Without "original sin" all of Christianity collapses

[Sky Dancer]

I love it when non-believers try to explain Christianity. It reminds me of the legends cargo cults dream up to explain away airplanes.

Plenty of non-believers as you call us are former Christians.

 

[Sky Dancer]

If you don't buy the literal idea of a talking snake and a man created out of dust and a woman created out of man's rib, then how can you possibly believe the concept of original sin?

All of Christianity collapses without this biblical myth. Without "original sin", human beings wouldn't be "sinners" in need of "redemption in the form of a "redeemer or savior", Christ. Until Augustine, Christians regarded freedom, not redemption as the primary message of Genesis.

"...I came to see that for nearly the first four hundred years of our era, Christians regarded "FREEDOM as the primary message of Genesis 1-3. Freedom in its many forms, including free will, freedom from demonic powers, freedom from social and sexual obligations, freedom from tyrannical government and from fate; and self mastery as the source of such freedom. With Augustine, this message changed.

(E. Pagels, ADAM, EVE, AND THE SERPENT, intro p.XXII, 1988, Random House)

Are you trying to argue that, without the Bible, human beings would be perfect?

No, I'm saying that the Bible teaches that human beings are flawed and the Buddha teaches that buddha nature is present in all sentient being. We are all pure in essence.

The dross poisons of the mind can be refined away to reveal buddha nature, rainbow like radiance within.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with the bible. Bible goers think their personality is solid and self-existing and they think the solid mind and body "go" to heaven or hell. As if heaven and hell are "real" places and God is a "real" personality with emotions.

 

[Liability]

Why doesn't anybody ever give due consideration to unoriginal sin?

 

[BDBoop]

Why doesn't anybody ever give due consideration to unoriginal sin?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNChMKBBszI]Eddie Izzard - Original Sin - YouTube[/ame]

 

[AmericanFirst]

If you don't buy the literal idea of a talking snake and a man created out of dust and a woman created out of man's rib, then how can you possibly believe the concept of original sin?

All of Christianity collapses without this biblical myth. Without "original sin", human beings wouldn't be "sinners" in need of "redemption in the form of a "redeemer or savior", Christ. Until Augustine, Christians regarded freedom, not redemption as the primary message of Genesis.

"...I came to see that for nearly the first four hundred years of our era, Christians regarded "FREEDOM as the primary message of Genesis 1-3. Freedom in its many forms, including free will, freedom from demonic powers, freedom from social and sexual obligations, freedom from tyrannical government and from fate; and self mastery as the source of such freedom. With Augustine, this message changed.

(E. Pagels, ADAM, EVE, AND THE SERPENT, intro p.XXII, 1988, Random House)

Are you trying to argue that, without the Bible, human beings would be perfect?

No, I'm saying that the Bible teaches that human beings are flawed and the Buddha teaches that buddha nature is present in all sentient being. We are all pure in essence.

The dross poisons of the mind can be refined away to reveal buddha nature, rainbow like radiance within.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with the bible. Bible goers think their personality is solid and self-existing and they think the solid mind and body "go" to heaven or hell. As if heaven and hell are "real" places and God is a "real" personality with emotions.

The buhdda is a lying false god who leads people astray. Buhdda means nothing.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Are you trying to argue that, without the Bible, human beings would be perfect?

No, I'm saying that the Bible teaches that human beings are flawed and the Buddha teaches that buddha nature is present in all sentient being. We are all pure in essence.

The dross poisons of the mind can be refined away to reveal buddha nature, rainbow like radiance within.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with the bible. Bible goers think their personality is solid and self-existing and they think the solid mind and body "go" to heaven or hell. As if heaven and hell are "real" places and God is a "real" personality with emotions.

The buhdda is a lying false god who leads people astray. Buhdda means nothing.

Oh, and God is real, more real then the fat buhdda.

 

[Swingline50022]

First off, you've got to define what original sin was.

Was it eating from the Tree of Knowledge? Not really.

Was it because Adam and Eve succumbed to temptation? Again. Not really.

Was it because Adam and Eve got caught by God eating of the fruit and they refused to take responsibility for their actions? Exactly.

The main sin of the Garden wasn't that they ate the fruit, or even that they were embarrassed about being naked. When God asked Adam why he ate, Adam said "it's not my fault, because the woman that You made for me conned me into it".

When God asked Eve why she did it, it was the same answer, she refused to take responsibility for her own actions and admit to what she'd done, instead choosing to blame the serpent.

