Is the concept of Original Sin fair?

[Metatron]

I have some concerns about the fairness of Original Sin and would be interested other forum members opinion on this issue.

One of my concerns deals with the account as presented in Genesis. God tells Adam not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil otherwise he will die. Later of course, Adam and Eve are seduced by that rascally serpent, God banishes them from Eden, and death is brought into the world, etc. The problem I have with this is that by definition, not having yet partaken of the famous apple, Adam and Eve have no concept of good and evil and indeed the threat of death is meaningless to them since they also would have no understanding of what death is! Adam and Eve are innocents who have no moral compass with which to make the decision. Its like telling a toddler who has never been disciplined not to eat the really neat looking poisoned candy and then walking away and seeing what happens.


Another thing that bugs me is the implied concept of inheritability of sin, i.e. Adam and Eve sin so everyone else to the umpteenth generation is equally culpable and has a one-way ticket punched to the Really Hot Place. Where is the personal responsibility in that? Indeed, where is free will if the punishment is already in place without a decision having been made? I would think that God at least would want to punish you for the sins that YOU have committed.

Thank you for your time.

[Metatron]

I still don't get how you think this pass down of responsibility for an ancestor's sin is reasonable. It's like being jailed for a crime committed by one's grandfather. Nor do I know what you mean by "a reality based model"? In what way does it model reality? And I don't think God's offering a way out of a predicament of his own creation meets my personal definition of fairness.

Great questions. Before I respond with my thoughts, I would like to clarify one variable.. Do you think God is responsible for our bad behavior(via the "curse") or is our bad behavior outside the Adam/Eve Narrative and it is "just us"?

Reality based model: I just mean the facts lie in life and not theory.

It depends on what you are talking about. I'm obviously debating the concept of original sin as proposed by Genesis or at least some interpretations thereof. So you might say I'm arguing from a what if the biblical account is literally true perspective.

Now if you are asking what I think outside of the constraints of this debate, since I'm agnostic obviously I don't believe in the Adam and Eve story and believe man is responsible for his actions whether good or bad without reference to a supernatural being.

Is this what you wanted to know?

(Incidently, why do you always quote yourself? When you do that it's sometimes difficult to pick out what you are saying from the other quoted material. Just curious.)

[AB]

Yeah, I am still trying to get the logistics. This time I did a "reply" without quote. Better?

Ok, there is a context that is involved in the Adam and Eve Narrative. The context is just as important as the happenings itself. From what you say, sounds like you don't believe in the context. Given that, we would counterpoint all over the place.

[Metatron]

Yeah, I am still trying to get the logistics. This time I did a "reply" without quote. Better?

Ok, there is a context that is involved in the Adam and Eve Narrative. The context is just as important as the happenings itself. From what you say, sounds like you don't believe in the context. Given that, we would counterpoint all over the place.

What context? Are you saying that the Genesis account cannot be understood on it's own?

[AB]

Yeah, I am still trying to get the logistics. This time I did a "reply" without quote. Better?

Ok, there is a context that is involved in the Adam and Eve Narrative. The context is just as important as the happenings itself. From what you say, sounds like you don't believe in the context. Given that, we would counterpoint all over the place.

What context? Are you saying that the Genesis account cannot be understood on it's own?

The context: My understanding is you don't incorporate that God created the situation that involved Adam/Eve and that God's purpose still resides.

[Metatron]

Yeah, I am still trying to get the logistics. This time I did a "reply" without quote. Better?

Ok, there is a context that is involved in the Adam and Eve Narrative. The context is just as important as the happenings itself. From what you say, sounds like you don't believe in the context. Given that, we would counterpoint all over the place.

What context? Are you saying that the Genesis account cannot be understood on it's own?

The context: My understanding is you don't incorporate that God created the situation that involved Adam/Eve and that God's purpose still resides.

I'm not sure what my beliefs in the validity of the Garden of Eden story have to do with anything. Since the topic is on whether the concept of original sin and inheritability of sin in general is fair, I'm essentially arguing based on the proposition that the Bible account is true. I'm stating that if the account is true as written then God is not fair in condemning people for the actions of an ancestor. This abrogates free will since they are condemned before any moral choice is made.

[AB]

Yeah, I am still trying to get the logistics. This time I did a "reply" without quote. Better?

Ok, there is a context that is involved in the Adam and Eve Narrative. The context is just as important as the happenings itself. From what you say, sounds like you don't believe in the context. Given that, we would counterpoint all over the place.

What context? Are you saying that the Genesis account cannot be understood on it's own?

The context: My understanding is you don't incorporate that God created the situation that involved Adam/Eve and that God's purpose still resides.

I'm not sure what my beliefs in the validity of the Garden of Eden story have to do with anything. Since the topic is on whether the concept of original sin and inheritability of sin in general is fair, I'm essentially arguing based on the proposition that the Bible account is true. I'm stating that if the account is true as written then God is not fair in condemning people for the actions of an ancestor. This abrogates free will since they are condemned before any moral choice is made.

abrogates: What does that mean?... Sounds like we are coming from very diferrenet foundatiional core of belief.

