The concept of original sin was a way of explaining how a perfect God could create such an apparently flawed people and callous, harsh world. Earth was a perfect paradise, see, with the lamb lying next to the lion. Then Eve got seduced into the idea of learning what only God should know, and disobeying His command, and cocked it all up for humanity. The crime was obvious: curiosity and challenging authority. Of course, the blame got pinned on a woman who just didn't know her place.
You have to at least respect the allegory for humanity it represents. Without curiosity and challenge to authority, their is no growth or freedom. Refusal to surrender in any degree to authority produces chaos.
heheh yeah that eve.. she was always up to something- I mean if you read genesis all the way through.. and don't realize when it was written, I could see people walking away shaking their heads it is the first book in the book.. so think that's where most people's journey on religion ends.. they read about a guy boning everything under the sun towards the end of it too.. I really have a lot of issues with the old testament but it was written way before christ came along christ did come and fulfill the prophesy.. the old testament was not changed, it already existed before he walked
Absolutely. In the His Dark Materials trilogy Philip Pullman describes "the Fall" as something positive and life-affirming; an event that defines humanity and elevates it above mere animals. If you thought Eve got bad press, check out Lilith: Adam's first wife. The idea that Adam had a wife prior to Eve may have developed from an interpretation of the Book of Genesis and its dual creation accounts; while Genesis 2:22 describes God's creation of Eve from Adam's rib, an earlier passage, 1:27, already indicates that a woman had been made: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." The Alphabet text places Lilith's creation after God's words in Genesis 2:18 that "it is not good for man to be alone"; in this text God forms Lilith out of the clay from which he made Adam but she and Adam bicker. Lilith claims that since she and Adam were created in the same way they are equal and she refuses to submit to him. As a result God casts her out of Eden. Lilith then enters Jewish folklore as a demon responsible for the death of infants. Another "lesson" for woment to know their place. All prophecies tend to be self-fulfilling.
yeah I'm not gonna get into defending the old testament.. but if you look at psalm 22:16 it describes his death.. I love psalms, can pick up a lot of wisdom there book of isaiah 53:2-12 is a good read.. also zechariah 12:10.. jesus was seen by people who didn't believe in miracles too.. his resurrection was witnessed by many- shockingly he was found missing by women who were basically cast as non trustworthy witnesses back in that day.. if you were writing a book of fiction, and wanted it believable that wouldn't have happened he was here imo.. too much evidence and truth to say he was a scam.. now the roid raged monkey who likes to go downtown..
"Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her as a covering." (1 Corinthians 11:13-15)
Before we venture into the arena of Biblical quotes, it might be worth pointing out the fact that the holy books are big enough and just vague enough to pull out singular quotes to illustrate almost any opinion. More important than just plopping down a single quote to prove a point, it makes much more sense to look at the passages surrounding that quote for further context. Then, take some time to learn about when that passage was written, who wrote it, and why it was written. Only then should you quote a passage from a holy text. to do otherwise is nothing more than engaging in political sound bite theater. Who cares what it really means; if I can pick a short phrase that proves my point then that's all that matters! Nonsense; I rarely go downtown. Thanks to crap public transportation, and a city seemingly designed to discourage driving, I stay within about a 5 mile radius of my house.
It's a bit of a pity because Religion has the potential to be (and for many people actually is) a wonderful thing. The majority of people I know who are religious are actually benefited greatly by their faith. But then thousands of people are slaughtered either in the name of, or for the sake of religion. People across the globe are being persecuted for no other reason than that it was written in a book long ago that happened to be tied in with a particular faith. Now, is this a flaw inherent in people or a flaw inherent in religion? Are these consequences part of religion? I'm inclined to say yes. While I can see the benefits of believing in a god, I can't say I would expect blind faith ever to be constructive in the long term.
It's a misconception that someone would have to be religious in order for him to believe in a creator. I do, and I'm not religious.
I assume you find this to be a contradiction, else you wouldn't have posed the question, why is that? Why is this concept foreign to you?
Check back at my earlier post which cites the definition of religion as being: "a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects". Now, you're free to find other definitions which suit your needs better, but I quite like this one. It allows for people such as walle to create a distinction between creation and religion, quite important in my mind. It's entirely possible to believe that someone or something created everything as we know it without classifying it as a "God" figure and assigning a set of beliefs to go with it. It's equally possible to assign a set of beliefs and practices without specifying a creator, though this is slightly less common (to my knowledge, which is ready to be expanded).
I can't be bothered to try to slog through what looks to be a massive mess of headaches and facepalming so I'll just assume that walle's got some idea of creation that would make most of us think he's escaped from the looney bin. All I know is that in the context of this thread there is a very distinct difference between being religious and believing in a creator(s). As long as no one's arguing that I'll take your word for it and back down before things turn into that thread.
Religion is a uniquely human phenomenon. To ask which is to blame or to praise for humanity at its worst or at its best, is to ask whether it was the clouds or the rain that flooded the fields or nurtured it.
