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 you put off the Christian beliefs that were drilled into you when you were a kid, the Garden of Eden story just reads like a story of people who got in trouble for doing something that a particular god told them not to. I don't see how you can get the idea that there was some pre-existing moral code that was first violated in the Garden.
If you put off the Christian beliefs that were drilled into you when you were a kid, the Garden of Eden story just reads like a story of people who got in trouble for doing something that a particular god told them not to. I don't see how you can get the idea that there was some pre-existing moral code that was first violated in the Garden.
The idea is of paradise lost. Adam screwed up, had to till the lands forever after as did all humans, Eve got her naughty bits re-engineered so that child birth would be painful.
The story anyway reads like the musings of ignorant people that did not understand the how of the working world, animals did not really seem to need to do much to survive.
The original sin is the fact that they disobeyed this imaginary god b/v they assumed that once upon a time it was different. Oddly enough, that premise does support evolution as when we were still on all fours, the internal bodily functions were better "designed" as opposed to what we currently have going bipedal.
YHWH holds grudges up to the ninth and tenth generation, or something like that.
The idea being that you would need like 10 or 11 generations of holy ancestors to be cleared of "Original Sin" and that is not likely to happen as Sin breeds more Sin.
The "Original Sin" was that fact that they Injured the Deity by not following its directions and changing in themselves the very nature that the Deity had wanted them to have as His creation, and that "Original Sin" line has not been cleared ever in anyone (as in, there hasn't been a line of 10 to 11 generations of holy people). That is, except in the sometimes Catholic view that God magically cleared Mary the mother of Jesus from Original Sin, and therefore Jesus was born without it too.
The mysterious "pre-existing moral Code" that religionists often gloss over in this Genesis story is "Don't injure those who can injure you back." A pretty simple-minded but applicable guiding principle.
If you put off the Christian beliefs that were drilled into you when you were a kid, the Garden of Eden story just reads like a story of people who got in trouble for doing something that a particular god told them not to. I don't see how you can get the idea that there was some pre-existing moral code that was first violated in the Garden.
It pre -existed, I suppose in God's head. The concept of sin was there all the time, and don't forget, God was perfectly capable of doing stuff that would be utterly sinful if a human did it.
So he has a tree with some absolootley delishiooos froot plonked smack in front of Adam, with commandments that he shouldn't eat of it.
...
....
Then God makes woman. We don't know how long after he found out that Adam was actually NOt eating the froot, but in any case, he made woman in whom he encapsulated beauty, wisdom, fortitude and the innate ability to always do the opposite of what the man was doing.
This, said God, was the 'Helper' that God needed. And, in a way that I would not care to speculate about, a lizard with the power of speech was sentethed to put the idea of biting into the fruit into her head.
As soon as they did that, God downloaded all the original sin that had been backed up in his head like a trojan horse virus, as soon as you click on the tempting advt for..uh..illustrated fairy tales for kiddies.
And for ever after, all Mankind was totally screwed and God could do whatever he fracking liked with them.
I don't see how you get the idea of "Original Sin" from the Garden of Eden story
Sounds like a setup to me.
Create two humanoids,put them in a garden of Eden, put a tree full of luscious apples in front of them and tell them not to eat the apples its just a matter of time before the humanoids try an apple.Then the boss gets to have a major hissy fit throwing his two creations out of the garden of Eden and Adam and Eve looking at each other saying w t f was that all about?
"I don't see how you get the idea of "Original Sin" from the Garden of Eden story"
Yes, God did set the first couple up. He created them flesh knowing full well in advance that the flesh can't please God and is not subject to His law (see Romans 8).
What was His law laid down in the garden? "Thou shalt not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." He told Adam he could eat of everything else but that. He told him the result should he break His law. It was Adam's responsibility to tell Eve about this. Adam probably told her "Don't even touch the tree or fruit" because she told that to the serpent.
Adam broke the law. Sin entered and so did the process of dying. But God didn't set them up just to set them up. He did it to bring in the Saviour.
All mankind are dying due to Adam's one act (see Romans 5:12) and because of that, all sin. What is God going to do about this? How is He going to turn this around? Remember right after they sinned God told them about the Saviour. Romans 5:18 & 19 tells us what God is going to do about it. Because of what Adam did all mankind were condemned to dying. Because of Christ's obedience all mankind (that included all of you folks here) will be have their lives justified. Due to Adam's sin all mankind were made sinners. Due to Christ's one righteous act all mankind (that includes you folks here who don't get it) will be made just or righteous.
Rom 5:12 Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death, and thus death passed through into all mankind, on which all sinned -"
Rom 5:18 Consequently, then, as it was through one offense for all mankind for condemnation, thus also it is through one just award for all mankind for life's justifying."
Rom 5:19 For even as, through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners, thus also, through the obedience of the One, the many shall be constituted just."
All mankind will be saved due to Christ ransoming them (1 Timothy 2:4-6).
God IS the Saviour of all mankind, especially (not exclusively) them that believe (1 Timothy 4:10).
If you put off the Christian beliefs that were drilled into you when you were a kid, the Garden of Eden story just reads like a story of people who got in trouble for doing something that a particular god told them not to. I don't see how you can get the idea that there was some pre-existing moral code that was first violated in the Garden.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Quotes a lot of xian texts
I think you missed the plot entirely
Quote:
God IS the Saviour of all mankind, especially (not exclusively) them that believe (1 Timothy 4:10).
That is even more scary as we atheists will still have to educate you in heaven, real scary stuff.
I don't see how you can get the idea that there was some pre-existing moral code that was first violated in the Garden.
You don't, really. I regard "original sin" as something bolted onto the origins myth with no more basis than that both refer to "origin". It didn't even start to develop as a doctrine until the 2nd century CE. It was initially a push-back against the gnostic "heresy" at a time when the church was still struggling to define what constituted orthodoxy -- things like unitarianism vs trinitarianism, the very nature of Christ and of man. I think that its purpose is to slather on extra layers of guilt, unworthiness and need, the better to create faux needs and bolster the value-proposition of the faith.
You don't, really. I regard "original sin" as something bolted onto the origins myth with no more basis than that both refer to "origin". It didn't even start to develop as a doctrine until the 2nd century CE. It was initially a push-back against the gnostic "heresy" at a time when the church was still struggling to define what constituted orthodoxy -- things like unitarianism vs trinitarianism, the very nature of Christ and of man. I think that its purpose is to slather on extra layers of guilt, unworthiness and need, the better to create faux needs and bolster the value-proposition of the faith.
The apostle Paul in the first century didn't use "original sin" to slather on guilt or unworthiness? He used it in Romans 12 to reveal a solution to the dilemma. It's an evangel, i.e., good news. It might be true that later on, churches used it to slather on guilt etc. but that does not prove it's original intent as proposed by Paul.
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.
its just a matter of time before the humanoids try an apple.Then the boss gets to have a major hissy fit throwing his two creations out of the garden of Eden and Adam and Eve looking at each other saying w t f was that all about?
