Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

For intuitive and critical discussions, from spirituality to theological doctrines. Fair warning: because the subject matter is personal, moderation is strict.

Moderator: Dan~

Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:17 am

Back in the late 60s, Pope Paul VI convened a unique meeting at the Vatican. Realizing the majority of anthropologists were convinced the human race evolved from more than one set of “original parents,” the pontiff was anxious to explore how this rather new theory of polygenesis could fit into the Christian doctrine of original sin. That doctrine presumed we all sprang from one set of parents who at one point in their early existence had committed a sin so serious that it not only affected them personally, but was somehow passed down to all their descendants.

Among those whom Paul gathered were eminent scientists, Scripture scholars, anthropologists and theologians. Their final report was eventually published in the now-defunct Critic magazine. Though their opinions differed, they all seemed to agree on two things. First, the Yahwistic author of Genesis never expected us to take her biblical account of the “fall” literally. She simply created a classical myth to explain the origins of something we all experience: a basic sinful disorder in each of our lives. Second, the actual original sin probably wasn't something our ancestors did, but something they didn't do.
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby WendyDarling » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:41 am

The original sin was not having Faith in God (something that they didn't do...trust). It remains today the same old story just thousands of years later with more people who lack Faith.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sat Mar 11, 2017 5:35 am

WendyDarling wrote:The original sin was not having Faith in God (something that they didn't do...trust). It remains today the same old story just thousands of years later with more people who lack Faith.


I understand polytheism was prevalent at the time the Book of Genesis was written ... certainly throughout the Egyptian, Greek and Roman Empires.

The truly radical and unpredictable break with tradition (the "unwind") is the conclusion that a woman wrote the Book of Genesis ... and this amidst a staunchly patriarchal society. That the patriarchs would give the Book of Genesis ... written by a woman ... the anchor position in a staunchly patriarchal religion is truly astonishing. Amazement grips me!

Many theologians and scholars give credit to the Hebrew peoples for the introduction of a monotheistic God. I'm not convinced (The "unwind")

According to these experts, the first humans were few enough to have definitively changed the moral environment in which they lived. But they didn't. Instead, time and time again they caved into their “dog eat dog” surroundings, refusing to replace the hateful situations they encountered with the love God intended them to display. The result was that their descendants were forced to face the same disordered environment


The life span of the "dog eat dog" attitude seems eternal ... the "menace"
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sat Mar 11, 2017 7:46 am

more emerging thoughts ...

Are all Abrahamic religions simply branches of the "Pagan" tree? (the Unwind)

If true ... this would make Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code book the equivalent of a fart in a windstorm. :o
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby MagsJ » Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:30 am

The Unwind?
Image
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 16779
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:22 pm

MagsJ wrote:The Unwind?


The Unwind = Omega Point
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby phyllo » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:53 pm

pilgrim_tom wrote:
Back in the late 60s, Pope Paul VI convened a unique meeting at the Vatican. Realizing the majority of anthropologists were convinced the human race evolved from more than one set of “original parents,” the pontiff was anxious to explore how this rather new theory of polygenesis could fit into the Christian doctrine of original sin. That doctrine presumed we all sprang from one set of parents who at one point in their early existence had committed a sin so serious that it not only affected them personally, but was somehow passed down to all their descendants.

Among those whom Paul gathered were eminent scientists, Scripture scholars, anthropologists and theologians. Their final report was eventually published in the now-defunct Critic magazine. Though their opinions differed, they all seemed to agree on two things. First, the Yahwistic author of Genesis never expected us to take her biblical account of the “fall” literally. She simply created a classical myth to explain the origins of something we all experience: a basic sinful disorder in each of our lives. Second, the actual original sin probably wasn't something our ancestors did, but something they didn't do.
When you post a quote, you're supposed to say where you got it. That lets other people verify the source, the context and the contents.
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9696
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: Far away from the BS

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby James S Saint » Sat Mar 11, 2017 5:26 pm

pilgrim_tom wrote:
Back in the late 60s...

Among those whom Paul gathered were eminent scientists, Scripture scholars, anthropologists and theologians. Their final report was eventually published in the now-defunct Critic magazine. Though their opinions differed, they all seemed to agree on two things. First, the Yahwistic author of Genesis never expected us to take her biblical account of the “fall” literally. She simply created a classical myth to explain the origins of something we all experience: a basic sinful disorder in each of our lives. Second, the actual original sin probably wasn't something our ancestors did, but something they didn't do.

It is highly unlikely that the Pope said those words in that way. And though not totally unbelievable, I hope that he didn't state that particular translation of the literal. Too many very informed people know better than to be that simple minded.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24876
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby Amorphos » Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:19 pm

Their final report was eventually published in the now-defunct Critic magazine. Though their opinions differed, they all seemed to agree on two things. First, the Yahwistic author of Genesis never expected us to take her biblical account of the “fall” literally. She simply created a classical myth to explain the origins of something we


Very interesting, and its kinda how I see it. I would add that divinity was around before and after Christ, so ‘the bible’ is still being written. This as if there were something akin to the bible but the universal version of it [history in the akashik perhaps], and concerns all peoples and all their stories too. Religion is shown in very ancient artefacts.

…back on point though;

Is this true; there is at least the set of informations specifically derivative in causal info of the material world, as well as >a given info set of divine/other origin<,. if existent.?

to me the answer must be yes.

The next question concerns application; what percentage of our thoughts and actions derive from that set. Next; what proportion of the remaining derives from the divine. Then finally; what proportion is neither divine nor causal [sets] and is therefore directly responsible to the individual.

Sin I must conclude, is in the material. Moreover in an ever-changing world those instincts are constantly meeting with unexpected situation and events. Sin is in and of the world imho. We inherit it because we inherit everything we are.

The Adam and Eve metaphor may represent [ehem, somewhat archaically] how a soul being born into this world, WILL inherit sin.
_

edit; i think the root of any given evil can be found to be illusory. our instincts aren't necessarily good or evil, but simply effective. ergo sin itself has no basis.
Last edited by Amorphos on Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The truth is naked,
Once it is written it is lost.
Genius is the result of the entire product of man.
The cosmic insignificance of humanity, shows the cosmic insignificance of a universe without humanity.
the fully painted picture, reveals an empty canvas
User avatar
Amorphos
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7048
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:49 pm
Location: infinity

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby MagsJ » Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:21 pm

pilgrim_tom wrote:
MagsJ wrote:The Unwind?


The Unwind = Omega Point

Wikipedia:
The Omega Point is a spiritual belief and a scientific speculation that everything in the universe is fated to spiral towards a final point of "divine" unification. The term was coined by the French Jesuit priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881–1955).

It being a spiritual belief and a scientific speculation spans the huge chasm between religion and science, but I guess that is what he was going for, but at the very least it's a beautiful concept.

It is plausible that very ancient man started out with one God and expanded the concept through a growing need to reconcile their place in the world through an ancient brain with a complex world they found themselves in.
Image
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 16779
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:25 pm

Pope Francis declares evolution and Big Bang theory are real and God is not a magician with a magic wand....

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 22514.html


If you wanted to create a religion everybody would embrace, how would you do it:

Perhaps make it more mainstream, perhaps invite leaders of other religions from all over the world and make it clear you consider all these religions to be valid as well and all that unscientific stuff about God creating the world in six days and creating man out of the dust of the earth is to be thrown out.

The following are some of the Pope’s statements.

-“When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so.”

-“The Big Bang, which today we hold to be the origin of the world, does not contradict the intervention of the divine creator but, rather, requires it.”

-“Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”

Really?

Pope Francis says there is not any room for 'fundamentialsm" in Christianty.

He said “A fundamentalist group, even if it kills no one, even it strikes no one, is violent. The mental structure of fundamentalism is violence in the name of God.”

But what is 'fundamentalism?"

A google search gives this definition

“a form of a religion, especially Islam or Protestant Christianity, that upholds belief in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture.”