It's not that humans ate the apple, it's that we lied about eating it and tried to dodge responsibility for our actions.

Now..........in the concept of forgiveness, if you take responsibility for what you've done, apologize to whomever you harmed and make sincere restitution for what you'd done, as well as sincerely endeavor to never repeat those actions again, then you've achieved true forgiveness, because you've admitted you were wrong, repented, and then had a sincere desire to never do that again.

So, if you recognize what the original sin really IS (avoiding responsibility for what you do), then you can be forgiven for it.

And no............original sin has NOTHING to do with sex, because why would a loving God engineer the human race with a black mark against them before they even get started?

That's an interesting interpretation of the story. The whole story is traceable to 4th Millennium BC Sumerian cuneiform tablet stories, as are a lot of the Genesis stories. One of my favorite variants of this particular story is the Prometheus legend, where Prometheus represents the Serpent who brings knowledge to humanity in the form of fire, and Zeus represents Yahweh as the all-father who wishes to keep humanity ignorant.

In the Genesis story proper it's important to distinguish that the Tree bore not just the fruit of Knowledge, but the fruit of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Also important is the Tree of whose fruit humanity did not partake, which was the Tree of Life, or eternal life.

If I remember the story correctly, Yahweh is attributed as saying something to the effect that, had Eve and Adam eaten the fruit of the Tree of Life as well, they would have then become "like Us," implying that that humanity would have become godlike, and also, that there was more than a single god. This is consistent with variants of the Sumerian legend in which Yahweh is the Demiurge, a hermit god who has separated himself from the other Sumerian gods to create this imperfect material world in which we now live.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If you don't buy the literal idea of a talking snake and a man created out of dust and a woman created out of man's rib, then how can you possibly believe the concept of original sin?

All of Christianity collapses without this biblical myth. Without "original sin", human beings wouldn't be "sinners" in need of "redemption in the form of a "redeemer or savior", Christ. Until Augustine, Christians regarded freedom, not redemption as the primary message of Genesis.

"...I came to see that for nearly the first four hundred years of our era, Christians regarded "FREEDOM as the primary message of Genesis 1-3. Freedom in its many forms, including free will, freedom from demonic powers, freedom from social and sexual obligations, freedom from tyrannical government and from fate; and self mastery as the source of such freedom. With Augustine, this message changed.

(E. Pagels, ADAM, EVE, AND THE SERPENT, intro p.XXII, 1988, Random House)

Are you trying to argue that, without the Bible, human beings would be perfect?

No, I'm saying that the Bible teaches that human beings are flawed and the Buddha teaches that buddha nature is present in all sentient being. We are all pure in essence.

The dross poisons of the mind can be refined away to reveal buddha nature, rainbow like radiance within.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with the bible. Bible goers think their personality is solid and self-existing and they think the solid mind and body "go" to heaven or hell. As if heaven and hell are "real" places and God is a "real" personality with emotions.

The Bible does not teach that human beings are flawed. The Bible teaches that human beings can aspire to perfection despite the fact that they are flawed. Anyone that says that, in essence, everyone is perfect has never dealt with a tow year old child. Unless all children are taught from birth to be selfish little pricks every child is actually born to believe that he is the center of the universe, and that the world exists to serve his whim. All the Bible does is explain what is obvious to any parent, people are born selfish and have to learn to care about others.

The Bible is not a guide to enlightenment, in that you are correct. What it is is an explanation of why we cannot attain it through looking inside ourselves. We have to look toward YHWH and His light, let that light shine upon our lives, and then the portion of that Light that is inside all of us is able to shine.

By the way, rainbows happen after white light passes through the distorting affects of something. If your enlightenment is a rainbow it is because it is passing through imperfection first.

 

[nitroz]

Jesus's sacrifice would be in vein.

So Thats why I make it a priority to jerk off while watching porn every day. Just giving him some sympathy sin. But anyone got any good links? The ones i have are getting boring.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Are you trying to argue that, without the Bible, human beings would be perfect?

No, I'm saying that the Bible teaches that human beings are flawed and the Buddha teaches that buddha nature is present in all sentient being. We are all pure in essence.

The dross poisons of the mind can be refined away to reveal buddha nature, rainbow like radiance within.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with the bible. Bible goers think their personality is solid and self-existing and they think the solid mind and body "go" to heaven or hell. As if heaven and hell are "real" places and God is a "real" personality with emotions.

