CONCERNING ABORTION!

P1234567890 · Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2007 5:02 am Post subject:

The way I think of it, before the apple incident, mankind was perfect, and did not sin... Adam and Eve had no impure thoughts; they were never mean, and they never did anything bad.

The apple thing caused the downfall of man, making us all corrupt and now capable of sinning (actually, incapable of NOT sinning is more accurate), whereas before we could not sin. So the original sin certainly condemned us all, and it made us all guilty because it made us sinners, but we're not guilty OF the original sin, we're guilty BECAUSE OF the original sin.

You can't be guilty of something which you did not do. You did not pick the apple, and you did not tell anyone to pick the apple, so you're not guilty of that particular crime. But because of that particular crime, you ARE guilty of other crimes which were only made possible by the original sin.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous.

sofyst · Tiger Joined: 11 Dec 2006 Posts: 830 Location: Tejas

I understand your position, P, and it is held by some Christians. My point is only that it is not held by the majority of Christians. The majority holds to the idea that that one act of Adam condemned all man in that it made all corrupt and sinful by nature (this is the idea you hold to), but it likewise condemned all because all are just as guilty of that act as Adam was. This is the 'orthodox' position.

The reason we can accept it is because we likewise accept the parallel act of Christians being righteous for an act that they did not do. Just as all man is held guilty for an act they didn't do (Adam's sin), so is all men (in Christ) held as righteous for an act they didn't do (Christ's death).

To say that all men are guilty because of Adam's sin, and then say that they are not guilty of that one act, but guilty of subsequent acts doesn't make much sense. You cannot say that all men are guilty because of Adam's sin (that is if you hold to your line of thinking). You can only say that all men become guilty because of Adam's sin, or are made capable of becoming guilty (by reason of being made capable of sinning, or by reason of being tainted or corrupted because of Adam's sin).
_________________
simul justus et peccator

the Protestant pub

P1234567890 · Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 5:31 am Post subject:

Do you understand why I have a problem with throwing someone in jail (or worse, hell) for something they did not do?

I similarly think that praising someone (or letting them into heaven) for something that they did not do is totally wrong.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous.