HOME | DD

Description
How did many become sinners because of Adam?...How could we, who were not yet born, all be condemned with him, even though God said, 'Neither the fathers shall be put to death because of their children, nor the children because of their fathers, but the soul which sins shall be put to death'? (Deut 24:16)
-Saint Cyril of Alexandria-

This has been made in respons to the vilification of Christian doctrine by here: [link] and here [link]
I will be making a detailed response to his articles.
-----------------------------------------------------------
It is not uncommon for muslims to use the doctrine of Original sin in attempt to promote Islam and defame Christianity. Hoepfully with the proper words and proper hiding of information, the Christian towards the argument is target to will convert to Islam.
What the muslim will do is explain and even emphasize the stance on original sin which the Western church (Catholics, Protestants etc.) have and hide what the Eastern (Orthodox, the first church) say. There are 2 very basic reasons this is done.

1. Unlike the Western view, the Eastern view agrees with the Jewish teachings and hance will confirm the validity of Christianity (we don't want that to happen)
from the Jewish Encyclopedia [link]

A change from the beatific condition, due to the alleged original depravity of the human race. The events narrated in Gen. iii. leading up to the expulsion of Adam and Eve from Eden are held to support the doctrine of the fall of man and to be the historical warrant for its assumption. According to this doctrine, man (and woman) was first created perfect and without sin. Placed by God in the Garden of Eden, he found his wantsprovided for. In a state of innocence, he was not aware of his nudity, since, not having sinned, he was without the consciousness of sin and the sense of shame had not yet been aroused in him. Man could have continued in this blissful condition and would never have tasted either the bitterness of guilt or that of death had he not disobeyed the divine command, according to which he was not to partake of the fruit of the tree of life, under penalty of immediate death. (See Adam; Eden; Eve.) Expelled from the garden under the curse which their disobedience brought upon them, Adam and Eve were doomed to a life of labor and pain which was the prelude to death. Happiness, innocence, and deathlessness were forever forfeited. And in their fall were involved all of their descendants, none of whom in consequence was exempt from the corruption of death and from sin.

2. In giving the reader an exegisis of the Eastern church, he will be given an option to which to turn, other than Islam. Hence Dawah will not be as effective.

Now, you might think that this is not fair because Nayzak might've not known about the Eastern stance...That is not true. I asked him on his deviation here [link] but he ignored me saying (if memory serves me right) that I should express my opinion on my page. And quite conveniently hid the rest of my comments os that nobody accidentaly reads what I am saying and might discover the Orthodox stance. We also extensively talked about it in private but depsite priding himself for speaking truth (mentioned at the ver end of his pages by the phrase (If I am right, it is from the God. if I am wrong, it is from myself.) he put a tremendous fight to not include an exegsis of the Eastern tradition. His argument for not doing this was (and I copy paste from the message)

Nayzak said:
If you think people misunderstand your religion (and people do. because Western Christianity is louder than your Eastern Christianity) then shouldn't you be trying your best to explain your religion.

Nayzak said:
when people like you go and attack other people's faiths instead of trying to explain their own faith, it's totally normal that others will keep misunderstanding you.

Nayzak said:
I don't aim to spread misinformation or falsehood, that's why I edited my article about the original sin and added this:
EDIT2:
I'm told that Eastern Christians differ from Western Christians. and I understood that they reject the concept of original sin. if this is true, then keep in mind that this article is not about all what is/supposed to be labeled as Christian. it's mainly about what's known as the Original Sin, a concept which is believed by many who consider themselves as Christians.
End of EDIT2.
but this is the most I can do.
explaining your religion is upon you not me.

(and in attempts to disprove me and shun me he did one of the dumbest things one can do...he quoted the Catholic Encyclopedia, to debunk an Orthodox

Meanwhile, it should be noted that The Christian that Nayzak mentions, the one that acuses him of lying...yeah, that would be me.

