Yagirlcheatinonus
Icon Poster
I clicked saw a cac and stopped the video. I would never listen to a devil tell me about God.
Are we really “Born in SIN”?
- Thread starter DoubleClutch
- Start date
That is my interpretation too. Like, even Jeffrey Dahmer was once a cute little baby, but somewhere in life he decided to become a devil.
That's not what it means tho.
The passage is I believe, "Born in sin, shapen in inequity".
It means from the time you are conceived, formed in the womb you are already doomed in the sense of you are a sinner who will need salvation. People baptize their babies partially because of this, even tho babies are innocent...they're still "shapen in inequity". Although some ppl do it as a dedication of their baby to God.
Different sects of religion are different. For example, Catholics aren't speaking in tongues to cast out devils, speaking to the devil, dancing and laying hands....whereas in other sects like Holiness churches, COGIC, those things are common.
It wouldn't mattrr if Dahmer grew up to be a lawabiding citizen, trusted family man who worked in accounting, he's still a sinner, born into sin, shapen in inequity...if we are going by the letter
2 Up 2 Down
Veteran
Where is your proof?
Go read the gospels. You’re confused breh.
Listen to yourself…… a religion that Paul a JEW was directly persecuting was “built off of Paul's letters” after he became CHRISTIAN
I’ll let you cook but at the end of the day, You’re just a guy talking on the internet
I’ll believe 1st-2nd century accounts over the opinion of a Coli breh.
Maybe you’re troll and I’m taking the bait but regardless I respect your interpretation. You can believe anything based on your own personal theology it’s a free world
Logically you’ll get no respect though
They say “don’t argue with fools” so….. no disrespect but
I don’t think this type of discussion is worth the time or effort going further especially when it’s distracting from the thread topic
ARE WE BORN IN SIN?
Can you answer that question
What influences did St. Paul have on Christianity? | Britannica
What influences did St. Paul have on Christianity? St. Paul is often considered to be the most important person after Jesus in the history of Christia
www.britannica.com
BBC - Religions - Christianity: Paul
Saint Paul is undoubtedly one of the most important figures in the history of the Western world. Famously converted on the road to Damascus, he travelled tens of thousands of miles around the Mediterranean spreading the word of Jesus.
Last edited:
DoubleClutch
Superstar
I think it is your humanity that leads you to God and not the opposite.
God isn’t a bully
DoubleClutch
Superstar
What influences did St. Paul have on Christianity? | Britannica
What influences did St. Paul have on Christianity? St. Paul is often considered to be the most important person after Jesus in the history of ChristiaBBC - Religions - Christianity: Paul
Saint Paul is undoubtedly one of the most important figures in the history of the Western world. Famously converted on the road to Damascus, he travelled tens of thousands of miles around the Mediterranean spreading the word of Jesus.www.bbc.co.uk
the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, the primary Christian denomination in Ethiopia, developed largely without direct influence from the Apostle Paul, as its Christianization is traditionally attributed to the missionary activity of Frumentius in the 4th century, long after Paul's time, and is considered part of the Oriental Orthodox tradition which diverged from the wider Christian community following the Council of Chalcedon, where Paul's writings are not considered the sole authority on Christology.
The Ethiopian Church adheres to Miaphysitism, a Christological doctrine that differs from the Chalcedonian definition accepted by many other Christian denominations, which is considered to be a key factor in their separate development from Paul's teachings.
^ THERES THE BLACK AFRICAN CHRISTIANITY YOU SO DESPERATELY ARE SEEKING
This is a “black forum” after all right?
Or are you an ARAB?
Ethiopians also have the oldest ancient complete bible I think as are their traditions preserved
And all their iconography features BLACK people
If that matters to you.
Now go join an Ethiopian Orthodox Church breh
Problem solved
Just remember it’s ONE body of Christ. One faith. Ethiopia is proof
The problem with you is you think everything began with “Christianity” and some new religion that was created or “updated”
You don’t even understand Judaism so I don’t expect you to believe in Jesus
I’ll make a separate Paul thread just for you. No more Paul talk in here for me.
