Original Sin--Born with the sin nature...
- Thread starter SeekerSeeking
- Start date
Am I the Road Runner here? Ostrich, possibly?
Feed meant to feed others to Jesus. "Feed my sheep."
This can be tricky! If you are comfortable and confident in your own social media voice, this will be simpler, as the INTENT should align with the VOICE that is communicating the message.
Above all, it comes down to INTEGRITY. Integrity is the key to overcoming the ugly “I” Mentality. Ask WHY are you involved – will your thoughts and efforts truly help to improve the current situation? Are you getting involved simply to feel included? Do you seek recognition? INTEGRITY is doing what you say you will do and is deliberately choosing your thoughts and actions based on values, rather than personal gain. Like the individual who felt she wasn’t getting anything out of her appointment, committing to something or someone and not following through, but staying involved solely for the job title, diminishes the legitimacy of their character. The “I” Mentality can destroy personal and professional relationships. Be cautious with your words and be careful with your actions.
Copyright © 2017 Connect4Excellence, LLC
If we are born innocent and good, why aren’t there at least some people who have continued in this state and remained sinless? The fact that everybody sins needs some explanation. The best explanation is that we are sinners by nature. copied DesiringGod
Above all, it comes down to INTEGRITY. Integrity is the key to overcoming the ugly “I” Mentality. Ask WHY are you involved – will your thoughts and efforts truly help to improve the current situation? Are you getting involved simply to feel included? Do you seek recognition? INTEGRITY is doing what you say you will do and is deliberately choosing your thoughts and actions based on values, rather than personal gain. Like the individual who felt she wasn’t getting anything out of her appointment, committing to something or someone and not following through, but staying involved solely for the job title, diminishes the legitimacy of their character. The “I” Mentality can destroy personal and professional relationships. Be cautious with your words and be careful with your actions.
Copyright © 2017 Connect4Excellence, LLC
If we are born innocent and good, why aren’t there at least some people who have continued in this state and remained sinless? The fact that everybody sins needs some explanation. The best explanation is that we are sinners by nature. copied DesiringGod
Last edited:
Some thoughts off the top about original sin.
It clearly isn't remotely like a personal fault, like something I've done wrong that is my own fault: it's an inherited attribute. When you read Genesis it's very easy to see the Fall as only as a child's story, or a myth phrased in an archaic and simple style - and it's so familiar and so ingrained in our culture that it is a huge cliché. Like other creation myths though it has some very deep meaning if you look closely at it. At the end of the Genesis 3 it says
"The Lord God said 'See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil...' ".
This is profound because the fault, whatever it was, has resulted in a new ability to be aware of good and evil: this has made us like God. The ability to be self-reflective has certainly been passed down through the human race for tens of thousands of years, at least. So it seems to me that "original sin" was essential to the way we experience self-consciousness, and this is most certainly a characteristic of people that sets them apart from all other living things. Does this mean that there is actually something amiss with the way our consciousness works? The views expressed in this thread are typical of the range of views in the world at large on this one.
I'm a Roman Catholic myself and I'd just like to pick up on something that may not be well known about our understanding of original sin - it's best expressed in the Exsultet, the great song of rejoicing in the Easter Vigil Mass. Here's the relevant part:
It clearly isn't remotely like a personal fault, like something I've done wrong that is my own fault: it's an inherited attribute. When you read Genesis it's very easy to see the Fall as only as a child's story, or a myth phrased in an archaic and simple style - and it's so familiar and so ingrained in our culture that it is a huge cliché. Like other creation myths though it has some very deep meaning if you look closely at it. At the end of the Genesis 3 it says
"The Lord God said 'See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil...' ".
This is profound because the fault, whatever it was, has resulted in a new ability to be aware of good and evil: this has made us like God. The ability to be self-reflective has certainly been passed down through the human race for tens of thousands of years, at least. So it seems to me that "original sin" was essential to the way we experience self-consciousness, and this is most certainly a characteristic of people that sets them apart from all other living things. Does this mean that there is actually something amiss with the way our consciousness works? The views expressed in this thread are typical of the range of views in the world at large on this one.
I'm a Roman Catholic myself and I'd just like to pick up on something that may not be well known about our understanding of original sin - it's best expressed in the Exsultet, the great song of rejoicing in the Easter Vigil Mass. Here's the relevant part:
Father, how wonderful your care for us!
How boundless your merciful love!
To ransom a slave
You gave away your Son.
O Happy fault. O necessary sin of Adam
Which gained for us so great a Redeemer!
Tolkein brings out a similar theme, that evil can bring forth a greater good than if it had not been permitted. This is from the Ainulindale and Iluvatar (God) is talking to Ulmo (the lord of waters) about the marring of Arda (the World) by Melkor, who is like the Devil:How boundless your merciful love!
To ransom a slave
You gave away your Son.
O Happy fault. O necessary sin of Adam
Which gained for us so great a Redeemer!
And Iluvatar spoke to Ulmo, and said: "Seest thou not how here in this little realm in the Deeps of Time Melkor hath made war upon thy province? He hath bethought him of bitter cold immoderate, and yet hath not destroyed the beauty of thy fountains, nor of thy clear pools. Behold the snow, and the cunning work of frost! Melkor hath devised heats and fire without restraint, and hath not dried up thy desire nor utterly quelled the music of the sea. Behold rather the height and glory of the clouds, and the everlasting mists; and listen to the fall of rain upon the Earth! And in these clouds thou art drawn nearer to Manwe, thy friend, whom thou lovest."
Then Ulmo answered: "Truly Water is become now fairer than my heart imagined, neither had my secret thought conceived the snowflake, nor in all my music was contained the falling of the rain."
Speaking from a religious point of view, as opposed to an atheist perspective, when I look at the scale of the Universe in terms of its extent, its duration, and its complexity, it seems that a lot of trouble has been taken to evolve us. I think it is a fallacy that an "all powerful" God can simply create anything he wants to "just like that" - it may well be that all this apparent work has to be put into creation if He wants people who are not simply robotic automata with no independent spirit at all. Now looking at the trouble that has gone into the World, it seems to me that none of us will be allowed "to go to waste" needlessly. That doesn't mean the journey is an easy one, because it has to be freely chosen and acted upon, and may well extend beyond our present life. It seems likely to me that the only people who will not complete the journey are the ones who ultimately refuse to, in full understanding of what that means - because He will not force us. I should add as well that I personally think there are many different ways for each of us to make that journey.Then Ulmo answered: "Truly Water is become now fairer than my heart imagined, neither had my secret thought conceived the snowflake, nor in all my music was contained the falling of the rain."
Last edited:
Just because someone doesn’t remain “free from sin” doesn’t mean they weren’t born innocent and good.
That’s a total false equivalency and projection of your religious values on other people who are free from your judgements.
Some people DO continue in this state of goodness (imperfection doesn’t equal sin and lack of goodness) - the fact the everyone sins doesn’t need any more explanation than we are imperfect and were created to be imperfect in order to learn - so who is deciding what is a sin or not, the Bible, ultimately you (based on your interpretations and beliefs)?
"The best explanation is that we are sinners by nature.” in other words...we are not perfect and make mistakes.
Also...your question - "If we are born innocent and good, why aren’t there at least some people who have continued in this state and remained sinless?”
Says who?
God?
Jesus?
The Bible?
Your church?
Pastor?
You?
The Christian definition of “sin” is not settled upon...well, I take that back - it’s settled in most “Christians’” minds.
But hey, we are not a Theocracy...we can agree upon the laws of the land, and even a certain number of “morals”...but religious law has no place in public law-making in a country with freedom of religion and from religion.
I don’t see a world full of “sinners”...in fact, personally I find that view to be pessimistic, assumptive, hateful, judgmental, and flat out ignorant.
Why would God punish us for sins He incorporated in us in the first place (original sin)?
That’s a really negative way to look at the world and the people contained within I feel.
