Okay, I have three different questions for you, which are related to each other. I would ask that you read each question in order, and think carefully about each question, formulating your answer to each one BEFORE reading the next question. Oh, and if the second question doesn't apply to you, don't post an answer.
Okay, now for the questions:
1. Many people believe that blacks in the United States should be given compensation from whites because their ancestors were slaves some 150 years ago. Do you believe that white people should be morally required to provide this compensation?
***
2. If you believe, either literally or metaphorically, in the biblical account of Adam and Eve eating the apple, do you think that modern people morally deserve to go to Hell for a choice which their distant ancestors made and which they had no power over?
***
3. Now, if you answered 'no' to the first question and 'yes' to the second question, how do you reconcile those two positions?
2007-11-09 08:42:25 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
By the way, best answer goes to the person with the best explanation to question 3.
2007-11-09 08:43:16 · update #1
Hmm, it seems like a lot fewer people are saying yes to question 2 than I expected. Of course maybe that's partly due to a self-selection process in the answerers. At any rate, I'd just like to make sure something is clear. Most people here seem to be conceding that we don't deserve to go to Hell based on a taint left by Adam and Eve, but only on our own sins, and that all Adam and Eve did was make it possible for us to live in sin if we so choose. I just want to make sure everyone understands that, given this position, it is at least theoretically possible that a person could choose never to sin and therefore go to Heaven by default. If this is NOT the case, if it is inevitable that every person will sin at some point, then this is technically no better than deserving to go to Hell from the original taint alone, because it eliminates the aspect of free choice. So, remember to take that into account in your answer if it's applicable.
2007-11-10 08:12:28 · update #2
1.) No we should not. The problem lies between equality and freedom and if one tries to make everything fair, then it infringes on civil liberties.
2.) No, we deserve to go to hell for our own sins.
3.)Notice I said No for both question. Well the problem lies in the fact that we inherited sin nature from the fall of Adam. That means it was impossible for us to live a perfect sinless life. However we are only responsbible for our sins, once we are at the age of accountablity. Therefore children will not be judged for their sins. It does seem unfair that God would create us knowing our dilemma, but he solved the problem now it is up for us to accept it.
2007-11-09 08:50:52 · answer #1 · answered by ۞ JønaŦhan ۞ 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
1) No, I say this because, it was some 150 years ago, and they have been well compensated. They have black awearness month, there is no white awearness month, and people are forgetting white heritage, which is sad. We are now equal, and everything we are sorry about doing is undone. In fact, if you go into the inner city, and live there, as a white person, you will get hurt because you are white, (not always but often and by mean black people, not the good ones but it does happen).
2) I believe in the Bible account. I believe that, because we "all" sin and come short of the glory of God, for which the punishment is eternal death, we are all guilty. But because Jesus saved us, we now are free from that guilt if we only believe. So to answer your direct question, No, I don't believe we should all go to hell because of their decision, I believe we are all guilty because of OUR CURRENT decisions.
3) I answered no to both. But I get what your saying, and it is very interesting, also very impressive. Good Job.
Ok, so I'll answer this question also.
Because I believe that we are guilty because of our current sin and not because of adam and eve's sin, but their punishment, expulsion from the Garden of Eden, effects us. I believe that if we are cruel to black people now, then we should be punished, but we should not be punished because of what our ancestors did. Actually, some of them weren't our ancestors, I'm half polish and half english/scotts Irish, my moms family has been in America for a long time but my dads family has only been here 3 generations. So, my grandmother, whose mother moved here, didn't even have ancestors with black slaves. Just to point that out, I found that amuzing, and I thought of it while I was typing this out.
I don't know if that was the answer you were looking for, but I'm sure you wanted a truthful answer and thats what I gave.
Curious to see the results.
Jessica - feel free to email
2007-11-09 08:53:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No to Question 1
Yes to Question 2
As for Question 3 here is my explanation:
What is described in Genesis has implications for the universe and all people in it. It's not just the story of Adam and Eve that should be considered. Taking it out of context is a common "fundamentalist" type mistake.
If we look at other stories - Cain and Abel, Noah and the Flood, the Tower of Babel - we see a common theme: human sin is followed by punishment, but the last word in each story is one of grace from God.
The sin in each of these stories is one and the same, and it is named in the first story - PRIDE
We all continue to commit this sin to this very day. In fact, it is the root of all sins. We aren't guilty because Adam and Eve spoiled it for everyone. We are guilty because we are ALL SINNERS. Responsibility lies with each person and God is his judge.
Besides, to say we all "deserve to go to Hell" is probably not the phrase I would use. It smacks of Calvinism and "total depravity." Rather, all men are naturally good yet born with original sin, and suffer from the effects of it until redeemed by God through repentance and baptism.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says about the Genesis account: “In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current” (#110).
We realize that the story of Adam and Eve is rather like a parable. The critical truth (and the point God intended) is in the message of sin = punishment = need for salvation - rather than in factual history.
Wow, awesome question and thank you for the spiritual exercise!
Pax Vobiscum+
2007-11-09 08:49:46 · answer #3 · answered by Veritas 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
1. No. It's unjust for children to be liable for the sins of the parents.
2. No. The Atonement of Jesus Christ was planned from before the foundation of the earth to resolve the conditions brought on by the fall of Adam. People will be judged for their own sins and not for Adam's transgression.
1st Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
2007-11-09 15:27:14 · answer #4 · answered by Bryan Kingsford 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. Yes, for compensation; No, for only whites. I believe that they were promised "40 acres and a mule" by the U.S. government [that is, ALL citizens, not only white people] at one point in U.S. history.
2. No. The so-called "original sin" is a man-made invention by the early RC Church, which granted them a portal to institute 'infant baptism' to eradicate such a fabrication. In turn, this has provided them [and other sects that follow these doctrines] with a steady stream of converts up to now.
3. I don't need to reconcile these two positions.
Does my answer still qualify??
Peace be with you.
2007-11-09 08:58:05 · answer #5 · answered by Arf Bee 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. No I don't think whites should have to do anything. I think that was in the past and people should get over it.
2. I don't believe we are condemned just because one person ate a piece of fruit. That would not be fair justice. I think we are guilty of sin when we become of age to actually know right from wrong. How could a baby be born guilty of sin and not even know what sin is, because they did nothing wrong?
2007-11-09 08:52:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The "Original Sin" from Adam and Eve left a distinct change in humanity.
Adam and Eve did not have the knowledge of Sin, as such were incapable of it. Once they ate from the "Tree of Knowledge", They became aware of Sin and as such fell victim to it
From there, their descendent's each carried the potential of sin and as such are punished for it
ADD: Sorry, I jumped to #3
#1 - I don't believe in reparations
#2 - I don't believe in Adam and Eve (Atheist)
But I have studied a bit so I think my answer to #3 may still have some weight
2007-11-09 08:45:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
No to the first question. And if you study, you will find that we were redeemed by Christ, and are only condemned by being evil (John 3:19-21)
While slavery was certainly an evil thing, it bears no relation to original sin.
2007-11-09 08:47:23 · answer #8 · answered by great gig in the sky 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1 - no to reparations
2 - while I believe in Adam and Eve, I also believe that it's your choices that condemn you to Hell, not the choice made by Eve.
3 - not applicable.
2007-11-09 08:47:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
no
I'm not going to hell because of Adam and Eve, if i went it would be because i denied the Lord and am sinfull. it is through the grace of God I am saved, i prayed for forgiveness and in doing so excepted Jesus as my Savior.
so to answer your question I'm not going to hell, and i didn't do anything to anyone and the people being compensated aren't the ones who were mistreated so i stay with no on that one.
2007-11-09 08:49:16 · answer #10 · answered by bre 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