The Original Sin

BaruchHaba wrote: �. 2. Islam is just one of many religions that teaches salvation through good works. The problem with such teaching, however, is that one cannot know when his deeds are good enough in quality and quantity to merit eternal life. That is beyond sad; it is mental slavery.

Believe that God is just and will not do injustice to any of his creature is the limit one can apply, if needed. So, if you know about how many bad deeds you have done, one can rest assure, he simply have to do just one more good deed than his bad deeds, and that should be it. This system of justice is very powerful as it provide for the short comings of those who are born poor and cann�t do much good deeds like charity etc as compared to the rich people. So, in essence, God knows how much one is trying to make good of all the grace & resources afforded to him by the God.

BaruchHaba wrote: 3. The Ezekiel passage you quote does not abrogate the need for sin atonement; it simply states that man will bear his own sins. That's true of course; hence, the Jewish ritualistic animal sacrifice in their temple for the atonement of the people's sins once a year.

No, not abrogation; rather you should try to convince us the need for this new doctrine, despite such clear passages. Secondly, in essence, animal sacrificial is only for showing one�s sacrifice of his resources in the way of God, just like charity. Yes, I agree with you, making it ritualistic without understanding its essence, what Jews of the time might have made it. But that doesn�t mean, this animal sacrifice is the only way to atonement of one�s sins, this is just one of the many ways.

BaruchHaba wrote: 4. Something to keep in mind when attempting to interpret the Bible is this: has any Old Covenant teaching been changed or clarified by the New Covenant? For example, in the OC, someone caught in adultery was stoned to death. In the NC, Jesus zeroed in on the root cause of adultery: Mat. 5:28 "...anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Jesus showed that adultery does not begin with the physical act, but in the heart. And further, Jesus admonished that of those accusers who had picked up stones to kill the adultress for the one without sin to throw the first stone. They all dropped their stones and walked away and the woman was forgiven and told to go and sin no more.

Instead of replying a straight answer, you answered by Questioning the reader. This sometimes happens, once there is something more to you implied reply. I hope you would be straightforward in your replies, if possible. So, from where the whole doctrinal shift from �Unity of God� to �Trinity of God� came? Can you quote �Jesus� in support of your answer?

BaruchHaba wrote: 5. Re your Ezek. 20 question, not bearing the sins of the father does not cancel out the need for man to have a remedy for his own sins. That is why Jesus came, to be the scapegoat, the propitiation, the blood atonement for sinful man. If good deeds could save a man, there would be no need for any repentance. Back to the question of the appropriate quantity/quality of good works and never knowing how much was enough....very tyrannical doctrine, I think.

So, you think, �God deceiving himself� doctrine is superior?

BaruchHaba wrote: 6. Yes, Saint, Jesus was sacrificed on an old Judean hill called Calvary. That is not only biblical, it is historical. Do not believe Islam's dogma that flies in the face of irrefutable facts

I am sorry, please don�t blame it on �Muslims�, your own historians have difficulty in identifying the historical �Jesus�. On the other hand Muslims have no difficulty in recognizing the physical Jesus. Only the spiritual Jesus, as proposed by Mr Paul, is where the problem lies.

BaruchHaba wrote: 8. It is interesting to me the lengths to which muslims go in trying to destroy the bedrock of biblical scriptures upon which Mohammad's teachings lie. I understand that in order to build up Islam, there had to be the dogma of biblical error. That is truly a travesty, because there are probably millions of muslims who are likely in true pursuit of God, but have been led astray with this false teaching against the Bible.

This so wrong about the Muslims views. There is no Muslim dogma of biblical errors. It is the Historian and not the Muslims who you should blame. The concept of trinity was longtime before the arrival of Islam. Therefore, the Quran came to help the Christians to correct their fault and to revert them back to the religion of Abraham i.e. Strong belief in Unity of God as is the case of with the Jews.

Thanks for your responses.

1. I do not know of any Christian denomination that does not teach the biblical doctrine of original sin. If you know of one, please enlighten me.

The Unity Church holds that original sin is a false doctrine

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (also known as the LDS Church and the "Mormons")rejects the concept of original sin,


2. Islam is just one of many religions that teaches salvation through good works. The problem with such teaching, however, is that one cannot know when his deeds are good enough in quality and quantity to merit eternal life. That is beyond sad; it is mental slavery.

I do not know about other faiths but Islam teaches in detail which good works are required of individuals; viz, five pillars of Islam and following the examples of the Holy Prophet PBUH. These leave absolutely no confusion as to whether they are enough for salvation.

3. The Ezekiel passage you quote does not abrogate the need for sin atonement; it simply states that man will bear his own sins. That's true of course; hence, the Jewish ritualistic animal sacrifice in their temple for the atonement of the people's sins once a year.

Atonement of sins is also an individual responsibility in Islam. We do not need anyone to die for us to be saved.

4. Something to keep in mind when attempting to interpret the Bible is this: has any Old Covenant teaching been changed or clarified by the New Covenant? For example, in the OC, someone caught in adultery was stoned to death. In the NC, Jesus zeroed in on the root cause of adultery: Mat. 5:28 "...anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Jesus showed that adultery does not begin with the physical act, but in the heart. And further, Jesus admonished that of those accusers who had picked up stones to kill the adultress for the one without sin to throw the first stone. They all dropped their stones and walked away and the woman was forgiven and told to go and sin no more.

I have often heard the argument of the new covenant. But Jesus' PBUH own words nullify the proposition that the OT is superseded in any manner by the NT.
He said, Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.�

5. Re your Ezek. 20 question, not bearing the sins of the father does not cancel out the need for man to have a remedy for his own sins. That is why Jesus came, to be the scapegoat, the propitiation, the blood atonement for sinful man. If good deeds could save a man, there would be no need for any repentance. Back to the question of the appropriate quantity/quality of good works and never knowing how much was enough....very tyrannical doctrine, I think.

Why? Repentance is a must! Otherwise man will continue to sin without repentance and there will be no forgiveness from God and sins will go on piling. Therefore, know, that good deeds without repentance for earlier sins and declaration to desist from same is the way to salvation.

6. Yes, Saint, Jesus was sacrificed on an old Judean hill called Calvary. That is not only biblical, it is historical. Do not believe Islam's dogma that flies in the face of irrefutable facts. The atoning death of Jesus Christ is central to understanding sin, sacrifice, judgement, propitiation, grace, and ultimately, God's deep and abiding love for us. Once you come to grips with these issues, you will be utterly slain by the extent and depth of God's love for you, personally.

I am utterly 'slain' by God's love and mercy already without Jesus PBUH having to do anything about it. I am sorry to say but Jesus PBUH is not a historical figure. There are no records of his life in the secular domain. Yet, as a Muslim I believe he was born miraculously. He lived and preached Islam and he was raised-up to God Almighty. And that he shall come again.

7. That God could and would take on human flesh is probably the biggest hurdle for a muslim to climb in understanding who Jesus Christ was/is. It is simply not enough to acknowledge him as a prophet, Saint. We cannot grasp with our minds how deity can inhabit flesh and blood and not jeopardize his being God. Well, how could we understand unless we were God himself. Christians take on faith that the Bible is God's Word to his creation.

I am asking, why would God do such a thing? It is like saying God rode a bicycle or played football. No, there is just no logic in this theory. Did he ever do it before? We believe if He needs to do something He merely says, 'Be' and it happens!

8. It is interesting to me the lengths to which muslims go in trying to destroy the bedrock of biblical scriptures upon which Mohammad's teachings lie. I understand that in order to build up Islam, there had to be the dogma of biblical error. That is truly a travesty, because there are probably millions of muslims who are likely in true pursuit of God, but have been led astray with this false teaching against the Bible. As to faith, when you think about it, it takes faith for a muslim to believe that Mohammand split the moon, whether by God's grace or not! Is there any historical evidence for Mohammad splitting the moon? And why did he supposedly do such a thing? We both have faith, Saint, but what is important is the object of our faith and the teachings thereof.

Muslims do not need to destroy anything, except false religions. Islam is not really a new religion. In fact, it is the oldest religion on earth. Starting with Adam PBUH, the first prophet until the last and final prophet Muhammad PBUH. Including, Abraham, Moses and Jesus PBUT all. They were all prophets. Jesus PBUH was reinvented by the Roman Emperor Constantine and also by Paul both of whom never even met Jesus PBUH. They gave him a new persona, son of God. But there is nothing unique about that title. Because there are many sons of God in the Bible. Jesus PBUH was a Muslim prophet not a christian. You must start accepting the truth.

Btw, it makes no difference whether you believe Jesus PBUH is God Almighty. Our religion is complete and I do not need Jesus PBUH in any way. Although, we love him and respect him.

Edited by The Saint - 07 December 2015 at 2:45am

Hello Saint. Neither Unitarianism nor Mormonism is a bonafide "Christian" religion because of their denial or perversion of doctrinal positions held by adherents to biblical scripture. That doesn't mean Unitarians or Mormons are bad people; it just means that because they do not believe the basic tenets of the Christian faith they cannot truly be considered "Christian." Actually, Unitarians have a lot in common with humanism (https://www.unitarian.org.uk/sites/default/files/1973_What_Do_Unitarians_Believe.pdf). They mention a Jesus, but do not believe scripture that he is co-equal with God in the trinity. As for Mormonism, they have a truly twisted doctrine in their "Blood Covenant". Such doctrine holds that there are some sins which man can commit that are so heinous, that the blood shed by Jesus on the cross is unable and insufficient to make atonement for them. Such a man must shed his own blood for those grave sins by having his throat cut "from ear to ear." Just because Islam, Mormonism or Unitarianism uses the name of "Jesus", that does not mean they are talking about the Jesus of the OC/NC. They have another Jesus. One must understand definitions in order to get to the heart of a matter. If you don't have the real Jesus of Nazareth, you are just wasting your time and jeopardizing any chance of eternal life. Satan is so clever. He takes a grain of truth and builds an empire of lies on it! He especially tries to obfuscate the true Jesus because he knows it was the blood of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, shed on Calvary that defeated him.

As to adhering to the Five Pillars of Islam, even if you are faithful in performing those good works, there is still no assurance that you did so perfectly. Perhaps Allah doesn't mind. Maybe his standard for repentance and good works is low enough that anyone who at least goes through the motions, regardless of his sincerity, is good enough to have eternal life. Not sure what that says about the character of Allah, but at the very least, it suggests that he doesn't have too much problem with sin as long as a man tries to eradicate it by "good works", regardless of the condition of his heart (out of which all sin comes).

We agree on Mat. 5:17. It has never been my belief or contention that Jesus came to abolish the law. God forbid! Jesus fulfilled all the requirements of the law (Luke 24:4). The whole Book of Hebrews is a fascinating read, Saint, on how and why the NC is "better" than the OC. The OC law was tyrannical in its demands for the payment of sins, which is why no man was ever able to fulfill all the requirements of the law and why the blood of animals was shed to cover their sins. Until Jesus Christ came into the world. His blood didn't just cover or hide sins, it eradicated the sins of "whosoever put their trust in Him and his shed blood. A good analogy that you may have heard before is like a guilty man who stands before a judge in a court of law after being found guilty of crimes and someone steps forward and offers to take the punishment of the guilty man. It may seem unfair to the Muslim mind that an innocent man should have to pay for the sins of another, but it takes us right back to the question of how a sinful man can pay for his sins. The logic is evident: a man who is sinful is unable and unqualified to pay for his own sins. Good works are but filthy rags, according to the prophet Isaiah.

Saint,you stated, "Why? Repentance is a must! Otherwise man will continue to sin without repentance and there will be no forgiveness from God and sins will go on piling. Therefore, know, that good deeds without repentance for earlier sins and declaration to desist from same is the way to salvation." I think that must be a typo. I think you mean, "good deeds WITH repentance..."?