How about the idea of “original sin” though?
2 Up 2 Down
Veteran
There were multiple Christian sects that were separate from Paul. The one that took over is what Paul was behind.the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, the primary Christian denomination in Ethiopia, developed largely without direct influence from the Apostle Paul, as its Christianization is traditionally attributed to the missionary activity of Frumentius in the 4th century, long after Paul's time, and is considered part of the Oriental Orthodox tradition which diverged from the wider Christian community following the Council of Chalcedon, where Paul's writings are not considered the sole authority on Christology.
The Ethiopian Church adheres to Miaphysitism, a Christological doctrine that differs from the Chalcedonian definition accepted by many other Christian denominations, which is considered to be a key factor in their separate development from Paul's teachings.
^ THERES THE BLACK AFRICAN CHRISTIANITY YOU SO DESPERATELY ARE SEEKING
This is a “black forum” after all right?
Or are you an ARAB?
Ethiopians also have the oldest ancient complete bible I think as are their traditions preserved
And all their iconography features BLACK people
If that matters to you.
Now go join an Ethiopian Orthodox Church breh
Problem solved
Just remember it’s ONE body of Christ. One faith. Ethiopia is proof
The problem with you is you think everything began with “Christianity” and some new religion that was created or “updated”
You don’t even understand Judaism so I don’t expect you to believe in Jesus
I’ll make a separate Paul thread just for you. No more Paul talk in here for me.
How about the idea of “original sin” though?
I believe my answer is on the first or second page
DoubleClutch
Superstar
Yep and every sect believed Jesus to be Divine to some extent and the son of God going all the way back to the church of James
All roads come from the same source.
The one that “took over” doesn’t exist. There’s no compulsion in religion
Every man his own personal relationship with Jesus/God.
End of discussion.
The Official APOSTLE PAUL thread
Since he lives free in the minds of Hebrew Israelites, Muslims, JW, and other psuedo Christian sects active today, why not make a thread dedicated to the most polarizing figure in the religious debates NOT named Muhammad (because we can’t really talk too much about Muhammad) :youngsabo: Thread...
www.thecoli.com
^ thread for Paul discussion.
Let’s get this thread back to the original topic: Are we BORN IN SIN?
Most damaging, exaggerated, globally harmful game of telephone
Eternally Jaded
Superstar
To answer the original question; I'd say yes.
Babies are innocent, yet as they get older and gain more comprehension of the world around them, you have to teach and instruct virtues and warn against/discipline against vices.
That says one is inherent and the other is gleaned.
So yes, born in sin just means that it's a root that can be found in our basic DNA at this point.
Babies are innocent, yet as they get older and gain more comprehension of the world around them, you have to teach and instruct virtues and warn against/discipline against vices.
That says one is inherent and the other is gleaned.
So yes, born in sin just means that it's a root that can be found in our basic DNA at this point.
Koichos
Pro
Funnily enough, I had written a response to your post #14 on this very subject two weeks ago but it got lost in drafts! (Unfortunately, this forum only saves your work for so many hours.) In short, yes - despite the traditional reading, צֵלָע tzeila' means a side, facet or aspect and has nothing whatever to do with one's ribs.
The former does not exist because the חֲ־ ħa- in חֲסִידָי ħasidai is not a definite article prefix (which is invariably spelled with ה he not ח ħet) but part of the root itself. חֲסִידָי ħasidai is just the word חָסִיד ħasid (plural חֲסִידִים ħasidim) with the possessive pronominal suffix ־ַי ai ('my') and means 'my pious ones'. Now if one wants to be pedantic, חֲסִידָי is technically the pausal form of חֲסִידַי, its vowel being lengthened from pataħ (אַ) to ḳamatz (אָ) to reflect the linguistic pause.
שַׁדַּי Shaddai ('Almighty') is one of the Creator's many titles (usually preceded by אֵל El 'God', another of His titles), which has the possessive suffix ־ַי ai ('my') added to it just like אֲדֹנָי Adonai ('My Master') or אֱלֹהַי Elohai ('My God'). The same rules apply here for the pausa, with an exception: שַׁדַּי to שַׁדָּי and אֱלֹהַי to אֱלֹהָי - but אֲדֹנָי is unchanged. Incidentally, the pausa of אֲדֹנַי adonai ('my [human] masters') is also אֲדֹנָי; however, this is exceedingly rare in the Tana"ch.
אִשְׁתּוֹ ishto is the noun אִשָּׁה ishah (cognate feminine form of אִישׁ ish) with the possessive pronominal suffix ־וֹֹ -o ('his') and means 'his woman/wife'.Is there a difference between Wife and Bow?
קַשְׁתּוֹ ḳashto is the noun קֶשֶׁת ḳeshet (accented on the last-but-one syllable) with the the possessive pronominal suffix ־וֹֹ -o ('his') and means 'his bow'.
The Hebrew word for a 'bow' is קֶשֶׁת ḳeshet and the verb 'to bow' is לְהִשְׁתַּחֲוֺת l'hishtaħavot (from root שׁ.ח.ה), so even these are different.
Nobody believes that Greek shyt dumbass
it's refreshing to be off other people's fairytales
in 4th grade, you were taught that greeks were making it all up, right? and you had zero fear of being punished by greek gods? but christianity is real?
DoubleClutch
Superstar
I think the root is the story of Adam and Eve which explains the CONCEPT of “origin of sin” in an allegorical sense
After reading this story, man’s understanding and interpretation CAN BE that we are “born in sin, shapen in inequity.”
That just how the Bible portrayed it. Adam sinned and then curses were given and it set in motion a series of events which would lead to Jesus “defeating sin” or “the plans of the Satan” if I can paraphrase
^You don’t have to believe this
So in YOUR interpretation, what reason should we see it as the OPPOSITE with mankind being:
“Without sin, shapen in purity”
^ what’s the benefit of this in theology
Why would someone argue we aren’t predisposed to sin (or so bad things) as Humans?
I personally think religions that are AGAINST the idea of original sin are inherently against the Christian concept of a SAVIOR to humanity.
“Born into sin” kinda opens the door to there needing to be a solution to the problem.
Regarding babies getting baptized and babies being sinful or not,
I think a lot of it is traditional. But people have their own understanding or beliefs whether Babies are responsible for “sin” or even if the concept can be applied LITERALLY to them.
I think it’s an overall concept or theme of the Bible that Jews and Christians understand.
How you understand it as a Muslim, atheist, Hindu, Jehovahs witness or whatever faith you subscribe to may differ because you DONT BELIEVE the Bible or GOSPEL
thank you for the break down
well the reason i considered "wife and bow" potentially the same thing is when you look at the lense of Cain and Abel
If the hunter's wife is his weapon (think Esau), then the bow offers the firstlings of its flock (arrows/spears).
Resheph - Wikipedia
such that when he slays an enemy he can take a rib from the carcass and bring it to the people and say this is now your wife (this only makes sense if you consider extreme ancient beliefs of being connected with the environment)
only reason i had this thought was because of the rib/side debate. And also that in Age of Empire 1 there are only male characters no female. So if you existed in an apocalyptic world with no women they would have to go to great lengths to have wives
Qetesh - Wikipedia
and also, because of Leah who said that because she was "unloved" God opened her womb. So the judgment from Jacobs perspective is the things you hurt become like your wife?
these ancient contracts looks incredible now if Ananiahs(protected of God) wife Tamut (Great Death) is a burnt offering. Also the narrative of Paul persecuting the church
Elephantine papyri and ostraca - Wikipedia
Last edited: