As a teenager I reached the conclusion that Original Sin is exploited by organized religion to place human sexuality in the closet, thus stigmatizing it and inspiring people to partake with greater frequency for the rebellious pleasure it yields. Organized religion is a business, and if members don't procreate bankruptcy is inevitable.

Apart from this, I decided to delve further into the concept to see if it may have merit in a non-theocratic context.

Assume that each of our souls stems from one enormous mass of energy. While the souls maintain wholeness in a sense, the human brain creates division through faulty programming over extended periods of time. Proverbs such as "Idle Hands are the Devil's Workshop" being ingrained at an early age undoubtedly discourage meditation, even though it is commonly accepted in metaphysical circles as a means of establishing a direct link to spiritual energy.

In addition to the obvious biases in parenting and social mores, any missions or hopes given by the Creator to earlier man would have been lost due to geographically isolated societies that disappeared, and decay or burial of writing materials containing such messages.

Quite simply, division of the Source Energy via reproduction increases the probability that the individual slices will lose sight of the fact that they originated within a whole pie.

Any comments and disagreements are welcome.

Interesting...
I don't recall hearing that 'original sin' had been definitely defined.
I'm not educated in theology, but I seem to recall that 'original sin' isn't defined in the Bible and there's been many theories as to what it could've been.

Personally... I think original sin may have been something akin too:
~Humans being gullible enough to be talked into disobeying God's words.

~

Hello, not_mikee,

Below is a link that may be helpful to you. One interpretation given is that Adam passed death onto all men for the sin he committed by eating the forbidden fruit (Fruit for which an omnipotent Creator is, by definition, responsible). Sex is commonly associated with Original Sin since Adam's consumption of the fruit opened his eyes to the pleasures of the flesh.

Without getting Biblical, my own interpretation of the first man causing death to all future generations ties in with my initial post. Energy that was formerly in an immortal state is implanted time and time again into human bodies, which are obviously subject to disease, injury, and death.

Catholic Encyclopedia: Original Sin

Hey FrankBlunt,

Wicked thread!

I love the paradox you have spotted with the idol hands and meditation point, there are SO many!

As for original sin, it is a WONderful paradox also. The basic message is that all desire leads to sorrow. Many religious texts stand by this. I stand by it. But the thing the Bible does is then to make qualifications for us to aspire to in order to gain entry to heaven. These commandments created the fixed dualities of good and evil that upholds the law today (no criticism, just a point), and this encapsulates desire. For nearly every encounter is judged as good vs bad and meaning interpreted in this context. Everytime we make a judgement, we take another bite from the apple.

Oh yeah, and they say that Adams apple binge was the original sin, but Satan sinned against God before Adam for wanting to be more powerful than God (pride)...does anyone know what this is? errr the pre original sin?

NICE ONE!
nn23

I am a Pagan I am not related to Adam and Eve, I am related to Canes wife. Good Baal worshiping people.

Otter Zell explains it very well. Clicky here

Hi, nn23,

I don't know if you're familiar with Michael Savage or not, but one of his famous quotes, "Diversity is perversity", applies well to this thread. While he is speaking in terms of borders, language, and culture in America, I find a higher spiritual meaning in it.

It is unity, not diversity / division, that solidifies our relations with fellow men.



Hello, Darkwind,

Nice to speak with you again. Since I don't subscribe to the idea that a divine flood destroyed everything that creepeth upon the Earth, leading God to start again from scratch, Adam was purely hypothetical from my standpoint. Whomever it was who begat future generations is not relevant to the thread. Division from a unified Source was encouraged directly and via theocratic manipulation.

Regards,
Brian

You ask about original sin which is a myth as well as the rest of the Bible as far as I am concerned. We are not divided from the Universe we are the Universe.

Though my application of reproduction / division as a path deviating from the Whole (Not a sin in my book) has no bearing upon the Biblical reference.



I stated that we are divided from each other as a Source that was once unified, not that we are divided from the physical universe.