A brief expostion of East and West

Western:
The Western church basically teaches what we all know, Adam and Eve were created sinless and pure, they disobeyed, and now we are born sinners and doomed to hell (from birth)

Eastern:
The Eastern church teaches that Adam and Eve were created sinless and pure, they disobeyed, and through disobedience human nature became corrupted and must now face death. We, as decendants of Adam and Eve carry the penalties/consequence of their sin. NOT the guilt of the sin. Children are born in a neutral state, neither capable of good nor bad. They are not born Christians and they are most definately not born muslims. Upon death children go to heaven, simply because they have committed no sins. For this reason Orthodox use the term 'Ancestral sin'. Many people confuse this wiht Original sin, but in reality they are not the same.
For more information, here is an actual source of information about the Orthodox church [link]

Answering the arguments
(will be completed over time)

From [link]

The argument...

You must have heard it said that we were born in sin - and perhaps you even believe that... But let's think about that for a moment and see what Islam has to say about such concept:
Would the Just God blame you for a sin you never committed?
Would He hold you responsible for what someone else did?
Definitely not!
In fact, God's final testament teaches that you are responsible for ONLY your own actions. You cannot sin until you do something wrong. And you certainly could not have done wrong before you were even born.

Yet we often meet people who say that we are somehow born in sin. Could that possibly be true?
They say that the first human being, Adam, sinned and through him sin entered the world; and now sin corrupts everything, including every newborn baby. Can you believe that human beings are condemned before they do anything? Which judge would condemn people for crimes they never committed? A just judge cannot do that except by mistake.

But what about The God? Would He make such a mistake?!

This is a reference and a brief exposition of the Western teaching. It should be noted that no mention of The Eastern teaching is mentioned anywhere excpet for that little part where he says:

EDIT2:
I'm told that Eastern Christians differ from Western Christians. and I understood that they reject the concept of original sin. if this is true, then keep in mind that this article is not about all what is/supposed to be labeled as Christian. it's mainly about what's known as the Original Sin, a concept which is believed by many who consider themselves as Christians.
End of EDIT2.

But no mention or an exegesis of the doctrine is made in way. If it was, this would mess with his dawah and would result in less people doubting Christianity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From [link]

(this magnificent piece of taqqiyah has many arguments that need answering)

argument no.1

Nayzak said:
from the Catholic Encyclopedia [link] :
Original sin may be taken to mean:
(1) the sin that Adam committed;
(2) a consequence of this first sin, the hereditary stain with which we are born on account of our origin or descent from Adam.
for those who didn't understand this definition, it basically means that thousands of years ago, a certain man called Adam ate from the forbidden fruit, so the whole of mankind will go to hell. he didn't ask our opinion, but we are still guilty because we are his descendants. we inherited what's called the Original Sin.

I cannot emphasize the importance of the word Catholic. I will repeat it till my fingers have melted on the keypoard...CATHOLIC

argument no.2

Nayzak Said:
first, We should know that the idea of original sin (also called ancestral sin) is found in Christianity, not in Judaism nor in Islam; its scriptural foundation is in the New Testament teaching of Paul (not Jesus -peace be upon him-)

Bringing Paul into the conversation is a common argument amung muslims. This way the idea that Paul was a mere man trying to corrupt Christianity and that it is no longer in it's pure form as given by Jesus (what is taught in Islam) This way the authenticity of Islam is established and doubt is stricken into the Christian reader increasing the probability of him converting to Islam. And that would make the dawah succesful.

Firstly, while the Catholic, Protestant and in general the Western doctrine is not supported by Judaism, the teachings of the Eastern chruches DO agree. Nayzak SHOULD'VE known this, but unfortunately he would rather copy-paste articles.
The reason this has not been mentioned is because this would establish Christian validity and would result in the Christian being more likely to convert to Orthodox Christianity rather than Islam. This is why some taqqiyah needs to be used to cover up for this. Otherwise, in speaking the truth, dawah is ruined.

