Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If we look at the father of Cain and Abel (Adam) as the real Lord who favors one son over the other, then to me it is very easy to see what the original sin is. Adam in this story represents the powers of this world plotting the workers, the common men, against each other. Cain had no choice but to offer a blood offering, since that is the only kind that was acceptable. Adam had a taste for wild game, just as his descendant Isaac would as well.
The story is obviously a reference to war. And the powers which bring spiritual brothers (of different nations) against each other.
If we look at the father of Cain and Abel (Adam) as the real Lord who favors one son over the other, then to me it is very easy to see what the original sin is. Adam in this story represents the powers of this world plotting the workers, the common men, against each other. Cain had no choice but to offer a blood offering, since that is the only kind that was acceptable. Adam had a taste for wild game, just as his descendant Isaac would as well.
The story is obviously a reference to war. And the powers which bring spiritual brothers (of different nations) against each other.
Do you think that this could be the original sin?
no sin, the first humans are ignorant. Back then, mystic inaccurately calls them barbarians, they improperly thought that people chose to remain ignorant, they didn't.
Some people's brains are not fully connected for amerid of reasons, they walk, talk, and act normal but they have major disconnects in the brain. its called executive functions.
then mix in personality types, with cluster-b being the worst. cluster b's make great fundy mentals and anti-religious socialist mentals. they have no limits and will turn on themselves. the always do. they are dangerous because they prey on the uncertain. They are the most dangerous to freedom there is.
no sin, the first humans are ignorant. Back then, mystic inaccurately calls them barbarians, they improperly thought that people chose to remain ignorant, they didn't.
Some people's brains are not fully connected for amerid of reasons, they walk, talk, and act normal but they have major disconnects in the brain. its called executive functions.
then mix in personality types, with cluster-b being the worst. cluster b's make great fundy mentals and anti-religious socialist mentals. they have no limits and will turn on themselves. the always do. they are dangerous because they prey on the uncertain. They are the most dangerous to freedom there is.
Sin means "missing the mark". You don't think that people ever miss the mark?
And the head El-o-hym layeth a charge on the man, saying, `Of every Rhod of the garden eating thou dost eat;
and of the Rhod seeing and knowing Good&Evil, thou dost eat of it, NOT, thou shalt die-die in the day that thou eatest thereof'
(or "and of the Rhod Good-Reu-Seeing-El, thou dost eat of it, for thou shalt kill death in the day that thou eatest thereof")
Now the serpent was more crafty (aruwm) than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
And the woman said unto the serpent, `Of the fruit of the Rhods of the garden we do eat,
But of the fruit of the Rhod which is in the interior of the garden, El-o-hym has said,
"Ye shall eat of it not; ye shall die"
And the serpent (named Good&Evil) said unto the woman,
"Ye shall eat of it; not ye shall die for knowing Kym-u-el".
For in the day you eat thereof your eyes shall be opened.
And you shall be like (in the image of) El-o-hym
Knowing Good&Evil, the woman saw that the Rhod was good for food,
and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and desired the Rhod.
To the bereaved she took the fruit thereof, and did eat.
And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked (eyrom)
(Who was right God or the serpent? Maybe both were right. Maybe their bodies did die when they ate from the tree but their consciousness was uploaded to a computer.)
And the head El-o-hym said to the woman, `What [is] this you have done?'
and the woman said, `The (sneaky) snake snaked me -- and I did eat
Just curious. Is there a reason this wasn't posted in the Christianity sub-forum? Almost seems like you are inviting atheists to dispute that there is any evidence of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel.
Just curious. Is there a reason this wasn't posted in the Christianity sub-forum? Almost seems like you are inviting atheists to dispute that there is any evidence of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel.
I suppose I could have posted it there. But Christianity is not necessarily the only religion that might have an interest in this question. And there are just as many atheists who would address the question in that forum also.
Also, the existence of Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, etc, is not limited to atheists. There are mainstream Christian believers who would deny their existence. My interpretation of the "sin" of Adam is the sin itself which is common to all people, not something that one man committed historically.
I suppose I could have posted it there. But Christianity is not necessarily the only religion that might have an interest in this question. And there are just as many atheists who would address the question in that forum also.
Also, the existence of Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, etc, is not limited to atheists. There are mainstream Christian believers who would deny their existence. My interpretation of the "sin" of Adam is the sin itself which is common to all people, not something that one man committed historically.
All right. So are you saying that there was no "real" Adam?
All right. So are you saying that there was no "real" Adam?
This kind of question is inappropriate when dealing with mythos. Adam and Eve can be found in Hindu mythos about Atman and Jiva. The farther back in time you go, the mythos become more primitive and abstract. The only concern about reality in such matters is their cognitive import to our evolving spiritual understanding. The only purpose of these writings is their recording of the evolution of our spiritual understanding. They are the cognitive "fossils" that track our spiritual evolution much as the fossil bones track our physical evolution.
This kind of question is inappropriate when dealing with mythos. Adam and Eve can be found in Hindu mythos about Atman and Jiva. The farther back in time you go, the mythos become more primitive and abstract. The only concern about reality in such matters is their cognitive import to our evolving spiritual understanding. The only purpose of these writings is their recording of the evolution of our spiritual understanding. They are the cognitive "fossils" that track our spiritual evolution much as the fossil bones track our physical evolution.
The question is not at all inappropriate. I am trying to assess where the poster is coming from.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
