have the ability to decide things for themselves. They are therefore born sinless, and up until they commit their first sin, they absolutely are not condemned to hell. They are alive in the spirit until the first time they lie, or steal, or think mean-spirited thoughts about someone, knowingly... and at that instant, just like Adam and Eve, they die spiritually and only Jesus can give them a second rebirth if they'll accept him.

Make sense?



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Original sin isn't a Biblical teaching. Mankind didn't inherit Adam's sin, but inherited a nature to sin. Each person is responsible for his or her own sin, and sins are not reckoned to those with no capacity to comprehend their sin or need for a Savior; i.e. mentally challenged people and children.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


I think the idea of original sin is misunderstood...

We're born into sin because of our past life actions or lack there of... Not because of some mythical person born thousands of years ago...

We're born into what we created for ourselves...



Wow that really sucks. Now instead of being responsible for my sins in this life, I have numerous other lives full of sin to account for on judgment day.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Wow that really sucks. Now instead of being responsible for my sins in this life, I have numerous other lives full of sin to account for on judgment day.
NuT,
my friend...
I hope in the new year you find a way to STOP WORRYING and beating yourself up.

As for "original sin" - ludicrous for it to be passed on from the mythical Adam and Eve....
babies are born innocent - perhaps having returned after a former life but with only limited memory of it -

I believe neither in "original sin" nor in Jesus "sin-sacrificing" for us. We are human; sometimes better, sometimes worse, but we are all loved and we belong to the same "Oneness."
Hug to you, man.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


I think the idea of original sin is misunderstood...

We're born into sin because of our past life actions or lack there of... Not because of some mythical person born thousands of years ago...

We're born into what we created for ourselves...



Wow that really sucks. Now instead of being responsible for my sins in this life, I have numerous other lives full of sin to account for on judgment day.


No worries though...

you have plenty of time to make up for those lives...

ye know, since the world didn't end on schedule


or you could figure it all out this time around...
edit on 31-12-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Thought Provoker
 



Here's how I view original sin:
God told Adam and Eve to never touch the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil because it would kill them.
Satan comes along and wants to screw up God's creation, so he tells Eve that God forbade it because eating it would make them "like God." (Adam was standing right there too, by the way, and heard all of that.)
They believed Satan and ate it because their self-interest in becoming like God outweighed their desire to obey God.


Interesting. Many parents nowadays would be overjoyed to watch their children surpass them in every way. It's a continuation of legacy. After all, there's nothing more annoying than being all-powerful and feeling utterly alone.

I would like to point out, however, that it's rather suspicious that a talking snake outsmarted "God". I think "God" WANTED it to happen. He wanted them to be tempted, because he KNEW they wouldn't resist. It doesn't matter what he wanted, he knew what WOULD happen. The choice was already made in his mind, because he was omniscient. He could see a hundred years ahead of their decision to eat the fruit. And yet he didn't stop it?

No. He wanted it to happen. Why, I am not entirely certain, but I have a good idea.



But Adam and Eve had always had within them the ability to sin, just like their kids did. Abel probably sinned a few times too.


Sin is ego. Ego leads to judgment. Ego IS judgment. They had no ego.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Thought Provoker
 
I would like to point out, however, that it's rather suspicious that a talking snake outsmarted "God". I think "God" WANTED it to happen... Why, I am not entirely certain, but I have a good idea.


Of course God wanted it to happen. He's the one who outsmarted Satan. If they'd never touched that apple, the entire human race would currently consist of Adam and Eve. God wanted billions of children, not just two, and Satan played right into his hands. He probably feels pretty stupid about falling for it... one can only hope...



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
The idea of "original sin" is important to make "The Saviour" exclusive and in turn bring more followers.
And if being in flesh means being in sin then wasnt Jesus pbuh also in flesh? And so in sin? And a sin sacrifice required a sinless sacrifice.
Or i have to conclude that the act of procreation is a sin, but then why the church would make marriage as a sacrament if it just increases sin?



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Thought Provoker
 


I think the concepts that are represented by the characters "God" and "Satan" would be more accurately depicted as playing a game of cards over some delectable wine, discussing the pros and cons of morality and what it really means to be perfect.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Humans are born with a sin nature caused by the original sin of Adam and Eve.
When Jesus laid down his life as sacrifice for our sins he took on the sins of the world, he became sin. If we accept his sacrifice and put our faith in him we are washed in his blood - our sins are washed away- but we still have the sin nature. Humans who are still in the body are still proned to sin if we walk in the flesh and not in God's spirit.

So, the answer is no...we do not become sinless in the sense of we no longer sin.

As someone already posted...children are born with a sin nature but are not held accountable until they become aware of sin as sin. Therefore, children who die before they become aware of sin are not, I repeat not burning in hell.

Thank you for starting this thread. It is a good forum to attempt to understand Christian beliefs and faith.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Doesn't it say that children do not inherit the sins of their parents?

If original sin existed, how would Jesus Christ be the sinless sacrifice or epitome of perfectness?
edit on 31-12-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


I think the idea of original sin is misunderstood...

We're born into sin because of our past life actions or lack there of... Not because of some mythical person born thousands of years ago...

We're born into what we created for ourselves...



Wow that really sucks. Now instead of being responsible for my sins in this life, I have numerous other lives full of sin to account for on judgment day.


No worries though...

you have plenty of time to make up for those lives...

ye know, since the world didn't end on schedule


or you could figure it all out this time around...
edit on 31-12-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)


Who's "schedule"? The Mayans? Biblically speaking, there needs to be A LOT transpire first before that day. And how does adding sin on top of more sin make up for sin when heaven is for the righteous?

edit on 31-12-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join