It would seem the Pope has a problem with people that believe the Scriptures are literally true.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sat Mar 11, 2017 10:58 pm

phyllo wrote:
pilgrim_tom wrote:
Back in the late 60s, Pope Paul VI convened a unique meeting at the Vatican. Realizing the majority of anthropologists were convinced the human race evolved from more than one set of “original parents,” the pontiff was anxious to explore how this rather new theory of polygenesis could fit into the Christian doctrine of original sin. That doctrine presumed we all sprang from one set of parents who at one point in their early existence had committed a sin so serious that it not only affected them personally, but was somehow passed down to all their descendants.

Among those whom Paul gathered were eminent scientists, Scripture scholars, anthropologists and theologians. Their final report was eventually published in the now-defunct Critic magazine. Though their opinions differed, they all seemed to agree on two things. First, the Yahwistic author of Genesis never expected us to take her biblical account of the “fall” literally. She simply created a classical myth to explain the origins of something we all experience: a basic sinful disorder in each of our lives. Second, the actual original sin probably wasn't something our ancestors did, but something they didn't do.
When you post a quote, you're supposed to say where you got it. That lets other people verify the source, the context and the contents.


1) The source is included in the quote ... "now defunct Critic Magazine"

2) My source is Rev Roger Karban ... I subscribe to his weekly scripture commentary. http://www.fosilonline.com/index.php?pagekey=roger#0305

3) ""Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said” Thomas Kempis
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:01 pm

James S Saint wrote:
pilgrim_tom wrote:
Back in the late 60s...

Among those whom Paul gathered were eminent scientists, Scripture scholars, anthropologists and theologians. Their final report was eventually published in the now-defunct Critic magazine. Though their opinions differed, they all seemed to agree on two things. First, the Yahwistic author of Genesis never expected us to take her biblical account of the “fall” literally. She simply created a classical myth to explain the origins of something we all experience: a basic sinful disorder in each of our lives. Second, the actual original sin probably wasn't something our ancestors did, but something they didn't do.

It is highly unlikely that the Pope said those words in that way. And though not totally unbelievable, I hope that he didn't state that particular translation of the literal. Too many very informed people know better than to be that simple minded.


The "simplicity" of the words is the "beauty" of the message. For me ... words that are served up in exquisitely adorned vessels are much more suspect.
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby phyllo » Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:26 pm

1) The source is included in the quote ... "now defunct Critic Magazine"
No it isn't. The entire quote can't have been published in a "defunct Critic Magazine".

The author of the quote does not give the issue of Critic Magazine which served as his source.
We are unable to verify his statements.
2) My source is Rev Roger Karban ... I subscribe to his weekly scripture commentary. http://www.fosilonline.com/index.php?pagekey=roger#0305
He does not give his sources either.

:-k Seems to be a trend.
3) ""Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said” Thomas Kempis
That's why fake news and fake stories proliferate like the plague. People end up believing all sorts of nonsense.

If people verified the sources, fake nonsense would be nipped in the bud.
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9696
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: Far away from the BS

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:00 am

phyllo wrote:
1) The source is included in the quote ... "now defunct Critic Magazine"
No it isn't. The entire quote can't have been published in a "defunct Critic Magazine".

The author of the quote does not give the issue of Critic Magazine which served as his source.
We are unable to verify his statements.
2) My source is Rev Roger Karban ... I subscribe to his weekly scripture commentary. http://www.fosilonline.com/index.php?pagekey=roger#0305
He does not give his sources either.

:-k Seems to be a trend.
3) ""Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said” Thomas Kempis
That's why fake news and fake stories proliferate like the plague. People end up believing all sorts of nonsense.

If people verified the sources, fake nonsense would be nipped in the bud.


Phyllo ... you make a very valid point ... yet ... you also infer the entire Bible ... the entire Sanskrit Scriptures ... the entire Quran ... the entire Buddhist Scriptures and so on ... are also "Fake News". Who can verify their source?
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby phyllo » Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:13 am

Phyllo ... you make a very valid point ... yet ... you also infer the entire Bible ... the entire Sanskrit Scriptures ... the entire Quran ... the entire Buddhist Scriptures and so on ... are also "Fake News". Who can verify their source?
Well, yeah. A lot of people think it is fake. A fair amount of effort goes into trying to figure out who wrote what, when and why.

