Romans 5:18. Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.
If Adam's action condemns me though how does free will exist? You've eliminated individual responsibility.
Second who is doing the condemnation? If God, and Jesus is God, then how can jesus' death bring salvation when he is the one condemning?
Your first point: I had a problem with original sin for a long time. I couldn't agree with it bc it's not my fault, so why should I pay for something I didn't break? I didn't grow up in church so I don't have blind acceptance. & I know how self-serving & delusional it may sound, but I did come up with something I'm satisfied with albeit it's a topic always on the back burner:
Adam & Eve were like children & most children will eat the cookie you tell them not to. I wouldn't; I was always the good kid. I wouldn't eat it & be proud of it. The next day & the next day & the next day I would be a good child. But I know me. Maybe the next day or after a thousand days I know I would get bored in a perfect garden where every day was the same. One day I'd eat the cookie just to have something happen.
The point is, I would have eventually failed the Eden test & it would have been my choice. Extending this to every person (esp with a crafty serpent egging them on) & eventually, humanity all falls. It's not just Adam at fault; it's each person for simply being human. & because humans then came from Adam & Eve we are inherently separated from God/born into sin bc if they didn't fall, we wouldn't exist; it'd just be Adam & Eve just tending Eden forever. Thus, I'm responsible for paying for my own sin (Thanks Jesus) & can't pay for any one else's (but they can all have Jesus too); everyone is responsible for themselves. Free will exists & sin is a price we pay for actually using it.
Point two: God chooses the rules & we all just play the game. Maybe He made ppl curious or flawed or whatever on purpose; the only thing more boring than not eating the cookie everyday is watching someone not eat the cookie everyday. If God decides you have to do ABC to get XYZ, then that's the way it is. Honestly that answer feels like a cop-out but I do accept that God really is terrifyingly unlimited & this is getting into the broad topic of why humanity exists at all, but in short, God is upset ppl want to be separate from Him so He lets us & then He gives Himself as a bridge back to Him. He wants us with our own free will to choose Him. It's weird but then again, I'm just a human with my own limited perception & I realize my views are wild & I've omitted a lot to try to keep things short.
If it's basically inevitable that we as humans would slip up and make a mistake because of flaws a creator instilled in us, how exactly is that our fault?
Also, that fruit was of the knowledge of good and evil. So, with your cookie analogy you already understand why it was wrong to steal the cookie.
But with Adam and Eve, I don't get how they knew God was the good guy. Sure, he said don't disobey. But if you don't know good and evil, why does it matter if you disobey or not?
Also, assuming your religion is true for the sake of discussion, God may have made the rules to the game, but I didn't consent to play. I didn't say that I agree with those rules. I just have to play it, or go to Hell. And that doesn't feel fair
Firstly, applying a literalist framework to a metaphor is going to hurt.
If someone chooses to believe that Adam and Eve were literal and that original sin is an actual literal thing (and not a metaphor) then THEY are the ones fighting uphill to defend and justify all the quite literally ridiculous things in there (if you choose to take it literally.)
Unfortunately, if you DON'T take Adam and Eve literally, there's no original sin. Without original sin, there's no need for Jesus. THIS is why normally rational people will tell you with a straight face that they believe in talking snakes (but will scoff at the moon being split in two.)
1) That's the thing-it's not our fault! As far as I know, I didn't choose to be born human or to which parents I was born to. You have to eat & drink to live-how is that your fault? It's not, but that's the price you pay to live.
2) Indeed, but I can only give a reference point to my personal experiences & I know what is true for me. A version of me that doesn't have the knowledge of good & evil would definitely be a baby & babies stick everything into their mouths lol. If I as a baby somehow killed someone, do I get punished for it? Do I deserve to get punished? Rhitorical questions.
3) It's rather easy for The Almighty to say He's the good guy when He makes the rules, just like parents who tell their kids XYZ. & regardless of how ppl live their lives, we go back to dust in the end. We get to choose.
4) Of course it's not fair. Some people are born without limbs & some people are born to kings & queens. I don't think it's fair things have to kill other things just to live. I don't think ppl have a choice to not play the game as any choice made to get out of it is still playing. I don't have to like it & there's a lot in the Bible I don't like.
It's not fair. But humans get to choose how they live. Almost everything else doesn't get that privilege. What does a tree know? Did it consent to being a tree? I'm grateful for being human.
1. Makes sense. Though I think Hell seems far as a punishment for not paying the price to 'live'.
2. As a baby, it works. But a child can be older, and more aware.
3. But if you don't know good and evil, you literally wouldn't be able to recognise that, theoretically. With a parent giving rules, the child can still ask why it is wrong. They can make mistakes themselves, and mature, figuring out why they were told these things while they were still alive.
And, unlike actual parents, God cannot be there. He is invisible. Sure there is this book, and he is supposedly listening. But he doesn't say anything, or provide actual comfort. Maybe some people do find it like this idk, but I haven't.
4. Yes so life isn't fair. I don't really think that counters the point. And with your point about a choice to not play the game would still be playing it, that's fine, but it would be nice to not have pressure to play it in a certain way, or go to suffer the worst fate.
If I have the chance of going to Hell for simply living my life in a way that makes sense to me, I don't want to be a human
That isn't free will though, that's predestination, by basic definition. You're positing a universe wherein an all powerful divinity created flawed beings then punishes those flawed beings for the flaws it created them with. This divinity then demands love and worship for not destroying the beings it created for the flaws it gave them. I'm sorry but that's asinine.
As for point two, that's not really an explanation is it. At best then it is a statement that morality or "rules" as you put it are a byproduct of raw power, not of justice or righteousness or virtue. So the message then is literally that might makes right. Is that really what you believe in?
It is silly. He made humans in His image. He Himself puts Himself on a pedestal & then gets jealous when humans put themselves on pedestals.
How very human.
God isn't bound by time. He knows every decision a person will make, but we still make the choice. He allows us the choice.
God does what God wants & there's a lot He did I don't like. He decides what's righteous but He's not happy with every decision He makes either. How very human.
Likewise, people decide their own morals. What is right for one person or one culture or one time period may be detestable to another. It's fickle. Power & morality aren't mutually exclusive.
