|
Author
|
Topic: Is there Biblical support for the concept of "Original Sin"?
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
Message 8 of 240 (589579)
11-03-2010 12:43 PM
|
Reply to: Message 6 by kbertsche
11-03-2010 11:24 AM
|
|
kbertsche writes: Yet they died anyway, and we know that death is the penalty for sin. So why did they die?
That looks to me like a case of a false premise producing a questionable conclusion. We know that death is the penalty for sin? No, we don't know any such thing. Death is a natural consequence of life. The Garden of Eden story is pretty vague about the Tree of Life. Pauls attempt to reason from the vague to the specific isn't very convincing.
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 6 by kbertsche, posted 11-03-2010 11:24 AM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 14 of 240 (589615)
11-03-2010 2:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 13 by kbertsche
11-03-2010 2:26 PM
|
|
kbertsche writes: Remember, I was summarizing Paul's argument. Whether or not you or I agree with his argument is irrelevant.
Of course. I was simply suggesting that Paul's reasoning was flawed. If you agreed with him, your reasoning would be flawed too.  (Paul had already pointed out in Romans 2 that Gentiles keep the law by nature much as people did before "the law" was given to Moses. I think his point may have been more about everybody having the knowledge of good and evil rather than "inheriting" sin from Adam.)
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 13 by kbertsche, posted 11-03-2010 2:26 PM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 25 of 240 (589719)
11-04-2010 12:47 AM
|
Reply to: Message 24 by kbertsche
11-04-2010 12:33 AM
|
|
kbertsche writes: So if Paul teaches the concept in Rom 5, the answer to this question must be "yes", whether we agree with Paul's reasoning or not.
Not at all. One man's unsupported opinion doesn't constitute "Biblical support". What Paul teaches is not necessarily equivalent to what has Biblical support. I'm sure we could find a lot of opinions in the Bible that are just plain wrong. You can't count all of them as Biblically supported just because they're mentioned.
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 24 by kbertsche, posted 11-04-2010 12:33 AM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 33 of 240 (589789)
11-04-2010 2:10 PM
|
Reply to: Message 30 by kbertsche
11-04-2010 1:09 PM
|
|
kbertsche writes: Any teaching of any biblical author has biblical support, by definition.
You're playing fast and loose with your definitions. "Support" generally implies two components: that which is supported and that which provides the support. The concept of "self-supported" has no more value than the concept of "self-evident". If there is any other support besides the skyhook of Romans 5, please show it.
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 30 by kbertsche, posted 11-04-2010 1:09 PM | | kbertsche has seen this message but not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 68 of 240 (590159)
11-06-2010 11:24 AM
|
Reply to: Message 67 by kbertsche
11-06-2010 10:00 AM
|
|
Re: Free Willy
kbertsche writes: The "naming" suggests that Adam knew something about the nature of the serpent.
And yet he didn't seem to think the serpent was "evil". If he did know that the serpent was more shrewd than the other animals, he didn't take that to be a bad thing. He either didn't know, or didn't believe that the serpent was giving bad advice. The serpent let the cat out of the bag:
quote:
Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
and God later confirmed that the serpent was right:
quote:
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever....
It's hard to understand how anybody could consider becoming more like God a "fall" or a "sin".
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 67 by kbertsche, posted 11-06-2010 10:00 AM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 79 of 240 (590510)
11-08-2010 2:00 PM
|
Reply to: Message 78 by iano
11-08-2010 1:22 PM
|
|
iano writes: quote:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Direct contradiction without accomodation. Directly on a par with Colin saying that Alice knew that the old staircase was safe but choose to say otherwise.
God did acknowledge later on that the serpent was right:
quote:
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil....
It's the equivalent of Alice acknowleging that she was wrong/mistaken/lying. Edited by ringo, : Soelling.
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 78 by iano, posted 11-08-2010 1:22 PM | | iano has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 83 of 240 (590538)
11-08-2010 5:25 PM
|
Reply to: Message 81 by kbertsche
11-08-2010 3:24 PM
|
|
Re: Free Willy
kbertsche writes: ringo writes: It's hard to understand how anybody could consider becoming more like God a "fall" or a "sin".
The sin wasn't becoming more like God. The sin was the direct disobedience of God, and the desire to make oneself like God (c.f. Is 14:12-17).
You only addressed half of what I said. How can becoming more like God be considered a "fall"?
