- This topic is empty.
- Posts
BD: I don't see where they repented of anything. They had the choice to make. It was not a sin. It seems to me that when Adam chose to accept good/and evil that he split God in his mind. Now there were to Gods, one good and one evil. By making that choice to believe in
evil they both began to sense/feel the effects of an opposite force to God that never really was. Man believed in evil when there was no evil. It was an allusion in his mind. Yet he had the power to make the illusion real to him. Did man create evil? In his mind? Only God existed, there was no evil at that time. No sin, no laws from God or man. There could be no sin/error until man decided that something
was to him, good or evil. Man decided to see thing as good or evil. Man then felt separated from God. Man believed God was angry with him. God never told Adam it was a sin or would separate them from each other. God told him the consequence of believing in two Gods. I tend to believe that sin was from the very beginning an error of thinking by man that something he could do would separate him from
God. Actually that even is true but the action is not the sin. The sin/error/separation occurs when a man believes something to be evil. If he believes it to be evil then to him it is evil. It may be untrue, it may be illusion but if the man believes it is sin then it is sin to him!! Just some thoughts. I appreciate your answers. God bless, TK
I think what's important to understand is that man was created the way he is so that God can perfect man's soul
——————————————
In Judaism, yetzer hara (Hebrew: יצר הרע for the definite “the evil inclination”), or yetzer ra ((Hebrew: יצר רע for the indefinite “an evil inclination”) refers to the inclination to do evil, by violating the will of God. The yetzer hara is not a demonic force, but rather man's mis-use of things the physical body needs to survive. So the need for food becomes gluttony due to the yetzer hara. The need for procreation becomes sexual abuse… and so on. Judaism teaches that humans are born with a yetzer ra (physical needs that can become “evil”), but that humans don't acquire a yetzer tov (“a good inclination”) until an age of maturity — 12 for girls and 13 for boys.The phrase yetzer lev-ha-adam ra ( יֵצֶר לֵב הָאָדָם רַע ) “the imagination of the heart of man [is] evil” occurs twice in the Tanakh, in Genesis 6:5, 8:15.
—————————————————————Allah doth wish to lighten your (difficulties): For man was created weak (in flesh).
( سورة النساء , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #28)
——————————————————————-The Role of the Yetzer HaRa:
Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (the Ramchal) in his work “The Way of G-d” describes the role of the Yetzer Hara is man's quest for perfection “Man is the creature created for the purpose of being drawn close to G-d. He is placed between perfection and deficiency, with the power to earn perfection. Man must earn this perfection, however, through his own free will… Man's inclinations are therefore balanced between good (Yetzer HaTov) and evil (Yetzer HaRa), and he is not compelled toward either of them. He has the power of choice and is able to choose either side knowingly and willingly…”Ohr Somayach: The Ramchal explains that this balance existed prior to the sin of Adam.
After his sin, however, he became more inclined to listen to the wiles of his Yetzer Hara. His job is now two-fold: First, he must even the balance between the spiritual and the physical. Then, he can work to perfect his soul until his spiritual so overwhelms the physical that the physical becomes elevated to its level of perfection.
The Yetzer Hara is an inclination to “stray,” but Man has the wherewithal to overcome it. The pull of the Yetzer Hara is the more powerful of the two inclinations, but is by no means impossible to conquer.
The Torah states:
“G-d said to Kayin, 'Why are you so furious? Why are you depressed? If you do good, will there not be special privilege? And if you do not do good, sin is crouching at the door. It lusts after you but you can dominate it.'”
————————————————-In other words repentence is to return back to the stage of being with God with nonjudgement and the acceptance that the creation is VERY GOOD
So we have an evil inclination in a weak body of flesh so as to where we are continuously confronted with perfecting our Judgement and also our Mercy towards others through the conscious raising of the good inclination.
Quote (Stu @ June 24 2010,22:55) Quote (bodhitharta @ June 19 2010,07:40) Also you have profaned the name of God and although you did out of ignorance it still was an unintentional SIN
What absurd religious fantasy story could find any ethical content in the concept of 'unintentional SIN'?Isn't that an oxymoron?
