Evolution is how we came to be if this is true (which it is so far) that means no adam and eve which means no such thing as sin, which in turn means no reason for a savior. Thoughts!
Sinning is the idea of doing something that is against the will of god -which only the greatly superior “chosen ones” know. So sinning is, from the perspective of the religious pseudo philosophy fed to the masses, rebelling against authority.
@adamd, Your correct its not it was actually just a metaphor. @orla0magenta, abosultly! Where I’m coming from is that the teaching that we are born as sinners is wrong or misinturpreted reason being there was no “great fall”. and last but not least @seeker, I kinda see what your saying what is the greatly superior “chosen ones” I’m curious?
@bookofjames, what he meant was that if Adam and Eve didn`t exist then the human race isn`t tainted with the original sin. But as adam said, the truth of Christianity is shrouded in metaphor and symbolism, this literal Christianity is meant as opium to subdue the masses.
@bookofjames, Seeker does have a point, all I’m proposing is all sin started with the fall of adam and eve as the Bible says, however, if Adam and Eve and the events that are said to occur did not happen then we are not born into sin. Now this is not to say that there is not good or bad in the world by every means there are this is actually what I am studying now along with why there is suffering. Its been an interesting study so far! and by the way @seeker, @tine, @thekingofthenorth, @orla0magenta, @adamd, your all awesome for commenting and giving me your thoughts thank you!!!! Keep them coming!
@bookofjames, the mainstream church disproves evolution and instead proposes creationism which begins with the creation of adam and eve who brought about the original sin. If creationism is disproven then the validity of the whole notion of original sin collapses because the context is false.
At its core, sin as contextualized by Christianity is simply a list of motivators that lead to, in my opinion, most all destructive acts, but, we are still only talking about something that is an observable cause/effect, meaning, that even if the term sin is removed, these actions would still occur, sin is just a term humans associated to a certain type of action to create a mental anchor that make the issue more important for individuals in general,
basically, despite his argument that the original sin never occurred in the garden, my counter is that humans would have started the process anyway, that sin is simply describing something that happens anyway, the difference being that to term actions as sin the individual is attempting to overcome his base, animal impulses, he is creating a mental anchor to increase the relevance
Maybe not take it so literally? I’m definately not a Christian, but come on man! You speak about it in absolutes. There are no absolutes in life.
I go out and fuck a hooker from the tittay bar, my girlfriend doesn’t find out, I still feel guilt. In my mind I’ve still sinned. Of course there is no ultimate truth, but as long as your not a sociopath, that shit’s real. Sin in the sense that I was dishonest to myself/someone else et cetera.
@seeker, Well, as an nonbeliever, I wouldn’t say rebelling against authority.
From the example I used above, even when there is no higher power than myself (in my eyes), I can still feel what christians call “sin”. I just choose not to call it “sin”.
@tine, obviously destructive behavior would still occur, but sin isn`t “simply” destructive behavior, sin is the tendency towards disobedience inherited from the original weaklings which angered boss, sin implies guilt, lifelong fucking guilt! We were talking about sin in the context of mainstream christianity.
“Sin” and “Original Sin” are different concepts. What we are talking about is “original sin.” If we are taking the story metaphorically, as stated above, it is a metaphor for an innate flaw (ie. acting in ways contrary to ones belief system) in the human species. I dont know how you all put names when you respond but which “mainstream church” teaches against the possibility of evolutionism? Also, studying the nature of suffering sounds fantastic. I vote for desire as the cause.