You'll need to direct those questions to individual pastors/scholars of different backgrounds/faiths...
Wars have been fought over those questions.
Wars have been fought over those questions.
Thought experiment
- Thread starter Silent Bob
- Start date
- Status
This is true. What's your personal take on it?
Actually, the catechism states that what Jesus washed away was ORIGINAL sin. That innate badness that we're all born with because Eve decided to eat an apple (actually, it's never stated what type of fruit it is, but apple seems to have stuck in the public concious) and give it to her husband. Because we're all descended from their wickedness, we are all born chock full of sin.
Any sin you do during your life is all on you. It can only be washed away through whatever mechanism your particular flavor of christianity favors, be it through invocation, plenary indulgence, or confession and pennance.[DOUBLEPOST=1347852413][/DOUBLEPOST]For the record, I was a DEVOUT christian once upon a time and was one sexuality issue away from going to seminary school.
Oh I get it now! But wait... didn't the original sin from the fruit of knowledge give Adam and Eve...knowledge? So does this imply that every descendant they had before Jesus was super smart from the day they were born? So Jesus taking this away could arguably be seen as him punishing man for squandering such knowledge and taking said knowledge away. That is a really interesting concept if that is the implication. Very debatable though.
Not at all...
The sin wasn't what the knowledge they gained, the sin was that they directly disobeyed god by eating it at all.
Also, the knowledge gained wasn't "intelligence" it was awareness of good and evil. Prior to that they were basically as innocent as every common animal.
Now wait, does this washing of the original sin mean that Adam and Eve's descendants(being all of man-kind) ALSO had awareness of the difference between good and evil? Or was it just Adam and Eve who had said awareness and this was just a gesture forgiving them and all of man-kind for their original folly?
Prior to Jesus's crucifixion, anyone who wasn't one of God's chosen people (aka jewish) had no chance of getting into heaven, barring some loopholes involving blood sacrifice and ritual. This is because mankind was infected with original sin, and previously only the descendants of Abraham (again, the jews) had formed a covenant to obey God's rules and overcome it. Jesus was a 'perfect' sacrifice in that he was both man and god, and so the power of this sacrifice was able to extend that covenant to all mankind and free them of original sin. You still had to follow the rules, though.
Disclaimer: again, atheist, and it's been awhile since I've actively studied religion, so my memory could be a bit off.
Disclaimer: again, atheist, and it's been awhile since I've actively studied religion, so my memory could be a bit off.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaah I get it now. So basically Christianity was meant to be the new fun club that anyone could into I assume?
On the topic of Bhudism, what I've always found funny is how the main dude the Tathagata Bhuda in some stories could be basically a tyrant. Hell, in Journey to the West he arrested a scorpion...for stinging it. This caused it to turn into a monster and almost forced the monk Sanzang to do the deed with her(seriously). Also in a Japanese story, he used his armies(because a being of enlightenment and peace needs armies) to force Fuujinn and Raijinn to be Bhudists. Whether what they did was evil or not, that is some straight hardcore world conqueror style stuff right there.
On the topic of Bhudism, what I've always found funny is how the main dude the Tathagata Bhuda in some stories could be basically a tyrant. Hell, in Journey to the West he arrested a scorpion...for stinging it. This caused it to turn into a monster and almost forced the monk Sanzang to do the deed with her(seriously). Also in a Japanese story, he used his armies(because a being of enlightenment and peace needs armies) to force Fuujinn and Raijinn to be Bhudists. Whether what they did was evil or not, that is some straight hardcore world conqueror style stuff right there.
Those are works of fiction (I'm not going to go the snarky route and call all religious works fiction... but I want to.) The founder of Buddhism and the first Buddha was Siddhartha Gautama, a man from India. Born into a wealthy family, he found the lifestyle unsavory, and left to join various religious sects at the time that practiced asceticism (extreme fasting, denial of all worldly pleasures, etc) but also found that unsavory. He founded Buddhism as a 'middle way' to find balance between the two extremes.
I did too until a few years ago. Like how I was confused how in Journey to the West there were to Bhodisatvas. I was like "Wait...isn't she somewhere else?
I've always found Sidhartha's back-story...questionable. Does anyone else wonder if was REALLY a monarch/rich-dude before Bhudaing up? I question this since his actual place of origin is still debated and since until about 400 years after Bhudism's creation it was all told through spoken word and logically the original spoken word was told from ol Sid. In one story I read he traded his royal rich clothes for beggars clothes. Well...what if he was always a beggar? What if the origins of Bhudism are that some poor homeless schmuck found a way of enlightenment and made up a really cool back-story to go with it? Because if there is anyone who could create a crazy story about themselves and believe it, it would be the homeless.
But if the rich guy story is true, what happened to old Mrs. Gautama? I'd be pretty annoyed if my spouse left me to look for enlightenment and never even left a note.
- Status