Stuart
Greetings Stu….I think that sin as I know it,that is the transgression of Gods law, would not apply to you,given your belief system….Now you must be carefull , because if you acknowledge unconsious sin,you will be indirectly paying recognition to sin which might raise the question of… Sin against who???Hey Stu …oxymorons…..Jumbo shrimp,Happy Haloween
Quote (Tim Kraft @ June 30 2010,15:10) BD: I don't see where they repented of anything. They had the choice to make. It was not a sin. It seems to me that when Adam chose to accept good/and evil that he split God in his mind. Now there were to Gods, one good and one evil. By making that choice to believe in evil they both began to sense/feel the effects of an opposite force to God that never really was. Man believed in evil when there was no evil. It was an allusion in his mind. Yet he had the power to make the illusion real to him. Did man create evil? In his mind? Only God existed, there was no evil at that time. No sin, no laws from God or man. There could be no sin/error until man decided that something
was to him, good or evil. Man decided to see thing as good or evil. Man then felt separated from God. Man believed God was angry with him. God never told Adam it was a sin or would separate them from each other. God told him the consequence of believing in two Gods. I tend to believe that sin was from the very beginning an error of thinking by man that something he could do would separate him from
God. Actually that even is true but the action is not the sin. The sin/error/separation occurs when a man believes something to be evil. If he believes it to be evil then to him it is evil. It may be untrue, it may be illusion but if the man believes it is sin then it is sin to him!! Just some thoughts. I appreciate your answers. God bless, TK
Tk,
For now on i ask you to speak with scripture,
First of all,
Evil is the result of choice.Therefore since the devil fell before man, sin and error is not an illusion. it was a action.
You can Choose God or anythign that is not God.
Man believes everythign he does in his own eyes are right, but in reality they are evil to God.
Its common sense would a person do something that they themselves believe is wrong, of course not, they would have to justify it.can you see??
what you state is not real brother.
please read this short thread. about somethign i wrote concerning this. comment when u do read it.
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 11 2010,04:18) Quote (Tim Kraft @ June 30 2010,15:10) BD: I don't see where they repented of anything. They had the choice to make. It was not a sin. It seems to me that when Adam chose to accept good/and evil that he split God in his mind. Now there were to Gods, one good and one evil. By making that choice to believe in evil they both began to sense/feel the effects of an opposite force to God that never really was. Man believed in evil when there was no evil. It was an allusion in his mind. Yet he had the power to make the illusion real to him. Did man create evil? In his mind? Only God existed, there was no evil at that time. No sin, no laws from God or man. There could be no sin/error until man decided that something
was to him, good or evil. Man decided to see thing as good or evil. Man then felt separated from God. Man believed God was angry with him. God never told Adam it was a sin or would separate them from each other. God told him the consequence of believing in two Gods. I tend to believe that sin was from the very beginning an error of thinking by man that something he could do would separate him from
God. Actually that even is true but the action is not the sin. The sin/error/separation occurs when a man believes something to be evil. If he believes it to be evil then to him it is evil. It may be untrue, it may be illusion but if the man believes it is sin then it is sin to him!! Just some thoughts. I appreciate your answers. God bless, TK
Tk,
For now on i ask you to speak with scripture,
First of all,
Evil is the result of choice.Therefore since the devil fell before man, sin and error is not an illusion. it was a action.
You can Choose God or anythign that is not God.
Man believes everythign he does in his own eyes are right, but in reality they are evil to God.
Its common sense would a person do something that they themselves believe is wrong, of course not, they would have to justify it.can you see??
what you state is not real brother.
please read this short thread. about somethign i wrote concerning this. comment when u do read it.
Evil is not the result of choice, God directly told Adam out of all the trees in the Garden you may FREELY CHOOSE FROM but of the tree of good and evil you must not touch it.Genesis 2:15-17 (King James Version)
15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
This proves that there was choices which did not include evil because infact there were many choices that would not have transgressed the command of God so therefore, choice that has and evil result comes from the evil inclination
Quote (bodhitharta @ July 10 2010,23:55) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 11 2010,04:18) Quote (Tim Kraft @ June 30 2010,15:10) BD: I don't see where they repented of anything. They had the choice to make. It was not a sin. It seems to me that when Adam chose to accept good/and evil that he split God in his mind. Now there were to Gods, one good and one evil. By making that choice to believe in evil they both began to sense/feel the effects of an opposite force to God that never really was. Man believed in evil when there was no evil. It was an allusion in his mind. Yet he had the power to make the illusion real to him. Did man create evil? In his mind? Only God existed, there was no evil at that time. No sin, no laws from God or man. There could be no sin/error until man decided that something
was to him, good or evil. Man decided to see thing as good or evil. Man then felt separated from God. Man believed God was angry with him. God never told Adam it was a sin or would separate them from each other. God told him the consequence of believing in two Gods. I tend to believe that sin was from the very beginning an error of thinking by man that something he could do would separate him from
God. Actually that even is true but the action is not the sin. The sin/error/separation occurs when a man believes something to be evil. If he believes it to be evil then to him it is evil. It may be untrue, it may be illusion but if the man believes it is sin then it is sin to him!! Just some thoughts. I appreciate your answers. God bless, TK
Tk,
For now on i ask you to speak with scripture,
First of all,
Evil is the result of choice.Therefore since the devil fell before man, sin and error is not an illusion. it was a action.
You can Choose God or anythign that is not God.
Man believes everythign he does in his own eyes are right, but in reality they are evil to God.
Its common sense would a person do something that they themselves believe is wrong, of course not, they would have to justify it.can you see??
what you state is not real brother.
please read this short thread. about somethign i wrote concerning this. comment when u do read it.
Evil is not the result of choice, God directly told Adam out of all the trees in the Garden you may FREELY CHOOSE FROM but of the tree of good and evil you must not touch it.Genesis 2:15-17 (King James Version)
15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
This proves that there was choices which did not include evil because infact there were many choices that would not have transgressed the command of God so therefore, choice that has and evil result comes from the evil inclination
define choice,i believe we agree,
i believe you misunderstood me.
It is a result of choice, maybe i should use a better phrase or what not. but the point is the result of Mans choice to do evil, caused Evil.
the sinful Choice was the cause, the effect was evil.
anyways we agreee so whatever. do you get my point?
Quote (theodorej @ July 11 2010,03:59) Quote (Stu @ June 24 2010,22:55) Quote (bodhitharta @ June 19 2010,07:40) Also you have profaned the name of God and although you did out of ignorance it still was an unintentional SIN
What absurd religious fantasy story could find any ethical content in the concept of 'unintentional SIN'?Isn't that an oxymoron?
Stuart
Greetings Stu….I think that sin as I know it,that is the transgression of Gods law, would not apply to you,given your belief system….Now you must be carefull , because if you acknowledge unconsious sin,you will be indirectly paying recognition to sin which might raise the question of… Sin against who???Hey Stu …oxymorons…..Jumbo shrimp,Happy Haloween
Thank you for your acknowledgement that the concept of sin only sensibly applies to religious believers. In that regard I can't see what I need to be careful about in regard to a word that I consider meaningless.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ July 11 2010,12:50) Quote (theodorej @ July 11 2010,03:59) Quote (Stu @ June 24 2010,22:55) Quote (bodhitharta @ June 19 2010,07:40) Also you have profaned the name of God and although you did out of ignorance it still was an unintentional SIN
What absurd religious fantasy story could find any ethical content in the concept of 'unintentional SIN'?Isn't that an oxymoron?
Stuart
Greetings Stu….I think that sin as I know it,that is the transgression of Gods law, would not apply to you,given your belief system….Now you must be carefull , because if you acknowledge unconsious sin,you will be indirectly paying recognition to sin which might raise the question of… Sin against who???Hey Stu …oxymorons…..Jumbo shrimp,Happy Haloween
Thank you for your acknowledgement that the concept of sin only sensibly applies to religious believers. In that regard I can't see what I need to be careful about in regard to a word that I consider meaningless.Stuart
It depends what you define Sin as.If you feel like someone can do something morally right or wrong.
Than you have an understanding of sin and rightousness.
Its not the same and it means nothing of course if you do not believe,
but if you have an simple understanding of the justice system and agree that a person can do either right or wrong,
correct decisions or Mistakes/wrong deicisions, than you could agree with the concept.Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 11 2010,19:14) Quote (Stu @ July 11 2010,12:50) Quote (theodorej @ July 11 2010,03:59) Quote (Stu @ June 24 2010,22:55) Quote (bodhitharta @ June 19 2010,07:40) Also you have profaned the name of God and although you did out of ignorance it still was an unintentional SIN
What absurd religious fantasy story could find any ethical content in the concept of 'unintentional SIN'?Isn't that an oxymoron?