No one is perfect...but...I also don’t feel we are all sinners with only one way of redemption.
Last edited:
February 2, 2009
An Infant’s Burial
Fr. Steven Kostoff, Rector of Christ the Savior / Holy Spirit Church, Cincinnati, OH, recently posted to his congregation some reflections on the burial of a newborn child. They speak eloquently to this tragic yet thoroughly Paschal event. We include portions of them here for their pastoral sensitivity and their illustration of the depths and power of the theological message expressed by the burial service.
Yesterday, we served The Order for the Burial of an Infantover and on behalf of a two-day old boy, who died at Children’s Hospital on Saturday.
Humanly speaking, there is nothing more heartbreaking than this: a tiny infant dressed in white baptismal clothes, lying in the middle of the church in a coffin that looks more like a small box, surrounded by his grieving family and friends. With an open casket, I was deeply struck by the innocence, purity and beauty of this “undefiled infant,” as he was called in the funeral service. It was difficult not to keep returning to his coffin and looking at him. Here was an indelible image that will always remain with me. In addition, we witnessed his poor mother, still recovering from giving birth on Friday, together with a father who was momentarily elated with the birth of his firstborn son, joined together in mutual grief at their little son’s burial service. The initial impact of death is that of irrevocable lost. This is why we sing so realistically, “I weep and wail when I think upon death ...”
We use a completely different funeral service for infants, basically meaning children under the age of seven. This was the first time I had ever served this particular funeral office in my years as a priest. I was struck by the beauty of the service, the certainty of an infant’s entrance into the Kingdom of God, and the complete absence of prayers for the “forgiveness of sins” of the departed infant. There is no sin for which he needs to be forgiven — including so-called “original sin.” The service explicitly states that “he has not transgressed Thy divine command” (Ode 6 of the Canon); and that “infants have done no evil” (Ode 9 of the Canon). Since transgressing the divine commandment is inevitable in a fallen world, we pray over a departed adult that God will forgive his/her sins. But for an infant, the service repeatedly refers to the departed infant as “undefiled,” “uncorrupted,” “most-pure,” “truly blessed,” and even “holy.” This is not sentimentalism meant to make us feel better. It rather reveals a profound theological truth.
A child, according to Orthodox Christian teaching, is not born a “guilty sinner.” A child is not baptized in order to wash away the stain of “original sin” with its attendant guilt. We believe that a child is born bearing the consequences of “original sin,” often referred to as “ancestral sin” by Orthodox theologians precisely in order to distinguish it from “original sin.” The consequences of ancestral sin are corruption and death. A child is born into a fallen, broken, and corrupted world, grievously wounded by sin and death. There is nothing sentimental in that assessment of our human condition! Disease and physical deformities are a part of this world, caused by humankind’s initial alienation from God—and providentially allowed by God. Thus a child is never too young to die. And hence the tragic nature of life, nowhere more clearly revealed than in the death of an innocent infant. An infant is baptized in order to be saved from the consequences of the ancestral sin that lead each and every person inevitably to sin and be subject to corruption and death. The child needs to be “born again of water and the Spirit”—the Mystery of Baptism—in order to “put on Christ” and the gift of immortality that is received only through sacramentally partaking of the death and resurrection of Christ.
The entire funeral service was permeated by the sure hope and conviction that this little child has been “translated unto Thee,” and that he is now “a partaker of Thy Heavenly good things.” (Ode 6 of the Canon). His death is treated realistically, and the pathos of an uncompleted earthly life is clearly acknowledged. Yet his death is his entrance to life with God in His eternal Kingdom:
By Thy righteous judgment, Thou hast cut down like a green herb before it has completely sprouted, the infant that Thou hast taken, O Lord. But, as Thou hast led him unto the divine mountain of eternal good things, do Thou plant him there, O Word.
