• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Question about Jesus and original sin

burgerjockey

Student
B
Joined
Nov 9, 2004
Messages
38
I have a question that purtains to Jesus and original sin. Correct me if I am wrong(which I very well may be), but every human is born with some sin because of Adam and Eve(original sin). Now, I know Jesus was supposedly a god in human skin or something like that but he was technically human. If I put two and two together that means that Jesus technically had a little sin stain on him. Wasn't the J-man supposed to be sin free or something? And if he technically wasn't doesn't that mean our sins can never be washed away by his blood?
 
burgerjockey said:
I have a question that purtains to Jesus and original sin. Correct me if I am wrong(which I very well may be), but every human is born with some sin because of Adam and Eve(original sin). Now, I know Jesus was supposedly a god in human skin or something like that but he was technically human. If I put two and two together that means that Jesus technically had a little sin stain on him. Wasn't the J-man supposed to be sin free or something? And if he technically wasn't doesn't that mean our sins can never be washed away by his blood?
Click to expand...

I believe the point of virgin birth was to avoid that little bit of stickiness.
 
Jesus did not have to be perfect; he only had to be good enough to forever cure God of his insatiable lust for blood sacrifices.
 
You boys in the outfield just sit down and have a scratch and a chaw, because I'm about to knock this one out of the park.

According to Roman Catholic theology Jesus and his mother Mary were born without original sin. The end.
 
TeaBag420 said:

According to Roman Catholic theology Jesus and his mother Mary were born without original sin.
Click to expand...

Why? What's their reason?
 
Re: Re: Question about Jesus and original sin

monkboon said:
I believe the point of virgin birth was to avoid that little bit of stickiness.
Click to expand...
:dl:
 
Since this thread hasn't really taken off with regard to ' original sin ', I was thinking....

Since Jesus ( if he was/is God ) obviously had the power to save himself, it follows that his death was a form of suicide.

It is my understanding that suicide is considered a sin ( mortal? ) by the Catholic church..

I also feel confident that a good Catholic theologian can waffle their way out of this... ( with lots of syrup )
 
Catholic theologians realised this problems many moons ago, and created the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception to cover it. Basically Mary gets born without sin (somehow), and since she never touches a guy's naughty bits before Jesus' birth, Jesus is sinless. His bits are still naughty, though, so he never touches them.

I believe the basic Protestant idea is that original sin is transmitted via sexual intercourse, and since there was none of that shenanigans going on, Jesus was cool.
 
So, what about artificial insemination? If someone can be born without original sin AND leads a perfect life(sin-free) is that a free pass to not having to accept Jesus as your savior?
 
I'm not sure artificial insemination counts as sinless, because there's still some man juice involved. Man juice comes from naughty bits, and is therefore naughty in and of itself.

ETA: But to answer your full question: According to doctrine, if someone were somehow born without original sin, and lived a blameless life in the eyes of God, they'd get a pass, I think. Good luck on convincing anyone about the blameless life thing, particularly since rejecting belief in Jesus would count as a sin. The perfect life could not avoid accepting Jesus, assuming one heard of the guy.

As for what happens if someone (blameless or not) hasn't heard of Jesus, well that's a whole other can of worms.
 
What I don't understand about the whole situation is this: Jesus sacrificed himself to essentially repent for all of humanity for the sin perpetrated by Adam and Eve, right? Shouldn't that mean that on the sin balance sheet the debt has been payed off? At least for the original sin? Why, then, are people supposedly still having to repent for the sin perpetrated by their ancestors?

I think loan sharks would have a thing or two to learn from this system.
 
This is the loan shark system. Jesus paid off on the original sin, but that still leaves the accumulated sins of all humans since Adam and Eve. It's the interest on the original sin! :(
 
As far as I am concerned A&E tree loving escapades shouldn't earn me an eternity in the ALL CONSUMING FIRES
 
burgerjockey said:
As far as I am concerned A&E tree loving escapades shouldn't earn me an eternity in the ALL CONSUMING FIRES
Click to expand...

It did give them a scorching case of Dutch Elm Disease, though.
 
Somebody, can't remeber who it was, presented the hypothesis that Mary was simply parthenogenic. The only problem with that is that in mammals females have a homogenous set of sex chromosomes, and males a heterogenous one.

This means, excluding some unknown facet of biology, one of four things:

1) Mary was lying about the whole viginity thing.

2) Jesus was adopted.

3) Mary was a parthenogenic transexual.

4) Mary wasn't a mammal.

Note that these possibilities are not mutually exclusive in any way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom