Which one of these religions is founded on the most absurd premise?

All are born with original sin. Someone born of a virgin is born without original sin.

 

Well I was born an original sinner.
I was borne from original sin.
And if I had a dollar bill
For all the things I've done
There'd be a mountain of money
Piled up to my chin...

sorry....carry on....

 

MacBeth !!!!!



DD

 

I almost went back to edit my post to say "...you know, like MacBeth".

 

I agree...

Thank god DREAMer is not on Clutchfans anymore...

 

Why is it considered an original "sin"?

 

I've recently discovered that a surprising amount of moderate theologians have questioned the historical authenticity of the birth of Jesus and concluded that maybe it didn't happen the way it's recorded. The claim is that there are plenty of flamboyant and elaborate details of the story that would be common in a fictional story of the same time period (i.e. a bright star, virgin birth, manger scene, gifts, etc.).

Now before I get marked, I'm not saying I believe this. And neither are the scholars. Essentially, they are throwing their hands up and saying, "OK, the truth is that the virgin birth doesn't really matter. We aren't hanging our hat on this, so we can be flexible."

Those same scholars, however, would say that the Resurrection is without flexibility or debate. We can't get around that one or explain it away.

 

This does not make sense.

Understatement. As it pertains to the above topic, Isaiah's "prophecy" about Jesus in Hebrew uses the term almah, which means "young woman". Matthew, reading the Greek version, instead sees the term parthenos, virgin - the story of his birth is accordingly changed. In doing so Matthew adjusts Mark's account of Jesus' life by implying that Jesus received the spirit not at baptism, but at conception. More to the point, a birth that would have been scandalous is instead miraculous, the fulfillment of prophecy.

 

Dear God....

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hk41Gbjljfo?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hk41Gbjljfo?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

DD

 

In Catholicism they believe that Mary not Jesus was born first without original sin and call it the Immaculate Conception.

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

Thus having Mary be born without sin by the grace of God, was picked to have Jesus the Lord and Savior.

I don't think other denominations believe the same but gives you a better understanding of why Catholics portray Mary as a very important figure in the religion.

 

Let people believe in what they want as long as they don't intefere with what you believe. Why do yall care about which is more absurd in your opinion. It's one thing to ask out of curiousity and another to ask out of spite.

The same people that hate when people preach to them are the same people who try to mock and trash religion. That annoyance is not a one way street. You're preaching your belief of "non-belief".

 

True but non believers are not running around trying to spread their non belief and using said non belief to inspire people to kill each other.

DD

 

While I agree to the 2nd part of your statement, the first part is wrong. Although not quite has annoying as 'believers' preaching, the b!tching/moaning about religions is at an all time high and climbing.

 

That is what happens when religions run out of gas and a new ones are born.

Inevitably I believe that Christianity and Islam will run out of vogue and die just like all the others have in history....

DD

 

Wiki says it better than I can:

"In the theology of the Catholic Church, original sin is regarded as the general condition of sinfulness, that is (the absence of holiness and perfect charity) into which humans are born, distinct from the actual sins that a person commits. "

 

Combining the two religions and their followers you get about 3.7 billion people. Seeing that the world's population is around 6.9 billion I find it hard that you actually believe your statement. The face of the religion may change in the future, but the religions themselves will never end.

 

You could be right, but history suggest otherwise, every religion has died out and another one was born and became more popular.

Maybe our time now is different, but I doubt it.

Let me give you a scenario, for fun.....what if an Alien race landed and showed us evidence that they were the ones that seeded our planet, what would happen to today's religions then?



DD

 

I would ask them who created them.

 

And again, a new religion is born.....just as I said.

DD

 

Right, but that does not answer what having been a virgin mother would have to do with it vs. having had sex. Why is sex considered a sin?