The Bible does not teach that human beings are flawed. The Bible teaches that human beings can aspire to perfection despite the fact that they are flawed. Anyone that says that, in essence, everyone is perfect has never dealt with a tow year old child. Unless all children are taught from birth to be selfish little pricks every child is actually born to believe that he is the center of the universe, and that the world exists to serve his whim. All the Bible does is explain what is obvious to any parent, people are born selfish and have to learn to care about others.

The Bible is not a guide to enlightenment, in that you are correct. What it is is an explanation of why we cannot attain it through looking inside ourselves. We have to look toward YHWH and His light, let that light shine upon our lives, and then the portion of that Light that is inside all of us is able to shine.

By the way, rainbows happen after white light passes through the distorting affects of something. If your enlightenment is a rainbow it is because it is passing through imperfection first.

Catholics say you are born with original sin, the sin of Adam and Eve. Christians have no teachings on emptiness. Realizing emptiness is a prequisite for enlightenment. Christian aim for heaven, not enlightenment. Buddhists are not interested in "heaven realms".

 

[Liability]

No, I'm saying that the Bible teaches that human beings are flawed and the Buddha teaches that buddha nature is present in all sentient being. We are all pure in essence.

The dross poisons of the mind can be refined away to reveal buddha nature, rainbow like radiance within.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with the bible. Bible goers think their personality is solid and self-existing and they think the solid mind and body "go" to heaven or hell. As if heaven and hell are "real" places and God is a "real" personality with emotions.

The Bible does not teach that human beings are flawed. The Bible teaches that human beings can aspire to perfection despite the fact that they are flawed. Anyone that says that, in essence, everyone is perfect has never dealt with a tow year old child. Unless all children are taught from birth to be selfish little pricks every child is actually born to believe that he is the center of the universe, and that the world exists to serve his whim. All the Bible does is explain what is obvious to any parent, people are born selfish and have to learn to care about others.

The Bible is not a guide to enlightenment, in that you are correct. What it is is an explanation of why we cannot attain it through looking inside ourselves. We have to look toward YHWH and His light, let that light shine upon our lives, and then the portion of that Light that is inside all of us is able to shine.

By the way, rainbows happen after white light passes through the distorting affects of something. If your enlightenment is a rainbow it is because it is passing through imperfection first.

Catholics say you are born with original sin, the sin of Adam and Eve.

So what?

That doesn't make "original sin" a necessary component of Christianity.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, I'm saying that the Bible teaches that human beings are flawed and the Buddha teaches that buddha nature is present in all sentient being. We are all pure in essence.

The dross poisons of the mind can be refined away to reveal buddha nature, rainbow like radiance within.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with the bible. Bible goers think their personality is solid and self-existing and they think the solid mind and body "go" to heaven or hell. As if heaven and hell are "real" places and God is a "real" personality with emotions.

The Bible does not teach that human beings are flawed. The Bible teaches that human beings can aspire to perfection despite the fact that they are flawed. Anyone that says that, in essence, everyone is perfect has never dealt with a tow year old child. Unless all children are taught from birth to be selfish little pricks every child is actually born to believe that he is the center of the universe, and that the world exists to serve his whim. All the Bible does is explain what is obvious to any parent, people are born selfish and have to learn to care about others.

The Bible is not a guide to enlightenment, in that you are correct. What it is is an explanation of why we cannot attain it through looking inside ourselves. We have to look toward YHWH and His light, let that light shine upon our lives, and then the portion of that Light that is inside all of us is able to shine.

By the way, rainbows happen after white light passes through the distorting affects of something. If your enlightenment is a rainbow it is because it is passing through imperfection first.

Catholics say you are born with original sin, the sin of Adam and Eve. Christians have no teachings on emptiness. Realizing emptiness is a prequisite for enlightenment. Christian aim for heaven, not enlightenment. Buddhists are not interested in "heaven realms".

All Christians are not Catholic. Enlightenment only requires being empty if you think emptiness is everything. There are other paths to enlightenment that do not require one to be empty, tai chi comes to mind. No bull about the sound of one hand clapping there.

By the way, Christians don't aim for heaven because we know there is nothing we can do to get there.

