[blindkid] Subject: Original Sin

Sat Jul 22 17:29:36 UTC 2017

There is no need to respond to his messages.  He 
has been unsubscribed, and blocked.  He is invading a number of our lists.

Dave

At 08:39 AM 7/22/2017, you wrote:
>+1 > On Jul 22, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Penny Duffy 
>via blindkid <blindkid at nfbnet.org> wrote: > > I 
>am thinking this was posted in error as it's not 
>on topic. > > On Sat, Jul 22, 2017, 9:05 AM Bob 
>Evans via blindkid <blindkid 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 doesnâ€™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 Trumpâ€™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, Iâ€™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 doesnâ€™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 hasnâ€™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 
>didnâ€™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 couldnâ€™t. Itâ€™s 
>either >>>> forgiveness or retaliation, it 
>couldnâ€™t be both. And as for Christ, how >>>> 
>could an innocent bear the guiltyâ€™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. 
>Jesusâ€™s date of Crucifixion and resurrection 
>differs from >>>> gospel >>>> to another. 
>Please, donâ€™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 didnâ€™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 donâ€™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 conceptâ€™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 
>wouldnâ€™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 doesnâ€™t do more than 
>substantiating your >> unprecedented >>>> 
>nescience. If Original Sin wasnâ€™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/) >>>> >>> >> >>