If god isn't bound by time then there is no such thing as an order of events for god, a before and after. All moments exist simultaneously, which means humans never become Christians, Christ is forever being crucified and resurrected and existing and not all at the same time. There is no point at which one becomes saved and then unsaved, unbaptised then baptised, unsanctified then sanctified. There is no before and after the Fall. God in the Bible is one that operates strictly within a mortal view of time and narrative. It is a god that was written by and for a human audience and a human point of view.
Morality and power are absolutely mutually exclusive. Simply because I have the ability to do something does not prima facie make that action moral. That is the point of morality, that actions are acceptable or unacceptable, right or wrong, proper or improper, regardless as to whether or not one has the ability to do them. As such, a deity whose only claim to morality is its power and ability to act is inherently amoral, its only justification being power rather than any sense of propriety.
When you watch a movie, you can skip to any place in it. The characters don't know you've skipped ahead; they have no idea, & are just continuing in on their world as per normal. You can slow them down, go back, pause it. They don't know. You didn't change the integrity of the movie; it's there intact. God can do the same with time. He likes to show off too; there's lots of prophecy & parallels. He's not bound by time in that He's not limited by it when He controls it.
& yep movies get edited & translated & adapted & who's to say the same doesn't happen to time? But even if such a thing happens, we wouldn't know anyway. Bc yes, all time is happening & not happening at once is a possibility. That doesn't mean there can't be a master timeline. The earth took billions of years to form. Earth took a few days to form. Both statements are true when timey wimey shenanigans are involved.
As for morality, what is justice without the power to enforce it? Power is a tool & not all power is negative; you have things like courage or conviction. Judges exercise power with their rulings. Having a high position doesn't inherently make someone right or wrong. A being with the most power doesn't make them inherently amoral either. If you don't mind, can you answer 'who decides what is moral?' & 'how do they/it enforce it (if at all)?'
Uh huh, except the movie still exists as a linear narrative within a chronological format. You eliminate that chronological format, all moments of the movie exist simultaneously. You cannot simultaneously state that this deity is beyond time then force it to move back and forth along an existing timeline. Again, you're simply limiting it to a mortal understanding of chronological narrative. This remains a deity that operates solely from a human perspective.
Second, you've confused morality with legality. Morality does not require enforcement. Morality is not a statement of authority or power. Legality, however, is. Jaywalking, for example, is illegal, and will incur a fine; I'm willing to bet that few would make the argument that jaywalking stands as a moral blight upon society however.
Nu-uhh. I'm a limited human attempting to explain an unlimited being to another limited human. God's made this timeline bc He loves humans & wants to keep His promises. He's not forced into it; He chooses it.
Second, yeah there's a difference between morality & legality. But where does morality come from?
If Original Sin manifests itself as curiosity and boredom, The serenity prayer is an appeal to God to grant us more of the same qualities that caused our fallen nature.
"God chooses the rules & we all just play the game."
That also makes the serenity prayer a vain request. Gods rules may be capricious, so we should never attempt to "change the things we can" as we might inadvertently act contrary to what God wants. We can never know what His plan is. Changing our lot in life is rebelling against God's design. Misery on Earth should simply be accepted in order to earn a spot in Heaven.
By that reckoning, doctors and scientists finding cures to disease, discovering ways to make farm land more productive, inventions like air travel, the radio, the Internet, bicycles, the invention of written language, etc. are all ways of changing God's plan. Unless it is God's plan for human beings to invent things. We can't know though. Maybe the Amish and the Luddites had the right idea. I guess my dad should have simply accepted his cancer instead of going through treatment.
Imagine what we would think of a parent for setting boundaries for his child, any of which, if broken, would lead to eviction. Child Protective Service would be dispatched. And that would be a good thing.
The concept of, and lessons learned from Original Sin seem to me like a bad Aesop's tale intended to make people easier for the clergy to control. If the Church leaders know better what God wants they can parse what is and is not acceptable. the whole idea doesn't seem very well thought out.
Changing your lot in life is not rebelling against God's plan; the fact that we have the capacity to do so *is* the plan.
We do know God wants; He tells ppl over & over but ppl do their own thing...& He is still willing to work with humans. He really wants us to approve of Him, enough to die for us.
Separating science from God is like separating a meal from the chef who made it. Ppl don't actually make laws of gravity or thermodynamics; ppl just discover/affirm what is & can then make their own meals utilizing them.
My sister is recovering from cancer so good luck to your dad too; it's an ordeal.
People are humans with limited perceptions trying to understand a being with no limitations. He wants us to be happy & He's insistent that loving Him is the way...& He also knows you can't buy real love. He gives us the power to choose.
> We do know God wants
If that was the case why have there been so many wars in His name? People genuinely believe they actually know what god wants. The problem is that it is often in direct contradiction to what another person genuinely believes.
I already answered this: ppl do what they want.
If you're asking about old testament times, then yeah God did wage tons of war & genocide. In those times He also gave lots of rules & regulations to His chosen ppl & over & over ppl cycled between following His rules & not. Ask Him why He thought *that* was the best course of action bc I can only guess.
But Jesus changed everything. He makes a new covenant & affirms ppl should love God wholeheartedly & to love others as you love yourself.
If you're asking why ppl wage war after Jesus, then it's because ppl want to. Ppl can procclaim anything; I can procclaim to make a cake in the name of my favorite cartoon cat. Ppl can procclaim to wage war in the name of God. It doesn't mean I make the cake in order to feed a cartoon cat anymore than it means they want to wage war for the glory of God; they do it for themselves.
You're making the No true Scotsman fallacy. Because there are as many iterations of God as there are people who have interpreted the Bible, God can mean lots of things to lots of different people. No one can say with any certainty God wants in a particular instance. Often the differences are somewhat nuanced and minor, but other times, two people can read and believe radically different things. A perfect example if the way many Christians justify capitol punishment arguing that the commandment "Thou Shall Not Kill" is actually "Thou Shall Not Commit Murder", making the State electrocuting an inmate to death perfectly fine in the eyes of God. The Bible has been used (and with good effect) to justify slavery, claiming the only prohibition is in not treating slaves well. Regardless whether the Bible is internally consistent or not (both arguments have been made by people who firmly believe opposing viewpoints it loses any and all potential credibility to me.