Secondly, it should be noted that in reality Paul doesn't teach Original Sin. He teaches Ancestral Sin.

The problem arises with a mistranslation and a misunderstanding of Paul's letter to the Romans 5:12

διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ δι' ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, ἐφ' ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον

The difficulty of the passage, which has formed the basis of the Church''s teaching on ''original sin'' lies in the last four words of Paul’s phrase. The reason for this is that these words "ἐφ' ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον" can be interpreted in at least three different ways. These are as follows: 1) in whom all have sinned; 2) because all have sinned and 3) because of death all have sinned. And these diverse readings give different understandings.

Firstly, the West, based on Jerome''s Vulgate, translated the difficult Greek phrase as "in whom all have sinned" which led to the belief that Adam''s sin was passed onto future generations and that human persons today carry this sin of Adam. This gave rise to the belief that human beings throughout the centuries have inherited the sin of Adam and therefore are guilty in that they share in his sin as they share in his nature. Whereas the Orthodox Christian tradition would claim that the world today shares in the effects of the sin of Adam which was death, this understanding believes that human persons share in the sin of Adam directly. The consequences of such an doctrine is that God is seen to punish subsequent generations unjustly since He judges them not on their actions but on the deeds of Adam.

A second rendering of this difficult phrase and one espoused by most scholars today is to translate this verse not as “in whom all have sinned” but as "because all have sinned". Such an understanding implies that human persons today have not inherited Adam''s transgression or guilt but rather that they have replicated it in their lives by sinning themselves. Simply put, in this understanding, Adam sinned causing death which inturn caused a likely propensity on the part of human persons to sin themselves. This subtle difference makes each person responsible for their sin and consequently takes away any inherited notions of culpability. In agreement with this view, St Mark the Monk affirmed: "When evil thoughts become active within us, we should blame ourselves and not ancestral sin." Understood in this way, Adam''s sin is not passed down to human persons today causing them to sin. Rather Adam''s sin is a prototype of all future sin in the world and therefore all people are responsible for their own sin.

There is yet a third reading of the text which takes the Greek words usually translated as "because all have sinned" to mean "because of death all have sinned." In this case, the relative pronoun, e˙f∆ wˆ— is taken to be masculine, as was the case in the first interpretation, but in this case it does not relate back to Adam but rather to the word "death". Grammatically speaking, it makes more sense to have the relative pronoun relate back to the word "death" since it is this word which immediately precedes and substantiates the phrase in question. Understood in this way, it is the cosmic reality of death which explains the reality of sin in the world and not the other way around. In other words, this subtle yet profound saving truth affirms that human persons sin or break communion with God because of the reality of death and not that human persons are punished to death because they have sinned. Therefore the verse could read in the following way:
"Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all; because of death all have sinned" (Rom. 5:12)
from: [link]

Argument no.3

Nayzak said:
Basically, Christians believe that God created humans to live eternally in Heaven, and that when Adam ate from the tree from which he had been forbidden, God punished him through death and banishment from Heaven. They further assert that as death was inherited by his progeny, so too was the sin of their father, which was a permanent stain on the hearts of humanity, never to be removed except through a sacrifice so great that it would oblige God to forgive humanity. This sacrifice would be nothing other than the sacrifice of God himself, incarnate in His “son” Jesus. Therefore Christianity deems all of humanity as damned to Hell for the sin of Adam from which they could never be cleansed, except through the belief that God died for Adam’s sin, ritualized as Baptism, through which Christians are ‘born again’ into the world, but this time free of sin.
So we see that the concept of ‘Original Sin’ forms the basis of various Christian beliefs, from the crucifixion of Jesus to the concept of salvation.

