|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
posted August 24, 2013 01:12 PM |
|
|
Elodin,since I haven't read the Bible soon,I would like to know what is mentioned in it about sin.
My question is-
Is it specifically mentioned people like to REPEAT THE SAME SIN over and over again,
(as for example thieves make thefts,killers kill,liers lie,etc)
OR,
Is it mentioned people like to AMMOUNT different types of sin?
Maybe both?
The base for my question is that in our time making the same sin again and again is called "business"(talking about the illegal ones).
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted August 25, 2013 12:36 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 00:38, 25 Aug 2013.
|
JollyJoker said:
Elodin said:
Quote:
And you know that from the Bible?
Yep. Jesus also called Abraham's bosom paradise when he was on the cross.
Wait a second. You say basically, that heaven and hell existed before Jesus with the same "mechanics" of being sorted into one or the other after death - but only for Jews, then?
Everyone who has ever died has gone to a place of torment or a place of joy no matter if they were Jew or Gentile.
Before Christ all of the dead went to Sheol. Sheol was composed of a place of torment and a place of joy (called Abraham's bosom or paradise.) But the place of joy was not heaven. The "righteous dead" could not enter heaven until the death and resurrection of Christ.
No, as I explained earlier some pagans could be considered righteous by God depending on how they responded to what they knew and what they had the opportunity to know. Go back to page 86 and read my post dated: August 21, 2013 05:00 AM and read that please.
Before the sacrifice of death God's actions were to all appearances unrighteous to the spirit world because he was not throwing all people into torments because of their sin. The sacrificial death of Christ vindicated God for not throwing everyone into torments. Upon the death and resurrection of Christ the sacrifice of Christ was applied to the "righteous dead" and then it was seen why everyone did not have to pay the price of eternal torment for their sin.
Quote:
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Before Christ technically sin was "covered" but not forgiven. The sinless Christ had to bear the sins of others for the sins to be forgiven. Mercy and justice kissed at the cross.
@master_learn
I don't understand what you are asking.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 25, 2013 10:27 AM |
|
|
I see.
So I suppose it's your conviction then that God with his omniscience sees it in every person, when they have to account for their lives, eventually, that what would have been potentially possible considering the life circumstances, and what part of that potential had been realized.
Translating into the fact that someone like you or me who know a lot about these things, have time to dwell over things like right and wrong and so on, would be measured with a much larger yardstick, then, let's say an oxen farmer somewhere in the depths of Outer Mongolia who cannot read and never heard about anything like this.
Which makes a lot of sense, and I would consider it only fair, obviously.
But that would also mean, that for example evil-doers with a very rough upbringing, abused, extremely poor, violent neighborhood and so on, would be judged differently, since their potential to become "good people" was way lower than that of a son of some well-off Upper Middle Class family, right?
|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
|
posted August 25, 2013 11:08 AM |
|
|
Trying to periphraze it a little bit:
The sinful people love their sins more than God.They prefer to sin everyday and ignore God in their lives.
Some of them may commit different types of crimes/sins.
I am interested if there is a PATTERN:
Majority of people sommit the SAME crime/sin they are SKILLFUL at
(example-thiefs PREFER to steal than making something different,killers PREFER to kill again than making other crime,liers stick to lying,haters stick to hatred...)
OR
Majority of people just do as many DIFFERENT sins as they like,as if making a SIN COLLECTION.
How is it described in the Bible this process of leading sinful life?
Or do people tend to specialize in a sin?
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted August 25, 2013 01:06 PM |
|
|
JJ said:
Translating into the fact that someone like you or me who know a lot about these things, have time to dwell over things like right and wrong and so on, would be measured with a much larger yardstick, then, let's say an oxen farmer somewhere in the depths of Outer Mongolia who cannot read and never heard about anything like this.
Which makes a lot of sense, and I would consider it only fair, obviously.
But that would also mean, that for example evil-doers with a very rough upbringing, abused, extremely poor, violent neighborhood and so on, would be judged differently, since their potential to become "good people" was way lower than that of a son of some well-off Upper Middle Class family, right?
Remember, we've discussed something similar in the early pages of this thread, the idea of "good versus evil" is always too simplistic and dualistic for the many parameters and social conditions that involves human psychology and behavior. If heaven and hell existed (and functioned just based on deeds not your religious identity), it would practically be impossible to decide who goes where most of the time. I mean Jack The Ripper goes to hell and Gandhi goes to heaven, ok, that much would be covered, but most regular people are neither here or there. The idea is too caricaturistic to properly work.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 25, 2013 02:24 PM |
|
|
On the other hand it's also the only way it can work at all, and since absolute justice needs absolute knowledge, in theory I don't see any problem with it Who, if not an omniscient being COULD evaluate all these things, and in fact it would be a waste, if all that knowledge would NOT be used properly.
