Biblical illiteracy

[ThomM]

As to the question of original sin and/or the sins of the father passing to the son. The answer is yes and no based upon the circumstance. The apparent condradiction has to do with the distinction between a "sinfull nature" and the "specific sins of a person" (in this case that person being a father). In the case of Deuteronomy 24:16 ("Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.") if a father were to commit murder his son should not be put to death for his fathers sin of murder, the son should only be put to death for his own sin. This differs from children inheriting a "sinful nature" from their father. For example Romans 5:12 ( Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned). Sinfull nature passes from father to children, punishment for specific sins do not. For further reading, http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/genes...ers-or-not

However - when I brought up the subject = I was specific in talking about Babies and INFANTS - who do not sin - because they have not reached the age of reason and responsibility.

And that is where the case you mention fails - since Babies and infants are supposedly innocent until they come of age. Even a sinful nature requires reason and responsibility.

---

The problem with including people who believe nothing in particular is that the 'nothing in particular' they believe in often includes a vague sort of God or cosmic force. I call these people 'somethingists'. Their theological statement usually goes along the lines of 'I don't know what it is, but I believe in something greater than myself'. I think the 'nothing in particulars' may include a lot of somethingists. Apparently, somethingism is the majority religion of Iceland, according to polls.

Obviously - they were given the choice of "Atheist" and did not agree with that classification - which alone says that they are not atheists.

AS I said - and atheist does not accept the existence of supernatural "gods".
People who believe in nothing in particular - are not saying that.

---

Evidence of what specifically?

That reasonably solid historical evidence from outside the bible that you mentioned.

Let's see

THERE is no evidence that the solar system was created the way it was stated in geneis
THere is no evidence that humans were created as stated in the bible

THERE is no evidence that a great flood covered the entire earth to the highest mountain in the last 6000 years.

THERE is not a single document that we have - from the supposed time of the christ that even mentions his name.

WE have no evidence that the Israelis even existed at the time of the supposed bondage to Egypt. (They claimed nearly a million people in the Exodus - no evidence it ever happened)

WE have no evidence of a group of a million wandered in the Israeli desert

There is Evidence that Jericho did not exist at the time of the mention in the bible

There is evidence that Nazareth existed ONLY as a burial site at the supposed time of the christ.

We KNOW that Rome was a country of law at that time - and they ONLY crucified Traitors - Pirates - and enemies of the state - the mythical christ was none of that. WE know they sent "thieves" to the lions too - another problem with the story.

SO - if YOU have evidence otherwise - please by all means post it.