Catholics, catholics, catholics, catholics, atholics, catholics, catholics, catholics, CATHOLICS, CATHOLICS, CATHOLICS, CATHOLICS, CATHOLICS, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST,

Description
How did many become sinners because of Adam?...How could we, who were not yet born, all be condemned with him, even though God said, 'Neither the fathers shall be put to death because of their children, nor the children because of their fathers, but the soul which sins shall be put to death'? (Deut 24:16)
-Saint Cyril of Alexandria-

This has been made in respons to the vilification of Christian doctrine by here: [link] and here [link]
I will be making a detailed response to his articles.
-----------------------------------------------------------
It is not uncommon for muslims to use the doctrine of Original sin in attempt to promote Islam and defame Christianity. Hoepfully with the proper words and proper hiding of information, the Christian towards the argument is target to will convert to Islam.
What the muslim will do is explain and even emphasize the stance on original sin which the Western church (Catholics, Protestants etc.) have and hide what the Eastern (Orthodox, the first church) say. There are 2 very basic reasons this is done.

1. Unlike the Western view, the Eastern view agrees with the Jewish teachings and hance will confirm the validity of Christianity (we don't want that to happen)
from the Jewish Encyclopedia [link]

A change from the beatific condition, due to the alleged original depravity of the human race. The events narrated in Gen. iii. leading up to the expulsion of Adam and Eve from Eden are held to support the doctrine of the fall of man and to be the historical warrant for its assumption. According to this doctrine, man (and woman) was first created perfect and without sin. Placed by God in the Garden of Eden, he found his wantsprovided for. In a state of innocence, he was not aware of his nudity, since, not having sinned, he was without the consciousness of sin and the sense of shame had not yet been aroused in him. Man could have continued in this blissful condition and would never have tasted either the bitterness of guilt or that of death had he not disobeyed the divine command, according to which he was not to partake of the fruit of the tree of life, under penalty of immediate death. (See Adam; Eden; Eve.) Expelled from the garden under the curse which their disobedience brought upon them, Adam and Eve were doomed to a life of labor and pain which was the prelude to death. Happiness, innocence, and deathlessness were forever forfeited. And in their fall were involved all of their descendants, none of whom in consequence was exempt from the corruption of death and from sin.

2. In giving the reader an exegisis of the Eastern church, he will be given an option to which to turn, other than Islam. Hence Dawah will not be as effective.

Now, you might think that this is not fair because Nayzak might've not known about the Eastern stance...That is not true. I asked him on his deviation here [link] but he ignored me saying (if memory serves me right) that I should express my opinion on my page. And quite conveniently hid the rest of my comments os that nobody accidentaly reads what I am saying and might discover the Orthodox stance. We also extensively talked about it in private but depsite priding himself for speaking truth (mentioned at the ver end of his pages by the phrase (If I am right, it is from the God. if I am wrong, it is from myself.) he put a tremendous fight to not include an exegsis of the Eastern tradition. His argument for not doing this was (and I copy paste from the message)

Nayzak said:
If you think people misunderstand your religion (and people do. because Western Christianity is louder than your Eastern Christianity) then shouldn't you be trying your best to explain your religion.

Nayzak said:
when people like you go and attack other people's faiths instead of trying to explain their own faith, it's totally normal that others will keep misunderstanding you.

Nayzak said:
I don't aim to spread misinformation or falsehood, that's why I edited my article about the original sin and added this:
EDIT2:
I'm told that Eastern Christians differ from Western Christians. and I understood that they reject the concept of original sin. if this is true, then keep in mind that this article is not about all what is/supposed to be labeled as Christian. it's mainly about what's known as the Original Sin, a concept which is believed by many who consider themselves as Christians.
End of EDIT2.
but this is the most I can do.
explaining your religion is upon you not me.

(and in attempts to disprove me and shun me he did one of the dumbest things one can do...he quoted the Catholic Encyclopedia, to debunk an Orthodox

Meanwhile, it should be noted that The Christian that Nayzak mentions, the one that acuses him of lying...yeah, that would be me.

