Per Wiki
but if the story of Adam and Eve is only a parable(as I’ve been told by many), then what is the Original Sin?
Humanity’s tendency toward detrimental behaviors.
My understanding is that they mostly argue backwards from effect to cause. People will kill other people, steal from them, hurt them, think only of themselves and act without regard for other people, animals and things. If humans were innately sinless, they argue, these things wouldn’t happen. They do, ergo humans aren’t innately sinless. Without the creation story, it becomes harder to argue how a perfect god could create imperfect people, but this is theology, so thinking too hard about it isn’t recommended.
Being really creative about it.
‘learning’ apparently -
The offense committed was -
a) taking advice from a different ‘voice’
b) learning the difference between good and evil -
(b) I guess being the bigger problem - before that, you could do what you want in ignorance and ‘sin’ did not exist.
But that’s just a list of sins. Which one of those(if any) is the original sin?
Not “the” Original Sin: original sin is a condition, not an event.
A bit of googling turned up what looks like a pretty good explanation of original sin on, of all places, the BBC website: BBC - Religions - Christianity: Original sin
Also an article in the Catholic encyclopedia, and an article from a recent issue of Christianity Today. I haven’t yet had a chance to read any of these articles in detail, but once I have, I might come back and comment on them further.
But, once again, that is now regarded as a parable. How can original sin be considered to be real by some religionists if it’s origin stems from a parable?
Original sin is not an act that everyone just happens to have done at some point. It is that quality of being human that allows us to even think of ‘sinning’.
because they have a hard time letting go ?
They’ve accepted the idea that the only reason we ‘sin’ is because imperfection came to be thanks to the choices made early on - if the parable has any meaning, its that you’re only supposed to listen to god - so (a) takes care of that - listening to a different voice would be the original sin.
Sinfulness is innate. That’s what original sin refers to. It’s not “this act of sin made us all sinners” it’s “people are born sinners and must be redeemed.”
It’s a tenet of the Roman Catholics, but a lot of protestant flavors of Christianity don’t follow the idea.
Sin had to enter the world - unless they are saying that God ‘created’ us sinful.
or is that free will? and ‘free will’ is the orignial sin?
That’s not true. Original Sin doesn’t have anything to do with Adam and Eve. It wasn’t even implemented until the 1500s by the RCC with the arguments made by St Augustine. His argument was as I laid down in my last post:
Everyone is born innately sinful and must be redeemed through the RCC as an institution (which leads to Jesus and more religious stuff).
Well, that his (the RCC) use of it as the tool - but that doesn’t answer what it originally was.
What part of us is ‘innately sinful’ - what makes that ‘true’ ?
If it’s the fault of the designer, who gets to redeem him?
What it is, whether it is, and why it is are separate questions.
You seem to be trying to establish an Act that is the sin, much as we modernly think of sin. You punch someone. You break a window. The idea of “original sin” was simply the RCC’s position that you are born sinful and without them you aren’t going to a Celebrex commercial in your afterlife.
As for God making us “sinful” by nature, I don’t have an explanation for how the RCC koshered this with their views (okay, I do, but it’s just that they ignored the inconsistency), just that they decided this was their view.
Super God? 
well - not so much an ‘act’ but a ‘why’ -
If we are ‘innately sinful’ - why is that ? what part of us makes us “innately sinful” -
‘free will’ seems to fit - since that can lead to many acts - but in and of itself is “not sin” - but it also seems that if the parabale holds any wieght, its the knowledge of what ‘sin’ is that makes us ‘innately sinful’.
IOW - nudity/sex is only a sin if you recognize it as such. Before the ‘apple’ - there was no such sin.
Really. You expect ancient religious philosophy to make sense? At this point in my arguments with Dad, it’s time for him to say, “Because I said so.”
So, what is a simple definition of “original sin” that doesn’t involve the parable of Adam and Eve?