I am stunned by your assertion that there are "no records [of Jesus Christ] in the secular domain"! You seem to be an educated man, Saint, so you may be interested in pursuing this line of inquiry. Here are some good sources to start with: http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/what-historical-evidence-is-there-to-support-the-existence-of-jesus-christ/ Also, as I understand it, in Islam at least three suras of the Quran are named after references to Jesus (3, 5 and 19) and he is mentioned in 15 suras and 93 verses. Since Muhammad mentions the "People of the Book" numerous times, he was referring to biblical scripture, hence biblical Jesus. Also, "Josephus, The Essential Writings" is an excellent historical source to pursue. Additionally, Stephen Swartz's "The Other Islam: Sufism and the Road to Global Harmony" offers an attempt to reconcile Islam and Christianity through the person of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, however, the Muslim Isa and the Jewish/Christian Yeshua/Jesus are not the same personages. The fact that Isa is even mentioned in the Quran is testament to what I meant about how Satan will taken a truth and build a false narrative around it. Also, as I understand it, "Isa" has no meaning in Arabic, in contrast to "Jesus" (he saves people from their sins; God with us - Emmanuel; read Luke chapter 2). Food for thought.

Why would God take on human flesh and allow himself to be crucified for the sins of mankind, you ask. Because man cannot save himself, by good works or otherwise. That is a hurdle that must be crossed before one can understand Jesus' sacrifice on the cross. Why would God do anything is not necessarily for his creation to know. Logic loses its appeal in the face of our transcendent, almighty, righteous and loving God. Yes, of course, God can simply say, "Be" and the thing is done. But why would anyone want to limit God by disbelieving that he could do something in a way that is much more complex than just saying "Be!" He's God, we're not, so it is pretty arrogant for anyone to try to limit God. We will never be able to plummet the depth or breadth of God because we are in the created realm, and thus will always come short in understanding things of eternal weight and glory.

Sorry, Saint, but it is utterly hogwash to state that Islam is the oldest religion! It's only been around 1400 years or so. You can try to twist Islam backwards all the way to Adam, but it is the Jewish religion, the People of the Book, as Muhammad calls them, that gave us the scriptures, that gave us the Messiah.

Hello AhmadJoyia. I only have time right now to answer one of your questions (will address others later). You misunderstand the basic concept of original sin. We don't pay for Adam's sin, we do however, inherit his sin nature. When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they died spiritually, not physically, of course. In that spiritual death, they lost their innocence and gained the knowledge of good and evil, since they ate of that tree. Because all generations after Adam are born spiritually dead and grow in the knowledge of good and evil as part of growing up, man succumbs to sin sooner or later. He lusts after something, even knowing the obtaining of what he lusts for will lead to sin. But it looks good, so he pursues it. No different from Adam and Eve being tempted by Satan when he appealed to the lusts of their eyes (the fruit was attractive) and to their pride (when you eat the fruit, your eyes shall be opened and you shall be as gods, knowing good and evil (Gen. 3:5). It is important to understand that even though we inherited Adam's "sin nature", the sins we commit are not anyone's but ours. When Jesus died for our sins, he undid the damage that Adam and Eve brought upon all of mankind through their disobedience to God. Jesus was able to do that because as the Son of God, he was perfect and without sin, thus being the perfect sacrifice for man's sins. That is why Jesus said, "Unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God (John 3:3). One is born again when he receives Jesus as his savior. In a nutshell, that means surrendering our lives to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Even though one is born again the instant he accepts Jesus as savior, it takes a lifetime for the reality of that to be manifested in all the aspects of our human nature. After a man is born again and sins, he knows he must repent and God is faithful and just to forgive our sins. Important to note: God's forgiveness is not because we repent only; it is because as a born again child of God, the penalty for our sins was paid by Jesus' atonement, and we repent knowing that Jesus paid our debt. The person who grasps at least an inkling of the enormity of what the atonement means will be "burdened" by that act of love and sacrifice all his life and will never be the same again.