“Original sin” basically means that all humans are born in sin because of Adam and Eves sin in the garden.

This strange doctrine teaches that all humans are in sin till they accept the blood sacrifice of Jesus.
So this means that a new born baby is as “sinful” as a serial killer/rapist or one of those psychos who abuse their own children…. till of course, they accept that Jesus was killed for their sins.

This is why I believe that original sin has no solid biblical basis….

1. God is shown to be ‘pleased’ with so many people in the Old Testament… just born after theoriginal sin sin was committed. Starting right with a son of Adam…. Abel.

2. Jesus was not around for any OT era sinner to believe in, but yet many are shown to be “righteous” and were led by God.

3. God never said anywhere in the bible that all humanity in general are born as sinners, by default and that the only way to get saved is to believe that an innocent man died for our sins…. the the old testament prophets or Jesus never said such a thing.

4. God is shown to differentiate between righteous people and sinners even in the OT.

Now I am well aware that there are certain verses which are used commonly to back up the core ideas behind the doctrine of original sin. But then again, there are several more verses which contradict this doctrine… and establish that there were “righteous people”, even during the new testament. 
For that reason, it would be appreciated if those participating in this thread can hold up a discussion without simply quoting isolated verses which are normally used to promote the doctrine of original sin. It would also be good if you can address the points I have raised regarding the flaws of the idea of the original sin doctrine.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread756703/pg1

Advertisements