It needn't be overstated to anyone who follows current events that we are a planet within our universe that breeds particular individuals to strap bombs to themselves and hinder fellow men from achieving their goals here on Earth. If those suicide bombers acknowledged the oneness of which I speak, they would not be partaking of such activities.

Re unity and division, just thought you might like this

All manifestations preceeds by the two terms, Vidya and Avidya, the consciousness of Unity and the consciousness of Multiplicity. They are the two aspects of the Maya, the formative self conception of the eternal.

Unity is the eternal and fundamental fact, without which all multiplicity would be unreal and an impossible illusion. The consciuosness of Unity is therefore called Vidya, the Knowledge.

Multiplicity is the play or self expansion of the One, shifting in its terms, divisable in its view of itself, by force of which the One occupies many centers of consciousness, inhabits many formations of energy in the universal Movement. Multiplicity is implicit or explicit in unity. Without it the Unity would be either a void of non-existence or a powerless, sterile limitation to the state of indiscriminate self-absorption or of blank repose.

But the consciousness of multiplicity separated from the true knowledge in the many of their own essential oneness, - the view-point of the separate ego identifying itself with the divided form and the limited action, - is a state of error and delusion. In man this is the form taken by the consciousness of multiplicity. Therefore it is given the name Avidya, the Ignorance. ~ Sri Aurobindo

I like to think of the divisions or multiplicities as many rivers all flowing into the sea.

nn23,

The quote from Sri Aurobindo is very insightful. Thank you for sharing it.

Your river analogy is a beautiful means in comparing, and describing the intermingling of, multiplicity and unity. Taoism also equates the Source (The Tao) to water. It flows without prejudice, and exists even in the filthiest of environments.

I'm almost certain that I struck a nerve with a few people who viewed this thread, but it wasn't my intention to disparage procreation.

Twice in my life I've been transported to a place beyond the dream state where I had no sense of self: none of my customary five senses were operable in that realm. All I "felt" was blissful energy, and while I had no desire to leave, I was not disappointed upon my return. One such encounter was immediately preceded by death within a vivid dream. Was that oneness I experienced? Perhaps...

Cheers man, yeah water is a mad motif. When you relook at religious texts in the context of water representing the Source it translates some very different meanings from that of the symbolygy and ritualism within Christianity and of the Bible. Christening, Jesus walking on water, to name a couple.

WOW that sounds awsome, i have experienced many different divisions of consciousness...infact i suppose they are in constant transition he he....ITS AMAZING!! i LOVE IT! I think perhaps whether we are aware of it or not, we are always within that constant transition of oneness.

NICE ONE!
nn23

WOWOWOWOWOWOw. A creator cannot judge his creation because it acted in a way it was designed to act. A natural inclination cannot be a SIN.
How is GOD not prideful?????? or dont his own laws apply to the creator??? If Satan thought he was more powerful it was his free will to do so. I am a parent if my daughter thought she was smarter then me I wouldnt be upset if it were true I would be very proud if it was false it would be evident shortly. Why would God Be angry at Satan??? Did he have some kind of inferiority complex??

EXactly!!!!

BRRRILLIANTLY put...but this is why Lucifer became Satan and was sent down to hell wasnt it? I am unconcerned, i feel all these stories are symbolic teachings that have been twisted in all directions by mans desire for domination.

The concept of original sin is one of the worst, if not the worst theological fallacy, christianity in the form of St. Augustine ever came up with. His twisting of scripture and uncontextual interpretations of the Genesis Accounts of the Fall of Man shocked most of the christian world in his time and were only accepted by Church Authority because it gave them the unscriptutral power to control human morality as well as salvation.

1500 Years later the church is waking up to this pernicious heresy and is doing something about it. We can lay at the feet of this heresy much of the degrading attitudes that the church has had toward sexuality and its nature as well as manipulation of what is or was moral and what isn't.

This all because Augustine had serious sexual problems and traumas, he left the church a legacy that has done more harm than good.

FrankBlunt...thank you so much for starting this thread.

whatever way you look at it, you must realize that god gave adam and eve a choice. they had the perfect life. all god said was "just dont eat of this tree."

that sounds like a reasonable request.

All requests are rooted in desire for something. This is the paradox and hipocracy.

HAve you ever asked your kid not to touch the fire only out of the desire to protect them?

Do they listen?

true, but its still a decision to be made. you must alot for both sides. the fact that god gave them a choice in the first place is a gift. hes not some cosmic rapist, forcing us to do whatever he wants.

adam and even need to accept responsiblilty for their decision.

I understand what you're saying, but I must disagree on this point. Diversity is not synonymous with division. There can be diversity and unity. Look around at the natural workings of this world and you can see it is self-evidently true. The diverse array of organs, creatures and elements work in unison to make you, the ecosystems and the planet.



That's like saying to a fanatic, "don't blow up people". Adam and Eve, prior to eating the forbidden fruit, had no concept of good or evil. How were they to choose between right and wrong? Not only that, if the Christian God has a divine plan, then their eating of that fruit was part of the plan.

Yes, i understand your point Jor-el but going back to the context....What is so threatening about an apple tree other than God's consequences? ...Why should God need to protect Adam and Eve from Himself?...

Dont know if i worded that right, but do you get where i'm coming from?

I think that humans are meant to do everything that is seen as wrong in modern society. Being under the constraint of religions and laws, has done some major damage. It was only until someone started to manipulate, did we begin to sway from our "primeval" nature. Even after all this time of being taught to suppress natural emotions, they still come out once in awhile.

There is no SIN there in no EVIL.

Hmmmm. I like that. Interesting and thought-provoking. Thanks! Jody

okay, if god had given you this beautiful life and beautiful world, which we didnt deserve in the first place, i thin i would trust him if he issued this warning. and besides, every man is born with a moral sense of right and wrong. if god wanted to hurt us, why would he make a world with free will? rain falls on us all, but for the most part, the pain of humanity is brought on by mankind, not god.

the divine plan is gods will. now, our free will gives us the ability to meander from his path.

your looking at this all wrong.

gods choice was this, live THIS life, and be happy, or give into temptation and embrace death.

this sounds to me like this is an escape for responsibility of your actions.

there is GOOD in this world, and there is BAD in this world. call it evil. call it sin. call it what you will. you KNOW that some things are bad. period.

if it wasnt for this fact, humans would be a depraived and horrible race. just because some emotions might feel natural to some, it doesnt justify rape, torture, murder, ect..

So God is not responsible?

I prepose the exact opposite!!!

They were not responsible for their decision, for their true nature is God himself. It was their mind, duality that created this problem. This is represented by their creation (division) itself! WOW having maaad revelations here as i type

Taking responsibility for their decision surely pushes them further away from God no? For to do this requires judgmental which is the very reason they decided to eat the apple in the first place, they made a judgment, a decision...if this be the case, taking responsibility would simply have pushed them further away.

True, if they simply identified with their source rather than their mind/senses then they would not have been tempted in the first place, but to take responsibility (blame) draws an even greater veil over their identity with God.

Everything is predetermined. But one is always free not to identify oneself with the body and not to be affected by the pleasure and pain associated with its activities. ~ Ramana Marharshi

It is through identifying oneself with their Source, the Self, God that one can transcend the bindings of desire and sorrow.

We must be living on separate planets cause last time i checked the human race was a sick piece of



To me it sounds like someone is in denial and cant accept the world around him for what it really is. Or maybe its just you cant see it, thats what happens when you seek the truth in the liars eyes.

not responsible for their decision? cop out. i dont buy that crap. twist the words as you wish, but the fact is inescapable. THEY ate the fruit, they dealt with the consequences that god had already warned them about. its pretty simple. to a point yes ,its in our nature to embrace the allure of temptation. but its not neccessary. and even when we fail, a genuine remorse is all it takes for it to be forgiven. yes, their mind and duality created the problem. thats the beauty of life. what kind of world would this be if there were only 1 decision to be made? thats rape, and the world dont work like that.