Stuart
Greetings Stu….I think that sin as I know it,that is the transgression of Gods law, would not apply to you,given your belief system….Now you must be carefull , because if you acknowledge unconsious sin,you will be indirectly paying recognition to sin which might raise the question of… Sin against who???Hey Stu …oxymorons…..Jumbo shrimp,Happy Haloween
Thank you for your acknowledgement that the concept of sin only sensibly applies to religious believers. In that regard I can't see what I need to be careful about in regard to a word that I consider meaningless.Stuart
It depends what you define Sin as.If you feel like someone can do something morally right or wrong.
Than you have an understanding of sin and rightousness.
Its not the same and it means nothing of course if you do not believe,
but if you have an simple understanding of the justice system and agree that a person can do either right or wrong,
correct decisions or Mistakes/wrong deicisions, than you could agree with the concept.
I don't think the concept of sin even has any significant meaning for a christian, let alone me.I have ethics that I share with many others, if not most other people on the planet, and equally some of my values could be minority ones. The universally agreed ethics, like not stealing or murdering are ubiquitous: people who have never heard of Judeo-christian scriptures can tell you they are wrong. Many of those ignorant people have their own gods who, they will say, have implanted these universal ethics in you in the same way you might claim it was your god that did the implanting.
Just as I am not a member of a golf club so calling me Captain of a golf club would be a nonsense, calling me a “sinner” is a nonsense because I am not a member of the club that names people that way either.
For your post to have merit you would really have to demonstrate that the NT can be relied upon to tell you what is godly and ungodly. Does it actually do that?
Further, to use the darkly comical word “righteous” you would have to be defending your beliefs as “right” in some way. How is it “right” in principle to punish an innocent man for the crimes of others? How is it “right” to accept a human sacrifice as a route to leading a better life yourself, or insisting that I will be punished in some way if I do not accept the verity of an ancient Palestinian being put to death for my sake? This is a really nasty belief system, and I think christian doctrines might be a place to start to apply the word sin if you want it to have a negative connotation.
Stuart
To say you have ethics is the same tone as saying you believe in SIN since you do believe that someone can be Unethical other than that part of your post, please carry on
Quote (Stu @ July 11 2010,20:11) I don't think the concept of sin even has any significant meaning for a christian, let alone me. I have ethics that I share with many others, if not most other people on the planet, and equally some of my values could be minority ones. The universally agreed ethics, like not stealing or murdering are ubiquitous: people who have never heard of Judeo-christian scriptures can tell you they are wrong. Many of those ignorant people have their own gods who, they will say, have implanted these universal ethics in you in the same way you might claim it was your god that did the implanting.
Just as I am not a member of a golf club so calling me Captain of a golf club would be a nonsense, calling me a “sinner” is a nonsense because I am not a member of the club that names people that way either.
For your post to have merit you would really have to demonstrate that the NT can be relied upon to tell you what is godly and ungodly. Does it actually do that?
Further, to use the darkly comical word “righteous” you would have to be defending your beliefs as “right” in some way. How is it “right” in principle to punish an innocent man for the crimes of others? How is it “right” to accept a human sacrifice as a route to leading a better life yourself, or insisting that I will be punished in some way if I do not accept the verity of an ancient Palestinian being put to death for my sake? This is a really nasty belief system, and I think christian doctrines might be a place to start to apply the word sin if you want it to have a negative connotation.
Stuart
Well Stu,You have stated things i have not said.
Quote I don't think the concept of sin even has any significant meaning for a christian, let alone me. I have ethics that I share with many others, if not most other people on the planet, and equally some of my values could be minority ones. The universally agreed ethics, like not stealing or murdering are ubiquitous: people who have never heard of Judeo-christian scriptures can tell you they are wrong. Many of those ignorant people have their own gods who, they will say, have implanted these universal ethics in you in the same way you might claim it was your god that did the implanting.
Well thats not always the case Steward, and of course we cant hold that has a fact. Good theory though. And i dont think we should follow what an ignorant person believes. Anyways I agree we have this univeral morality not ethics.
Because there are cultures such as the Natives of Americas who did all sorts or rituals and killings an so on and so forth. My people. So they in the other hand did not care for morality. Morality is a choice. You can do right or wrong, your choice.Quote Just as I am not a member of a golf club so calling me Captain of a golf club would be a nonsense, calling me a “sinner” is a nonsense because I am not a member of the club that names people that way either.
I dont know you, how can I say your a sinner? You could be a typing bird for all i know. I dont think a Sinner is a club, but a condition. Just like a Father is not a club, but a role you take in your life.
How about this,
Are we all imperfect?
