The sin nature of man
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-11-2015, 10:28 AM
The sin nature of man
So last night, my ADD brain was doing it's thing and a post from yesterday that brought up the sin nature of man. This got me thinking about how we get it. So every church I have ever heard of preaches that we inherit it from our parents, who got it from their parents, etc. all the way back to Adam and Eve. This got we pondering how this occurs. (puts theist hat on briefly)

Lets assume that the sin nature is a real thing and so is the soul. As I see it, this leaves a couple of possibilities (by no means the only 2, just the most obvious IMO):
1) the soul was tainted when it was infused into the body
2) the soul is pure since it was given to us by "god" and the sin nature can override it (it really doesn't matter when the soul is infused into the body for the purposes here)

Looking at option 1. If the sin nature of man was due to a tainted soul that was provided, isn't that the fault of the manufacturer? If that is true, then it isn't mankind who is at fault here. I am willing to bet most christians would dismiss this one outright because it means that their perfect being knowingly did something inherently bad.

Option 2: The perfect soul's nature can be overridden by this sin nature, whatever it may be. This option raises many questions as well. To me, the most obvious is question is that if the soul is given by an all powerful being, then how could it be transmitted from parent to child? Bearing in mind that back when the babbale was written, people knew what they had to do to have children but they had absolutely no idea how it happened. Now we do. So how could it be transmitted? Is half from the mom and the other half from the dad? That makes no sense because of the Jeebus story. Mary couldn't have been without this nature since she had a mother even though catholics say it was immaculate. She still had a mother and still was a human, requiring the same DNA makeup that the rest of us possess. So if that is true, then it can't come from the mother since that means that Mary must have had a sin nature (which catholics would dispute).
That leaves the father. The answer in Genesis (Big Grin) regarding the offspring of Adam and Eve were boys who then had their own wives (from ????) so this further suggests the sin nature is fraternal. So, we know everything that is in semen and therefore, how is this infection transmitted? If someone has IVF, the sperm is separated from the rest of the seminal fluid and I am pretty sure that a christian believe that a baby born via IVF would have a sin nature so that leaves the sperm itself. Again, we know the makeup of the stuff so how is it actually affecting the soul that is infused after conception? Even further, how did the act of eating a magic apple screw with Adam's baby batter and still make it compatible with the egg from Eve? Why do christians think that the sin nature of man can override a supernatural force from a perfect being? How would simply removing this impurity change anything in the freewill department (if that even exists)? Wouldn't removing it show a much higher level of love and affection than just simply letting the fire you started keep burning?

I know this is probably further into this than most people go but dammit, this is really annoying. The older I get, the more apparent it becomes that christians really don't ponder the implications of their comments.

TL/DR part:
The sin nature of man is a completely stupid idea on many levels and this hat is really hurting my brain. (removes it and throws it into the dusty closet )
Any thoughts?

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
22-11-2015, 10:30 AM
RE: The sin nature of man
I would stick with your tl;dr and smoke more weed. Smokin

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2015, 11:10 AM (This post was last modified: 22-11-2015 11:15 AM by jennybee.)
RE: The sin nature of man
I don't think most Christians stop to ponder any of it. They take what is said in church at face value because the church encourages mindless thinking.

When I was a Christian, questioning God or anything in the Bible was HIGHLY discouraged. They even used the hell card if you questioned God and his word.

The church also focuses on all the good passages in the Bible and since most Christians have not actually read the Bible, they choose to believe the good parts that the church tells them. They like believing that even when their lives are going shitty, God is always there for them. Believing in God makes reality much less scary for some. Who wouldn't want their own personal magic genie who watches out for them? Since most haven't bothered to read the Bible, it's easy to believe this magic genie is a good guy. I mean, why would priests lie?! You add all these things together and it is quite easy to get people to listen to and believe what you are saying.

