The Problem(s) with Original Sin

Now I'm gonna be blunt. The biggest problem I have with Christianity is original sin, and here's why. The suppositions made here are based on Catholic dogma btw, since it is generally speaking the most liberal in terms of accepting evolution and modern biology.

Prior to original sin we know that a number of restrictions that God has since placed upon humanity did not exist. First and foremost, we didn't age. Now, where did all the shit go? Surely we digested food, surely we absorbed nutrients and excreted waste; we know Adam and Eve ate from the trees in Eden.

Problem: Before the fall, to justify this, we must have had innately different biological mechanisms.

I'll touch on more repercussions of this later. Now since we didn't age, this means that the number of humans God intended upon having was finite. Why? Because if no one died, then at a certain point the number of available resources on the Earth could not be allocated to a population beyond a certain point; this is a biological idea which has a name, but I can't think of it at the moment. As a result, this means that after a couple of generations, there ostensibly could no longer be any more humans, thus meaning that according to God's original plan the number of souls in existence was limited further meaning that according to God's original plan, anyone living today would not be alive.

Problem: God's plan was inherently flawed because of the nature of biology. Again, biology must have been radically different before the fall to support this idea.

Also, since we never would die, how exactly could our cells have functioned? We understand that there exists a number of chromosomal and otherwise biological traits in human that were inherited from common ancestors between modern apes and ourselves. So,

Problem: Humans had cells that did not undergo cell division as they do in modernity. Human cells prior to the fall existed in a state of immortality and must not have divided or expended energy. So the question is: How did apes evolve to a point wherein their cells did not undergo division? How was such a biological mechanism sustained when we have reason to believe we did not take in energy?

Now also, since we lived forever, there is the problem of the sun. The sun is expanding. We can verify this. All stars expand and ultimately undergo deaths either via supernovas, black holes, etc.

Problem: How exactly would humans have gotten to another planet if God destined for us to exist on the earth? Would the sun simply have not expanded? If it didn't expand, this would mean that the life-cycles of stars could not take place and, as a result, it is highly likely the earth could not have formed to begin with.

The Catholic Church also notes how humans experienced a "dislocation of passions," or something along those lines. This has to do with a few things. The placing of the self before god, lust for the human form, and sexual deviance. So lets go in order. Placing the self before god means that we seek our own best interests and want life to be more enjoyable. The Catholics teach work was already was enjoyable prior to the fall. We didn't have any issues.

Problem: if we already enjoyed all facets of existence, then how would society have developed? How would technology have developed? If human interest was already completely satisfied, then ostensibly there would be no way for us to progress from a civilization of hunter-gatherers. Now this may not seem to be a problem, but in the light of what I'm going to say next, it will.

So we didn't feel lust. There's a multitude of angles we can take here, so lets just tackle all of them. We didn't wear clothes because we didn't have to, as a result of the fact we felt no shame over our bodies. Huge, HUGE problem here for many reasons.

Problem: What would we have done when it became colder outside? Presumably the earth still tilted on it's axis, seasons still existed, etc. So if the seasons existed, then how would we have kept alive? We know that we couldn't develop technology, so would God simply have provided this for us? Now if we are to say the earth didn't rotate, then this is to claim that the earth in existence was completely different before the Fall than it is now, a rather bold claim. We could also say that because we didn't feel pain that we wouldn't have been harmed by the cold, but we'll address this later.

So, again, we also didn't feel lust. Great. Except,

Problem: How did apes evolve to exist in a biological manner that did not favor chemicals in the brain that facilitated attraction to the opposite gender? What biological means favored this? Moreover, in simply saying we didn't have lust, not only are Catholics postulating that biology favored an anomalous trait, but also that we must have had brain chemistry that was inherently different from that of modern man. This, again, is an extremely bold claim. There's also the matter of the fact that we experience attraction in the same way as other animals, so this is to say that God intentionally gave us animal-like traits.

Now there's the problem of homosexuality and other sexual deviance. Much of Catholicism excepts that these are biological realities.

Problem: God must have inserted these, or at the very least allowed them to become manifest, after the Fall. This not only goes for sexuality, but for transgender-ism, and things of this sort.

Now there was also the fact that the pain of childbirth would be greatly multiplied. This is a problem.

Problem: Humans mustn't have had nerve cells before the fall or, at the very least, had nerve cells that experienced pain in a manner radically different from those of modernity.

Now let's finally jump back to the problem of immortality. Say Adam jumps in a fire. What would happen? Well, a few things could happen.
1: He can't die, so the fire simply wouldn't affect him.

Problem (a): Human cells mustn't have been able to be damaged. How, then, could we have evolved to have cells that are literally unable to be killed?

Problem (b): Fire simply couldn't burn us. Not because of our cells, but because of the nature of fire. This then implies that the very nature of thermodynamics and energy before the fall was RADICALLY different from those laws which exist now.

2: He can't die, so the fire would burn his cells (he wouldn't be able to feel this or perhaps wouldn't feel pain from it) and they would immediately grow back.

Problem: This implies that we evolved to take on cells that could instantaneously grow back. How?

I want to touch back on the sun again because this is a point I forgot to make. Let's say the sun simply wouldn't expand; after all, the promised land is on earth and earth is where humanity is supposed to be.

Problem: Energy flows out of a closed system in modernity; the earth is a closed system. Then sun will burn itself out in modernity. If the sun wouldn't burn out, it has an infinite source of energy. Where would this energy come from?
Corollary 1: If energy in stars could be infinite, this means that the entire dynamic of energy was completely different than it is now.
Corollary 2: If energy can be infinitely sustained, and also if our cells can live forever, energy did not flow out of the system of earth. This means that the entire nature of causality was inherently different before the Fall.
Sub-corollary: If causality was inherently different, how do we know the 5 ways of Thomas Aquinas are legitimate? Of course in modernity because of the fall causality exists as it does, but prior to the Fall it very well may not have. Humans could have originated first and created God, God assuming supremacy and thus facilitating Christianity through this means. Or, perhaps, Humans were God maybe even are God. We can say anything at this point.
Sub-sub-corollary: The universe before the fall was different in it's entirety from the universe that exists now. The fact that prior to the fall causality was inherently different means the entire nature of the universe in it's totality was inherently different.

So, let's see the problems here: a system of biology that was inherently different from that which exists now, (one which favors traits that are rather impossible or at least inexplicable), brain chemistry that was completely different, an inability to escape from an expanding sun, inability to escape the cold, God's deliberate insertion of illness and sexual deviance into the human genome, lack of normal nerve cells causing problems of evolutionary inconsistency, and the fact that the universe was completely different meaning that any argument that is made in modernity to argue for or against Christianity is completely wrong.

Now this means that technically everything I'm saying can be refuted by "god's providence," but this "providence," falls flat as a result of this final claim. Because of every single one of these inconsistencies, God MUST have rewritten history. Rewritten biology. Rewritten the laws of energy, thermodynamics, and chemistry. Christianity is boldly claiming that the the actions of two humanoids not only accorded the entire human race with sin, but so drastically altered the universe that everything about it was fundamentally changed to such an extent that there now exists an alternate timeline of past events that can be interpreted by humans in modernity. Such inconsistencies mean that all things about the past, millions of years ago &/c. are not true reality but, as a result, are false. Evolution as we observe it now was NOT evolution as it took place before the Fall. All evidence for the big bang was, essentially, fabricated by God.

The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p7.htm

"affirms a primeval event"

Catholics teach that the fall happened.

Also for anyone wondering here are the passages from the Catechism and Bible upon which I've based my assertions:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p7.htm

Catechism on the Fall, see 404 and 405 for the loss of original justice and holiness.

http://biblehub.com/niv/genesis/3.htm

Genesis 3:16-19 Describes the repercussions of original sin.