Are we all flawed?Quote For your post to have merit you would really have to demonstrate that the NT can be relied upon to tell you what is godly and ungodly. Does it actually do that?
Actually The NT gives mandates of what Christ said, and always gives reference to the Ten commandments which are alot like the hammurabi code of laws, you know the eye for an eye law.
Anyways the commandments gives us common rules that we follow today. not to lie, steal, murder and so on. Even though there are more than ten commandements for the Israelites, that we dont even follow today.
Anyways i dont know what i have to prove to you,
I didnt even mention bible.
All i mention that it depends on what you define as sinner, and that there is a right and a wrong.Quote Further, to use the darkly comical word “righteous” you would have to be defending your beliefs as “right” in some way. How is it “right” in principle to punish an innocent man for the crimes of others? How is it “right” to accept a human sacrifice as a route to leading a better life yourself, or insisting that I will be punished in some way if I do not accept the verity of an ancient Palestinian being put to death for my sake? This is a really nasty belief system, and I think christian doctrines might be a place to start to apply the word sin if you want it to have a negative connotation.
Actually Sin means disobediance to Gods will. its an action against God.
I wasnt defending my beliefs, if anything i was just stating we have common grounds.
but lets continue anyways.God is right, i am not. Therefore God is righteous, im worthless.
Punishing what man? to whom do you refer?
God didnt accept a human scrafice by the way, the Guy was being dumb and wanted to do that. The bible acutually states taht God hates human scrafice.
What ancient being? To what do you refer to so that i can respond accuratly.Again it depends what you mean by sin. If sin means doing anythign against God, and God deemed those things right, than it is not Sin.
Either way i think you took things out of context.
Im sure if you should me to what your referring to, i can expliain it to you.in Conclusion,
I didnt mention all these things,
nor these arguements,,
nor did i even mention bible,
so my basic point is that we all have an understanding between right and wrong.
thats why it depends on what you define as Sin.Much love,
Quote (bodhitharta @ July 11 2010,22:35) To say you have ethics is the same tone as saying you believe in SIN since you do believe that someone can be Unethical other than that part of your post, please carry on
Incorrect.
Sin is against God,
even though we would hold him as a sinner, as we all are,
he woudnt,
becuase there is no one to transgress.He doesnt have to believe in that.
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 12 2010,06:31) Quote (bodhitharta @ July 11 2010,22:35) To say you have ethics is the same tone as saying you believe in SIN since you do believe that someone can be Unethical other than that part of your post, please carry on
Incorrect.
Sin is against God,
even though we would hold him as a sinner, as we all are,
he woudnt,
becuase there is no one to transgress.He doesnt have to believe in that.
sin is not just against God according to the scripturesBut when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
1 Corinthians 8:11-13Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
Matthew 18:20-22Quote (bodhitharta @ July 12 2010,04:35) To say you have ethics is the same tone as saying you believe in SIN since you do believe that someone can be Unethical other than that part of your post, please carry on
Huh?This time in English?
Stuart
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 12 2010,06:27) Quote (Stu @ July 11 2010,20:11) I don't think the concept of sin even has any significant meaning for a christian, let alone me. I have ethics that I share with many others, if not most other people on the planet, and equally some of my values could be minority ones. The universally agreed ethics, like not stealing or murdering are ubiquitous: people who have never heard of Judeo-christian scriptures can tell you they are wrong. Many of those ignorant people have their own gods who, they will say, have implanted these universal ethics in you in the same way you might claim it was your god that did the implanting.
Just as I am not a member of a golf club so calling me Captain of a golf club would be a nonsense, calling me a “sinner” is a nonsense because I am not a member of the club that names people that way either.
For your post to have merit you would really have to demonstrate that the NT can be relied upon to tell you what is godly and ungodly. Does it actually do that?
Further, to use the darkly comical word “righteous” you would have to be defending your beliefs as “right” in some way. How is it “right” in principle to punish an innocent man for the crimes of others? How is it “right” to accept a human sacrifice as a route to leading a better life yourself, or insisting that I will be punished in some way if I do not accept the verity of an ancient Palestinian being put to death for my sake? This is a really nasty belief system, and I think christian doctrines might be a place to start to apply the word sin if you want it to have a negative connotation.
Stuart
Well Stu,You have stated things i have not said.
