Christian church theologians - from word one - fully understood
the criticality of positing the existence of Original Sin.
[Saul of Tarsus surely did. *There was a man who understood
Judaic theology. The finest theologian in all of Christian history.]
The CCC, on orginal ‘sin:’
point 404, at
This was a wholly new concept, introduced by St. Paul -
and is in no way akin to the Judaic concepts of the yetzers.
yetzer hatov - the inclination to do good
yetzer hara - the inclination to do that which offends God.
[size=2]The yetzer hara is not considered some kind of
"sin" which is contracted by the human infant.
This astonishing use of the word “contracted” actually
appears in the link given above. Point 404.
[Sounds more an hydrualic image - rather than a
word descriptive of the human person - or the human condition.]
There may be those who would consider
the *yetzer hara *as a kind of original sin, but in the
aggregate, the concept of original sin is not at
all accepted in Judaic thought, over the millenia.
[The *yetzer hara is more akin, I think, to the[/size]
Catholic teaching on concupiscence.]
If there is no original sin, then there is no need for
a Messiah to “save” us from same.
The Judaic concept of Messiah is wholly different
from that of Christian theology. In Judaic thought,
man is not born into the world under the burden
of any kind of “sin,” - nor is the Messiah’s role on
earth that of saving human beings from some kind
of contracted “sin,” as states Christian theology.
Metaphysically, the concept of orginal sin is
perfectly elegant. Once posit it’s existence,
and the syllogisms begin to fly. :coffeeread:
If X, then Y.
All men are born with the burden of original sin.
Oscar is a human being.
Therefore, Oscar is burdened down with OS.
Jesus came to save human beings from original sin.
Pruenella is a human being.
Jesus removes Pruenella from this deleterious condition,
and makes her “right” with God.
Now. One who accepts all that has been written - in the
Christian scriptures - must needs cleave to the notion of original sin.
But this keystone of Christian syllogistic effort
makes both an assumption and an assertion:
I assume that all in the NT is from the hand of God Himself.
I assert that original sin exists.
No original sin - no need for a Savior, a Messiah.
Once haul away this pillar of faith, and the *raison d’être *for a Savior -
to save us from this contracted “sin” - no longer exists.