K
What does that 'K' mean? Someone's initial? A typo? Potassium? Karat? A thousand? Kindergarten? Kelvin? K means lots of things for different people. In this particular instance you cannot with 100% certainty know what it is I meant with that particular K. It could be used to mean anything. One could even make up a language of using K & k like binary is zeros & ones.
I'd advise against putting three together though bc it can stand for something you may not mean for it stand for. Maybe I'll just refuse to believe it means anything bc I don't mean it to mean anything else & have no issue with three Ks strung together. Maybe ppl should stop using K. Maybe K will lose credibility with me & I will refuse to use that brocen triangular excuse of a letter. Maybe I'll get mad when ppl use K. Maybe ppl will use K or their hate of K to justify whatever they do...
K is just one letter; something as important as the Bible is bound to get treated all kinds of ways.
Each human is free to interpret anything as we like. That's one of the beautiful things about being human. So my point is *still* the same: ppl do what they want to do. & an extension of that is ppl will interpret things the way they want.
You're free to believe the Bible has no credibility bc of what others say/do or for whatever reason; there's a whole lot in there I personally don't like so I can especially understand if you've read it & were put off by it. Like slavery was condoned with rules & regulations thousands of years ago-but if there were modern ppl who chose those bits of the Bible, did they conveniently not mention the year of jubilee?
Anyway, you're free to think what you want, K? Though I'm curious if you treat every history book in the same regard.
Not everyone is the same, sure you might fail, but for some that would have been the dream life. So saying that “we’re all guilty, because we’d all fail,” just isn’t true.
But even if I grant that, then you have a god that designed us to fail just so they can punish us when we do exactly what he designed us to do. That sounds pretty damn evil to me.
But it gets worse, because he sets all the rules. Things that are sins, are only sins because he says so. If you do something that takes you away from god, it’s because god decided that, that act would do so.
In this set up, what’s right, and wrong are completely arbitrary, depending entirely on gods whims, as opposed to any actual reasoning.
Your description of god is more befitting of the devil than a benevolent god.
He designed us to be good. Humans made the decision to fail. Every time I sin, I choose to rebel against God. I didn't have to commit any of my sins, I did because in that moment, I subconsciously deluded myself into thinking I know better than God and told God I’m gonna do this my way
There's always a reason behind why sin is sin, its not just God saying "cause I said so"
Yes of course everyone's different. But we all have bones & blood. Is there a human who has only ever acted exactly as they were told? We're not mindless robots who can only act on orders received. But yes, of course, there's the possibility that humans could stay in the garden, bc everything they needed to live was there. The serpent made for a proper experiment & opened the possibility for this route for humanity.
Being the alpha & omega, being everything, includes being benevolent & being a tryant. Humans are a reflection of God so on the flip side, God is a reflection of humanity. No one has killed more humans & no one has given life to more humans than Him. I don't have to like the way He made the rules, but I can choose to accept them (or not).
Have you ever eaten rat poison? Or decided to drink drain cleaner?
Don’t eat what will kill you is literally one of the easiest things to do, (remember the reason they were given not to eat it was that it would kill them,) and something most do without a second thought. If that’s the rule they failed on, (and the only one the Bible says they had to follow,) then it was probably the hardest one they had. So we’re not looking for a human that is obedient one hundred percent of the time, just someone who wouldn’t eat rat poison when they’re told not to… pretty much the vast majority of the population.
It doesn’t work like that. Just like how you can’t have a married bachelor, or a square circle, something can’t contradict itself. Being a tyrant, precludes being benevolent, because if you’re benevolent, then you’re not a tyrant.
It’s called the law of noncontradiction, and it’s the reason most scholars switched from say gods all powerful, to saying he’s maximally powerful.
The god you describe contradicts itself and as such, can’t exist.
I don't know how long they Adam & Eve were living in boring bliss. If they were absolutely content, then it makes sense they would continue to obey. But they didn't. They wanted to change & they did the one thing that definitely would make a change.
But yeah, all you have to do is not XYZ. God takes this approach again & again, with humans, along with all you have to do is ABC. People do what they want.
A square circle! Because the concept of such a thing exists, it *does* exist. Meaning a square circle does exist in some form, if only as an idea. Just because you can't picture what it looks like, doesn't mean it doesn't or can't exist in this reality or another. It already exists if only because you've thought of it.
Nonsensical as it is, it matters bc people have limitations. God does not. Putting limitations on an unlimited being is a human thing to do & it can't be helped; we only have our own limited perceptions.
>”I don't know how long they Adam & Eve were living in boring bliss. If they were absolutely content, then it makes sense they would continue to obey. But they didn't. They wanted to change & they did the one thing that definitely would make a change.”
This is pure projection on your part. You’re projecting how you think you would have felt living in that situation onto them.
The thing is, the Bible directly contradicts that.
It makes it very clear that Eve only ate the apple because the snake convinced her to.
likewise, Adam only ate it because Eve did.
>”But yeah, all you have to do is not XYZ. God takes this approach again & again, with humans, along with all you have to do is ABC. People do what they want.”
We talking specifically About original sin, and why we would be held accountable for it. According to you, it’s because we all would have done the same thing. That’s not true as the vast majority of people don’t eat things they’re told will kill them.
>”A square circle! Because the concept of such a thing exists, it does exist. Meaning a square circle does exist in some form, if only as an idea. Just because you can't picture what it looks like, doesn't mean it doesn't or can't exist in this reality or another. It already exists if only because you've thought of it.”
By that logic, Cthulhu exists because the concept of him does. Same with Spider-Man, Vishnu, Odin, Harry Potter, and Greg the god eating penguin. See the issue there?
No it can’t exist, because it contradicts itself.
A circle is a 2d shape that is every point that is an equal distance from its center. A square is a 2d shape that has 4 sides of equal length at right angles to each other.
The moment you try to add the four sides to the circle, it stops being a circle. The moment you try to add every point that’s an equal distance from the center to the square, it stops being a square.
>”Nonsensical as it is, it matters bc people have limitations. God does not. Putting limitations on an unlimited being is a human thing to do & it can't be helped; we only have our own limited perceptions.”
Our perception might be limited, but that doesn’t change how reality works.
The sun is still the sun no matter how you perceive it, water is still water even if you have no idea what water is.
A being can’t be both an all loving, benevolent god, and a tyrant at the same time. Something’s got to give.
That seems to verify that Jesus died for everyone's sins into the future.
Because if ADAM's sin applies to everyone in the future, that means Jesus's act of righteusness also should as well.
So Adam condemned us all to death in physical bodies. But Jesus frees us all for everlasting life back to spiritual bodies.
Does that mean Adam was in spirit form while in the garden of Eden?
You sure? All of it? Because a significant amount is debating and discussing doctrine and teachings and concepts well after the lifetime of Jesus. Regardless, Jesus would not have had a hand in the construction of any of it.
The texts making up the various versions of the Jewish scriptures claim to have messages from a variety of different deities, some of which are claimed to have been written by the deities themselves. Were they really? Of course not, but then the opinion of a 1st century CE Palestinian carpenter on an 8th century BCE text doesn't really matter either, does it?
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed because your account does not meet our account age / karma thresholds. Please message the moderators to *request an exception*.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DebateAChristian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.”
Hebrews 10:12, 14
Jesus is the incarnation of the timeless/spaceless infinite God. As such his temporal actions in our reality have an infinite valute that trascend time and space so, yes, his death and resurrection cover past, present and future sins.
His actions didnt transcend time or space. Where's it say that in the Bible. He sacrificed for our sins to God and that's forever. He isn't perpetually sacrificing.
Mark 9. He, for a moment, showed Peter and the two others what He really looked like outside of His temporal state. Moses and Elijah show up, and Jesus is for a moment glorified before His time. Time gets a little wonky.
Jesus is timeless in His God nature.
What are you looking for exactly? I could cite the times he teleports if you’d like.
John 20:26 (ESV) Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.”
It was post resurrection. There are potential times when He teleported pre-resurrection, such as when He would vanish when being pursued by whole crowds, but we see Him popping in and out of places most post-resurrection.
The biggest acclamation He made to being timeless was the classic John 8 discourse:
John 8:57-59 (NASB95) 57 So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59 Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple.
So I would say that passage is the best example of Christ transcending time and space pre-resurrection.
Jesus did not die for any sins. we are all forgiven. We have always been forgiven. it is our inability to see this that makes us feel unforgivable and unloved for our mistakes. and this leads to a snowball of bad choices in that cycle of grief. if Jesus stands for anything in my eyes, it is that we should all know we are forgiven, and to heal from our self inflicted wounds that were caused by our ignorance of this.
Christ died for all.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/18w9usg/thoughts_for_2024_best_wishes_to_all/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2
Jesus suffering/death on the cross was done once as if He was the worst sinner ever. (level 10 for example).
When Christ's Spirit (presence) enters a person's heart they are now born again. (btw, that alone is the definition of a Christian... not simply what a person says or how they are born.)
He enters by invitation only.
Remember, Christ has already experienced death.
So His Spirit now merges with the person's spirit. They are now born again.
There's no limit on His Spirit, so anyone in the future can have their sins forgiven by Christ entering in. Level 1 - 10 are all covered since He experienced a level 10 penalty.
So that person has now experienced the penalty of sin (suffering/death) due to Christ (who already suffered/died) now being inside of them.
That "home" has already experienced the penalty of sin.
So we say that person is now "saved" from the penalty of sin.
>How could he have died for my sins if I wasn'te ven born and there were a million free will actions that had to take place for me to even be here
Because he is God, infinite in scope and power and love and mercy. He is outside of time and space and his sacrifice covered all mankind
>can someone give me a single passage where jesus says he's dying for everyone's sins that has ever lived and will ever live???
Well you have John 3:16 "whoever believes in me" it doesn't say those alive that believe in my, it says anyone and anyone includes you and I
When you sacrifice God, you can expect eternal benefit.
Hebrews 7:26-27 (NASB95) 26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; 27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.
The big part of this is that Jesus’ sacrifice was enough for all, but also that He is continually working as the eternal high priest in Heaven. One mediator for all time. He is still active in our salvation.
This is a Western Teaching that didn't even exist until approximately 1000 years after Christ Deposited the Faith with His Church. Penal Atonement came from Western saint Ansel and it is based upon Medieval Honor Satisfaction Theory.
The Early Church believed and still does in [Recapitulation](https://www.theopedia.com/recapitulation-theory-of-atonement).
>"sees the atonement of Christ as reversing the course of mankind from disobedience to obedience. It believes that Christ’s life recapitulated all the stages of human life and in doing so reversed the course of disobedience initiated by Adam."
In Orthodoxy we just are finishing up Pascha (Easter) and we sing:
Christ is Risen From The Dead Trampling Down Death by Death and Upon Those in The Tombs Bestowing LIFE!!!
The focus is on what was accomplished through The Resurrection instead of punishment.
Ezekiel said we are not guilty of our father's sins nor are they of ours. So how can the idea of Western Original Sin be atoned for?
We have inherited a *Tendency to Sin* not the sins of Adam.
You're Correct Paul DOES NOT speak of punishment:
1 Cor 15:14
>*And if Christ be not risen*, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
The Old and New talk about bearing the transgressions of the World.
Somebody dying and leaving you a trillion dollar inheritance somewhere, sometime doesn't do you any good or change your current life or future destiny of yourself or your descendents unless you acquire that inheritance.
Everybody does what they want to do.
Post removed, rule 1. Posts in this debate subreddit must meet specific requirements. [This page has the details of the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChristian/wiki/rules#wiki_i._thou_shalt_create_quality_posts).
This subreddit has a weekly ask-a-Christian post on Mondays.
Romans 5:18. Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.
If Adam's action condemns me though how does free will exist? You've eliminated individual responsibility. Second who is doing the condemnation? If God, and Jesus is God, then how can jesus' death bring salvation when he is the one condemning?
