Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
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.


I'm not beating myself, perhaps my flippant sarcasm wasn't evident enough. Oh well, sometimes it doesn't come out right over the internet. And yes, the notion of original sin is both lunacy and un-biblical. People will answer for their own sin and no one else's.




posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
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)


The question is...what is it that was inherited?...
Clearly scholars down the ages have discussed the 'chinese-whisper', event (for want of a better word)...but, discussing the stories upon the stories is futile and stoopid...let alone discussing the stoopid questions arising from stoopid musings on stories upon stories...i.e. babies being born or not being born into 'sin'.

What was 'inherited' was the requirement to INCARNATE...which, as we speak, many are doing or, or in the process of divesting themselves...DI-VEST...removing, or having removed the vestment/clothing that covers the soul/spirit...Before 'sin' they were naked and in no need of 'clothing'...after 'sin' they were aware of thier nakedness, to themselves and to the material domain...

The prophets are/were teachers...it is what they all allude to, or openly aver...the rest is a man-made excuse to abrogate personal responsibility in the scheme of things...

A99
edit on 31-12-2012 by akushla99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



Who's "schedule"? The Mayans?


No silly... yours

I think the mayans have been fully debunked as of this month... so


Biblically speaking, there needs to be A LOT transpire first before that day.


What day?

Judgement day or the end of the world? Both?

I guess it depends on the flavor of Christianity you've picked... I've heard some Christians say that when people die they sit in waiting for judgement day to come. To me that is absurd... but that's me.

Judgement comes at death... and the so called "end of the world" will happen when we destroy ourselves or the sun runs out of fuel...


And how does adding sin on top of more sin make up for sin when heaven is for the righteous?


Didn't he tell the lady at the well to go... and sin no more?

Those that don't learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them....

I know Christians are all sinners right... but is that just an excuse to do what you please?

Since I know you know the answer to these questions... I believe you answered your own questions as well




posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
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)


Here's what happened.

The death of jesus does not directly save anyone.

Jesus taught unconditional love.

The original sin was not so much rebellion against God as it was directly the fact of realizing good and evil.

Calling things good and evil is judgement. Good and evil are subjective determinations. What's evil to you may not be evil to the black widow spider. Your judgements shade your perception of the judged object as the judgement, which is a subjective interpretation, which ultimately is an opinion and not absolute. Good and evil are valid for individualized perception, but not for the absolute. Not for ultimate truth.

Unconditional love, which jesus taught is the salvation from the knowledge of good and evil. However, either you love unconditionally or you don't. There is no," jesus save me from my sins and forgive me for my wrongdoings". That's unrealistic. The real salvation is your decision to be unconditionally loving and therefore judgement free.

Unconditional love means you love all without conditions attached. A judgement is a condition you place upon an object that basically says, "I shouldn't love this because...". And therefore, jesus brought a message and an example that had never before been known that shows people that judgement is your downfall and unconditional love is your redemption. But guess what. We still judge. And no one has been able to be successful followers of jesus. That's why he's coming back. This time, with force. This time, invasive. This time, he will succeed, one way or another.



posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Admitting one isn't perfect and never will be isn't advocating rampant sin. It's just being honest and saying I'm included with the less than perfect crowd. Sure, we are to live the best we can, but we still have a fallen nature and from time to time we miss the mark. There is a scripture that says if we confess our sin God is faithful and just to forgive us and cleanse us from them.

And I'm confused about my "schedule" for the end of the world that was allegedly supposed to have come and gone. There is a boatload of events that must happen before that, so maybe you're thinking of someone else who dropped a date or I misread your statement about a schedule.
edit on 1-1-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 



Calling things good and evil is judgement. Good and evil are subjective determinations. What's evil to you may not be evil to the black widow spider. Your judgements shade your perception of the judged object as the judgement, which is a subjective interpretation, which ultimately is an opinion and not absolute. Good and evil are valid for individualized perception, but not for the absolute. Not for ultimate truth.


Good and evil are not determined by man theyre determined by God and Jesus came teaching us the difference between the two by being a living example on how to live.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


Jesus taught unconditional love. This means love for good things and bad things. There may be good things and bad things according to your subjective interpretation, but they are both to be held in the same regard– loved. That is the lesson he intended to convey.

When you stop trying to be good and just try to be yourself, then you are true to yourself. And that is the best thing you could hope for. Because you were made as you were made. If you would like to change yourself and how you are, then that is your rebellion against God who made you as you are.

Everything is as it should be because it was made this way by God, the one creator. When you see this, then unconditional love is then only possible attitude you can have. When you accept the world as it is, then your true nature is revealed. And that is all you need.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 



Jesus taught unconditional love. This means love for good things and bad things. There may be good things and bad things according to your subjective interpretation, but they are both to be held in the same regard– loved. That is the lesson he intended to convey.


Maybe Jesus did. "God" didn't. He's got the biggest kill record in the Christian history of mankind. No matter which way you look at it, he made those people knowing he was going to kill them in the end. And he still didn't change his design. It was like a controlled demolition, planned from the first day of construction.


Everything is as it should be because it was made this way by God, the one creator. When you see this, then unconditional love is then only possible attitude you can have. When you accept the world as it is, then your true nature is revealed. And that is all you need.


Mankind is interfering with the true nature. Mankind is trying to become a different sort of god entirely.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 





Maybe Jesus did. "God" didn't. He's got the biggest kill record in the Christian history of mankind. No matter which way you look at it, he made those people knowing he was going to kill them in the end. And he still didn't change his design. It was like a controlled demolition, planned from the first day of construction.


Seriously? If you want to be able to hold a conversation with bible scholars you at least need to read the material
.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 



Seriously? If you want to be able to hold a conversation with bible scholars you at least need to read the material


Yeah? Then remind me what 'omniscient' means? He knew us before he created us, knew our fates before we were ever born, and he designed our lives before we ever had a chance to live. And then there's omnipotence...

If you want to be able to hold a conversation with the average critical thinker, you at least need to read a dictionary and understand the implications of the properties you so hastily and blindly attribute to your god.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


God is not worried if a great empire falls and a lot of people die when it will bring about a newer one and a better one. It's all for the greater good.

Jesus taught unconditional love because that's what is needed to see and know God.

We are all one god. I have no more pride because I know this, nor do I wish to control the world because I know this. My egobis Jo more enlarged because I know this.

But what I am able to do now that I know there is only one spirit that we all share as our innermost self, is I can accept everything you say and do, because I known it is me doing it. It is you doing it. It is me doing it. Same thing. I don't regret your actions. I take responsibility for your actions. And I am glad I did what you did.

Now, what I see in this world because i love unconditionally, is that I am doing all of this. I see me in others' eyes because I am there. I don't regret what you do and I take responsibility for your actions. I see the greatest thing anyone can see. I look around this world at all the beautiful people and animals and flowers and I see myself. Soninside, I feel awesome for being able to do this. I feel as great as we are.

When others are realized as the self, unconditional love and acceptance is all there can be. When that is there, you know yourself, without doubt and delusion, to be god. Not a dominator or a power hungry slave driver. But you allow others to keep doing what they're doing so you can understand life. It's all a powerfully orchestrated dance. You are the director and it is doing exactly what you want it to do. See the beauty of that. It's awesome.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


That's an easy one. Omniscience means He knows everything that can be known, and omnipotence means He can do anything that can be done.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   
The bible teaches that all have been born into sin, all need redemption that are born of man and woman. This means Mary too. It is not because of a carryover from a prior life as some have suggested for it is appointed for man to live once and then the judgement. Children are under a special grace simular to the age of accountability in Judism so little babies do not go to hell whern they die or have their lives cut short.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 

Sure it was, and it's applicable no matter what anyone accepts or believes because by it's very nature it's unconditional love at its best and therefore an open invitation, not a threat or a warning (where's the love in that?)

Don't let the fundies tell you otherwise.

Then again we still need to do the work to become as little children to enter in.. so I'm a little confused to be honest.

edit on 2-1-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join