[blparent] Subject: Original Sin

[Tara Briggs]

This subject is off-topic. I know I'm not a moderator, but do you guys think you could please take it off the list. I understand that this list is to discuss parenting is blind people. Not politics.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 22, 2017, at 7:03 AM, Bob Evans via BlParent <blparent at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello, thank you for your response. I just would like to append
> further assertions. Based on your stark reluctance to tackle any of my
> theological challenges, it is considered an implicit defeatism for
> your camp. Protestants are not more than mere servants to Zionism. And
> as for your Christology devotion, it is considerably undistinguished.
> Your endorsement to the apartheid Zionist state is intrinsically
> inalienable. Thence, our duty is to incessantly engage with you in
> relentless combat missions until your party is perfectly discomfited.
> Your ministry doesn’t base its tenets on nothing but an oblique hope
> of a theoretical scheme of salvation. The assumption that someone
> could have died for your sin is substantially Laputan and
> consequently, it is unlikely to be rectifiable. In Trump’s damnable
> era, your state of dismay has just started. Americanisation is quite
> fragile and its global leadership is about to diminish. Your oval
> office is  rotten to the core. Jews have constantly been dominating
> your denomination since Martin Luther era and even earlier to that
> time. There are many Muslims whom I knew have abandoned Islam to
> Christianity. Nevertheless, I never fathomed the relationship between
> becoming Christian, residing in the States and endorsing Zionists. I
> wish you have got sufficient courage to tackle this challenge in the
> slightest. I urge you to ponder properly on what I proposed. If you
> ever perceived the demand to clarify what might be vague to you,
> kindly, keep me notified. Best wishes, Bob
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On 7/21/17, Marty Purvis <wuas at wake-up.org> wrote:
>> Hello Mostafa:
>> 
>> Thank you for your email.
>> 
>> Our views on religious matters are very far apart.
>> So far, that further discussion would most likely be fruitless.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Larry Wilson
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Contact Page Message <
>> postmaster at wake-up.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> From: Mostafa, technically Bob <ebob824 at gmail.com>
>>> Subject: Original Sin
>>> 
>>> Visitor's Message:
>>> Hello. I am Mostafa Almahdy. Bob Evans is just a technical name. I used
>>> to
>>> be called so when I worked at an American call centre here in Cairo. So,
>>> it
>>> is still my name. In the subsequent segment, I’ll present the Christian
>>> narrative of Original Sin in addition to posing crucial queries and
>>> denotative rebuttals. What is Original Sin in Christianity? It is a sin
>>> said to be inherited by all descendants of Adam. When Adam and Eve
>>> sinned,
>>> death entered to the world. Thence, God demanded to be paid to redeem
>>> humanity. He then sacrificed his only begotten son to ransom us. This
>>> account may ostensibly seem to be reasonable. Be that as it may, it
>>> contains major defects. First of which, it portrays the divine with
>>> imperfection. It doesn’t recognise his omnipotence. Why? Because
>>> according
>>> to this theology, he demanded to be paid in order to redeem. At its
>>> inception, I have couple of questions for clergy. First, has Adam been
>>> destined to be eternal in Eden? Second, when he committed his ever first
>>> sin, why hasn’t he been given one chance to repent? Third, when Adam ate
>>> from the tree of knowing good and evil, he became like God according to
>>> Genesis. A question here, has he been punished because he became aware of
>>> good and evil? It is assumed that he didn’t know good and evil until he
>>> ate
>>> from the tree of knowing good and evil. So, how could God punish an
>>> innocent? And as for sin inheritance, if a man and a woman committed
>>> adultery, could we possibly hold their child accountable for what they
>>> have
>>> done? This is the precise logic exploited in Christian concept of
>>> Original
>>> Sin. And as for redemption and forfeiture, if God was paid to redeem, how
>>> could he still forgive? If I supposedly wounded someone, does he has the
>>> right to retaliate? Yes, he certainly does. And, if he wanted to forgive
>>> me, could he still retaliate? No, he surely couldn’t. It’s either
>>> forgiveness or retaliation, it couldn’t be both. And as for Christ, how
>>> could an innocent bear the guilty’s iniquity? According to traditional
>>> Christian theology, death entered to the world when Adam and Eve sinned.
>>> Therefore, someone had to die for this. He had to be impeccant and, he
>>> had
>>> to die forever. Christians preach that Jesus is the one who paid for
>>> this.
>>> The question is, did he die forever? According to Christian story, he
>>> died
>>> for three days. Well actually, he died for less than that if you think of
>>> it a bit. Jesus’s date of Crucifixion and resurrection differs from
>>> gospel
>>> to another. Please, don’t take my word for this. I urge you to just check
>>> John nineteen and Mark fifteen. Most Christians today believe that Jesus
>>> died on a Friday afternoon and risen on a fine Easter Sunday morning. As
>>> for Adventists, they do not believe in this. They even have their Sabbath
>>> held on Saturday. Christian innovation of Original Sin is remarkably
>>> exposed. I urge southern laity and their associates to genuinely ponder
>>> on
>>> the scenario encountered in Christian theology. If Adam sinned and we
>>> were
>>> contagiously destined to be anathematised eternally, why didn’t Jesus die
>>> forever then? I believe that my points are critical and thus, they
>>> deserve
>>> thorough attention. It is a bit odd to just rely on the thought that
>>> someone theoretically died for my sins and then, go do whatever I want.