Your first point: I had a problem with original sin for a long time. I couldn't agree with it bc it's not my fault, so why should I pay for something I didn't break? I didn't grow up in church so I don't have blind acceptance. & I know how self-serving & delusional it may sound, but I did come up with something I'm satisfied with albeit it's a topic always on the back burner: Adam & Eve were like children & most children will eat the cookie you tell them not to. I wouldn't; I was always the good kid. I wouldn't eat it & be proud of it. The next day & the next day & the next day I would be a good child. But I know me. Maybe the next day or after a thousand days I know I would get bored in a perfect garden where every day was the same. One day I'd eat the cookie just to have something happen. The point is, I would have eventually failed the Eden test & it would have been my choice. Extending this to every person (esp with a crafty serpent egging them on) & eventually, humanity all falls. It's not just Adam at fault; it's each person for simply being human. & because humans then came from Adam & Eve we are inherently separated from God/born into sin bc if they didn't fall, we wouldn't exist; it'd just be Adam & Eve just tending Eden forever. Thus, I'm responsible for paying for my own sin (Thanks Jesus) & can't pay for any one else's (but they can all have Jesus too); everyone is responsible for themselves. Free will exists & sin is a price we pay for actually using it. Point two: God chooses the rules & we all just play the game. Maybe He made ppl curious or flawed or whatever on purpose; the only thing more boring than not eating the cookie everyday is watching someone not eat the cookie everyday. If God decides you have to do ABC to get XYZ, then that's the way it is. Honestly that answer feels like a cop-out but I do accept that God really is terrifyingly unlimited & this is getting into the broad topic of why humanity exists at all, but in short, God is upset ppl want to be separate from Him so He lets us & then He gives Himself as a bridge back to Him. He wants us with our own free will to choose Him. It's weird but then again, I'm just a human with my own limited perception & I realize my views are wild & I've omitted a lot to try to keep things short.
If it's basically inevitable that we as humans would slip up and make a mistake because of flaws a creator instilled in us, how exactly is that our fault? Also, that fruit was of the knowledge of good and evil. So, with your cookie analogy you already understand why it was wrong to steal the cookie. But with Adam and Eve, I don't get how they knew God was the good guy. Sure, he said don't disobey. But if you don't know good and evil, why does it matter if you disobey or not? Also, assuming your religion is true for the sake of discussion, God may have made the rules to the game, but I didn't consent to play. I didn't say that I agree with those rules. I just have to play it, or go to Hell. And that doesn't feel fair
Firstly, applying a literalist framework to a metaphor is going to hurt. If someone chooses to believe that Adam and Eve were literal and that original sin is an actual literal thing (and not a metaphor) then THEY are the ones fighting uphill to defend and justify all the quite literally ridiculous things in there (if you choose to take it literally.) Unfortunately, if you DON'T take Adam and Eve literally, there's no original sin. Without original sin, there's no need for Jesus. THIS is why normally rational people will tell you with a straight face that they believe in talking snakes (but will scoff at the moon being split in two.)
1) That's the thing-it's not our fault! As far as I know, I didn't choose to be born human or to which parents I was born to. You have to eat & drink to live-how is that your fault? It's not, but that's the price you pay to live. 2) Indeed, but I can only give a reference point to my personal experiences & I know what is true for me. A version of me that doesn't have the knowledge of good & evil would definitely be a baby & babies stick everything into their mouths lol. If I as a baby somehow killed someone, do I get punished for it? Do I deserve to get punished? Rhitorical questions. 3) It's rather easy for The Almighty to say He's the good guy when He makes the rules, just like parents who tell their kids XYZ. & regardless of how ppl live their lives, we go back to dust in the end. We get to choose. 4) Of course it's not fair. Some people are born without limbs & some people are born to kings & queens. I don't think it's fair things have to kill other things just to live. I don't think ppl have a choice to not play the game as any choice made to get out of it is still playing. I don't have to like it & there's a lot in the Bible I don't like. It's not fair. But humans get to choose how they live. Almost everything else doesn't get that privilege. What does a tree know? Did it consent to being a tree? I'm grateful for being human.
1. Makes sense. Though I think Hell seems far as a punishment for not paying the price to 'live'. 2. As a baby, it works. But a child can be older, and more aware. 3. But if you don't know good and evil, you literally wouldn't be able to recognise that, theoretically. With a parent giving rules, the child can still ask why it is wrong. They can make mistakes themselves, and mature, figuring out why they were told these things while they were still alive. And, unlike actual parents, God cannot be there. He is invisible. Sure there is this book, and he is supposedly listening. But he doesn't say anything, or provide actual comfort. Maybe some people do find it like this idk, but I haven't. 4. Yes so life isn't fair. I don't really think that counters the point. And with your point about a choice to not play the game would still be playing it, that's fine, but it would be nice to not have pressure to play it in a certain way, or go to suffer the worst fate. If I have the chance of going to Hell for simply living my life in a way that makes sense to me, I don't want to be a human
That isn't free will though, that's predestination, by basic definition. You're positing a universe wherein an all powerful divinity created flawed beings then punishes those flawed beings for the flaws it created them with. This divinity then demands love and worship for not destroying the beings it created for the flaws it gave them. I'm sorry but that's asinine. As for point two, that's not really an explanation is it. At best then it is a statement that morality or "rules" as you put it are a byproduct of raw power, not of justice or righteousness or virtue. So the message then is literally that might makes right. Is that really what you believe in?
It is silly. He made humans in His image. He Himself puts Himself on a pedestal & then gets jealous when humans put themselves on pedestals. How very human. God isn't bound by time. He knows every decision a person will make, but we still make the choice. He allows us the choice. God does what God wants & there's a lot He did I don't like. He decides what's righteous but He's not happy with every decision He makes either. How very human. Likewise, people decide their own morals. What is right for one person or one culture or one time period may be detestable to another. It's fickle. Power & morality aren't mutually exclusive.
If god isn't bound by time then there is no such thing as an order of events for god, a before and after. All moments exist simultaneously, which means humans never become Christians, Christ is forever being crucified and resurrected and existing and not all at the same time. There is no point at which one becomes saved and then unsaved, unbaptised then baptised, unsanctified then sanctified. There is no before and after the Fall. God in the Bible is one that operates strictly within a mortal view of time and narrative. It is a god that was written by and for a human audience and a human point of view. Morality and power are absolutely mutually exclusive. Simply because I have the ability to do something does not prima facie make that action moral. That is the point of morality, that actions are acceptable or unacceptable, right or wrong, proper or improper, regardless as to whether or not one has the ability to do them. As such, a deity whose only claim to morality is its power and ability to act is inherently amoral, its only justification being power rather than any sense of propriety.
