Man raised back to life in Jesus' name

well, than job makes no sense. it's no test if job deserves his punishment.also, i'm not sure that this jesus bit makes much sense either. how could suffering touch christ if he was born without original sin? and how could he die for our sins, if he couldn't die? i guess i missed this post before. going through old posts now that i can check my email. but, uh, belated happy new year to you too!

---

Because our sins are imputed to him, they are IN him or ON him or however that is to be said, they were taken into or upon himself as if they were his own, so he died for all those sins as his own.

well, that still doesn't explain job. do we need original sin? why?

---

I think original sin makes all the suffering in the world understandable, and that without it there is no reasonable -- or acceptable -- explanation for it.It also explains why Job could suffer and yet be a righteous man -- because nobody is perfectly righteous no matter how righteous. As I said already though. So I guess you're convinced or you're not.

i guess i'm not. because if job has any sin at all, he has no right to complain. he's getting what he deserves. job DOES have explanation of why bad things happen to good people, and it's not original sin. it's not particularly comforting in the way the book of job puts it, or a very good answer, but it's an answer nonetheless.note also hat original sin isn't so much as mentioned anywhere in the book. that would have been a good explanation from god: "blame it on adam." but the idea isn't even there.

---

Job is both blameless and upright. There is no indication anywhere in the book of original sin. The inflictions he suffers are not related to anything that Job does, or does not do, but rather to a direct request from GOD for Satan to test whether or not Job fears God and shuns evil because the Lord has "put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land."Satan suggests "But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face."To test that GOD says, "Very well, then, everything he has is in your hands, but on the man himself do not lay a finger."So what Job suffers is not related at all to original Sin but to the direct wishes of GOD.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

There is also nowhere in the entire Bible a "mention" of God as existing in three persons, but it is an inference from dozens if not hundreds of statements nevertheless. One has to read the Bible intelligently, not literal-mindedly looking for things to be said "in so many words."

What does any of that have to do with the Book of Job? In the book of Job the causes of Job's suffering is quite clearly shown, and it is not Original Sin.While there are allusions to the Fall in the Bible, and even ones that can be stretched to assert they point to Original Sin, when you actually read the Genesis account there is no support for either the idea of a Fall or of Original sin.Start a thread on the subject and we can discuss it.But I have show that there is no support for using the concept of Original Sin or the Fall or even that Satan is a Fallen Angel in the book of Job. In Job Satan is only carrying out the wishes and commands of GOD.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

well, yes, i agree with this statement. however, we can't just go quotemining for dogma and read whatever we want into it either.in the case of job, original sin can only be inferred to NOT be in place. it would negate the premise of job being upright and not deserving the curses put upon him. the question of job is "why do bad things happen to good people?" and the answer doesn't appear to be quite that "there is no such thing as a good person."job is blameless, and upright. perfect in everyway. the closest we get to original sin is the comparison between god and job -- next to god, job (perfect though he is) is nothing, and evil. but i think that's more a statement about GOD than it is about job.

---

Let me say this more clearly.Original sin is inferred from other parts of the Bible. The Bible is understood to be a consistent whole by my branch of Christianity. Therefore whatever is true for one book is true for all books. It does not have to be stated. Other parts of the Bible say clearly that there is NO one righteous, no not one. So applying these truths to the Book of Job we understand that Job's genuine righteousness is nevertheless imperfect or relative. Therefore it is possible for him to suffer. Yes, God decreed his suffering at the request of the devil. This is the reason for his suffering. But it would not have been possible if Job were perfectly righteous.

"Original sin" is about as mind-bogglingly UNreasonable an explanation for "suffering in the world" as I can imagine. Wow.And I thought it was a pretty sorry deal back when I was a Christian, too.

right, sure. but it says that job *IS* righteous.perhaps it's good to look at the whole of job, not just the first few sentances. job is perfect -- except when compared to god. maybe that's what paul meant. so perhaps job has some insight on romans, not the other way around. it's more a matter of who's in charge. if you get in a fight with god, you're wrong whether or not you might have a point.

---

Yes, that is what your sect of Christianity believes. However, if you will start a thread on the subject we can see if it is a supportable position. So you believe GOD is limited by a humans relative righteousness? Fine. Start a thread on it and we can discuss it. Perhaps you can even convince me that there was a Fall or anything like Original Sin. Are you open to being persuaded there there was no Fall and there is no Original Sin?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

nature and the fall of man
original sinthere have been more i'm sure but those are still open and i wager faith has been active in both and refuses to listen to the alternatives. but that's just a petty wager. a coffee maybe?

We have the magic 300 count of messages.Closing this thread.This message has been edited by AdminNWR, 02-01-2006 04:38 PM

---