Why are any of us responsible for original sin?

[Honey Parallel]

Hi there, so based on this response, it seems that you would agree there isn't a direct implication in the story that God did not forgive Adam and Eve,[but rather it has been assumed so due to a lack of direct implication that He did.

I'd disagree. Evicting them from paradise and cursing them would indicate absence of forgiveness. Especially in light of later salvation and where we're told when we repent of our sins, follow Jesus, God then remembers our sins no more.

Why not forgive the first ignorant mistake "we" made and remember that no more? So that paradise could continue. And really, can it be said to be paradise, what is that defined as, when the lord of this world, the fallen angel Satan, could gain entry? Where's the back story we're not seeing that that happened.

And what paradise was it when Adam and Eve admittedly had no knowledge of the world at all. They were living in the spirit then. Pure, innocent, ignorant of the separation of spirit and matter. Pure love and peace and that habitation that would be the world wherein he who did know good from evil ruled.

I don't remember that it does.

Nor do I.

That appears to be a consequence though, not due to a decision to not forgive. It is most easily understood to have been a change of world view, of that living in a sinless paradise with pure love of life, to that living in a sinful civilisation where love lacks, men despise producing food, women despise child birth and husbands over-power their wives. Apparently these curses can all be overcome though, by exercising godliness.

Have they ever in the history of the world been demonstrated in a culture?

I don't know that they were, but I also would not be surprised to learn that they were. Do you believe it is unimaginable that they might be heirs of heaven along with the saints?

I don't believe they're in Hell.

Genesis 3:22-24 describes that it seems to be in God's wisdom that it would be quite bad for mankind to live forever when they are slaves to sin, and it becomes a recurring theme through the rest of time, that those who will rule over sin and do God's will can be forgiven and given access to the tree of life again. Revelation 2:7.

And yet in the domain where Omniscience walked in the cool of the morning there was planted two trees bearing fruit. One fruit carried the knowledge of good and evil. And the other eternal life.
Eternal life was an option.

 

[AvgJoe]

As it's described to me, original sin seems like a kind of spiritual poison that makes its victims (us, that is) inherently sinful. But how is it just to hold anyone accountable for having that poison in their veins when they never chose to imbibe it? If "original sin" refers to the Fall of Adam and Eve and the subsequent sinful predisposition of humankind, then where's the justice in blaming the Fall on people born centuries after it happened, or in blaming people for having natures they couldn't help being born with? If I was born what I am, If I had these flaws thrust upon me against my will, then why should I be threatened with punishment for them? I'm not the poison– I was the one poisoned. If it were up to me, I wouldn't be a sinner. It's a tenet of Christianity that none of us actually deserve salvation– if we neither committed the Fall nor asked to be born sinners, then what did we do to find ourselves in that position?

We are not blamed for the Fall, that is, none of us are responsible for the sin that Adam and Eve committed, only they are. We are not blamed for having the natures we were born with. Yes, because of Adam and Eve's sin, we are born with a sin nature, but for even that, we are not blamed. No, the only things we are blamed for, are the sins that we commit, each and every day.

 

[oi_antz]

Hi there again, I am pretty sure we can't discuss it here like this, like a debate. I'll just resolve those bits that I think you are asking me, and then you can say a final remark, otherwise the thread will get a clean up and could get locked. Let us respect OP's interests, I think that is the best thing to do.

I'd disagree. Evicting them from paradise and cursing them would indicate absence of forgiveness. Especially in light of later salvation and where we're told when we repent of our sins, follow Jesus, God then remembers our sins no more.

Why not forgive the first ignorant mistake "we" made and remember that no more? So that paradise could continue.

The problem appears to be that Adam and Eve did not repent, so to go on exercising sin without repentance, paradise cannot be sustained. Forgiveness cannot actually change that, only Adam and Eve could have. Yet, we see that they didn't ask forgiveness, they only felt scared and hid. But they came out and didn't apologise to God, they blamed others. This indicates that they wanted to continue living in a sinful way. With this being the condition, God decided in His wisdom that they must not be allowed to reach out and eat from the tree of life and live forever. But we also see that He has permitted some people to do that, those who have chosen to live a repentant life, who are capable of sustaining paradise conditions (Matthew 25:41-43, Revelation 21:7).

And really, can it be said to be paradise, what is that defined as, when the lord of this world, the fallen angel Satan, could gain entry? Where's the back story we're not seeing that that happened.

I don't know that back story. It appears to me that when God knows some are good seed and some are bad seed, these things become evident with time. (Matthew 13:26).

And what paradise was it when Adam and Eve admittedly had no knowledge of the world at all. They were living in the spirit then. Pure, innocent, ignorant of the separation of spirit and matter.

This seems like another unsubstantiated assumption though.. your view would probably be a bit different in absence of this assumption.

Have they ever in the history of the world been demonstrated in a culture?

My mother described a miraculous experience of childbirth with my brother. I know that it is possible for man and woman to live cohesively in love, as I have seen that too. Also, yes it is possible for people to live selflessly, and that is what Jesus Christ promotes (Matthew 5:38-42). Yes there are people who live that way.

And yet in the domain where Omniscience walked in the cool of the morning there was planted two trees bearing fruit. One fruit carried the knowledge of good and evil. And the other eternal life.
Eternal life was an option.

I think that a more accurate understanding would describe that the tree provided fruit, sustenance by way of the knowledge of good and evil. It is a subtle difference, that allows us to consider that Adam and Eve probably knew about good and evil before the fall, but had always chosen to live in a more wholesome, righteous manner. This perspective becomes more apparent when considering Genesis in context of Theistic Evolution, but it can retain that meaning in a literal reading too.