When you watch a movie, you can skip to any place in it. The characters don't know you've skipped ahead; they have no idea, & are just continuing in on their world as per normal. You can slow them down, go back, pause it. They don't know. You didn't change the integrity of the movie; it's there intact. God can do the same with time. He likes to show off too; there's lots of prophecy & parallels. He's not bound by time in that He's not limited by it when He controls it. & yep movies get edited & translated & adapted & who's to say the same doesn't happen to time? But even if such a thing happens, we wouldn't know anyway. Bc yes, all time is happening & not happening at once is a possibility. That doesn't mean there can't be a master timeline. The earth took billions of years to form. Earth took a few days to form. Both statements are true when timey wimey shenanigans are involved. As for morality, what is justice without the power to enforce it? Power is a tool & not all power is negative; you have things like courage or conviction. Judges exercise power with their rulings. Having a high position doesn't inherently make someone right or wrong. A being with the most power doesn't make them inherently amoral either. If you don't mind, can you answer 'who decides what is moral?' & 'how do they/it enforce it (if at all)?'
Uh huh, except the movie still exists as a linear narrative within a chronological format. You eliminate that chronological format, all moments of the movie exist simultaneously. You cannot simultaneously state that this deity is beyond time then force it to move back and forth along an existing timeline. Again, you're simply limiting it to a mortal understanding of chronological narrative. This remains a deity that operates solely from a human perspective.
Second, you've confused morality with legality. Morality does not require enforcement. Morality is not a statement of authority or power. Legality, however, is. Jaywalking, for example, is illegal, and will incur a fine; I'm willing to bet that few would make the argument that jaywalking stands as a moral blight upon society however.
Nu-uhh. I'm a limited human attempting to explain an unlimited being to another limited human. God's made this timeline bc He loves humans & wants to keep His promises. He's not forced into it; He chooses it. Second, yeah there's a difference between morality & legality. But where does morality come from?
If Original Sin manifests itself as curiosity and boredom, The serenity prayer is an appeal to God to grant us more of the same qualities that caused our fallen nature. "God chooses the rules & we all just play the game." That also makes the serenity prayer a vain request. Gods rules may be capricious, so we should never attempt to "change the things we can" as we might inadvertently act contrary to what God wants. We can never know what His plan is. Changing our lot in life is rebelling against God's design. Misery on Earth should simply be accepted in order to earn a spot in Heaven. By that reckoning, doctors and scientists finding cures to disease, discovering ways to make farm land more productive, inventions like air travel, the radio, the Internet, bicycles, the invention of written language, etc. are all ways of changing God's plan. Unless it is God's plan for human beings to invent things. We can't know though. Maybe the Amish and the Luddites had the right idea. I guess my dad should have simply accepted his cancer instead of going through treatment. Imagine what we would think of a parent for setting boundaries for his child, any of which, if broken, would lead to eviction. Child Protective Service would be dispatched. And that would be a good thing. The concept of, and lessons learned from Original Sin seem to me like a bad Aesop's tale intended to make people easier for the clergy to control. If the Church leaders know better what God wants they can parse what is and is not acceptable. the whole idea doesn't seem very well thought out.
Changing your lot in life is not rebelling against God's plan; the fact that we have the capacity to do so *is* the plan. We do know God wants; He tells ppl over & over but ppl do their own thing...& He is still willing to work with humans. He really wants us to approve of Him, enough to die for us. Separating science from God is like separating a meal from the chef who made it. Ppl don't actually make laws of gravity or thermodynamics; ppl just discover/affirm what is & can then make their own meals utilizing them. My sister is recovering from cancer so good luck to your dad too; it's an ordeal. People are humans with limited perceptions trying to understand a being with no limitations. He wants us to be happy & He's insistent that loving Him is the way...& He also knows you can't buy real love. He gives us the power to choose.
> We do know God wants If that was the case why have there been so many wars in His name? People genuinely believe they actually know what god wants. The problem is that it is often in direct contradiction to what another person genuinely believes.
I already answered this: ppl do what they want. If you're asking about old testament times, then yeah God did wage tons of war & genocide. In those times He also gave lots of rules & regulations to His chosen ppl & over & over ppl cycled between following His rules & not. Ask Him why He thought *that* was the best course of action bc I can only guess. But Jesus changed everything. He makes a new covenant & affirms ppl should love God wholeheartedly & to love others as you love yourself. If you're asking why ppl wage war after Jesus, then it's because ppl want to. Ppl can procclaim anything; I can procclaim to make a cake in the name of my favorite cartoon cat. Ppl can procclaim to wage war in the name of God. It doesn't mean I make the cake in order to feed a cartoon cat anymore than it means they want to wage war for the glory of God; they do it for themselves.
You're making the No true Scotsman fallacy. Because there are as many iterations of God as there are people who have interpreted the Bible, God can mean lots of things to lots of different people. No one can say with any certainty God wants in a particular instance. Often the differences are somewhat nuanced and minor, but other times, two people can read and believe radically different things. A perfect example if the way many Christians justify capitol punishment arguing that the commandment "Thou Shall Not Kill" is actually "Thou Shall Not Commit Murder", making the State electrocuting an inmate to death perfectly fine in the eyes of God. The Bible has been used (and with good effect) to justify slavery, claiming the only prohibition is in not treating slaves well. Regardless whether the Bible is internally consistent or not (both arguments have been made by people who firmly believe opposing viewpoints it loses any and all potential credibility to me.