A brief expostion of East and West

Western:
The Western church basically teaches what we all know, Adam and Eve were created sinless and pure, they disobeyed, and now we are born sinners and doomed to hell (from birth)

Eastern:
The Eastern church teaches that Adam and Eve were created sinless and pure, they disobeyed, and through disobedience human nature became corrupted and must now face death. We, as decendants of Adam and Eve carry the penalties/consequence of their sin. NOT the guilt of the sin. Children are born in a neutral state, neither capable of good nor bad. They are not born Christians and they are most definately not born muslims. Upon death children go to heaven, simply because they have committed no sins. For this reason Orthodox use the term 'Ancestral sin'. Many people confuse this wiht Original sin, but in reality they are not the same.
For more information, here is an actual source of information about the Orthodox church [link]

Answering the arguments
(will be completed over time)

From [link]

The argument...

You must have heard it said that we were born in sin - and perhaps you even believe that... But let's think about that for a moment and see what Islam has to say about such concept:
Would the Just God blame you for a sin you never committed?
Would He hold you responsible for what someone else did?
Definitely not!
In fact, God's final testament teaches that you are responsible for ONLY your own actions. You cannot sin until you do something wrong. And you certainly could not have done wrong before you were even born.

Yet we often meet people who say that we are somehow born in sin. Could that possibly be true?
They say that the first human being, Adam, sinned and through him sin entered the world; and now sin corrupts everything, including every newborn baby. Can you believe that human beings are condemned before they do anything? Which judge would condemn people for crimes they never committed? A just judge cannot do that except by mistake.

But what about The God? Would He make such a mistake?!

This is a reference and a brief exposition of the Western teaching. It should be noted that no mention of The Eastern teaching is mentioned anywhere excpet for that little part where he says:

EDIT2:
I'm told that Eastern Christians differ from Western Christians. and I understood that they reject the concept of original sin. if this is true, then keep in mind that this article is not about all what is/supposed to be labeled as Christian. it's mainly about what's known as the Original Sin, a concept which is believed by many who consider themselves as Christians.
End of EDIT2.

But no mention or an exegesis of the doctrine is made in way. If it was, this would mess with his dawah and would result in less people doubting Christianity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From [link]

(this magnificent piece of taqqiyah has many arguments that need answering)

argument no.1

Nayzak said:
from the Catholic Encyclopedia [link] :
Original sin may be taken to mean:
(1) the sin that Adam committed;
(2) a consequence of this first sin, the hereditary stain with which we are born on account of our origin or descent from Adam.
for those who didn't understand this definition, it basically means that thousands of years ago, a certain man called Adam ate from the forbidden fruit, so the whole of mankind will go to hell. he didn't ask our opinion, but we are still guilty because we are his descendants. we inherited what's called the Original Sin.

I cannot emphasize the importance of the word Catholic. I will repeat it till my fingers have melted on the keypoard...CATHOLIC

argument no.2

Nayzak Said:
first, We should know that the idea of original sin (also called ancestral sin) is found in Christianity, not in Judaism nor in Islam; its scriptural foundation is in the New Testament teaching of Paul (not Jesus -peace be upon him-)

Bringing Paul into the conversation is a common argument amung muslims. This way the idea that Paul was a mere man trying to corrupt Christianity and that it is no longer in it's pure form as given by Jesus (what is taught in Islam) This way the authenticity of Islam is established and doubt is stricken into the Christian reader increasing the probability of him converting to Islam. And that would make the dawah succesful.

Firstly, while the Catholic, Protestant and in general the Western doctrine is not supported by Judaism, the teachings of the Eastern chruches DO agree. Nayzak SHOULD'VE known this, but unfortunately he would rather copy-paste articles.
The reason this has not been mentioned is because this would establish Christian validity and would result in the Christian being more likely to convert to Orthodox Christianity rather than Islam. This is why some taqqiyah needs to be used to cover up for this. Otherwise, in speaking the truth, dawah is ruined.

Secondly, it should be noted that in reality Paul doesn't teach Original Sin. He teaches Ancestral Sin.

The problem arises with a mistranslation and a misunderstanding of Paul's letter to the Romans 5:12

διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ δι' ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, ἐφ' ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον

The difficulty of the passage, which has formed the basis of the Church''s teaching on ''original sin'' lies in the last four words of Paul’s phrase. The reason for this is that these words "ἐφ' ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον" can be interpreted in at least three different ways. These are as follows: 1) in whom all have sinned; 2) because all have sinned and 3) because of death all have sinned. And these diverse readings give different understandings.

Firstly, the West, based on Jerome''s Vulgate, translated the difficult Greek phrase as "in whom all have sinned" which led to the belief that Adam''s sin was passed onto future generations and that human persons today carry this sin of Adam. This gave rise to the belief that human beings throughout the centuries have inherited the sin of Adam and therefore are guilty in that they share in his sin as they share in his nature. Whereas the Orthodox Christian tradition would claim that the world today shares in the effects of the sin of Adam which was death, this understanding believes that human persons share in the sin of Adam directly. The consequences of such an doctrine is that God is seen to punish subsequent generations unjustly since He judges them not on their actions but on the deeds of Adam.

A second rendering of this difficult phrase and one espoused by most scholars today is to translate this verse not as “in whom all have sinned” but as "because all have sinned". Such an understanding implies that human persons today have not inherited Adam''s transgression or guilt but rather that they have replicated it in their lives by sinning themselves. Simply put, in this understanding, Adam sinned causing death which inturn caused a likely propensity on the part of human persons to sin themselves. This subtle difference makes each person responsible for their sin and consequently takes away any inherited notions of culpability. In agreement with this view, St Mark the Monk affirmed: "When evil thoughts become active within us, we should blame ourselves and not ancestral sin." Understood in this way, Adam''s sin is not passed down to human persons today causing them to sin. Rather Adam''s sin is a prototype of all future sin in the world and therefore all people are responsible for their own sin.

There is yet a third reading of the text which takes the Greek words usually translated as "because all have sinned" to mean "because of death all have sinned." In this case, the relative pronoun, e˙f∆ wˆ— is taken to be masculine, as was the case in the first interpretation, but in this case it does not relate back to Adam but rather to the word "death". Grammatically speaking, it makes more sense to have the relative pronoun relate back to the word "death" since it is this word which immediately precedes and substantiates the phrase in question. Understood in this way, it is the cosmic reality of death which explains the reality of sin in the world and not the other way around. In other words, this subtle yet profound saving truth affirms that human persons sin or break communion with God because of the reality of death and not that human persons are punished to death because they have sinned. Therefore the verse could read in the following way:
"Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all; because of death all have sinned" (Rom. 5:12)
from: [link]

Argument no.3

Nayzak said:
Basically, Christians believe that God created humans to live eternally in Heaven, and that when Adam ate from the tree from which he had been forbidden, God punished him through death and banishment from Heaven. They further assert that as death was inherited by his progeny, so too was the sin of their father, which was a permanent stain on the hearts of humanity, never to be removed except through a sacrifice so great that it would oblige God to forgive humanity. This sacrifice would be nothing other than the sacrifice of God himself, incarnate in His “son” Jesus. Therefore Christianity deems all of humanity as damned to Hell for the sin of Adam from which they could never be cleansed, except through the belief that God died for Adam’s sin, ritualized as Baptism, through which Christians are ‘born again’ into the world, but this time free of sin.
So we see that the concept of ‘Original Sin’ forms the basis of various Christian beliefs, from the crucifixion of Jesus to the concept of salvation.

Catholics, catholics, catholics, catholics, atholics, catholics, catholics, catholics, CATHOLICS, CATHOLICS, CATHOLICS, CATHOLICS, CATHOLICS, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST, WEST,