The "original sin" doctrine & Christianity

Home Forums Urantia Book General Discussions The "original sin" doctrine & Christianity

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #36968
    Rick Warren
    Rick Warren
    Participant

    .

    Forum Friends,

    Do you think the “Original Sin” doctrine helps or harms modern Christianity?

    .Do yhttps://370w5yam0ls19yopg2kwq2la-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/ORIGINAL-SIN.pngou think the “Original Sin” doctrine helps or harms modern Christianity?

    #36977
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    Harms

    #36985
    Avatar
    Keryn
    Participant

    I do not think it is so simple as a ‘helps’ or ‘harms’.  I think there is a lot going on with regard to modern Christianity’s concept of sin and the Bible story of Adam and Eve in the form that most Christian religions continue to teach it.  In some ways, the ‘original sin’ doctrine serves as an impetus for action on the part of those who otherwise would not give a thought to the repercussions of their actions or the morality of their choices. Without original sin, there are likely some number of people who would not spend their time contemplating religion or belief in Christian principles.

    I think that remains true today; although probably less so.  Of course, it has the potential to harm, as well because it sets up this mindset of guilt and helplessness.  It’s not our fault that Adam and Eve got cast from the garden and now we are sinful by nature.  If it’s not our fault, we should not be held accountable. Therefore, sin is a myth and we can avoid responsibility for our actions.

    These are just a couple of quick examples that come to mind when pondering Rick’s provocative question.  I am sure there are many more examples of ways in which it both ‘helps’ and ‘harms’ modern Christinity (and, incidentally, humanity in general).

     

    #36990
    Rick Warren
    Rick Warren
    Participant

    I do not think it is so simple as a ‘helps’ or ‘harms’. I think there is a lot going on with regard to modern Christianity’s concept of sin and the Bible story of Adam and Eve in the form that most Christian religions continue to teach it. In some ways, the ‘original sin’ doctrine serves as an impetus for action on the part of those who otherwise would not give a thought to the repercussions of their actions or the morality of their choices. Without original sin, there are likely some number of people who would not spend their time contemplating religion or belief in Christian principles. I think that remains true today; although probably less so. Of course, it has the potential to harm, as well because it sets up this mindset of guilt and helplessness. It’s not our fault that Adam and Eve got cast from the garden and now we are sinful by nature. If it’s not our fault, we should not be held accountable. Therefore, sin is a myth and we can avoid responsibility for our actions. These are just a couple of quick examples that come to mind when pondering Rick’s provocative question. I am sure there are many more examples of ways in which it both ‘helps’ and ‘harms’ modern Christinity (and, incidentally, humanity in general).

    Interesting thought-work Keryn. Appreciate the reply. Yours too, Bonita.

    Keryn, I agree, “Original sin” and the Atonement doctrine might not have been so harmful in times past, when only the priests had access to scripture. People didn’t and couldn’t think thru the meanings behind them, that God looks like a blood-thirsty, vengeful tyrant with the maturity and reason of self-serving juvenile despot. This is devastating to western religious progress. What is most worrying, those phony doctrines place Christianity in the category of gory, mean-spirited religion. They are also lies that limit the range and reach of the only religion that claims Jesus as its savior. Because of these ill-conceived ideas, the noose is tightening around Christianity’s throat, and more so every day.  Worst of all, both doctrines conspire to feed secularism, the doctrine of ignoring God.

    #36991
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    Worst of all, both doctrines conspire to feed secularism, the doctrine of ignoring God.

    Well the good news is that God can’t really be ignored.  Sooner or later he becomes obvious and must either be accepted or rejected.  Ignoring something is just a way to pretend it doesn’t exist.  Very immature and unsustainable.

    #37002
    André
    André
    Participant

    Hi,

    Secularism, it isn’t “ignoring God” !    Summing it up will be state neutrality toward religion

    Ignoring is synonym of rejecting God …. atheism reject the idea of a God.

    Anyway, I’d like Keryn point of view. This thread is warming on the back burner.

    André

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

Login to reply to this topic.

Not registered? Sign up here.