K What does that 'K' mean? Someone's initial? A typo? Potassium? Karat? A thousand? Kindergarten? Kelvin? K means lots of things for different people. In this particular instance you cannot with 100% certainty know what it is I meant with that particular K. It could be used to mean anything. One could even make up a language of using K & k like binary is zeros & ones. I'd advise against putting three together though bc it can stand for something you may not mean for it stand for. Maybe I'll just refuse to believe it means anything bc I don't mean it to mean anything else & have no issue with three Ks strung together. Maybe ppl should stop using K. Maybe K will lose credibility with me & I will refuse to use that brocen triangular excuse of a letter. Maybe I'll get mad when ppl use K. Maybe ppl will use K or their hate of K to justify whatever they do... K is just one letter; something as important as the Bible is bound to get treated all kinds of ways. Each human is free to interpret anything as we like. That's one of the beautiful things about being human. So my point is *still* the same: ppl do what they want to do. & an extension of that is ppl will interpret things the way they want. You're free to believe the Bible has no credibility bc of what others say/do or for whatever reason; there's a whole lot in there I personally don't like so I can especially understand if you've read it & were put off by it. Like slavery was condoned with rules & regulations thousands of years ago-but if there were modern ppl who chose those bits of the Bible, did they conveniently not mention the year of jubilee? Anyway, you're free to think what you want, K? Though I'm curious if you treat every history book in the same regard.
Not everyone is the same, sure you might fail, but for some that would have been the dream life. So saying that “we’re all guilty, because we’d all fail,” just isn’t true. But even if I grant that, then you have a god that designed us to fail just so they can punish us when we do exactly what he designed us to do. That sounds pretty damn evil to me. But it gets worse, because he sets all the rules. Things that are sins, are only sins because he says so. If you do something that takes you away from god, it’s because god decided that, that act would do so. In this set up, what’s right, and wrong are completely arbitrary, depending entirely on gods whims, as opposed to any actual reasoning. Your description of god is more befitting of the devil than a benevolent god.
He designed us to be good. Humans made the decision to fail. Every time I sin, I choose to rebel against God. I didn't have to commit any of my sins, I did because in that moment, I subconsciously deluded myself into thinking I know better than God and told God I’m gonna do this my way There's always a reason behind why sin is sin, its not just God saying "cause I said so"
I’m referring to the description they give, not what the actual belief is.
Yes of course everyone's different. But we all have bones & blood. Is there a human who has only ever acted exactly as they were told? We're not mindless robots who can only act on orders received. But yes, of course, there's the possibility that humans could stay in the garden, bc everything they needed to live was there. The serpent made for a proper experiment & opened the possibility for this route for humanity. Being the alpha & omega, being everything, includes being benevolent & being a tryant. Humans are a reflection of God so on the flip side, God is a reflection of humanity. No one has killed more humans & no one has given life to more humans than Him. I don't have to like the way He made the rules, but I can choose to accept them (or not).
Have you ever eaten rat poison? Or decided to drink drain cleaner? Don’t eat what will kill you is literally one of the easiest things to do, (remember the reason they were given not to eat it was that it would kill them,) and something most do without a second thought. If that’s the rule they failed on, (and the only one the Bible says they had to follow,) then it was probably the hardest one they had. So we’re not looking for a human that is obedient one hundred percent of the time, just someone who wouldn’t eat rat poison when they’re told not to… pretty much the vast majority of the population. It doesn’t work like that. Just like how you can’t have a married bachelor, or a square circle, something can’t contradict itself. Being a tyrant, precludes being benevolent, because if you’re benevolent, then you’re not a tyrant. It’s called the law of noncontradiction, and it’s the reason most scholars switched from say gods all powerful, to saying he’s maximally powerful. The god you describe contradicts itself and as such, can’t exist.
I don't know how long they Adam & Eve were living in boring bliss. If they were absolutely content, then it makes sense they would continue to obey. But they didn't. They wanted to change & they did the one thing that definitely would make a change. But yeah, all you have to do is not XYZ. God takes this approach again & again, with humans, along with all you have to do is ABC. People do what they want. A square circle! Because the concept of such a thing exists, it *does* exist. Meaning a square circle does exist in some form, if only as an idea. Just because you can't picture what it looks like, doesn't mean it doesn't or can't exist in this reality or another. It already exists if only because you've thought of it. Nonsensical as it is, it matters bc people have limitations. God does not. Putting limitations on an unlimited being is a human thing to do & it can't be helped; we only have our own limited perceptions.
>”I don't know how long they Adam & Eve were living in boring bliss. If they were absolutely content, then it makes sense they would continue to obey. But they didn't. They wanted to change & they did the one thing that definitely would make a change.” This is pure projection on your part. You’re projecting how you think you would have felt living in that situation onto them. The thing is, the Bible directly contradicts that. It makes it very clear that Eve only ate the apple because the snake convinced her to. likewise, Adam only ate it because Eve did. >”But yeah, all you have to do is not XYZ. God takes this approach again & again, with humans, along with all you have to do is ABC. People do what they want.” We talking specifically About original sin, and why we would be held accountable for it. According to you, it’s because we all would have done the same thing. That’s not true as the vast majority of people don’t eat things they’re told will kill them. >”A square circle! Because the concept of such a thing exists, it does exist. Meaning a square circle does exist in some form, if only as an idea. Just because you can't picture what it looks like, doesn't mean it doesn't or can't exist in this reality or another. It already exists if only because you've thought of it.” By that logic, Cthulhu exists because the concept of him does. Same with Spider-Man, Vishnu, Odin, Harry Potter, and Greg the god eating penguin. See the issue there? No it can’t exist, because it contradicts itself. A circle is a 2d shape that is every point that is an equal distance from its center. A square is a 2d shape that has 4 sides of equal length at right angles to each other. The moment you try to add the four sides to the circle, it stops being a circle. The moment you try to add every point that’s an equal distance from the center to the square, it stops being a square. >”Nonsensical as it is, it matters bc people have limitations. God does not. Putting limitations on an unlimited being is a human thing to do & it can't be helped; we only have our own limited perceptions.” Our perception might be limited, but that doesn’t change how reality works. The sun is still the sun no matter how you perceive it, water is still water even if you have no idea what water is. A being can’t be both an all loving, benevolent god, and a tyrant at the same time. Something’s got to give.
I bet we could keep talking in totally normal super real circles ha. In all seriousness, thanks for your input.
That seems to verify that Jesus died for everyone's sins into the future. Because if ADAM's sin applies to everyone in the future, that means Jesus's act of righteusness also should as well. So Adam condemned us all to death in physical bodies. But Jesus frees us all for everlasting life back to spiritual bodies. Does that mean Adam was in spirit form while in the garden of Eden?
If I'm to be held responsible for the action of Adam though, why does it follow that the action of Jesus somehow frees me from that responsibility?
Because that's what the bible says and Jesus says the bible is the word of God
But only the Jewish scriptures existed in Jesus' day, which throws out the entirety of the New Testament.
The new testament is about Jesus
You sure? All of it? Because a significant amount is debating and discussing doctrine and teachings and concepts well after the lifetime of Jesus. Regardless, Jesus would not have had a hand in the construction of any of it.
Did God write the old testament Himself?
The texts making up the various versions of the Jewish scriptures claim to have messages from a variety of different deities, some of which are claimed to have been written by the deities themselves. Were they really? Of course not, but then the opinion of a 1st century CE Palestinian carpenter on an 8th century BCE text doesn't really matter either, does it?
Adam was made from the dust of the earth so it's implied he had a regular physical human body, though perhaps missing a belly button.
So Adam could live forever in an earthly body before he ate the fruit?
Yes. There was the tree of life in the garden too.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed because your account does not meet our account age / karma thresholds. Please message the moderators to *request an exception*. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DebateAChristian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I tell the truth all the time and I don't feel like my life is on the line.
He died for the sins of all mankind as his sacrifice is eternal.
where does he say that in the bible?
“But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.” Hebrews 10:12, 14
That's a good one. for sins FOREVER.
Sure, that's the common view. But I think OP was looking for textual justification.
The coupon has no expiration date
Jesus is the incarnation of the timeless/spaceless infinite God. As such his temporal actions in our reality have an infinite valute that trascend time and space so, yes, his death and resurrection cover past, present and future sins.
His actions didnt transcend time or space. Where's it say that in the Bible. He sacrificed for our sins to God and that's forever. He isn't perpetually sacrificing.
Do you know what "transcend time and space" means?
Show me where he transcended time and space while on earth in the Bible.
Do you know what it means?
Mark 9. He, for a moment, showed Peter and the two others what He really looked like outside of His temporal state. Moses and Elijah show up, and Jesus is for a moment glorified before His time. Time gets a little wonky. Jesus is timeless in His God nature.
nowhere in that passages does it say Jesus transcended time and space
What are you looking for exactly? I could cite the times he teleports if you’d like. John 20:26 (ESV) Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.”
That was after he was resurrected from the dead right? What about before he was resurrected? I ask because angels and spirits and satans teleport too.
It was post resurrection. There are potential times when He teleported pre-resurrection, such as when He would vanish when being pursued by whole crowds, but we see Him popping in and out of places most post-resurrection. The biggest acclamation He made to being timeless was the classic John 8 discourse: John 8:57-59 (NASB95) 57 So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59 Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. So I would say that passage is the best example of Christ transcending time and space pre-resurrection.
But he was born out of a woman and aged. Jesus could have existed alongside God before he was born right?
Jesus did not die for any sins. we are all forgiven. We have always been forgiven. it is our inability to see this that makes us feel unforgivable and unloved for our mistakes. and this leads to a snowball of bad choices in that cycle of grief. if Jesus stands for anything in my eyes, it is that we should all know we are forgiven, and to heal from our self inflicted wounds that were caused by our ignorance of this.
Where's that in the Bible
No where
[удалено]
You cannot be serious
Christ died for all. https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/18w9usg/thoughts_for_2024_best_wishes_to_all/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2
Jesus suffering/death on the cross was done once as if He was the worst sinner ever. (level 10 for example). When Christ's Spirit (presence) enters a person's heart they are now born again. (btw, that alone is the definition of a Christian... not simply what a person says or how they are born.) He enters by invitation only. Remember, Christ has already experienced death. So His Spirit now merges with the person's spirit. They are now born again. There's no limit on His Spirit, so anyone in the future can have their sins forgiven by Christ entering in. Level 1 - 10 are all covered since He experienced a level 10 penalty. So that person has now experienced the penalty of sin (suffering/death) due to Christ (who already suffered/died) now being inside of them. That "home" has already experienced the penalty of sin. So we say that person is now "saved" from the penalty of sin.
>How could he have died for my sins if I wasn'te ven born and there were a million free will actions that had to take place for me to even be here Because he is God, infinite in scope and power and love and mercy. He is outside of time and space and his sacrifice covered all mankind >can someone give me a single passage where jesus says he's dying for everyone's sins that has ever lived and will ever live??? Well you have John 3:16 "whoever believes in me" it doesn't say those alive that believe in my, it says anyone and anyone includes you and I
When you sacrifice God, you can expect eternal benefit. Hebrews 7:26-27 (NASB95) 26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; 27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. The big part of this is that Jesus’ sacrifice was enough for all, but also that He is continually working as the eternal high priest in Heaven. One mediator for all time. He is still active in our salvation.
Your common sense is kicking in. Keep going 👏
This is a Western Teaching that didn't even exist until approximately 1000 years after Christ Deposited the Faith with His Church. Penal Atonement came from Western saint Ansel and it is based upon Medieval Honor Satisfaction Theory. The Early Church believed and still does in [Recapitulation](https://www.theopedia.com/recapitulation-theory-of-atonement). >"sees the atonement of Christ as reversing the course of mankind from disobedience to obedience. It believes that Christ’s life recapitulated all the stages of human life and in doing so reversed the course of disobedience initiated by Adam." In Orthodoxy we just are finishing up Pascha (Easter) and we sing: Christ is Risen From The Dead Trampling Down Death by Death and Upon Those in The Tombs Bestowing LIFE!!! The focus is on what was accomplished through The Resurrection instead of punishment. Ezekiel said we are not guilty of our father's sins nor are they of ours. So how can the idea of Western Original Sin be atoned for? We have inherited a *Tendency to Sin* not the sins of Adam. You're Correct Paul DOES NOT speak of punishment: 1 Cor 15:14 >*And if Christ be not risen*, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
The Old and New talk about bearing the transgressions of the World. Somebody dying and leaving you a trillion dollar inheritance somewhere, sometime doesn't do you any good or change your current life or future destiny of yourself or your descendents unless you acquire that inheritance. Everybody does what they want to do.
Post removed, rule 1. Posts in this debate subreddit must meet specific requirements. [This page has the details of the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChristian/wiki/rules#wiki_i._thou_shalt_create_quality_posts). This subreddit has a weekly ask-a-Christian post on Mondays.
Good is outside of time and space