Born as 'Sinners'

[_the road to hana]

"born of sin", excuse my use of language please. If you read the links I provided it would make more sense.

I read the links. I was actually commenting on sethbag's comments on "born of sin," and not yours.

I get dizzy reading CARMS, pirate. I don't know how you can post there. My advice, don't.

[_solomarineris]

I
What do you all think regarding Satan being our Father and babies born of sin?
JonasS.

Hey do you have any doubt about it?
If you are male, you are born with a 7-8 "weapon.
When you are under forty, your waist-line often is twice as wide.
If that is not a sin of weapon, what is it?

[_Casslanpepci]

Is this also you, pirate?

I just want to point out that I formerly posted as Casslan. I changed my user name - you can check with Dr Shades if you like!

[_the road to hana]

Is this also you, pirate?

I just want to point out that I formerly posted as Casslan. I changed my user name - you can check with Dr Shades if you like!

No, that's fine. I was just getting confused by pirate taking on multiple socks.

[_huckelberry]

[quote="the road to hana"][quote="huckelberry"]I do not conclude from that that unbaptized babies go to hell. I realize there are people who have believed they do. I think they are wrong.[/quote]

I think it might be more accurate to say, "there are people who have believed that there are those who believe this."

I'm not aware of any mainstream Christian religion that believes that unbaptized babies go to hell. Limbo, maybe, but even that's been tossed out.

Mormons believe that those who are not baptized by their own perceived proper authority cannot inherit the Celestial Kingdom. However, to say that this means that they believe that those who are not baptized LDS "go to hell" would be inaccurate.[/quote]

A bit of sly humor in the phrase, there are people who have believed that there are those who believe this?

road to Hana, it is not easy to find a conversation path with a person who is agreeing. I seem to see the matter like you. It is interesting to observe some of the strange images of what the doctrine means held by those who dislike it. I was going to nominate Sethbag comment about religious distaste for female roproductive biology as most bizarre.But we have all heard the cartoons about repressed religious types. I don't know any real world examples that fit that sort of picture. (cultureal cartoons about medieval monks who being celibate had ignorant ideas of women)

But the phrase born of sin sounds like the problem is sex. The phrase is incorrect, we agree. The idea that we are children of Satan if literal is just bizarre, who believes that???

As you have pointed out LDS and trad Christian views on the fall are functionally very close together desite the amount of noise LDS make about their version being much better. I can't find that difference.

For arguement I might wonder if the LDS version allows people when sinning to say this is not their real self but just a temporary problem resulting from the "earthly experience" What is irritating about the tradition view is that our real self whch is born and finds its way into sinning.

[_the road to hana]

As you have pointed out LDS and trad Christian views on the fall are functionally very close together desite the amount of noise LDS make about their version being much better. I can't find that difference.

I think that's extremely well said, huckelberry.

It seems from me, in my own years of study, that Joseph Smith was very poorly catechized in Christian faith, although he was attracted to a number of aspects of it and repelled by others, and some (like infant baptism) that had direct bearing on his own life, he chose to design the way that was most attractive to his own worldview.

In so doing, I believe he misunderstood some aspects of Christian theology which got lost in translation, and nearly two hundred years later have not been remedied.

It's a really interesting hodgepodge he put together, influenced by many quarters, Swedenborgianism, the Anabaptist movement, Jewish mysticism, and so on, but there are many aspects of Mormon theology that claim to be different from mainstream Christianity, where there is really a distinction without a difference. Unfortunately, the rank and file of LDS membership is completely unaware of this, and continues to parrot things taught to them which only perpetuate misunderstanding between them and other faiths.

I'm frequently amused by things that Joseph Smith apparently chose to "inquire of the Lord" regarding, like, hey, what really happened to the Apostle John? or hey, what about all those Old Testament characters who had multiple wives?

Of all the mysteries of the universe that could have been solved by inquiring of the Lord, those are two that wouldn't have even occurred to me as priorities. And it seems that further inquiry, if real, might have resulted in less confusion, and not more. The resulting theology that sprung out of Joseph Smith's enthusiasm for creating his own faith and tailoring it to his own specific preferences is astonishing in the ways it has put its membership at odds with the greater Christian community simply because Joseph Smith didn't understand the terminology.

(I guess if that first sentence you cited of mine wasn't convoluted enough for you, this one can compete with it.)

[_huckelberry]

We are all born sinners. Scripture tells us so, plus it isn't hard to see we fall very short of sinlessness.

Wow, what an easy way to control someone.

So far I have failed to draw JonasS into engaging the subject. I do not know what view Jonas would support.

Attempting to lure a discussion I am picking on more pictures of the doctrine which appear mishapen to me. A way to control people??? Really, I do not see how. If it is such a control device would like to be enlightened. I do not like being controlled. I react negatively to efforts to controll me. If a doctrine I believe, original sin, is controlling me or is a device to control me, I really want to see it. Instead I see a doctine that cuts the ground out from underneath pretentious religious controllers. When ever some priesttype gets off on putting other people down just realize he is expressing sin which he has inherited like everybody else.

Compare this to the idea some people are extra special good due to their achivements in a preexistence that we do not remember have no record of and cannot access. This is a real oportunity for relgiious controlers. They claim to have the inside track and the rest of us need to follow.

If somebody, anybody, claims they have the solution to sin which I lack I remember we all inherited the problem together.

If anybody claims I cannot contribute to the solution to the problem of sin I remember our creator called us all to participate in the solution using our own heart mind and will. There is no special group with a head start. In this world we all start with Adams beginnings. We all start here together.

[_Hoops]

I put no. We are born with the capacity to commit sin but we are born sinless. As we get older, we begin to be "naughty" and thus this starts us on the path of sin. We may be born sinless, but all, without exception (excluding Jesus) have sinned and thus we come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)

"And Jesus called a little child to him, and set him in the midst of them. And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 18:2-3)

"But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 19:14 (13-15))

It would appear that Jesus himself thought that small children incapable of sinning as he used them to describe how we should be, in order to enter into the kingdom of heaven.

And the only way we can be come as a little child in order to enter the kingdom of heaven, is to repent of our sins and be baptised.

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts 2:38)

"And why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. (Acts 22:16)

Your biblical interpretation is incorrect. and illogical.

Jesus is referring to having the faith of a child. You are condemning children as the op is. in other words, what if a small child has died before being baptized? is he/she in hell? that's silly and illogical. And how can a child repent? And, I'm quite sure you do not know what repent means.

[_Hoops]

I voted other in response to how you worded the question. Obviously, i can't know for sure your intention of the words you use, but I believe you have lifted the phrase "children of satan" out of context.

we are all sinful, including newborn babes. But God will save who He will. I am quite confident that God is just and that He has made provisions for children.

[_Jersey Girl]

Where is this Satan as our father coming from? Scripture ref please?