Rumraket Asks About Original Sin


The Eastern Orthodox agree with you completely!

But this just seems wrong.

It says that my nature, as a human, is the result of a behavior by Adam. That’s just bonkers. It doesn’t work that way, unless God is completely evil and used supernatural methods to impose that on us.

It would be better to say that there are problems with human nature, and what Adam did merely illustrates this.


I think we can get bogged down on these parts of theology, that aren’t that important to Christianity, and are often unclear in the Bible. The fundamental message of Christianity is that we are sinners & because of that Jesus came to save us. Exactly why we have a nature capable of sin, isn’t really that important (but may make for interesting discussion).


3 posts were merged into an existing topic:
Is morality based on standards set by God?

The Bible makes a distinction between circumstantial consequences; evil (sour grapes) and moral evil (the soul that sins shall die), is this what you’re referencing re “affect us”, ie circumstantially?

What I find curious is, Adam was originally in a perfect body, in perfect circumstances; good, yet sinned. thereby negating any possibility circumstance/environmental pressure was causative re moral choice… at which point God was justified in imposing adverse circumstance; the Adamic Curse. Jesus demonstrated that circumstantial evil did not necessitate the performance of moral evil. This seems to create the divide between the physical consequences and spiritual consequences of “evil” re God’s Law.

Beyond this, I wonder if most, if not all, the mystery surrounding our corruption isn’t predicated upon a vague definition of “man”, and I wonder if this definition were hardened somewhat it might resolve a lot of issues re the blending of the physical evidence with the Biblical accounts and assertions?


I agree, Michelle (not sure if that isn’t the “kiss of death” :wink:

Imo, this is the basis of any religion, specifically Christianity, which asserts a “moral standard” to which we are accountable. It must explain, within the context of the very moral law to which we’re held, how this moral corruption is legally a universal condition… for upon that resolution all other doctrine/dogma is derived.

The reason why one gets “bogged down on these parts of theology” is because w/o an explanation for how/why we became corrupt, notions of “salvation”, “grace”, “redemption”, “atonement” or even “guilt” and “punishment” are incoherent, undefinable by the very moral law through which we’re judged. Before YOU did anything; good or evil, your fate, re moral criminality was sealed. This is at irreconcilable odds with Biblical Jurisprudence.

We were born here corrupted, alienated from God, guaranteed to screw up; either by conscience; Hamartia, or Ordinance; Parabasis. This universality, certainty of failure demands an explanation, for, as I said, w/o it, all the “important” parts of “Christianity” are moot.

1 Like

14 posts were split to a new topic:
Is morality based on standards set by God?

This thread should be reserved for discussions of original sin. Further posts on the more general topic of God and morality should be directed to this thread: Is morality based on standards set by God?
@moderators please take note.

1 Like