The bottom line is that you can't depend on what's written in those books. You have to be prepared for the possibility that all of it is fiction.

Fortunately, life is not a book.
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9696
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: Far away from the BS

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:34 am

phyllo wrote:
Phyllo ... you make a very valid point ... yet ... you also infer the entire Bible ... the entire Sanskrit Scriptures ... the entire Quran ... the entire Buddhist Scriptures and so on ... are also "Fake News". Who can verify their source?
Well, yeah. A lot of people think it is fake. A fair amount of effort goes into trying to figure out who wrote what, when and why.


Yeah ... even when we are able to state the 4 w's unequivocally ... we remain unable to confirm the source ergo ... God, Krishna, Abba, Yahweh and so on.

phyllo wrote:The bottom line is that you can't depend on what's written in those books. You have to be prepared for the possibility that all of it is fiction.


Perhaps ... yet practically speaking ... so much over such a long period of time ... in such a diverse geography ... suggests there may be some 'truth' in all of it.

phyllo wrote:Fortunately, life is not a book.


Really? For me ... life is a 'book' ... with paragraphs(days) ... pages (weeks) ... chapters (years) and so on. The quintessential challenge is to greet each new day as a "blank page".
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby phyllo » Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:43 am

God either exists in your life or He doesn't. The books are irrelevant. At best they give you good ideas, at worst they give you bad ideas.

The ideas are tested by living.
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9696
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: Far away from the BS

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby James S Saint » Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:39 pm

A Shieldmaiden wrote:If you wanted to create a religion everybody would embrace, how would you do it:

Make it effective.

A Shieldmaiden wrote:Perhaps make it more mainstream, perhaps invite leaders of other religions from all over the world and make it clear you consider all these religions to be valid as well and all that unscientific stuff about God creating the world in six days and creating man out of the dust of the earth is to be thrown out.

Or perhaps, given the right situation, provide the proper understanding behind those words.

A Shieldmaiden wrote:The following are some of the Pope’s statements.

-“When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so.”

That is true, the "Sky Daddy" concept.

A Shieldmaiden wrote:-“The Big Bang, which today we hold to be the origin of the world, does not contradict the intervention of the divine creator but, rather, requires it.”

As far as I can tell, the only reason that the BB is promoted is to promote that requirement. The BB never happened and God is the reason that it never happened.

A Shieldmaiden wrote:-“Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”

That's true.

A Shieldmaiden wrote:Pope Francis says there is not any room for 'fundamentialsm" in Christianty.

I can't argue much with that, although "not any room" might be a bit too strict.

A Shieldmaiden wrote:He said “A fundamentalist group, even if it kills no one, even it strikes no one, is violent. The mental structure of fundamentalism is violence in the name of God.”

But what is 'fundamentalism?"

A google search gives this definition

“a form of a religion, especially Islam or Protestant Christianity, that upholds belief in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture.”

It would seem the Pope has a problem with people that believe the Scriptures are literally true.

Well du-uhhh..

Anyone with any real education concerning the scriptures knows that the words were never to be taken literally. A "tree" is not a tree. "Bread" is not bread. "Water" is not water. The book is about SPIRIT, not OBJECTS. And more importantly, it was written for and by people of an entirely different culture, language, and concern than those of today.
Last edited by James S Saint on Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24876
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Sun Mar 12, 2017 10:39 pm

A "Biblical Call" is not a phone call! :lol:
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Mon Mar 13, 2017 5:58 am

JSS wrote:
Anyone with any real education concerning the scriptures knows that the words were never to be taken literally. A "tree" is not a tree. "Bread" is not bread. "Water" is not water. The book is about SPIRIT, not OBJECTS. And more importantly, it was written for and by people of an entirely different culture, language, and concern than those of today.



Futurism

I see that you are well versed regarding Futurism so I know where you are coming from. To those who are not aware, the Jesuits were commissioned by the Pope to develop a new interpretation of Scripture.

This is also reflected in your response. What you are saying is that one should downplay the importance of doctrine and adopt the attitude that Christianity is really a matter only of the spirit, a pleasant fellowship and that everything else is a minor accompaniment.