Do you really feel that way hun?... about the human race? ??

maybe thats YOUR world. the world we live in is the world we create for ourselves. so if your world is a living hell, YOU need to do something about it.

the world i live in isnt the same, aparently, as yours. i accepted a long time that bad things happen. alot of times to good people who dont deserve it. but im not sitting around pouting about it. my life is beautiful, because of my family, my god, my faith, my freedom. and im sorry brother that you arent experiencing this. its not that far out of reach, if you have the willingness to look.

About the vast majority, we do a lot of stuff that cant be justified.






I'm not pouting, I'm full of joy and laughter. I feel good being able to accept things for what they are, without having to cover them in a "o so creamy chocolaty coating"

WHOA!!!...Chill Winston i think you may have read what i wrote a little too quickly.

"to a point yes ,its in our nature to embrace the allure of temptation." ....perhaps this is an auto argument that you have had to use in discussions of old, i do not see its relavance with what i said.

"yes, their mind and duality created the problem" .....Well, what i was actually stating with this point was not that it was a problem, but a reason. I do not think the mind and duality is the beauty of life. I think the beauty of life can be found when you choose not to identify with the body and the pleasure and pain associated with its activities (aka mind and duality), but rather their Source...God.... Like the quote said.

This means accepting everything as predetermined which relinquishes responsibility.

He really likes to pull the rape card.

A divine plan of an omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient God that encompasses all creation is incompatible with Free Will, a Christian doctrine that isn't even supported by the bible, by the way. I agree that a lot of the pain is our own doing, but ultimately, as Creator, the responsibility falls upon God to a degree. There's no question of who's to blame - the question is to what extent.

If your father is guilty of a theft should you also be sent to prison to pay for your father's crime, and your son and grandson. I don't even believe in karma, I think we all come here with a clean slate. We make of our life by our own choosing or by hand we are dealt.

The parallel that I see in Satan vs. God is inherent in the wishes of clergy and monarchs to discourage and punish dissent.

wow frank what a refreshing incredibly thought provoking thread ..I love the idea of looking deeply into the scriptures, so much that is interpreted now is superficail at best....

you got it my freiind so much has been lost in translation and few really look within to see what wisdom the passages bring forth...

iposted this on antoher thread but it fits here better....

interesting take on genesis, i feel its a beautiful metaphor of original blessing and introducing the idea of duality ( commonly called fall from grace original sin ect..) at the core of the analogy..
love and fear being abject as portrayed with the character Satan an exaggeration of course( not a real bieng just an analogy to help understand duality for the level of awareness at the time ) .... and this is the theme of many mythologies some would say archetypes...its a mythology of mans early attempt to understand the universe and himself as a triune being. and what he did understand which was very primitive yet profound........genesis attempts to touch on the greatest simplicity is really the greatest of complexity..it attempts to in a very primitive way to show the process of self knowing... Its also the birth of choice or duality....

one can't be a creator with nothing to contrast hence opposites but really there are no opposites just varing degree's of the same thing....I also see the Adam and Eve lore to be mans fantasies of his highest vision for himself one would live beyond fear sort of a heaven on earth ( no worries state of being) which is very much the same as the enlightenment ideas from the east...

Hello, Chaostrom,

Our current approach to diversity in America is most divisive. My discussion of it in this thread is purely religious based. We will all be subject to universal truths once we've left this Earth, no matter our beliefs, and it's counterproductive to keep killing one another over personal truths and misconceptions.

I don't discount diversity in genetics, for instance, since we're all familiar with the retardation and deformities arising within telephone pole patterned family trees.

I agree with this currently we embrace ideas that lead to division.. diverstiy is not understood nor celebrated...i do feel many are waking up to a unity conciousness..... but at this time we are under a seperation paradigm....

we simply pass on values from one generation to the next that is ht is meant b ythe sins of the father are passed to the son.. meaning we except these values on word alone when word is the least purveyor of truth .. hindsight is not utiliutilized well very little and humanity doesn't use its observation skills...nor does it put much stock into its own experinces....and intuition is thought to be the work of satan...

much of the understandings are to shallow and thus ineffective...and its taught as 'truth' which eliminates the quest of inquiry.... so its a real catch 22....

HA HAHAHA HA HA...Superb!!!

