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.
He sure don't talk like one, but who knows. Anyway, I wasn't talking about his faith, I was replying to his comment about arguing with atheists, and "winning arguments" with them. If an atheist tries to convince me (as they often do) that Bible is nothing but a book of fiction full of inaccuraces, then he can have that argument. It is a waste of time to argue with some one who rejects everything you believe in. No atheist has ever made a persuasive argument against my faith or against the Bible. Never. Like I said, it amazes me how the atheists spend so much time and effort attacking something they do not believe in.
I agree. I recently read from a former atheist who is now a Christian that the reason he argued with Christians is because he wanted to see if they could prove him wrong. He didn't believe they could. He also said he believes God is actively seeking after these people.
I agree. I recently read from a former atheist who is now a Christian that the reason he argued with Christians is because he wanted to see if they could prove him wrong. He didn't believe they could. He also said he believes God is actively seeking after these people.
That is true. In that sense it is not a waste of time to argue with them.
Oh yes I was....was being the operative word there. After years of intensive study I now know how deluded I allowed myself to become by the lying spin doctors. When one actually critically and unbiasedly examines the evidence and the lack thereof....it's not a hard decision to begin the deconversion process. If the biblical contradictions and inconsistencies alone don't convince one....the syncretism that can be traced throughout the centuries should.
So, like I said...it will be interesting to see the spin that is placed on the subject of "original sin".
Oh BTW....I also asked this same question in Do "true" Christians sin....the few answers I received there were.....laughable to say the least.
I do not see the use of the term original sin the scriptures...
I do not see the use of the term original sin the scriptures...
I don't either...but it sure is implied and that you cannot deny. It is taught that we are sinful from birth and depraved, hence the alleged reason we need a savior....I've heard it a million times from Christians.
I don't either...but it sure is implied and that you cannot deny. It is taught that we are sinful from birth and depraved, hence the alleged reason we need a savior....I've heard it a million times from Christians.
Do you through the baby out with the bath water?...
Anyone who spends time around children can see our sinful nature. I used to be a preschool teacher and boy did I see it daily!
But are they really "sinning"? At what point does any behavior become sinful? If you tell your two-year-old not to touch a hot stove top and he does it anyway, is he sinning? He's disobeying, but if he has no concept of what it means to honor his father and mother (including not disobeying them), how is his behavior sinful?
I don't either...but it sure is implied and that you cannot deny. It is taught that we are sinful from birth and depraved, hence the alleged reason we need a savior....I've heard it a million times from Christians.
I do think it's reasonable to make a distinction between being born with a propensity or inclination to sin and being born a sinner. I believe we inherited Adam's and Eve's human nature, and because we did, we will all inevitably sin. We did not, however, inherit their actual sin, nor will we be punished for it. God doesn't punish people for something someone else did. It is absolute nonsense to think He does. Furthermore, it is impossible to sin without knowing right from wrong. Sin is the voluntary transgression of a religious law or moral principle. Babies and small children do not sin because they are incapable of choosing to break a religious law or moral principle. Period.
As far as I'm concerned, Adam and Eve didn't even sin when they ate the forbidden fruit. The fruit was from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Once they ate the fruit, they gained a knowledge of good and evil. Since they didn't have that knowledge until after they ate the fruit, they didn't sin. They disobeyed God and were thus subject to the consequences He told them would result from their disobedience, but it was not until after they ate the fruit that further disobedience became sinful.
But are they really "sinning"? At what point does any behavior become sinful? If you tell your two-year-old not to touch a hot stove top and he does it anyway, is he sinning? He's disobeying, but if he has no concept of what it means to honor his father and mother (including not disobeying them), how is his behavior sinful?
I do think it's reasonable to make a distinction between being born with a propensity or inclination to sin and being born a sinner. I believe we inherited Adam's and Eve's human nature, and because we did, we will all inevitably sin. We did not, however, inherit their actual sin, nor will we be punished for it. God doesn't punish people for something someone else did. It is absolute nonsense to think He does. Furthermore, it is impossible to sin without knowing right from wrong. Sin is the voluntary transgression of a religious law or moral principle. Babies and small children do not sin because they are incapable of choosing to break a religious law or moral principle. Period.
Sorry Kat . . . we disagree on this as well. We as a species need to grow up and abandon the "sin is disobedience of God's laws" training wheels. We needed to be given guidelines and examples of the proper exercise of our self-control over our animal nature. But there is a purpose that transcends the obedience aspect. In our case . . . "love God and each other."
When we give someone an order to do something . . . we have a reason for it . . . a purpose for the act. If a manager sends an employee out to mop the lobby . . . it is NOT just so the employee will do the ordered behavior . . . "mop the lobby." It is so the lobby will be clean. It is amazing how this gets lost . . . especially among the young and immature. My daughter managed a fast food store and she recounts giving such an order . . . and having the employee come back after mopping . . . and the lobby was still dirty and messy . . . but the employee had actually mopped it. So is it with us and God's training wheel laws. We focus on the "mopping" and don't achieve the purpose (Spirit . . . not letter) of the law.
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, Adam and Eve didn't even sin when they ate the forbidden fruit. The fruit was from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Once they ate the fruit, they gained a knowledge of good and evil. Since they didn't have that knowledge until after they ate the fruit, they didn't sin. They disobeyed God and were thus subject to the consequences He told them would result from their disobedience, but it was not until after they ate the fruit that further disobedience became sinful.
Of course they didn't sin . . . they were innocent and ignorant infant living souls who had newly been created!! They were learning their first lesson in distinguishing good from bad behavior.
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.