Which means, if science makes great discoveries, then manipulate the doctrines to fit these discoveries, which is really another way of saying....... abandon the doctrines, hence Jesuit Futurism was born.


Bible Prophecy

Human nature has not changed. Man/Woman are the same as they were yesterday and are today.

The Scriptures are just as relevant now as they were then.

The Book of Revelations means to reveal or disclose. It's purpose is to reveal crucial issues about end-time events and to prevent ignorance about the future.

Prophecy is used for two purposes, to warn and to recognise.

Because Revelation pertains specifically to the end of time, and

because we live in the closing time of Earth’s history,

this book, in particular, deserves our attention if, we want to recognize the signs and know the future and understand what is to take place.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby James S Saint » Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:01 am

A Shieldmaiden wrote:What you are saying is that one should downplay the importance of doctrine and adopt the attitude that Christianity is really a matter only of the spirit, a pleasant fellowship and that everything else is a minor accompaniment.

Which means, if science makes great discoveries, then manipulate the doctrines to fit these discoveries, which is really another way of saying....... abandon the doctrines, hence Jesuit Futurism was born.

Quite the contrary. Until you learn how to read the book, it remains merely a hearsay, probably wrong scribble. Once you understand what the book was actually saying, you recognized how relevant it is.

The use of metaphor and symbolism was alive, well, and very well used long before the Jesuits existed.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24876
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby Mackerni » Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:05 am

Well, the story says that the serpent convinced Eve to eat the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Thus Eve bore the mark of her sinful nature and to mix what good and evil were. Pope Paul VI declared that this was a metaphor, along with the original creation story, to fit the narrative of modern science and technology. If Genesis was written by a woman I wouldn't be surprised. At the end of the first Genesis chapter it declares that when Eve ate the fruit she felt ashamed of her body and she and Adam covered their bodies in shame. This is decisively a female issue, as most men, at least modern men, feel no shame when exposing their bodies. Take a look at the frequency of nude selfies by men.

The Genesis story could be metaphorically true. I don't think there was a talking snake or fruit that bore original sin. However, there had to be a point where people went from being naked to wearing clothes. There had to be some part in our evolution that decisively made us think in the duality of good and evil. The reason why Genesis, and many other parts of the Bible hold true to so many is its first messages. It repeats, "and it was good", the creation of the Universe, the creation of light, the creation of the Earth. While literally some of it cannot be true, the fact that Christians view it as good and part of divine nature, atheists could adapt, not by believing in a God, but by simply viewing the creation (us) as good. There are too many people who think we're all fucked, and most of them atheists. At least Christians believe their faithful will at least go somewhere nice when the Judgment Day comes.

A Shieldmaiden wrote: The Scriptures are just as relevant now as they were then.


Really? Tell that to the hundreds of Christian cults that told us "the end times are coming". Climate changers/global warming say the same thing. There's a lot of bullshit on both sides of the coin. Most eschatology stories revolve bad things happening, and everything getting wiped out. There is no hope for these people - both the religious and non-religious. Most people don't see what's really going on, save for a few exceptions like Teilhard, Rothblatt and Kurzweil who understand the "big picture". Many Christians will say these people are part of the Illuminati, such fools they are. It's people like them that will help us save our future, our lives and our image. I would contend that The Phenomenon of Man or The Singularity Is Near and the Lifeboat Foundation do more for people and are more relevant in our modern and future ages than any book written literally thousands of years ago.

Shameless plugs, eh...
"Anybody got a problem with the way I live? I don't want to go to Heaven if I can't get in!"
User avatar
Mackerni
 
Posts: 145
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 12:11 am

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby James S Saint » Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:19 am

It mentions a "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". Have you ever seen a tree of knowledge .. of anything?

If it was to be literal, don't you think that science would have discovered one of those laying about, perhaps fossilized by now? I can tell you where to find one. They became very common just a few decades ago. And the fruit from that particular tree still destroys paradise for the same reason now as then.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 24876
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Dogma of Original Sin Revisited

Postby WendyDarling » Mon Mar 13, 2017 8:00 am

The trick is that it's meant to be both- literal and figurative- woven together.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Next

Return to Religion and Spirituality



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users