Mar 14, 2017
seen from China
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Netherlands
seen from Netherlands
seen from Netherlands
seen from Malaysia
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Ireland
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China
seen from Singapore
seen from United Kingdom
seen from China
seen from Malaysia
seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from United States
Original Sin?
Adam and Eve sinned. They lost the paradise, mankind fell. Sin entered into the world. And now we're all born sinners, and need redemption. So Jesus comes, dies a horrible death just for that. Except mainstream Christianity does not believe that anymore. Not in just that anyway.
Mainstream Christianity which takes itself seriously today acknowledges that to ignore evolution and Charles Darwin's work--a man who belonged to the Church of England--is to risk looking stupid in the year 2014 Anno Domini. So they accept it, in fact, you'll find statements to the effect that 'evolution is totally compatible with our church's teachings'. What I still want to find is the creed which sets out in detail, whether or not Adam and Eve were literal hominids who received the first souls or if we should just not view their story as a literal account or something to explain the whole debacle.
Firstly, let's just for the sake of argument consider Genesis literal, even though we have mountains of evidence that totally and thoroughly disprove it as such. If Adam and Eve were the ones who sinned, then why do we have to pay for their sin? Wouldn't that be like going to jail because your parents were murderers? We didn't ask god to make us, so why the grudge against us?
Suppose you say evolution happened, but Adam and Eve were the first hominids to receive souls. Then, how is that compatible with evolution and mutation and genetics? It just isn't. And again, why do we have to pay for their sin?
Then we have the former Archbishop of Canterbury, who said Genesis is not literal. So if it is not literal, who were the first humans who sinned thus making us into sinners who need Jesus's sacrifice? And I must reiterate my question, why do we have to be held accountable for that?
Now, here is my view. For thousands of years, nothing challenged the theology of the Church as regards original sin. Then along comes Darwin and, oops, he discovers that Adam and Eve are no more plausible than the The Epic of Gilgamesh. Science gathers ever more evidence for evolution in the 155 years since. Christianity has a problem, how to justify the need for the redemption if we can't read Genesis literally? The solution: just don't. Just say we're sinners and we need Jesus and Genesis is a metaphor. Case closed. Well, if you can swallow that, it's up to you. To me, those books are spurious, they are man-made, not god-made, and they betray the scientific knowledge of the men who wrote them. Men made god in their image, not the other way round. There was no original sin, you are not a sinner, therefore, you don't need redemption, nor do you need scapegoat Jesus, who even if he was a real person, was not the son of god, or performed miracles.
The apostle Paul, or whoever wrote Corinthians, can be said to be writing prophetically, when he said: "But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." Indeed. Now let's get on with the business of living and have a healthy view of ourselves and our fellow primates, for fuck's sake.
Had to do it.