What is the meaning of the original sin?

Original sin is nothing more than a massive guilt trip invented by the church in order to instill guilt and fear in its followers.

In fact, everyone arrives in this world without the contamination of original sin. Although you didn't bring it up, Romans 5:12 has been used extensively to support the doctrine of “original sin.” In this passage, Paul wrote: “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned.” At first glance, this text may seem to support the idea of original sin; however, a little study of this verse will show that this is not the case. First, Paul said that “through one man sin entered the world.” Paul did not say that sin entered into every person at birth. Rather, sin became a part of the world in general. Second, Paul said that death entered through sin. This refers exclusively to the death that Adam and Eve experienced in the beginning. Third, Paul noted that “death spread to all men, because all sinned.” The text does not say that death spread to all men because Adam sinned but because all sinned. It is clear that humanity is the recipient of the consequence of Adam’s sin (i.e., death), but is not the recipient of the guilt of Adam’s sin. Each accountable person dies for his or her own sin (Romans 3:23).

Original sin is nothing more than a massive guilt trip invented by the church in order to instill guilt and fear in its followers.

Original sin is best described, I think, by Ayn Rand: "A sin without volition is a slap at morality and an insolent contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is outside the province of morality. If man is evil by birth, he has no will, no power to change it; if he has no will, he can be neither good nor evil; a robot is amoral. To hold, as man’s sin, a fact not open to his choice is a mockery of morality. To hold man’s nature as his sin is a mockery of nature. To punish him for a crime he committed before he was born is a mockery of justice. To hold him guilty in a matter where no innocence exists is a mockery of reason. To destroy morality, nature, justice and reason by means of a single concept is a feat of evil hardly to be matched. Yet that is the root of your code. "Do not hide behind the cowardly evasion that man is born with free will, but with a “tendency” to evil. A free will saddled with a tendency is like a game with loaded dice. It forces man to struggle through the effort of playing, to bear responsibility and pay for the game, but the decision is weighted in favor of a tendency that he had no power to escape. If the tendency is of his choice, he cannot possess it at birth; if it is not of his choice, his will is not free. "What is the nature of the guilt that your teachers call his Original Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge—he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge of good and evil—he became a moral being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by his labor—he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience desire—he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment. The evils for which they damn him are reason, morality, creativeness, joy—all the cardinal values of his existence. It is not his vices that their myth of man’s fall is designed to explain and condemn, it is not his errors that they hold as his guilt, but the essence of his nature as man. Whatever he was—that robot in the Garden of Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love—he was not man. "Man’s fall, according to your teachers, was that he gained the virtues required to live. These virtues, by their standard, are his Sin. His evil, they charge, is that he’s man. His guilt, they charge, is that he lives. "They call it a morality of mercy and a doctrine of love for man." I can't say it any better myself. This monstrous idea--this notion that we start by condemning people as evil in virtue of them being people, that we need to be saved from unearned guilt--is the core of Christianty, the very point of "needing" Jesus in the first place, and it's a horrible perversion of justice.

I always thought that heterosexual sex was the original sin. Original and best! er not that I have tried any other kind of sex you understand?

You'd think God would've cleared the original sin account when he killed everything but Noah and his fellow passengers...

The two verses you pointed out do not contradict each other. What Ezekiel 18:20 is referring to, is the individual sins of each person; however, Adam and Eve passed down a sinful nature, not individual sins. Children should not be punished for their father's robbery, yet those children are still basically corrupt and in need of a savior. They may not have committed the same exact sins as their parents, but they are still inherently sinful beings. How can someone die for your sins? The Old Testament is full of examples of sacrifice. Christ is the only blameless sacrifice who was able to offer us salvation for eternity. Babies do not know right from wrong as you said. Therefore, they cannot yet be responsible for their actions. The practice of baptizing them so they do not go to hell is not necessarily backed by Christian doctrine. It is a practice of the Orthodox Church not a Biblical command. What do you believe is the purpose of this life and creation? If we are basically good, there is really no reason for us to live on earth because we might as well be in heaven. A redeemed world is far better than one that was never corrupted because the beings of God's creation are then offered a choice to love their Creator.

The two verses you pointed out do not contradict each other. What Ezekiel 18:20 is referring to, is the individual sins of each person; however, Adam and Eve passed down a sinful nature, not individual sins. Children should not be punished for their father's robbery, yet those children are still basically corrupt and in need of a savior. They may not have committed the same exact sins as their parents, but they are still inherently sinful beings. How can someone die for your sins? The Old Testament is full of examples of sacrifice. Christ is the only blameless sacrifice who was able to offer us salvation for eternity. Babies do not know right from wrong as you said. Therefore, they cannot yet be responsible for their actions. The practice of baptizing them so they do not go to hell is not necessarily backed by Christian doctrine. It is a practice of the Orthodox Church not a Biblical command. What do you believe is the purpose of this life and creation? If we are basically good, there is really no reason for us to live on earth because we might as well be in heaven. A redeemed world is far better than one that was never corrupted because the beings of God's creation are then offered a choice to love their Creator.

You'd think God would've cleared the original sin account when he killed everything but Noah and his fellow passengers...