Debunking Original Sin

In light of scientific evidence, many, if not most, religious people now days accept that the human body is the result of evolutionary changes, and that mankind shares it's roots in the tree of life with ancient non-human, common ancestors.


en.wikipedia.org...

The Vatican claims Darwin's theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity

So if we have evolved to our present day form through the workings of evolution, the biblical Adam and Eve couldn't have existed. If Adam and Eve never existed, then there is no such thing as "original sin."

Even those who abide by the literal and fundamental story of the Garden of Eden, and Adam and Eve's sin of disobeying God, have to admit that there were other humans in existence, outside of the Garden of Eden, that didn't participate in the crime of "eating the apple" and weren't descendants of Adam and Eve. Therefore "original sin" would only exist and would apply only to those descendants of Adam and Eve, and not the whole world.

So how can people, who accept evolution, and / or Polygenism , still justify their belief in original sin?

They can't.

That is why the smallest percentages on your chart belong to those that interpret scripture literally and do not subscribe to evolution.

I am one of those. Maybe science considers me a fool for my belief but personally I believe God is a higher intelligence and authority than any scientist.

We've never seen an animal evolve at all, not ever.

We see things 'adapt'. And Darwin later published a work refuting his own claim, you'll have to do better than his earlier research. There's a plethora of scientifically approved rebukes for the theory of evolution. THEORY being the key word of course. THEORY.

What'll you say to God when he asks you what 'evolution' did? You haven't even observed it. We only see adaptation. Which is completely different. And it doesn't surprise me that the Vatican jumps on that bandwagon - they're evil.

reply to post by micmerci


I understand that there are litteralist that accept that Biblical story as 100% factual. But even they have to admit that Cain was afraid of the other people, when he was exiled by God. The population of humans that existed outside of the Garden of Eden wouldn't have bee subject to the sins of Adam and Eve.

If not everyone is an offspring of Adam and Eve, then not everyone would have been subject to original sin. Right?

"Debunking" is probably a strong term for you to be using. I somehow doubt you are gonna manage that on a thread here, when much greater minds than you and I have debated it for centuries.

Thoughts, are subject to change I admit, such as: You were a practicing Scientologist at one point, correct?

And you think the Christian folk are suckers...

ETA: Don't get me wrong WW, it's not that you don't raise a point worth debating, but debunking it's not.

reply to post by Joneselius


Would you accept a fossil which shows a transitional creature with both lungs and gills? which shows fish evolving to a land animal?

Oh and OP it is because followers of religion accept their own slavery and are quite happy to be a slave.
They are happy to be told what to think and happy too be told to question is bad.
They are anti humanity.

reply to post by Joneselius


This isn't a thread about evolution, or it's debunking. It's about original sin and how, and why, that belief persists among those who also accept the theory of evolution.

reply to post by The GUT

You were a practicing Scientologist at one point, correct?

Almost 40 years ago I took some courses in Scientology. I have never rejected or been sorry for the things that learned about myself in those courses. Scientology isn't evil, it's leaders are. I was never privy to the Xeno story, but I did meet Ingo Swann!

reply to post by windword

In light of scientific evidence, many, if not most, religious people now days accept that the human body is the result of evolutionary changes, and that mankind shares it's roots in the tree of life with ancient non-human, common ancestors.

Scientific evidence?

Religious people accept their physical realities are the result of evolution?

Mankind shares roots with ancient, non-human ancestors?

Excuse me while I kiss the sky...
... oh, where are you? You should be up here too, lol!

How do we do this? I mean, if someone preaches Jesus, we file our teeth for the attack.

Who in the hell are we? I mean, as a species... a species that hasn't even found a way to land a human being on another planet yet or a way to even leave this speck of a solar system in a vast, vast universe... how in the heck do we come to firm conclusions on how we got here?

Oh... science. The same science that denied powered flight well after Orville and Wilbur actually did it?
The science that suggested that human flesh would fly from our bones if we traveled more than 45 mph?

We're not that smart... not yet. Once we leave this little cradle we call earth and someday, some way get out and crawl down the hall... maybe. But now?

Religion is not based on fact and never has been. It is based on a faith in an ancient collection of manuscripts that have little physical proof. This requires belief in one's heart.

Science is based on things that supposedly can be proven... except that the book changes with each new discovery and every new generation... which is as it should be except that today, we apply faith to science like it was a religion!

Debunking original sin? How about debunking what science once held to be non-debunkable in the 18th and 19th and 20th centuries... and what will almost certainly be debunkable by the end of this one?

Religion ain't bad... but the book is closed.
Science is good... but it is a book that never closes.

We need to be able toi understand those differences.

Originally posted by windword
Scientology isn't evil, it's leaders are.

Neither is Christianity...although some of it's leaders are!

The thing is: Neither Evolution or Christianity are proven. I think great arguments can be made for both adaptation and deism though. Beyond that the waters are murky and up to individual interpretation.

I was never privy to the Xeno story, but I did meet Ingo Swann!

That must have been interesting for realz. Was there enough communication to do a thread on? If so I would love to hear the story. Ingo has always fascinated me even though I can't take him totally at face value.

reply to post by redoubt

Scientific evidence?

I'm not going to argue evolution with you.

Religious people accept their physical realities are the result of evolution?

Many do

Mankind shares roots with ancient, non-human ancestors?

Yep. That's the way theory goes.

You're free to reject it.

reply to post by windword


Nice bit of word surgery there but... no problemo.

It's your life and your choice to believe as you choose. The thing is this... so long as you choose to take what is basically an opinion and apply it as... well, gospel (forgive me), your evolutionary process grinds to a halt

Cheers

Originally posted by boymonkey74
Oh and OP it is because followers of religion accept their own slavery and are quite happy to be a slave.
They are happy to be told what to think and happy too be told to question is bad.

You are either being disingenious or fooling yourself, boymonkey. Pompous without intellectual or philosophical cause at the very least.

What makes you think that some folk don't come to their own conclusions as honestly as you have yours, through their own personal research and skeptical acumen?

Your faith-based religion is showing, btw.

reply to post by redoubt


While I appreciate your interest in my beliefs, you haven't address the subject of the thread.

This thread is directed to those who accept the theory of evolution but still believe in original sin. And to those who accept the Garden of Eden story, I'm asking about the other people who existed outside of the garden, and how original sin applied to them.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by redoubt

 

While I appreciate your interest in my beliefs, you haven't address the subject of the thread.

This thread is directed to those who accept the theory of evolution but still believe in original sin. And to those who accept the Garden of Eden story, I'm asking about the other people who existed outside of the garden, and how original sin applied to them.

The point is that you both both connected and disconnected in the same move. But... I do apologize...

Let me ask you this... in re original sin; What, in your opinion, was our specie's first sin/blunder?

Assuming you are a Darwinist, I am left to guess that humanity's imperfections began before we fell from the trees... but please do correct me as needed.

reply to post by The GUT


You are slaves you just accept that a god owns your past your present and your death, you let him/it judge you, Religion is mental slavery, to fall for it is giving up to the master and you lot are the slaves.
Iam not an Atheist I just will not accept that God is anything to do with man made religion, I think God gave us free will to use it, I will not call God Lord, the almighty and such because that means we serve him/it/she and I just do not believe that we need to nor does he /it/she wants us to.
Sorry but Religion is evil, it is an acceptance of slavery and the lack of original thought and feelings.

Originally posted by windword
In light of scientific evidence, many, if not most, religious people now days accept that the human body is the result of evolutionary changes, and that mankind shares it's roots in the tree of life with ancient non-human, common ancestors.

en.wikipedia.org...

The Vatican claims Darwin's theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity

So if we have evolved to our present day form through the workings of evolution, the biblical Adam and Eve couldn't have existed. If Adam and Eve never existed, then there is no such thing as "original sin."

Even those who abide by the literal and fundamental story of the Garden of Eden, and Adam and Eve's sin of disobeying God, have to admit that there were other humans in existence, outside of the Garden of Eden, that didn't participate in the crime of "eating the apple" and weren't descendants of Adam and Eve. Therefore "original sin" would only exist and would apply only to those descendants of Adam and Eve, and not the whole world.

So how can people, who accept evolution, and / or Polygenism , still justify their belief in original sin?

edit on 5-8-2013 by windword because: typos

- very true what you are saying here WW

- im sure this awful physical template has undergone some ' evolution'

however
the point remains, that a Gorgious Being, like A&E had,
somehow their Essence Fell into this horrible frame

...so...i dont quite get your point...

regards,

reply to post by redoubt


I don't believe that humanity had a "first blunder" that resulted in some kind of inbred failure that effected all of humanity and separated us from divinity.

I oppose the believe that human's are created with a sinful nature that they need to repent of. I think that people are basically good.

This is one way to debunk the concept of original sin. I know in Judaism there is no such thing. But it's in Christianity.
Link

Originally posted by boymonkey74
You are slaves you just accept that a god owns your past your present and your death, you let him/it judge you, Religion is mental slavery, to fall for it is giving up to the master and you lot are the slaves.
Iam not an Atheist I just will not accept that God is anything to do with man made religion, I think God gave us free will to use it, I will not call God Lord, the almighty and such because that means we serve him/it/she and I just do not believe that we need to nor does he /it/she wants us to.
Sorry but Religion is evil, it is an acceptance of slavery and the lack of original thought and feelings.

So you said all that just to basically say, without actually saying it, 'in your opinion.' Your faith-based opinion.