>>> We
>>> bear witness western Christians who basically don’t care about what they
>>> do. They eat explicitly prohibited cattle, they vastly consume alcoholic
>>> beverages and they carelessly engage in illicit wedlock. Where is your
>>> devotional consignment? Religious life is the last thing a lay western
>>> Christian wants to think of. I respectfully ask you to ponder on your
>>> religious responsibility. As a Muslim, what prevents me from having a
>>> girlfriend? Well, nothing but my religion which holds me fully
>>> accountable
>>> for either righteous or vicious deeds. Why Christian tradition is so
>>> tolerant with the culture of boyfriend and girlfriend illicit
>>> relationships? As you can see, despite the concept’s fraudulently
>>> emotional
>>> prettification, it is besieged with numerously irreconcilable
>>> discrepancies. This is the primary tenet upon which your whole faith is
>>> based, this is indeed the backbone of Christianity. If someone disagrees
>>> with this statement,  well, tell me then, how could the account of
>>> Crucifixion and Redemption be presented without basing it on the
>>> Christian
>>> concept of Original Sin? I seriously attempt to fathom. I do not intend
>>> to
>>> deride or ridicule. I am totally convinced that Christians have absolute
>>> right to broadly proselytize, to keenly call for their faith. Yes, they
>>> have the right to do so on one condition. I urge them to refrain from
>>> using
>>> fallacious rhetoric in their dialog. It just makes their stance quite
>>> attenuated and thus, susceptible  to easily crumble under critical
>>> scrutiny. I am prepared to be christened if someone convinced me with
>>> plain
>>> reasonableness that what you believe is the truth. I do not give credit
>>> to
>>> Christian portraiture of original sin. Now, if you want to convince
>>> someone
>>> to become Christian, you have got to explain this mystery to him. For
>>> some
>>> reason, it seems to be unexplainable to me. It looks like as if someone
>>> worked it out or made it up. So basically, I feel it is quite perturbing
>>> to  conjointly destine our whole human species to hell for no fault of
>>> its
>>> own. However, some pastors tend to baffle between holding the innocent
>>> versus the guilty accountable, either instigants or actual actors. Pastor
>>> Jacob of Michigan believes that instigants are not to be held
>>> accountable.
>>> Who is an instigant?                      An instigant is someone who
>>> deliberately foments trouble. So, if hateful pastors provoked mass Muslim
>>> offence that led to broad outrage, they are basically held accountable
>>> for
>>> any casualty or fatality rate. Similarly, if Muslim clerics caused hate
>>> because of their radical speech, they are wholly held accountable for any
>>> erupted tension  in the community. So, statutorily, instigants are
>>> equally
>>> held accountable just as actual actors. So, if a girl who is absolutely
>>> gorgeous wore a staggeringly provocative outfit to purposely beguile men,
>>> she is partly held accountable for the lust she consciously  instigated.
>>> It
>>> seems that    fibbers and  chisellers are not willing to address the
>>> subject of Original Sin fairly. They tend to breach with decisive facts.
>>> Therefore, their theology is incessantly subjected to critical criticism.
>>> Some of them even asked me, whether we as Muslims are sure we are going
>>> to
>>> heaven. I wouldn’t ever assure I am going to heaven unless with
>>> providential amnesty. I would say it is unjustified pride if I ever
>>> thought I am absolutely going to heaven. It just contradicts with
>>> enjoined
>>> humility. Islam teaches us to be pious and to devote ourselves to doing
>>> good deeds. I on multiple occasions attempted to establish a mutually
>>> deferential dialog with southern pastors. Nevertheless, they failed to
>>> comply to this. Their level of timidity did not match with my
>>> expectations.
>>> I tell them, if you ever wanted to learn about Islam, it is not an
>>> encouraging motive to obliviously quote oriental literature. First off,
>>> you
>>> desperately demand to develop proper command of Arabic. Moreover, your
>>> prejudicial notion doesn’t do more than substantiating your unprecedented
>>> nescience. If Original Sin wasn’t the fundamental belief of Christianity,
>>> it would have not been used to constitute its doctrinal tenets. I civilly
>>> postulate this theological conversation because I am quite interested in
>>> comparative theology. For each faith, there are fundamental tenets. I
>>> challengingly assert that without Original Sin, Christianity would have
>>> not
>>> ever existed. For emotional motives, the idea that someone died in the
>>> cause of your salvation is quite appealing. However, as we saw, it has
>>> many
>>> defects if it is to be illustrated in moderately rational disposal. I
>>> await
>>> to hear pastoral response. But please, we do not need to either
>>> equivocate
>>> nor unconscionably philosophise the matter. It rather has to be
>>> simplified
>>> in a rationally straightforward manner. Beating around the bush has
>>> intemperately fell at the first hurdle. Thank you for reading, Mostafa,
>>> technically Bob Evans.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> This e-mail was sent from the "Contact US" page on Wake Up America
>>> Seminars
>>> (https://www.wake-up.org/contact-us/)
>>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> BlParent mailing list
> BlParent at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blparent_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlParent:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blparent_nfbnet.org/thflute%40gmail.com