I have to intervene here and state that right and wrong are concepts that came into existence after the fact, in other words, before Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, there was no right or wrong, no concept like it existed before that in any form whatsoever.

God didn't ask them to understand his warning. The requirement here was not understanding but obedience without doubt.

It was not an apple tree. The fruit itself is unkown. What is important here is that this particular tree had something within it that gave humans the capacity to discern Good and Bad, before that, no such concept existed or was it necessary.

All was allowed by God as long as they obeyed one rule. Do not Eat from that Tree!!!

As I stated in another post, underastanding why God said so was not required of Adam and Eve... obedience was!!

There was also a Tree of Life that allowed them to live immortal lives, they partook of that tree on a regular basis until they were expelled from Eden. God had no problem sharing what he had to give.

Just a couple of thoughts...

We attach so much to our judgments living in todays society, constructs are based on what we define as good and bad, if eating the apple gave humans the capcity to desern good from bad, then surely it is through giving up these disernings that we can come closer to God?


Also, if pre apple Adam and Eve did not have the capasity to disern good from bad, then how were they to decifer God's rule to not eat the apple? ...just thought, that would probably be faith wouldnt it. But belief and faith are meaningless, why have faith in something that is self evident...this implys that they did not see God as self evident, so they had already entered the realms of duality which underpins good and bad which then contradicts the point that Adam and Eve did not have the capacity to dicern good from bad before the apple.

I think these teachings are symbolic, they can be picked apart in so many ways, but for me they show the illusionary and paradoxical nature of duality and how by identifying with our senses (mind and desire) we experience sorrow...same message that many religions translate in their way, just colourful imagery and poetic inscription to aid and enthuse understanding.

I also think the meanings have been successfully manipulated somewhat to assist in mans desire to dominate...a little ironic

NICE ONE!
nn23

The capacity for intelect is not connected to the concept of duality or "Good and Evil". A person who can reason and overcome obstacles does not and does not need to say if something is Good or Bad. The concept of morality though is directly connected to duality. The moment we judge whether something is good or bad we are applying this type of Knowledge which is a construct that is applied to civilization and the need for dominance over others.

These concepts were alien to Adam and Eve and cannot really even be applied to them before their eyes were "opened".
Notice the judgement they make on themselves, that they disobeyed, their guilt, their realization that they are nude and without clothes. These are all concepts that require a judgement of some kind on their part.

Duality only comes into effect after they ate from the Tree, not before.

Therfore the capacity to obey isn't necessarily connected to discernment as we see it today. Even a child obeys without asking and before he knows even to ask why.

Is it not?



But surely to reason is to draw distinction?

To overcome an obstacle one first has to identify it as something seperate to them selves, this is duality...

For someone to define something as an obstacle, they first need to judge it as this or that (good or bad).


nn23

Then how did they decide to eat the apple? They ate the apple because they were already dual, the fact that they were seperated from God with their creation made them dual. It was desire that made them eat the apple, temptation and desire, and these come from ones identity with their senses and mind rather than their selves (Self) or God.

I think the story simpley offers us the choice, do we eat the apple (identifying with desire and mind) or do we identify with "God" (and remain in "paradise"). "Bliss" as many of the mystics refer to it.

No it isn't. Look at dolphins and other higher order Animals. The capacity to reason is not connected to duality or morality



A thought process does not have to distinguish if something is good or bad. If you climb over an obstacle, would that mean the obstacle in your path is bad because it is blocking your way?

In this way intelect works without judging the framework, which is bound by our moral viewponts and to which duality really belongs.

Good and Evil, Light and Dark, Yin and Yang, finite and infinite, etc...

In Western culture, the dichotomy of good and evil is often taken as a paradigm for other dichotomies. In Hegelian dialectics, these dichotomies are linked to progress. In Chinese philosophy, the paradigmatic dichotomy of yin and yang does not generally give preference or moral superiority to one side of the dichotomy, and dichotomies are linked to cyclical processes rather than progress.

Yin and Yang

In other words problem solvers using the intelect don't need to be philosphers...

nn23, I really love the way you worded that. Profoundly simple, yet simply profound.