Quote I don't think the concept of sin even has any significant meaning for a christian, let alone me. I have ethics that I share with many others, if not most other people on the planet, and equally some of my values could be minority ones. The universally agreed ethics, like not stealing or murdering are ubiquitous: people who have never heard of Judeo-christian scriptures can tell you they are wrong. Many of those ignorant people have their own gods who, they will say, have implanted these universal ethics in you in the same way you might claim it was your god that did the implanting.
Well thats not always the case Steward, and of course we cant hold that has a fact. Good theory though. And i dont think we should follow what an ignorant person believes. Anyways I agree we have this univeral morality not ethics.
Because there are cultures such as the Natives of Americas who did all sorts or rituals and killings an so on and so forth. My people. So they in the other hand did not care for morality. Morality is a choice. You can do right or wrong, your choice.Quote Just as I am not a member of a golf club so calling me Captain of a golf club would be a nonsense, calling me a “sinner” is a nonsense because I am not a member of the club that names people that way either.
I dont know you, how can I say your a sinner? You could be a typing bird for all i know. I dont think a Sinner is a club, but a condition. Just like a Father is not a club, but a role you take in your life.
How about this,
Are we all imperfect?
Are we all flawed?Quote For your post to have merit you would really have to demonstrate that the NT can be relied upon to tell you what is godly and ungodly. Does it actually do that?
Actually The NT gives mandates of what Christ said, and always gives reference to the Ten commandments which are alot like the hammurabi code of laws, you know the eye for an eye law.
Anyways the commandments gives us common rules that we follow today. not to lie, steal, murder and so on. Even though there are more than ten commandements for the Israelites, that we dont even follow today.
Anyways i dont know what i have to prove to you,
I didnt even mention bible.
All i mention that it depends on what you define as sinner, and that there is a right and a wrong.Quote Further, to use the darkly comical word “righteous” you would have to be defending your beliefs as “right” in some way. How is it “right” in principle to punish an innocent man for the crimes of others? How is it “right” to accept a human sacrifice as a route to leading a better life yourself, or insisting that I will be punished in some way if I do not accept the verity of an ancient Palestinian being put to death for my sake? This is a really nasty belief system, and I think christian doctrines might be a place to start to apply the word sin if you want it to have a negative connotation.
Actually Sin means disobediance to Gods will. its an action against God.
I wasnt defending my beliefs, if anything i was just stating we have common grounds.
but lets continue anyways.God is right, i am not. Therefore God is righteous, im worthless.
Punishing what man? to whom do you refer?
God didnt accept a human scrafice by the way, the Guy was being dumb and wanted to do that. The bible acutually states taht God hates human scrafice.
What ancient being? To what do you refer to so that i can respond accuratly.Again it depends what you mean by sin. If sin means doing anythign against God, and God deemed those things right, than it is not Sin.
Either way i think you took things out of context.
Im sure if you should me to what your referring to, i can expliain it to you.in Conclusion,
I didnt mention all these things,
nor these arguements,,
nor did i even mention bible,
so my basic point is that we all have an understanding between right and wrong.
thats why it depends on what you define as Sin.Much love,
I appreciate your intention, but the devil is in the details, as they say. You did say:If you feel like someone can do something morally right or wrong. Than you have an understanding of sin and rightousness.
I think it is wrong for christians to call homosexuals sinners. Does that mean I can call my position righteous?Quote Anyways I agree we have this univeral morality not ethics.
I think most people would consider ethics and morality to mean the same thing.Quote Morality is a choice. You can do right or wrong, your choice.
Most murder is domestic, and often is committed when the murderer has “seen red”, when he is so enraged that really you could not call it a rational choice.Do you think you could commit a murder? I don't think I could choose to do that.
Quote I dont think a Sinner is a club, but a condition. Just like a Father is not a club, but a role you take in your life.
My analogy didn't say sinner was a club, it said that you call someone something that does not apply, because that person does not subscribe to the doctrine that defines the term. You can think of me as whatever you want, but you should not expect others to assent to your christian club definitions of people, in this case especially as it is libelous as well.Quote I didnt even mention bible.
If the bible didn't exist then neither would the concept of sin, in the particular religious sense it has.Quote God is right, i am not. Therefore God is righteous, im worthless.
You have not “insipred” a book in which you admit to the slaughter of up to 24,000,000 humans. I think you are more ethically in the right than the monster you worship.Quote God didnt accept a human scrafice by the way, the Guy was being dumb and wanted to do that.
How can you be a christian without accepting that your god required at least one human sacrifice?Quote Again it depends what you mean by sin.
There is your problem in a nutshell. Sin can be whatever you define it to be. You indicate it could be the commandments, or it could be “being ungodly”. Exactly what does christianity think sin is?Stuart
Hi Stuart,
You seem to defend homosexuals a lot, are you one?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgStuart,
Quote I appreciate your intention, but the devil is in the details, as they say. You did say: What you mean?
Quote I think it is wrong for christians to call homosexuals sinners. Does that mean I can call my position righteous?
I think its wrong when Christians condemn homosexuals as immoral creatures when they themselves are not as holy. Christ is for the sinners, they accused him for being so close and spending so much time with them. I dont believe its right to be homosexul, but i dont condemn them. Thats Gods job, not mine.
Well none of us are compeletly righteous.
Now if your saying that doing something that one believes is right makes his position righteous i would disagree.Because hitler and others like him believed they were doing the right thing, yet he is held to be a evil person.
Just because someone has good intentions doesnt mean they are doing the right thing.Quote I think most people would consider ethics and morality to mean the same thing.
I think its different in some aspects. they have common ground. i guess for this sake we could say they are basically the same.Quote Most murder is domestic, and often is committed when the murderer has “seen red”, when he is so enraged that really you could not call it a rational choice. Do you think you could commit a murder? I don't think I could choose to do that.
Sometimes people murder becasue they love it, i have met and heard of people who enjoyed to see people pass in to death. enjoyed the blood, the killing, the screams.Personaly I have chosen at one point of my life.
Thank God for Jesus.
I need Jesus.
Im happy to know that you couldnt do such a thing.
Your more of a saint than i could ever be.Quote My analogy didn't say sinner was a club, it said that you call someone something that does not apply, because that person does not subscribe to the doctrine that defines the term. You can think of me as whatever you want, but you should not expect others to assent to your christian club definitions of people, in this case especially as it is libelous as well.
Oh ok i understand. Again thats why i stated it depends on what you define certain terms as.
basically we are saying the same thing.Quote If the bible didn't exist then neither would the concept of sin, in the particular religious sense it has.
Actually since i believe that Adam and Eve were real, before the bible existed, these two understood the concept of sin.Quote You have not “insipred” a book in which you admit to the slaughter of up to 24,000,000 humans. I think you are more ethically in the right than the monster you worship.
Who are you speaking of?
Tell me about these people?
Of whom do you speak of?
Maybe we should study who these people were, and think about it.
maybe just than we can understand God.Quote How can you be a christian without accepting that your god required at least one human sacrifice?
Oh because Jesus was condemned by the Jews, he was condemned as a “sinner” even though he was innocent and took our place to be punished. he was a lamb who took our place. when it comes to scarfice its true at one point that animals were scraficed, but when it comes to Christ i wouldnt call it a typical human scarfice. He took our place.Quote There is your problem in a nutshell. Sin can be whatever you define it to be. You indicate it could be the commandments, or it could be “being ungodly”. Exactly what does christianity think sin is?
You should know that any word can mean anything to anybody. for example Jesus means savoir to Christians, a prophet to the muslims and etc. Even Jesus being the literal Son of God or God himself.
One word can mean alot of things depending on the person.
I seek to understand what you think about it,
Its obvious what Christians believe what sin is. a Transgression and what not towards God.Much love bro,
Quote (Ed J @ July 12 2010,11:41) Hi Stuart, You seem to defend homosexuals a lot, are you one?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
I'm not homosexual, so I guess I am safe from being stoned by a Jew or taunted by a Paulist as being “worthy of death” on that account.Of those who condemn homosexuality, I always wonder which famous gay person he would taunt / stone first.
Stephen Fry?
Oscar Wilde?
Martina Navratalova?
Ian McKellen?
Michelangelo??Stuart
Quote (Stu @ July 14 2010,11:54) Quote (Ed J @ July 12 2010,11:41) Hi Stuart, You seem to defend homosexuals a lot, are you one?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
I'm not homosexual, so I guess I am safe from being stoned by a Jew or taunted by a Paulist as being “worthy of death” on that account.Of those who condemn homosexuality, I always wonder which famous gay person he would taunt / stone first.
Stephen Fry?
Oscar Wilde?
Martina Navratalova?
Ian McKellen?
Michelangelo??Stuart
Does fame extricate someone from the Law or give them superior qualities that rise above any judgement?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