[Metatron]

Yeah, I am still trying to get the logistics. This time I did a "reply" without quote. Better?

Ok, there is a context that is involved in the Adam and Eve Narrative. The context is just as important as the happenings itself. From what you say, sounds like you don't believe in the context. Given that, we would counterpoint all over the place.

What context? Are you saying that the Genesis account cannot be understood on it's own?

The context: My understanding is you don't incorporate that God created the situation that involved Adam/Eve and that God's purpose still resides.

I'm not sure what my beliefs in the validity of the Garden of Eden story have to do with anything. Since the topic is on whether the concept of original sin and inheritability of sin in general is fair, I'm essentially arguing based on the proposition that the Bible account is true. I'm stating that if the account is true as written then God is not fair in condemning people for the actions of an ancestor. This abrogates free will since they are condemned before any moral choice is made.

abrogates: What does that mean?... Sounds like we are coming from very diferrenet foundatiional core of belief.

From dictionary.com

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=abrogates

ab·ro·gate
tr.v. ab·ro·gat·ed, ab·ro·gat·ing, ab·ro·gates
To abolish, do away with, or annul, especially by authority.

[AB]

Yeah, I am still trying to get the logistics. This time I did a "reply" without quote. Better?

Ok, there is a context that is involved in the Adam and Eve Narrative. The context is just as important as the happenings itself. From what you say, sounds like you don't believe in the context. Given that, we would counterpoint all over the place.

What context? Are you saying that the Genesis account cannot be understood on it's own?

The context: My understanding is you don't incorporate that God created the situation that involved Adam/Eve and that God's purpose still resides.

I'm not sure what my beliefs in the validity of the Garden of Eden story have to do with anything. Since the topic is on whether the concept of original sin and inheritability of sin in general is fair, I'm essentially arguing based on the proposition that the Bible account is true. I'm stating that if the account is true as written then God is not fair in condemning people for the actions of an ancestor. This abrogates free will since they are condemned before any moral choice is made.

abrogates: What does that mean?... Sounds like we are coming from very diferrenet foundatiional core of belief.

From dictionary.com

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=abrogates

ab·ro·gate
tr.v. ab·ro·gat·ed, ab·ro·gat·ing, ab·ro·gates
To abolish, do away with, or annul, especially by authority.

Free will is not abolished. God still gives us the opportunity to chose Him and out of sin. Although we do inherit the sinful tendency, God does provide a way out through Jesus Christ. And we have fee-will to choose that or not. And this is the core of my point that God wasn't and isn't unfair. HE does provide a parachute to use if we choose.

[Metatron]

Yeah, I am still trying to get the logistics. This time I did a "reply" without quote. Better?

Ok, there is a context that is involved in the Adam and Eve Narrative. The context is just as important as the happenings itself. From what you say, sounds like you don't believe in the context. Given that, we would counterpoint all over the place.

What context? Are you saying that the Genesis account cannot be understood on it's own?

The context: My understanding is you don't incorporate that God created the situation that involved Adam/Eve and that God's purpose still resides.

I'm not sure what my beliefs in the validity of the Garden of Eden story have to do with anything. Since the topic is on whether the concept of original sin and inheritability of sin in general is fair, I'm essentially arguing based on the proposition that the Bible account is true. I'm stating that if the account is true as written then God is not fair in condemning people for the actions of an ancestor. This abrogates free will since they are condemned before any moral choice is made.

abrogates: What does that mean?... Sounds like we are coming from very diferrenet foundatiional core of belief.

From dictionary.com

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=abrogates

ab·ro·gate
tr.v. ab·ro·gat·ed, ab·ro·gat·ing, ab·ro·gates
To abolish, do away with, or annul, especially by authority.

Free will is not abolished. God still gives us the opportunity to chose Him and out of sin. Although we do inherit the sinful tendency, God does provide a way out through Jesus Christ. And we have fee-will to choose that or not. And this is the core of my point that God wasn't and isn't unfair. HE does provide a parachute to use if we choose.

What good is free will if all morality is made irrelevant? Since we are born pre-judged as guilty of sin, our moral choices in life literally make no difference! Murderers and child molesters who find Jesus at the end of their lives theoretically go to heaven. The Hindu equivalent of Mother Theresa goes to hell. God apparently doesn't really give a damn how we live are lives, he's only interested in our fawning worship of him.

[Cmass]

I have not stopped laughing during the full 44 pages of this thread!
I have donated 5 tokens to Easyrider. He is by far one of the most frustrating and wordy people to read but also one of the most entertaining.
I have donated 5 tokens to Metatron for having the patience to skillfully manage a 44 page thread and not kill himself in frustration.
Thanks guys!