The First Sin.

Email
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Flag
Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf Max filesize is 16 MB. Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000. You may upload 5 per post.

File: bd6464677ce8636⋯.jpg (331.68 KB, 1600x1200, 4:3, The Great Work, Babel - Ho….jpg)

The First Sin. Christanon 10/22/17 (Sun) 18:16:47 901123 No.542980

When we look at Genesis, we see our first parents rebel against our Creator and eat of 'The Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil'. Their motivation and temptation in this rebellion was a grasping for power, in that they wanted to have the same Knowledge that God has, and in effect; claimed for themselves the same rights as God. This is the same motivation we see in Satan when he vied for power, and sought to ascend to take a throne for himself alongside the Most High: a veritable Act of War.

Now God had promised that on the day Man ate of the fruit of this Tree he would surely die, yet Adam and Eve were not immediately struck down in their physical flesh. Still, in rebelling against the One who is Life, they rejected Life – becoming cut off from Him – and Man became spiritually 'dead in his Sins': a nature we inherit.

(Ephesians 2:1, Romans 5:12, Psalm 51:5)

The historically orthodox argument from this, is that it is impossible for a dead soul – which has no animation, ability, desire, nor will – to turn to God; and it can only be reinvigorated and regenerated and thus repentant unto God, when Christ who is 'The Resurrection and The Life' commands it to rise.

(Hebrews 11:6, Ephesians 2:8, John 11:43)

An extension of this argument would say that all false religion can be demonstrated as such, if they hold that Man has the same right as his Creator; and is in some way capable of reinvigorating and motivating himself toward goodness – having enough life, or residual divinity within himself – as to pull himself from the grave and make himself able to meet the standard of Absolute Holiness demanded by God.

(1Peter 1:16)

So when we look at the pagan religions like Hinduism, philosophies such as Buddhism, the bastardised Abrahamic faiths of Islam and modern Judaism, or the errant sects of Christianity, we see an anthropocentrism which places Man as the ultimate creator of his fate, making an idol of himself; where he must perform rituals and rites of purification, and adhere to Extra-Biblical moral codes, so as please the gods of his imagination.

But God does not share His glory with anyone (Isaiah 42:8) least of all the mere worm that is rebellious Man who art hostile toward Him (Romans 7:24, Job 25:6, Romans 8:7) and anyone who boasts of their own righteousness rather than relying on Christ (Ephesian 2:8-10, John 17:6) is uttering that same Satanic lie before the Throne of God… and so risk their souls as to hear these words of Judgement: "I Never Knew You: Depart From Me, Ye Workers Of Iniquity!"

~ Acts 13:38

Christanon 10/22/17 (Sun) 20:11:11 ac1acd No.543035

>When we look at Genesis, we see our first parents rebel against our Creator and eat of 'The Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil'. Their motivation and temptation in this rebellion was a grasping for power, in that they wanted to have the same Knowledge that God has, and in effect; claimed for themselves the same rights as God. This is the same motivation we see in Satan when he vied for power, and sought to ascend to take a throne for himself alongside the Most High: a veritable Act of War.

Not quite, but close. Both first sins of angels and humans was pride, not grasping for power per se

> Now God had promised that on the day Man ate of the fruit of this Tree he would surely die, yet Adam and Eve were not immediately struck down in their physical flesh. Still, in rebelling against the One who is Life, they rejected Life – becoming cut off from Him – and Man became spiritually 'dead in his Sins': a nature we inherit. (Ephesians 2:1, Romans 5:12, Psalm 51:5)

Not quite, but close. Fall of Adam wounded our nature in four way. Lack of life i.e. lack of original grace and justice also called Original sin is one of them, not not only one. There is also Concupiscence - our passions are not under intelect anymore and we have this desire to sin in us. There is aloso ignorance and darkened intellect. And finally, physical frailty and death. This is courruption of human naturen that we inherit, this is one of three results of Fall of Adam

> The historically orthodox argument from this, is that it is impossible for a dead soul – which has no animation, ability, desire, nor will – to turn to God; and it can only be reinvigorated and regenerated and thus repentant unto God, when Christ who is 'The Resurrection and The Life' commands it to rise.

(Hebrews 11:6, Ephesians 2:8, John 11:43)

And now you are not close. The orthodox argument from this is that for dead soul, which has animation or rather IS animation (for animation is by defintion "Movement of body caused by soul". If dead souls were not animateing thay would not be souls, anima, at all), which have natural for them desire of God and wills first and formost it's natural end -happines which is God but have no natural ability to save itsefl (to think otherwise is to be Pelegian) only hope of being saved is to repent and be regenerated by God's Grace, by Christ who is 'The Resurrection and The Life' and not only phisical resurection but also spiritual one.

>An extension of this argument would say that all false religion can be demonstrated as such, if they hold that Man has the same right as his Creator; and is in some way capable of reinvigorating and motivating himself toward goodness – having enough life, or residual divinity within himself – as to pull himself from the grave and make himself able to meet the standard of Absolute Holiness demanded by God.

(1Peter 1:16)

And we call this pelagianism

> So when we look at the pagan religions like Hinduism, philosophies such as Buddhism, the bastardised Abrahamic faiths of Islam and modern Judaism, or the errant sects of Christianity, we see an anthropocentrism which places Man as the ultimate creator of his fate, making an idol of himself; where he must perform rituals and rites of purification, and adhere to Extra-Biblical moral codes, so as please the gods of his imagination.

Yes with one disclaimer. "Extra-biblical" as something wrong is stupid. Canon of Bible is extra biblical. Division of ilibe on chapters and verses is extra biblical. Bible being called bible is extrabiblical. You shoul have mean "Anti-biblical".

Also, if this is meant to be attack on sacramental churches and congregations then you probably have no idea what sacrament is.

> But God does not share His glory with anyone (Isaiah 42:8) least of all the mere worm that is rebellious Man who art hostile toward Him (Romans 7:24, Job 25:6, Romans 8:7) and anyone who boasts of their own righteousness rather than relying on Christ (Ephesian 2:8-10, John 17:6) is uttering that same Satanic lie before the Throne of God…

Close but not quite. He does not share his glory with anyone, but he makes us glorious. "Whom He foreknew(…), He glorifies".Also, he makes us righteous and thus we are righteous. We should not boast about it, for we are righteous not by us but by gift of God but we are truly righteous.

>and so risk their souls as to hear these words of Judgement: "I Never Knew You: Depart From Me, Ye Workers Of Iniquity!"

Right.

>~ Acts 13:38

We are not saved by our own, nor by any Law, but by Grace.

Christanon 10/22/17 (Sun) 23:09:44 901123 No.543151

File: 9116dce9174591f⋯.jpg (214.84 KB, 992x558, 16:9, I honestly forgot that doi….jpg)

>>543035

> Both first sins of angels and humans was pride

Do you understand how reductive this statement is, friend?

Now don't get me wrong, I agree with you that Pride was part of the motivation in our first parents to disobey God's only commandment to them, because in placing themselves in a position where they could judge God's instruction, and decide that He was wrong to restrict them from eating the fruit; they demonstrated an outstanding and outrageous arrogance, as if mere creatures could rule against the Law of their Creator. Yet they were tempted into that action by the promise that if they only ate of the tree, they would be like God; hence my stating in the OP that it was a power grab, feeling entitled to the same knowledge as God, and by extension; the same rights.

Just look at the wording from Gen 3, and while the emphasis is my own, a plain reading of the text shows the real crux of their temptation;

< But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

This is why I liken Satan's act of war against God as being of the same nature, that yes – in his Pride – a mere creature thought himself worthy of a throne beside the Most High. But Anon I feel confident in saying that all sinful action is borne of Pride, since whenever a man esteems his own wants and desires above the needs of others, and more importantly; above God's Moral Law, then whatever action he takes is a 'Prideful act', isn't it? If we need further proof of this we can look at all the sins of men listed in the Scripture, and from the cowardly self-preservation of Abram to the haughty boasting of Nebuchadnezzar, each esteemed their own worth to be of more value than anything else.

And I would further my argument by observing the Saviour, who being in very nature God did not consider equality with God something to be grasped and clung on to, but instead cast off His royal garments and making himself of no reputation, took on the form of a slave by becoming a man, humbling himself even to point of obediently dying on a cross, and moreover; commanded His disciples to do likewise, the greatest of them to be a slave to all, thus demonstrating the very antithesis of Sin is to be humble.

So please don't misunderstand me, Anon, you are correct in saying that the original Sin was pride, but please; the origin of all Sin is Pride.

Now I'm imagining some of our more pedantic friends on this board might have some objections, and the first one I can think of would be taking the words of Scripture out of context and saying; "… but St. Paul said the love of money is the root of all manners of evil", and while it may seem I've built a strawman here, I've been on this board a number of days now and this is the type of argumentation that gets thrown up quite regularly, so I will answer it briefly just in case. Money gives one a sense of security and many rely on money rather than rely on God, and Scripture tells us that anything not done in faith is Sin, so putting one's need for a sense of security over and above the command of God to have faith in Him… is an act of Pride - since you value your own self more than anything else.

If anyone has any other sins they'd like to claim aren't borne of Pride, please post them here and I'll see if I agree with you.

But back to you my Roman Catholic friend @ >>543035 you can see I've already created a TL;DR response to just one point in your comment, and right now I'd like to go do something else IRL, so I'll come back later and get to the next one.

Pic only related to the topic, I promise I'm not insinuating anything about your character, everything in the filename is true.

Christanon 10/22/17 (Sun) 23:14:25 3938aa No.543155

>>543151

>Do you understand how reductive this statement is, friend?

>Now I'm imagining some of our more pedantic friends

>I've been on this board a number of days now

Ayup … Pride, indeed.

Also, do you know your entire argument is a speech from Mother Abigail in the Stephen King novel "The Stand'?