The sword of death has come and cut thee off like a young branch, O blessed one that has not been tempted by worldly sweetness. But, lo, Christ openeth the heavenly gates unto Thee, joining Thee unto the elect, since He is deeply compassionate. (Ode 5 of the Canon)
O Most-perfect Word, Who didst reveal Thyself as perfect Infant: Thou hast taken unto Thyself an infant imperfect in growth. Give him rest with all the Righteous who have been well-pleasing unto Thee, O only Lover of mankind. (Ode 3 of the Canon)
The suffering hearts of the mother and father are not forgotten in the prayers of the service, expressed with a certain rhetorical style that may no longer be fashionable, but which retains a genuinely poignant realism:
No one is more pitiful than a mother, and no one is more wretched than a father, for their inward beings are troubled when they send forth their infants before them. Great is the pain of their hearts because of their children ... (Ikos following Ode 6 of the Canon)
This is further intensified in a hymn that seeks to articulate the words of the infant as if he could communicate with those left behind. Here we find a realistic acknowledgment of intense grief, suffused with a certain hope that God can bring relief to that very grief:
“O God, God, Who hast summoned me: Be Thou the consolation of my household now, for a great lamentation has befallen them. For all have fixed their gaze on me, having me as their only-begotten one. But do Thou, Who wast born of a Virgin Mother, refresh the inward parts of my mother, and bedew the heart of my father with this: Alleluia.” (Ikos following Ode 6 of the Canon)
These hymns and prayers are profoundly comforting, not primarily for psychological and emotional reasons, but because they reveal what is actually true: that Christ has overcome death, trampling it down on our behalf by His glorious Resurrection. Death itself has been transformed from within. Horror and darkness give way to hope and life. The healing grace of God does not come through pious, psychological or emotional sentiment, but through the awareness of this Truth as it penetrates our minds and hearts through the gift of faith. What other kind of “comfort” can there be when parents, relatives and friends must bear the cross of the death of a beloved infant? Grief and sorrow over such a loss never leave us, but they can be transmuted and transformed in time by the joy of knowing God’s love, poured out to us through His beloved Son and our Savior, Jesus Christ.
D
Deleted member 16771
I was going to say, in the worldview of many Christian traditions, free will is not achieved until the age of seven, and this is why such children are considered to be sinless, as @Milktoast Bandit pointed out.
I go back to Savonarola - this is what he preached. By definition in this system, if you don't have free will then you are moved entirely by the Grace of God. It's a zero sum game.
In fact, this is why Savonarola essentially took control of the streets of Florence with a gang of children - they were considered to be sinless and moved only by God's grace as a 'holy scourge' upon the city. They went around breaking up gambling games and various things like this. They were are real terror, primarily because of the strange salvationary authority that children possessed in this belief system.
There's a separate issue with unbaptised Children, which was addressed in the Benedictus Deus of 1336.
I go back to Savonarola - this is what he preached. By definition in this system, if you don't have free will then you are moved entirely by the Grace of God. It's a zero sum game.
In fact, this is why Savonarola essentially took control of the streets of Florence with a gang of children - they were considered to be sinless and moved only by God's grace as a 'holy scourge' upon the city. They went around breaking up gambling games and various things like this. They were are real terror, primarily because of the strange salvationary authority that children possessed in this belief system.
There's a separate issue with unbaptised Children, which was addressed in the Benedictus Deus of 1336.
I'd love to have seen that (from a safe distance!) :lol:
I must say that I don't find the issue of the Fall anything other than a curiosity as far as my own faith is concerned. I certainly don't accept that the creation myth in Genesis is an account of a real set of events although as a myth it has merit when applied with wisdom - in any case there are two distinct accounts in Genesis 1 and 2 that seem to have been butted together without a serious attempt to integrate them by the people who compiled the earliest written Jewish scriptures.
The way the earth formed billions of years ago, and the way life appeared and then evolved naturally, are "miracles" enough to my mind whether you come with an atheist or religious perspective. It seems pretty clear to me that modern humans didn't just appear one day out of an earlier species - it will have taken many tens of thousands of years (if not more) for us to evolve. We could have endless speculations on whether earlier forms of human had a souls or not and whether they were fallen or not - maybe a compelling pub discussion of course but not central to my own personal relationship with God. In fact if you look at the behaviour of our nearest relatives, the gorillas and chimpanzees, it's hilariously like human behaviour in many a social context - naughtiness and all ! So it seems to me that that at least some of the ways we behave that are considered wrong pre-date the time when we became human. When you look at things this way, the Fall as an event seems very unlikely to me.