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 81 by kbertsche, posted 11-08-2010 3:24 PM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 86 of 240 (590663)
11-09-2010 11:14 AM
|
Reply to: Message 85 by kbertsche
11-09-2010 11:04 AM
|
|
Re: Free Willy
kbertsche writes: ringo writes: You only addressed half of what I said. How can becoming more like God be considered a "fall"?
I have not claimed this. I don't see where the text implies it.
So there was no "fall". Good. That's a start.  The next obvious question is: How can an action that makes one better - i.e. more God like - be considered a sin? How can a desire to be better be a sin?
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 85 by kbertsche, posted 11-09-2010 11:04 AM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 96 of 240 (590870)
11-10-2010 10:03 AM
|
Reply to: Message 88 by kbertsche
11-09-2010 11:45 AM
|
|
Re: Free Willy
kbertsche writes: To rephrase and clarify: I have not claimed, nor do I see where the text (either Genesis or Romans) implies that becoming more like God is considered to be a "fall" or a "sin".
So you agree that becoming more like God was a good thing but you still claim that Adam and Eve became more like God by sinning?
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 88 by kbertsche, posted 11-09-2010 11:45 AM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 99 of 240 (590877)
11-10-2010 10:38 AM
|
Reply to: Message 97 by iano
11-10-2010 10:25 AM
|
|
Re: Free Willy
iano writes: Where did you get the notion that God or the serpent were seen as authority figures?
Isn't that the point? How were Adam and Eve supposed to know they should obey God?
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 97 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 10:25 AM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 104 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 11:19 AM | | ringo has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 110 of 240 (590891)
11-10-2010 11:50 AM
|
Reply to: Message 104 by iano
11-10-2010 11:19 AM
|
|
Re: Free Willy
iano writes: There is no need to introduce a should-element to a decision involving only consequences.
Again, isn't that the point? Without a "should-element", how can there be any sin? They used their free will, which they were entitled to do, and they accepted the consequences. Where's the sin?
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 104 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 11:19 AM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 113 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 12:11 PM | | ringo has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 115 of 240 (590904)
11-10-2010 12:45 PM
|
Reply to: Message 113 by iano
11-10-2010 12:11 PM
|
|
Re: Free Willy
iano writes: If "disobeying God" is a definition of sin then they sinned.
So the only way you can come up with "Original Sin" is by trivializing sin itself? If sin is nothing but disobeying God's whim, if it has no "bad" connotation in and of itself, why would we be concerned with sin at all?
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 113 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 12:11 PM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 116 by jar, posted 11-10-2010 12:54 PM | | ringo has seen this message but not replied | | | Message 119 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 2:11 PM | | ringo has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 120 of 240 (590945)
11-10-2010 5:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 119 by iano
11-10-2010 2:11 PM
|
|
Re: Free Willy
iano writes: I don't see the original sin as trivial. There were huge consequences arising from it.
Your reasoning seems circular. You're assuming that there was a sin committed in the Garden of Eden and then you're attributing consequences to that sin. I'm saying that if anything Adam and Eve did in the story was a "sin", then sin is trivial.
iano writes: Per definition, it has a "bad" connotation when arising from creatures made moral.
According to the story, Adam and Eve were "made moral" by eating the fruit. How can you retroactively charge them with sin when the act was what made them capable of sin?
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 119 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 2:11 PM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 122 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 6:16 PM | | ringo has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
kbertsche writes: ringo writes: So you agree that becoming more like God was a good thing but you still claim that Adam and Eve became more like God by sinning?
Please see Re: Free Willy ( Message 81), which might be a partial answer. But I'm not quite sure what you are trying to ask?
Acquiring the knowledge of Good and Evil made them more like God. How can becoming more like God be a sin? How can the desire to be more like God be a sin?
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 117 by kbertsche, posted 11-10-2010 1:46 PM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 125 of 240 (590952)
11-10-2010 6:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 122 by iano
11-10-2010 6:16 PM
|
|
iano writes: Wasn't sin previously defined as disobeying God (whether or not a moral element was attaching)?
That's how you defined it. I'm saying that that's a silly definition that trivializes sin. Sin has to have more to it than just disobedience of God's whims or it has no meaning. Nobody was hurt (with the possible exception of Adam and Eve), so I don't see how it was a sin.
"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 122 by iano, posted 11-10-2010 6:16 PM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 130 by iano, posted 11-11-2010 4:55 AM | | ringo has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2