There are passages in the Bible that mention that sin is passed from parent to child, from generation to generation. This always seemed extremely unfair to me. But that's where the church gets it from and therefore, includes it in its teachings. It's also a benefit to the church, since no one can get away from sin (since you are born with it)--therefore, they will always have members.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like jennybee's post
22-11-2015, 03:50 PM (This post was last modified: 22-11-2015 03:53 PM by jabeady.)
RE: The sin nature of man
You're talking about the doctrine of Original Sin. As explained to me in my seminary daze, Adam and Eve were created with the ability to Not Sin™. Eating from the Tree of Knowledge™, in defiance of God's Command™, gave them knowledge of Good and Evil™, which made them aware of Sin ™. This corrupted Adam and Eve. In the Catholic Church, children are born innocent and are unable to sin until they are old enough to understand Sin™; at about age 7, they acquire understanding which corrupts them. In the Lutheran church, you are born corrupt because of Adam and Eve's sin. In other words, you inherit the guilt. That is why Catholic children younger than seven wind up in Limbo™ until Judgment Day™, while the Protestants hem and haw and invoke God's™ Mercy™.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jabeady's post
22-11-2015, 04:11 PM
RE: The sin nature of man
(22-11-2015 10:30 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  I would stick with your tl;dr and smoke more weed. Smokin

Right, but this was just something that is for all intents and purposes, a legitimate question. Xtians love to try to use science when they think it helps them (which it never has) but this is a legitimate thing if it is indeed true. Which they claim it is.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2015, 04:12 PM
RE: The sin nature of man
(22-11-2015 03:50 PM)jabeady Wrote:  You're talking about the doctrine of Original Sin. As explained to me in my seminary daze, Adam and Eve were created with the ability to Not Sin™. Eating from the Tree of Knowledge™, in defiance of God's Command™, gave them knowledge of Good and Evil™, which made them aware of Sin ™. This corrupted Adam and Eve. In the Catholic Church, children are born innocent and are unable to sin until they are old enough to understand Sin™; at about age 7, they acquire understanding which corrupts them. In the Lutheran church, you are born corrupt because of Adam and Eve's sin. In other words, you inherit the guilt. That is why Catholic children younger than seven wind up in Limbo™ until Judgment Day™, while the Protestants hem and haw and invoke God's™ Mercy™.

Right. But what I was thinking about is HOW this is passed on. It is not enough in this day and age to just say "it is so" when a testable claim is made.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2015, 04:20 PM
RE: The sin nature of man
(22-11-2015 04:12 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(22-11-2015 03:50 PM)jabeady Wrote:  You're talking about the doctrine of Original Sin. As explained to me in my seminary daze, Adam and Eve were created with the ability to Not Sin™. Eating from the Tree of Knowledge™, in defiance of God's Command™, gave them knowledge of Good and Evil™, which made them aware of Sin ™. This corrupted Adam and Eve. In the Catholic Church, children are born innocent and are unable to sin until they are old enough to understand Sin™; at about age 7, they acquire understanding which corrupts them. In the Lutheran church, you are born corrupt because of Adam and Eve's sin. In other words, you inherit the guilt. That is why Catholic children younger than seven wind up in Limbo™ until Judgment Day™, while the Protestants hem and haw and invoke God's™ Mercy™.

Right. But what I was thinking about is HOW this is passed on. It is not enough in this day and age to just say "it is so" when a testable claim is made.

You are trying to apply reason to an incoherent mish-mash of ideas. Facepalm
There's no future in that. No

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2015, 04:31 PM
RE: The sin nature of man
(22-11-2015 04:12 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Right. But what I was thinking about is HOW this is passed on. It is not enough in this day and age to just say "it is so" when a testable claim is made.

It's *not* testable. Questions relating to a superbeing capable of manipulating, violating and suspending natural law at whim or will are not subject to reason.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jabeady's post
22-11-2015, 11:02 PM
RE: The sin nature of man
(22-11-2015 04:31 PM)jabeady Wrote:  
(22-11-2015 04:12 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Right. But what I was thinking about is HOW this is passed on. It is not enough in this day and age to just say "it is so" when a testable claim is made.

It's *not* testable. Questions relating to a superbeing capable of manipulating, violating and suspending natural law at whim or will are not subject to reason.

What I was saying is that if it is indeed passable in such a manner as a virus, it should be visible. The whole thing is stupid, I know, it is just a thought that I had to flush.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2015, 06:17 AM
RE: The sin nature of man
I still do this, I think about all of the odball implications if this myth was real. I'll even post about it and get insipid apologism from some of the loose nuts around here.


The scenario you bring up highlights how this god concept fails in so many ways. Why allow "sin nature" to propagate? To allow it to propagate actually removes choice from the equation, it stacks the deck in favor of a certain outcome.

Unless this god intended for us to sin to send us all to hell, but why bother with choice or hell? Just torture people on Earth if you want, you don't need a justification if you're The Dude.

Those ancient goat herders really didn't think things through when they made this stuff up. They just ripped off Babylonian myths and stuck their god into their myths.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: