“There Is Something Wrong”

This post title was part of a comment made in response to a lengthy conversation taking place on a Christian blog. When one reads the NUMEROUS comments (for and against Christiandom), no matter which side you’re on, you will most likely find yourself saying,  there is something wrong here.

Personally, I saw many things that were “wrong” in the conversations. But of course my perspective was from a non-Christian viewpoint. In any case, I’m sharing a few of the comments for consideration and discussion.

The topic of the post was why “we” killed Jesus … and the blog owner expanded on this as follows:

[T]he WORLD (societal construct) is flawed. We all live in this “world” of blame-shifting, fear, revenge, murder, greed, envy, and “us against them.” Therefore, it’s this MINDSET that killed Jesus. It’s the same mind behind the system we are all a part of, whether we like it or not.

This person believes the aforementioned “mindset” is “our” natural inclination to SIN, which by definition means: “Estrangement from God; An act that is regarded by theologians as a transgression of God’s will; The act of transgression against divine law; Any thought or action that endangers the ideal relationship between an individual and God.”

Or perhaps, as one person defined it …

I would call all horrendous actions “sin”. It doesn’t matter whether the act is committed by “religious people” or “non-religious people”. All horrible acts are “sin”.

NOTE: I agree that “horrible acts” are most definitely an offense against other humans. But are they SIN?

Many in Christianity believe humans are sinful by “association.” That is, because Adam and Eve (our spiritual parents) ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil after God told them not to, we are all guilty of the “sin of disobedience.”  However, the blog owner says this is not what the bible teaches and contends the doctrine was “invented” by Augustine in the 5th century … based on a “mistranslation of Romans 5:12.” Hmmm. A mistranslation …

NOTE: I’ve always found it interesting that much of today’s bible interpretations come from the early church fathers, who were simply men (!) who determined (i.e., interpreted) the meaning of various passages in the Septuagint (the oldest Greek version of the Old Testament translated from the Hebrew) based on their personal perspectives. I often wonder why religionists grant these individuals with such special powers of “determination.”

Rather, in his opinion, we are sinners simply because we sin. But why do we sin? Because we live in a “flawed societal construct and it’s this CONSTRUCT that led to Jesus’ death at the hands of the Romans and Jews.” Got that? O.K. Let’s continue …

He goes on to say this is very different from saying we’re born sinners because if everyone were born sinners then Jesus would’ve been born a sinner and that would create a theological absurdity, which a proper understanding would not do.

NOTE: Someone called this “word salad.” I tend to agree.

The question was then asked by the blog owner: By whose moral standard is right and wrong determined? Why are certain acts conferred immoral? What standard is being used? Public sentiment? If so, then (he contends):

[T]he South was morally right to own slaves since the “public pressure” in their culture was to own them. So, by what right do you have to judge slaveholders? And there are still parts of the world where selling children is normal. Who are you to judge those cultures? And on what grounds is your moral superiority?”

It seems he wants to know what moral standard we are appealing to if not the “morality” of the bible. Of course he believes there is no morality except via the invisible supernatural entity called “God.” Yet there are primitive tribes existing on this planet today who have never heard of the Christian god and seem to manage their “morality” just fine without any outside assistance.

NOTE:  Certain Pygmy tribes found in Africa have no identifiable cults or rites. They have no totems, no gods, no spirits. They bury their dead without special ceremonies or accompanying items and receive no further attention. In fact, some tribespeople, when asked about “God” respond, “Is he on a rock? On a white-ant hill? On a tree? I never saw a god!”

Me neither.

Final point: Doesn’t it feel like there’s something missing when our determination of what’s “wrong” is based on the ideology presented in a centuries old book full of myths and legends? What ever happened to the basic ability to understand and judge based on a simple perception of the situation or facts at hand?

Born in Sin?

I’ve been following the comments to a post at violetwisp.wordpress.com (before you go there, be warned the conversation is very long — and some of it is totally irrelevant, but fun).

A frequent contributor to this particular posting is someone who goes by the handle of “Tiribulus.” In a comment made on November 3, 2014 at 4:50 pm,  this individual said,

“EVERYone descended from him [Adam] is conceived and born in sin and spiritual death.”

This is such a long-time traditional teaching of the church, I doubt any believer reading it would disagree. Yet I wonder how many Christians know where this “original sin” doctrine originated. (As a refresher — original sin is the Christian doctrine of humanity’s state of sin that resulted from the fall of man, i.e., Adam’s rebellion in Eden).

I decided to offer a brief history lesson on this subject. Much of the information is gathered from Wikipedia, but some is from other sources that I researched during the writing of my book.

The formalized doctrine of original sin was first developed in the 2nd-century by Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyons, in his struggle against Gnosticism. Irenaeus believed that Adam’s sin had grave consequences for humanity, that it is the source of human sinfulness, mortality and enslavement to sin, and that all human beings participate in his (Adam) sin and share his guilt.

Later, another church father, Augustine of Hippo, further developed the doctrine. He taught the effects of Adam’s sin are actually transmitted to his descendants by birth, i.e, when the parents experience libido (or concupiscence), the “wounded nature” is transmitted to the soul and body of the new person.

Much later, Martin Luther asserted that humans inherit Adam’s guilt and are in a state of sin from the moment of conception. That is, all men are full of evil lust and inclinations from their mothers’ wombs and are unable by nature to have true fear and/or faith in God.

Many years later, Protestant reformer John Calvin said this in his Institutes of the Christian Religion:

Original sin, therefore, seems to be a hereditary depravity and corruption of our nature, diffused into all parts of the soul, which first makes us liable to God’s wrath, then also brings forth in us those works which Scripture calls “works of the flesh” (Gal 5:19).

Of course, various denominations (Roman Catholics, Methodists, Seventh-Day Adventists, Jehovah Witnesses, Latter Day Saints, et al)  each have their own individualistic definitions of original sin.

What’s important to note, however, is that the inception of this doctrine came from none other than the bible’s famous writer, orator, self-proclaimed apostle, and hijacker of the Christian faith: PAUL. It was he who first presented this idea in Romans 5:12 and 1 Corinthians 15:22. Early church fathers such as those named above merely took his words and refashioned them to fit their own personal beliefs … and thus today the concept is thoroughly entrenched within the Christian faith.

As many in Christianity believe, Paul was instructed in a “heavenly” message from a disembodied voice that he was to go to the gentiles and “open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light” (Acts 26:18). In his efforts to do so, Paul began teaching them that the Law was not the answer because it didn’t have the power to save; this could only be accomplished by believing in Christ’s death and resurrection (a dying-rising savior).

However, convincing the Jews the Mosaic Law was now defunct was an entirely different matter. For centuries they had been told that anyone who didn’t uphold the words of the Law by observing them was cursed! (Deuteronomy 27:26)

So what did Paul do? He developed the “original sin” doctrine. He told them sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13) – and it was all because of Adam’s wrongdoing in the Garden of Eden (Romans 5:12). He further asserted that with sin came death, and since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), the only way to life and salvation was by acknowledging that Yeshua was the Messiah/Savior.

It’s important to note here what the early Jews actually believed about sin:

According to early Judaic teachings (and maintained in modern-day Judaism), everyone is born innocent; that is, they enter the world free of sin.⁷² Throughout life, people may make choices that lead to sin, but it is not part of their inherent nature. To the Jews, sin is a violation of the divine commandments and is seen as an act (thought, word, or deed), not a “state of being”⁷³ or part of the human condition. Further, God explained in Ezekiel (18:20) that sinners will be punished for their own sins, not for the sins of others.

—Things I Never Learned in Sunday School: Facts about the Christian faith that will surprise and astound you (OR, Writing…Etc, 2012) p. 62

***********

As indicated above, this concept of original sin is a mainstay of the Christian belief system. Yet few realize it was an idea born, not of God, but from a man who believed he’d had a “revelation” from on high. A man who taught doctrines and concepts that Yeshua, the messenger to the Jews, never mentioned, and who created a religion that Yeshua would never recognize.
________________________________

(72) My Jewish Learning, The Jewish View of Sin
(73) Wikipedia.org, Jewish View on Sin

Jesus and the Big Picture

For those who read this blog on a somewhat regular basis, you know that I often refer to postings on the Finding Truth blog. Nate has developed quite a following and the discussions there often get pretty heated.

A participant in one of his recent postings is an individual who goes by the name of “Kathy.” This person, for all intents and purposes, is a Christian. She appears to believe God is real and the bible is his message to the world.

While many on the Finding Truth blog tend to believe there are contradictions and/or errors within the holy book, Kathy staunchly defends “The Word” by claiming she is the only one who is looking “objectively” at the scriptures in question. She further claims that all who disagree with her are doing so because of their “liberal” (atheist) perspective.

In one of her defenses against bible inconsistencies, she made this comment: “We can TRUST the ENTIRE Bible because it was approved by God. You are focusing on things that are INSIGNIFICANT.. because again, it reveals what is in your heart. If your questions related to contradictions in the actual MESSAGE of the Bible, then I could see your point.. but times and dates.. it just doesn’t matter in the big picture of what Jesus did for US on the cross.“ (Emphasis mine)

THE BIG PICTURE

At the heart of Christianity is the belief that salvation comes through believing in Jesus and his atoning death on the cross. Few are aware this doctrine was never mentioned, promoted, or taught by Jesus himself. Nor is it addressed anywhere in the Hebrew Bible. OT scriptures used by church leaders today to corroborate this teaching did not hold the same meaning to the ancient Jews. In fact, it wasn’t until (the apostle) Paul developed his theology about who Jesus was and why he came that things changed.

This change didn’t occur overnight. It was primarily through the plethora of Paul’s letters that (some of) the early Jews began to view the ancient texts in a new way. Using his skills as an eloquent writer, a powerful and charismatic orator, and an effective evangelist, Paul was eventually able to convince them that Yeshua was the long-awaited Messiah.

But he didn’t stop there. Since he had abolished the Torah as a requirement for salvation (Galatians 3:10), it was necessary for him to put a new requirement into place that would ensure Yahweh‘s approval. This he did by developing the doctrine of “original sin” (humanity’s state of sin resulting from the fall of man), and pointing out that only through faith in his “Christ” could anyone gain favor with God.

In other words, the conception that Christians have today about “what Jesus did for US on the cross” is based solely on the teachings of Paul — teachings that originated from his reported “vision” of a disembodied Jesus.

“Paul’s words are not the Words of God. They are the words of Paul — a vast difference.”
— John Shelby Spong