It's so easy for these sort of things to become a stumbling block - Christ attacked the Pharisees and Sadducees for a very rule based and legalistic approach that was elitist, self-serving and locked ordinary people out, and this was partly why they executed him. My feeling is that all the great religions are like signposts pointing a successful way to go, but many people seem to confuse the signpost with what it's pointing at and get stuck at that point.
It's hard to write this sort of thing without the possibility of treading over someone's boundary. For example there are Christians who take the Bible story literally and I'm not in the game of trying to argue differently here - I'm just saying where I'm at myself. In terms of my own spiritual journey, I love talking about these things, but my attention is onwards and upwards rather than looking back at what is behind us.
The way the earth formed billions of years ago, and the way life appeared and then evolved naturally, are "miracles" enough to my mind whether you come with an atheist or religious perspective. It seems pretty clear to me that modern humans didn't just appear one day out of an earlier species - it will have taken many tens of thousands of years (if not more) for us to evolve. We could have endless speculations on whether earlier forms of human had a souls or not and whether they were fallen or not - maybe a compelling pub discussion of course but not central to my own personal relationship with God. In fact if you look at the behaviour of our nearest relatives, the gorillas and chimpanzees, it's hilariously like human behaviour in many a social context - naughtiness and all ! So it seems to me that that at least some of the ways we behave that are considered wrong pre-date the time when we became human. When you look at things this way, the Fall as an event seems very unlikely to me.
It's so easy for these sort of things to become a stumbling block - Christ attacked the Pharisees and Sadducees for a very rule based and legalistic approach that was elitist, self-serving and locked ordinary people out, and this was partly why they executed him. My feeling is that all the great religions are like signposts pointing a successful way to go, but many people seem to confuse the signpost with what it's pointing at and get stuck at that point.
It's hard to write this sort of thing without the possibility of treading over someone's boundary. For example there are Christians who take the Bible story literally and I'm not in the game of trying to argue differently here - I'm just saying where I'm at myself. In terms of my own spiritual journey, I love talking about these things, but my attention is onwards and upwards rather than looking back at what is behind us.
So wrong. We all know how you feel and how I feel by now.
quote: Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. Wikipedia
To me, religious values are personal. Sharing what one feels is called talking.....or posting. My very own religious values have become a way of life for my own self. For someone to think they must protect everyone from something I said?
Nobody here is trying to control your internet speech or trying to take away your right to speak freely about your values, religiously derived or otherwise.
D
Deleted member 16771
Personally, I never detected any hostility in this discussion. I'm sure Skarekrow was just making a point rather than a personal attack.
So wrong. We all know how you feel and how I feel by now.
quote: Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. Wikipedia
To me, religious values are personal. Sharing what one feels is called talking.....or posting. My very own religious values have become a way of life for my own self. For someone to think they must protect everyone from something I said?
Again...you are not persecuted.
I am not one to speak of restricting anyone’s free speech...not once...it seems you want to censor me JustMe.
And I am not telling you what you can or can’t say or can or can’t believe - I’ve stated that several times just in this thread alone, because every time I try to “talk” (“It’s called talking” - Don’t be fucking patronizing) you have to twist things around to make it seem as if I am attacking you and your religion.
So yeah, that’s your out of control ego.
You can choose to believe anything you want JustMe...my original post is not addressed to you...and you can surely express your opinions on what you feel is wrong with my post...but then don’t get all butthurt when I express my opinions of what I view is wrong in your thinking back at you.
2nd grade BS.
You want to see me lay into your religion JustMe?
I actually DO think that is what you want...then your victimization will be justified in your mind.
Put me on block if you don’t like what I say - otherwise STFU if you can’t say anything nice or speak to me without being patronizing and condescending.
Good day.
Exactly correct.
Do you detect it now?
Cause he certainly pisses me off with this crap.
I was not attacking anyone.
So unnecessary.
Last edited:
*eye roll*
Sure, just write me off as imaginative and/or vain - aka crazy.
Much easier to do than try to understand the perspective of another person.
(You sure don’t know how to drop a subject before it gets really ugly.
)But then you couldn’t play the victim anymore as you defend from me, your (lol) “attacker".
lmao
Go ahead, pass more judgement on me...your fully informed judgement...your not at all superficial/thin as a paper-plate judgement and opinions formed on minimal human interaction over a forum.
(You know nothing about me actually)
God gave me this vivid imagination.
Are you saying he made a mistake?
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 16771
I had a friend in primary school (elementary), who used to sing when he got into fights.
'feel the heat, feel the heat!' and then he would beatbox the drums and everything. Would really throw them off.
He never won, mind...
'feel the heat, feel the heat!' and then he would beatbox the drums and everything. Would really throw them off.
He never won, mind...
@just me it's with some hesitation that I'm making this comment, but I'll have a go.
It seems to me that you feel you have a very deep commitment to Christ. I think the problem you are facing is that you are bringing yourself to these discussions in a way that can't appeal to dominant intuitives, and that is so sad because you very likely have valuable things to say. It's as though you are trying to get through a wall that has no door in it, but you keep on knocking as though there was one. Maybe you need to think about going around the wall instead? To put it explicitly, Ni dominant people build very complex inner models of the world. With something as profound as a spiritual perspective they will have spent a lot of time and energy on this - they won't modify their views quickly and easily when new input is at variance with their insight and will react defensively if pushed too hard. I know this is the way I am - perhaps you are like this yourself too?
What dominant Ni's do very well – again, this is what I do - is to suspend judgement, listen, express their own ideas non-judgementally, clarify through discussion, throw in some humour, and over time all these new ideas help their inner vision to grow, often in ways they never expected. It is a rare privilege to find a group of people like we have in this forum who see and think about the world in our own kind of way. At our best we tread lightly on other people's visions when we are on their territory and treat others as guests when they are on our own.
When I look through this thread I can see almost as many views on the topic of original sin as people who have posted, and they all seem to have been listened to courteously and considerately in the main. My own views are different from those of many others in the forum on religious topics - this is great because I can learn so much from what they bring to any discussion, and I hope others can gain something from me. I'm new to this particular the thread and in just a couple of days it has given me much food for thought and a far better feel for the topic than I had before.
It seems to me that you feel you have a very deep commitment to Christ. I think the problem you are facing is that you are bringing yourself to these discussions in a way that can't appeal to dominant intuitives, and that is so sad because you very likely have valuable things to say. It's as though you are trying to get through a wall that has no door in it, but you keep on knocking as though there was one. Maybe you need to think about going around the wall instead? To put it explicitly, Ni dominant people build very complex inner models of the world. With something as profound as a spiritual perspective they will have spent a lot of time and energy on this - they won't modify their views quickly and easily when new input is at variance with their insight and will react defensively if pushed too hard. I know this is the way I am - perhaps you are like this yourself too?
What dominant Ni's do very well – again, this is what I do - is to suspend judgement, listen, express their own ideas non-judgementally, clarify through discussion, throw in some humour, and over time all these new ideas help their inner vision to grow, often in ways they never expected. It is a rare privilege to find a group of people like we have in this forum who see and think about the world in our own kind of way. At our best we tread lightly on other people's visions when we are on their territory and treat others as guests when they are on our own.
When I look through this thread I can see almost as many views on the topic of original sin as people who have posted, and they all seem to have been listened to courteously and considerately in the main. My own views are different from those of many others in the forum on religious topics - this is great because I can learn so much from what they bring to any discussion, and I hope others can gain something from me. I'm new to this particular the thread and in just a couple of days it has given me much food for thought and a far better feel for the topic than I had before.