 

[Viren]

It's not like we're helpless victims to the flesh and the carnal mind. We have the choice everyday to renew the mind in the Spirit and to ignore the thoughts of the carnal mind. If we have a choice then we are also responsible for the sin we commit.

 

[com7fy8]

As it's described to me, original sin seems like a kind of spiritual poison that makes its victims (us, that is) inherently sinful.

Adam and Eve sinned, and our Apostle Paul says, "through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin" (in Romans 5:12). Also, "through one man's disobedience many were made sinners" (in Romans 5:19). So, yes sin started with Adam and Eve. And now Paul says there is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" (in Ephesians 2:2). From this, I consider that Satan's evil spirit "works in" people to cause us to sin.

Sin in us makes us degraded in our character so we are available to how Satan's evil and selfish spirit can mess us with sin-sick feelings and emotions and drives and thinking which have us sinning, instead of obeying how our Father rules us in His peace (Colossians 3:15). Satan's spirit has emotions which are confusing, cruel, nasty reacting, arguing and so unsatisfied that his spirit of such things can make us desperate for pleasure and excitements so we can feel something nicer than that awful-mess of sin. So, yes, we all have had this problem, and this infection with Satan's spirit started with Adam and Eve.

And I understand that Adam and Eve were created good. And so, of their own good selves, it was not their nature to give in to sinning, entirely on their own. But Satan's evil spirit "works". Now, ones do complain and argue and accuse God of "letting" this happen. But what we see in us and other humans can help us to see how much we need Jesus. Jesus was always meant to be the first perfect Person on this earth.

We can see how no matter how intelligent or physically strong or charming people are, or how nice and humanitarian and moral they act, they can not make themselves perfectly peaceful in God's own Heavenly quality love sharing personal and family and intimate affection. And Jesus came that we might have the eternal love life of our Father's own love. So, it is wise to first trust and obey Jesus >

"'Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.'" (Matthew 11:28-29)

 

[ViaCrucis]

As it's described to me, original sin seems like a kind of spiritual poison that makes its victims (us, that is) inherently sinful. But how is it just to hold anyone accountable for having that poison in their veins when they never chose to imbibe it? If "original sin" refers to the Fall of Adam and Eve and the subsequent sinful predisposition of humankind, then where's the justice in blaming the Fall on people born centuries after it happened, or in blaming people for having natures they couldn't help being born with? If I was born what I am, If I had these flaws thrust upon me against my will, then why should I be threatened with punishment for them? I'm not the poison– I was the one poisoned. If it were up to me, I wouldn't be a sinner. It's a tenet of Christianity that none of us actually deserve salvation– if we neither committed the Fall nor asked to be born sinners, then what did we do to find ourselves in that position?

Most theologians would undoubtedly assert that we are not held accountable for Adam's disobedience; we are only held accountable for our own sins.

Additionally, the narrative changes dramatically depending upon how one understands ideas such as atonement, salvation, judgment, hell, etc.

The predominant narrative frequently heard in the West has often involved a view of the atonement known as Penal Substitution, with a view of salvation largely being about escaping God's fierce anger and the threat of hell--a [literal] place of conscious eternal fiery torment. In other words: hell is punishment for being a helpless sinful sinner and one is a helpless sinful sinner because Adam ruined it for everyone--and so because Adam screwed up you must sign the dotted line and then God's anger unleashed on Jesus means He won't unleash that anger on you and so you can escape that eternal punishment awaiting every sinner.

This isn't the universal narrative of the Christian religion, though it is the narrative that has often gotten much of the air-time it seems.

As just one example, Wikipedia has an overview of the different approaches to the idea of the Atonement--how man is reconciled to God by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus--which exist throughout the Christian spectrum. Link here. It's certainly not perfect or exhaustive, but it's a nice starting point. Also, this isn't necessarily something Christians lash out at one another over all the time; there tends to be an overall sense that this is something that, as Christians, it is worth continuing to discuss and perhaps recognize that there is no single perfect human understanding to what is--fundamentally--a mystery of faith.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hawkins]

As it's described to me, original sin seems like a kind of spiritual poison that makes its victims (us, that is) inherently sinful. But how is it just to hold anyone accountable for having that poison in their veins when they never chose to imbibe it? If "original sin" refers to the Fall of Adam and Eve and the subsequent sinful predisposition of humankind, then where's the justice in blaming the Fall on people born centuries after it happened, or in blaming people for having natures they couldn't help being born with? If I was born what I am, If I had these flaws thrust upon me against my will, then why should I be threatened with punishment for them? I'm not the poison– I was the one poisoned. If it were up to me, I wouldn't be a sinner. It's a tenet of Christianity that none of us actually deserve salvation– if we neither committed the Fall nor asked to be born sinners, then what did we do to find ourselves in that position?

I explained Law in another thread. I believe that concept gives a very good explanation about this.

God sets up Law for the purpose of qualifying entities with freewill to enter heaven. This set of Law is quite absolute which applies to humans and angels alike. Adam broke this Law and was kicked out of Eden.

Since then humans are no longer living inside God's realm. Humans are living in a realm said to be ruled by the devil. The devil is said to be the god of our world. In such a realm, no one can keep this set of Law to its fullness to qualify him to enter heaven. You may call this situation as our "original sin", we are born to be sinful in this realm.

That's why everyone needs a covenant in order to be saved. A covenant basically says that, "since you humans cannot keep God's Law in full, you are give a chosen set of Law (such as Mosaic Law in a covenant granted to the Jews) which you can keep to a standard God specifies such that you will be save by God's Grace through Jesus Christ."

However as time goes by, say, even the Jews won't be able to keep the Mosaic Law given by the covenant granted to the Jews. A newer covenant is thus in place to save those who failed the Law in an older covenant.