Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Amaleq13 · 08-10-2007, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FuManchu

Working under the assumption that they don't just say "Damn it, the game's up, you've exposed our ultimately incoherent religious doctrine", of course. I haven't seen them do that yet, but there's a first time for everything.

It wouldn't have been worded that way but they make the admission all the time.

Have you seen anyone respond by declaring it is simply a "mystery"?

That is as close as you're likely to get.

Amaleq13 · 08-10-2007, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cege

Just so I understand, are you saying that the fabrication of "sin disease" is the fault of Christianity? or was it inherited by Christianity from Judaism?

It is my understanding that the concept of "original sin" is Christian.

Joan of Bark · 08-10-2007, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cege

Quote:

Originally Posted by FuManchu

1. It is generally claimed that sin came into the world when Adam and Eve ate from the tree in the Garden of Eden.
2. Sin is characterised as disobedience to God.

I've never given this any thought before, but it occurs to me now that if the serpent was Satan-in-disguise, and Satan had fallen to earth from heaven because of disobedience to God, then it follows that sin came into/onto the earth by way of Satan's fall.

By that way of thinking, Adam and Eve eating the fruit just spread sin to humans. Their disobedience didn't introduce sin to earth after all.

Your analysis is correct, but many theists accept that the serpent was NOT Satan, merely a talking snake with legs (and haven't we all run into several of those in our lives?). Certainly this is the Judaic position.

Roger Pearse · 08-11-2007, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wedge

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

The point about original sin is that *no-one* needs help with it.

But it's much more fun with two.:devil1:

Well, I'm not sure what *you* were thinking about but large-scale international financial fraud is something I prefer to do by myself, without witnesses or anyone knowing... oh drat....

Doubtless I am a deeply sad person.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

huff · 08-11-2007, 01:16 AM

I haven't read many of the original posts but coming from a YEC background, meaning raised by YEC parents, the argument you will probably find is that Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Before they ate the fruit, they didn't know the difference between good and evil, therefore it was impossible for them to sin. Now if you or I would do this evil deed now, we would both be sinning due to the original sin from Adam and Eve and the fact that all humans know the difference between good and evil thanks to Adam and Eve.

Magdlyn · 08-11-2007, 07:13 AM

So if A&E didn't know the difference between good and evil, they didn't sin. Yet God punished them anyway, just for fun. Just because He could. Nice.

WishboneDawn · 08-11-2007, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joan of Bark

Your analysis is correct, but many theists accept that the serpent was NOT Satan, merely a talking snake with legs (and haven't we all run into several of those in our lives?). Certainly this is the Judaic position.

A liberal christian one as well I think. He's really not even evil, more like a character of mischief.

WishboneDawn · 08-11-2007, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cege

Just so I understand, are you saying that the fabrication of "sin disease" is the fault of Christianity? or was it inherited by Christianity from Judaism?

Original sin is a construct of Augustine. It's not Jewish and not even from the early christians.

Magdlyn · 08-11-2007, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joan of Bark

Your analysis is correct, but many theists accept that the serpent was NOT Satan, merely a talking snake with legs (and haven't we all run into several of those in our lives?). Certainly this is the Judaic position.

A liberal christian one as well I think. He's really not even evil, more like a character of mischief.

Not a character of mischief, IMO, but a symbol of the Goddess and her wisdom. Trees (sacred groves, etc.) were also associated with the Goddess at that time. The Eden story was an anti-goddess/anti-woman's wisdom polemic. At least partly.

A snake was a protective device in the wilderness when Moses but a bronze one on a stick to heal people from snakebite. Why then, is it seen as evil in Eden? Things to make you go hmmm.

Chili · 08-11-2007, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

A snake was a protective device in the wilderness when Moses but a bronze one on a stick to heal people from snakebite. Why then, is it seen as evil in Eden? Things to make you go hmmm.

Moses raised the serpent first.

Snakebite creates thirst (tanha) from: "she (the greater serpent or woman) will stike at your head (the lesser serpent or Eve) and you (Eve) will stike at his (ego or Adam) heel (Gen.3:15). So no more 'snakebite in the promised land means no more 'desire' and no more sin possible in the promised land = a Christian cannot sin (1Jn.3:9) . . . which is the promise of the promised land.

The snake is not evil except maybe as seen with guilt complex. She teaches man to crawl when the going gets tough and that is good, of course, because not all is gold that shines. Remember here that woman saw that the the TOK was good for gaininggold, wisdom and beauty and she, woman, used the snake as her temple-tramp for this in the lower house and Adam liked her for that. Indeed, he called her Eve and took her to be his wife when they left Eden.

So the 'happy couple' that left Eden was really the ego and the serpent in a form of estrangement from the True Identity (Watts).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-11-2007, 01:16 AM	#15
huff New Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Lexington, KY Posts: 4	I haven't read many of the original posts but coming from a YEC background, meaning raised by YEC parents, the argument you will probably find is that Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Before they ate the fruit, they didn't know the difference between good and evil, therefore it was impossible for them to sin. Now if you or I would do this evil deed now, we would both be sinning due to the original sin from Adam and Eve and the fact that all humans know the difference between good and evil thanks to Adam and Eve.

08-11-2007, 07:13 AM	#16
Magdlyn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 2,230	So if A&E didn't know the difference between good and evil, they didn't sin. Yet God punished them anyway, just for fun. Just because He could. Nice.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.