Sinners

[fr0d0]

There's nothing in that link that disagree's with my statement. Please quote the precise text you think does so. Do you also disagree with the idea that it's a natural instinct in infants to attract care and feeding?

If you had the slightest understanding of the Christian dogma you are criticising, you would realise that the widely adopted 'fallen state' is precisely the same subject. To save yourself from hell (separation from God) you choose life (onesness with God).

'Childhood indoctrination' seems to be an emotive strawman you've thrown in for good measure. Let's keep on topic.

[tavarish]

There's nothing in that link that disagree's with my statement. Please quote the precise text you think does so. Do you also disagree with the idea that it's a natural instinct in infants to attract care and feeding?

You said babies are selfish and greedy. This is a blanket statement and I was illustrating that it is a developmental stage where they make a conscious choice to adopt those qualities or not. This is heavily dependent on the upbringing of the child as well. They are not born with inherently evil qualities and have to work out of it. They are simply learning and adapting to new concepts to manipulate the world around them.

Here's an excerpt:

"Birth to 18 months:

Erikson also referred to infancy as the Oral Sensory Stage (as anyone might who watches a baby put everything in her mouth) where the major emphasis is on the mother's positive and loving care for the child, with a big emphasis on visual contact and touch. If we pass successfully through this period of life, we will learn to trust that life is basically okay and have basic confidence in the future. If we fail to experience trust and are constantly frustrated because our needs are not met, we may end up with a deep-seated feeling of worthlessness and a mistrust of the world in general."

If you had the slightest understanding of the Christian dogma you are criticising, you would realise that the widely adopted 'fallen state' is precisely the same subject. To save yourself from hell (separation from God) you choose life (onesness with God).

That's not even remotely the same thing. Reacting to stimuli and developing personality traits has nothing to do with belief systems. If it was the same thing, all children would have an inherent knowledge of God from birth, or at least develop it down the line at a later time on their own. This does not happen.

I brought up childhood indoctrination because it is the most effective way of converting people. Children are highly incorrigible, and an appeal to authority is highly acknowledged and respected. Simply put, kids will believe anything an adults tell them. If religion was started only at an age where the person has mentally developed enough to make decisions about their belief systems without the authoritative pressure, religion would not be as prevalent as it is now.

It's not a strawman, it's connected quite solidly with the subject at hand.

[fr0d0]

Outside influence on a new born baby is negligible whereas instinctive behaviour in manipulating adult attention is 'instinctive'. It's there as a natural protection mechanism. As children grow there is adult influence to curb the selfishness to conform to a societal model of coexistence. Still we perceive overt selfishness as undesirable and punish it. This is our western society ethical framework, which strangely coincides with the predominant religious influence.

Here's my proof that babies are evil: http://www.cracked.com/article_18404_6-s...le-of.html

No one is talking about inherent belief, but observable inherent traits we can agree on. Childhood indoctrination is counter productive on many levels. A vast majority of atheists here are from such backgrounds. I myself am from a non religious background. The way to convince people to choose to follow Christ is not by taking the choice away.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Yet Christians can't justify why Mary, mother of Jesus, herself was preserved from original sin.

Actually,I think the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is only found within that broad collection of refined ignorance and idiocy called 'Catholicism'. The logic is perfectly sensible ;Viz: Jesus is the son of god,therefore his mother would be completely without sin.

It was questioning the innately unjust nature of the doctrine of original sin which began my long journey to atheism.

The Immaculate Conception is, according to Roman Catholic doctrine, the conception of the Virgin Mary without any stain ("immacula" in Latin) of original sin. It is one of the four dogmas in Roman Catholic Mariology. Under this aspect Mary is sometimes called the Immaculata (the Immaculate One), particularly in artistic contexts.

The dogma states that, from the first moment of her existence, Mary was preserved by God from the lack of sanctifying grace that afflicts mankind and that she was instead filled with divine grace. It is further said by Catholics that she lived a life completely free from sin.[1] Belief in Mary's immaculate conception in the womb of her mother, through sexual intercourse, should not be confused with the doctrines of the virginal conception of her son Jesus, known as the Annunciation and the Virgin Birth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Conception

[peace2u]

According to the Church, they say that man is born of the original sin, but this is contradicts the following verse in the Bible:

Book of Ezekiel, Chapter 20 verse 18: "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him"

Islam agrees with the above verse.

[fr0d0]

How is that contradictory P2U?

Born of/ has the propensity ... it isn't passed up or down... you own it.

[Darwinian]

And we have Augustine of Hippo to thank for that one who didn't let the fact that original sin isn't mentioned anywhere in the Bible stop him from spreading it around the Christian world.

Someone should write a book called 'The Unwritten Bible'

[tavarish]

According to the Church, they say that man is born of the original sin, but this is contradicts the following verse in the Bible:

Book of Ezekiel, Chapter 20 verse 18: "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him"

Islam agrees with the above verse.

What's your point?

[Zen Badger]

You were born naked and hungry and by some means you have to feed and clothe yourself with and without the help of parents. You're born selfish - babies are manipulative, greedy etc... you learn to coexist. No difference.

So how does this make you a sinner condemned to eternal hellfire if you don't beg forgiveness?

[peace2u]

How is that contradictory P2U?

Born of/ has the propensity ... it isn't passed up or down... you own it.

I'm just commenting on the concept of the original sin. Mainstream Christian believe that every man is born sinful taught by the Churches. Well, this teaching goes against the verse in the Bible. I thought I was clear enough.