 

[Sky Dancer]

The Bible does not teach that human beings are flawed. The Bible teaches that human beings can aspire to perfection despite the fact that they are flawed. Anyone that says that, in essence, everyone is perfect has never dealt with a tow year old child. Unless all children are taught from birth to be selfish little pricks every child is actually born to believe that he is the center of the universe, and that the world exists to serve his whim. All the Bible does is explain what is obvious to any parent, people are born selfish and have to learn to care about others.

The Bible is not a guide to enlightenment, in that you are correct. What it is is an explanation of why we cannot attain it through looking inside ourselves. We have to look toward YHWH and His light, let that light shine upon our lives, and then the portion of that Light that is inside all of us is able to shine.

By the way, rainbows happen after white light passes through the distorting affects of something. If your enlightenment is a rainbow it is because it is passing through imperfection first.

Catholics say you are born with original sin, the sin of Adam and Eve. Christians have no teachings on emptiness. Realizing emptiness is a prequisite for enlightenment. Christian aim for heaven, not enlightenment. Buddhists are not interested in "heaven realms".

All Christians are not Catholic. Enlightenment only requires being empty if you think emptiness is everything. There are other paths to enlightenment that do not require one to be empty, tai chi comes to mind. No bull about the sound of one hand clapping there.

By the way, Christians don't aim for heaven because we know there is nothing we can do to get there.

I can tell the way you use the term, "emptiness", that you don't know what it means.

Christians aim for salvation. They want to go to heaven, not hell.

Christians aren't interested in enlightenment.

 

[Liability]

Catholics say you are born with original sin, the sin of Adam and Eve. Christians have no teachings on emptiness. Realizing emptiness is a prequisite for enlightenment. Christian aim for heaven, not enlightenment. Buddhists are not interested in "heaven realms".

All Christians are not Catholic. Enlightenment only requires being empty if you think emptiness is everything. There are other paths to enlightenment that do not require one to be empty, tai chi comes to mind. No bull about the sound of one hand clapping there.

By the way, Christians don't aim for heaven because we know there is nothing we can do to get there.

I can tell the way you use the term, "emptiness", that you don't know what it means.

Christians aim for salvation. They want to go to heaven, not hell.

Christians aren't interested in enlightenment.

She may be smarmy, smug, supercilious and sickening, but ladies and gentlemen, she has the skills to speak on behalf of others.

That fat fuck Buddha must whisper in her ear.

Of course, he must be as close-minded as Sky to think that "enlightenment" means only one thing.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Catholics say you are born with original sin, the sin of Adam and Eve. Christians have no teachings on emptiness. Realizing emptiness is a prequisite for enlightenment. Christian aim for heaven, not enlightenment. Buddhists are not interested in "heaven realms".

All Christians are not Catholic. Enlightenment only requires being empty if you think emptiness is everything. There are other paths to enlightenment that do not require one to be empty, tai chi comes to mind. No bull about the sound of one hand clapping there.

By the way, Christians don't aim for heaven because we know there is nothing we can do to get there.

I can tell the way you use the term, "emptiness", that you don't know what it means.

Christians aim for salvation. They want to go to heaven, not hell.

Christians aren't interested in enlightenment.

I know exactly what it means, and I hold the entire concept in contempt. I have no respect for people that the entire goal of life is to accomplish nothing.

We don't aim for salvation because, again, there is nothing we can do to attain it. Enlightenment is the path to knowledge, to a better understanding of ourslef and our relationship to God. Why wouldn't Christians be interested in that?

 

[Sky Dancer]

All Christians are not Catholic. Enlightenment only requires being empty if you think emptiness is everything. There are other paths to enlightenment that do not require one to be empty, tai chi comes to mind. No bull about the sound of one hand clapping there.

By the way, Christians don't aim for heaven because we know there is nothing we can do to get there.

I can tell the way you use the term, "emptiness", that you don't know what it means.

Christians aim for salvation. They want to go to heaven, not hell.

Christians aren't interested in enlightenment.

I know exactly what it means, and I hold the entire concept in contempt. I have no respect for people that the entire goal of life is to accomplish nothing.

We don't aim for salvation because, again, there is nothing we can do to attain it. Enlightenment is the path to knowledge, to a better understanding of ourslef and our relationship to God. Why wouldn't Christians be interested in that?

Emptiness is not nothingness. That's nihilism. Nihiliism is considered one of the four extremes to be avoided.

Your view is unlike many Christians view of themselves as sinners who need to be saved.

 

[Liability]

I can tell the way you use the term, "emptiness", that you don't know what it means.

Christians aim for salvation. They want to go to heaven, not hell.

Christians aren't interested in enlightenment.

I know exactly what it means, and I hold the entire concept in contempt. I have no respect for people that the entire goal of life is to accomplish nothing.

We don't aim for salvation because, again, there is nothing we can do to attain it. Enlightenment is the path to knowledge, to a better understanding of ourslef and our relationship to God. Why wouldn't Christians be interested in that?

Emptiness is not nothingness. That's nihilism. Nihiliism is considered one of the four extremes to be avoided.

Your view is unlike many Christians view of themselves as sinners who need to be saved.

You are not allowed to speak of Christians in anything but universal terms, you supercilious but actually ignorant trout.

Buddha hates you now.

You made him feel the joy of nihilism.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I can tell the way you use the term, "emptiness", that you don't know what it means.

Christians aim for salvation. They want to go to heaven, not hell.

Christians aren't interested in enlightenment.

I know exactly what it means, and I hold the entire concept in contempt. I have no respect for people that the entire goal of life is to accomplish nothing.

We don't aim for salvation because, again, there is nothing we can do to attain it. Enlightenment is the path to knowledge, to a better understanding of ourslef and our relationship to God. Why wouldn't Christians be interested in that?

Emptiness is not nothingness. That's nihilism. Nihiliism is considered one of the four extremes to be avoided.

Your view is unlike many Christians view of themselves as sinners who need to be saved.

Suffering is life, emptiness is the lack of suffering, therefore emptiness is death. Call that not nihilism if you want, but it will only make sense if you can think in circles and end up somewhere you aren't going.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I know exactly what it means, and I hold the entire concept in contempt. I have no respect for people that the entire goal of life is to accomplish nothing.

We don't aim for salvation because, again, there is nothing we can do to attain it. Enlightenment is the path to knowledge, to a better understanding of ourslef and our relationship to God. Why wouldn't Christians be interested in that?

Emptiness is not nothingness. That's nihilism. Nihiliism is considered one of the four extremes to be avoided.

Your view is unlike many Christians view of themselves as sinners who need to be saved.

Suffering is life, emptiness is the lack of suffering, therefore emptiness is death. Call that not nihilism if you want, but it will only make sense if you can think in circles and end up somewhere you aren't going.

No, that's not what it means. You've mixed up the Four Noble Truths with nihilism.

I refer you to the Heart Sutra, also known as the Prajnaparamita. The Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom sutra. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.... Primarily, it points to a mistake all beings make in perception of self and others as separate and of our world as permanent, inherently self-existing, solid.

This cannot be understood intellectually. Not fully. It can be approximated, somewhat, through an understanding of quantum physics.

To realize emptiness, you have to contemplate the topic, pray to lineage masters who have gone before you and realized the truth of how things abide, meditate and then finally have an experience of rigpa, or non-meditation, pure awareness itself, primoridal, pristine, unborn and unceasing.

Once you have that recognition, then you train in it.

The Buddha did not teach, to start out with, because he wasn't sure it could be conveyed in words. The oral traditon is only one way, teachings on emptiness are conveyed. Symbolism and mind to mind are the two other lineages.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Emptiness is not nothingness. That's nihilism. Nihiliism is considered one of the four extremes to be avoided.

Your view is unlike many Christians view of themselves as sinners who need to be saved.

Suffering is life, emptiness is the lack of suffering, therefore emptiness is death. Call that not nihilism if you want, but it will only make sense if you can think in circles and end up somewhere you aren't going.

No, that's not what it means. You've mixed up the Four Noble Truths with nihilism.

I refer you to the Heart Sutra, also known as the Prajnaparamita. The Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom sutra. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.... Primarily, it points to a mistake all beings make in perception of self and others as separate and of our world as permanent, inherently self-existing, solid.

This cannot be understood intellectually. Not fully. It can be approximated, somewhat, through an understanding of quantum physics.

To realize emptiness, you have to contemplate the topic, pray to lineage masters who have gone before you and realized the truth of how things abide, meditate and then finally have an experience of rigpa, or non-meditation, pure awareness itself, primoridal, pristine, unborn and unceasing.

Once you have that recognition, then you train in it.

The Buddha did not teach, to start out with, because he wasn't sure it could be conveyed in words. The oral traditon is only one way, teachings on emptiness are conveyed. Symbolism and mind to mind are the two other lineages.

Emptiness is form.

Is that like freedom is slavery and war is peace?