Hypothetically spoken, of course.
So finally THAT makes sense - but of course, for the sake of this specific question here it would make you ask all the more so why we should NOT try and look behind an evil deed to come to a better idea of the actual amount of guilt of a criminal, before we start with the penalties - which is exactly what society is doing.
The problem in the US is simply that there are too many neighborhoods in the big cities that are like 2nd or even 3rd world enclaves with their own laws. Which is probably a consequence of illegal immigrants on one hand and mass unemployment on the other.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted August 25, 2013 02:42 PM |
|
|
|
Even with omniscience I don't see it functioning properly. I assume omniscience would have the opposite effect, you would stop judging completely. You would be totally above such things. The problem here is not being unable to determine all the parameters, the problem is the very existence of all those parameters and the relativity that comes with it when it comes to judging people.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 25, 2013 03:18 PM |
|
|
On the contrary. Pretty interesting to rate this - for example the failure to use your money and power to avoid innocents starving or dying because they can't afford treatment one one hand and for example a ganger deliberately not killing a rival or enemy but only wounding him.
Pretty interesting stuff actually, and knowing everything pertinent should make this possible.
Still hypothetically spoken.
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted August 31, 2013 08:32 PM |
|
|
Continued from VW
GunFred said:
The fact that humans are more good than evil is proven by science and common sense. Humans are pack animals and individuals who have treated their fellow humans well and been unselfish have been able to reproduce more and their group's survival chances has increased. It is the same among pack animals in nature as well. While individuals can be extremely selfish and evil, humans masses will only do large scale evil when under a powerful and evil/corrupt/misguided ideology. A massive majority just want to live in peace along with other humans and we would not live in organized societies if humans were not naturally good. We should not trust people who claim that humans would be evil without religion because they sound like moral time bombs and also have in mind that atheist nations are more peaceful and moral than religious ones.
Humans can be very selfish and can be very cruel to fellow humans, not to mention to other creatures. They are so because of sin. The Christian religion tells people to be good and not sin. The ones that claim to be Christians and do non-Christian things for selfish reasons are not true Christians. I wish people would stop repeating the same old stories about inquisitions and killing natives and witch hunts and would actually read what the New Testament says. Nowhere is it said that Christians should hate or kill anyone, quite the contrary.
Unfortunately society is becoming very anti-Christian.
|
|
GunFred
Supreme Hero
Sexy Manticore
|
|
posted August 31, 2013 09:20 PM |
|
|
Drakon-Deus said:
Humans can be very selfish and can be very cruel to fellow humans, not to mention to other creatures. They are so because of sin. The Christian religion tells people to be good and not sin. The ones that claim to be Christians and do non-Christian things for selfish reasons are not true Christians. I wish people would stop repeating the same old stories about inquisitions and killing natives and witch hunts and would actually read what the New Testament says. Nowhere is it said that Christians should hate or kill anyone, quite the contrary.
Unfortunately society is becoming very anti-Christian.
Saying that humans are evil because of sin is like saying humans are evil because of evil... 
All those horrible events were performed by true christians who were excused and inspired by Christianity. For modern christians to say that christians of the past were not real christians would not really right. The true christians would be the original ones and I would bet on that the christians of the past would be closer to the originals and their lack of knowledge would lead to a more firm belief of the Bible's supernatural content. The nicer kind of modern Christianity is watered down with non-christian influences while the worse kind hold on to hateful and unjustified intolerance. Neither however follow the religion as the originals would have done and cherry picks from the the religion whatever suits them.
And western/formerly christian nations are hardly as much anti-christian as christians are anti-others. Luckely for christians, most of these countries are secular with religious freedom(although Christianity is often unfairly favoured) and are little interested in revenge against their own people for mostly past sins. Today, people call out religion on its BS because they no longer are killed or worse for doing so and people have more knowledge which makes the BS more questionable. Why are europeans and americans so pissed off at Islam? It is because of all the BS and atrocities that is going on in islamic countries and it is the same against Christianity but at a much smaller scale.
Lastly, if 'true' christians do not want to be blamed for the nasty actions of 'false' christians then they need to stop grouping themselves together as "christians".
____________
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted August 31, 2013 09:52 PM |
|
|
Have you even read the New Testament? If you did, you would stop saying those things about "original" Christians.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
GunFred
Supreme Hero
Sexy Manticore
|
|
posted August 31, 2013 11:18 PM |
|
|
Drakon-Deus said:
Have you even read the New Testament? If you did, you would stop saying those things about "original" Christians.
I have never read the Bible (aside from a comic bible) but as a small child there were always lots of christian culture and traditions and people talking about biblical content. And in school of course we had unbiased religion and history classes for many, many years. And people such as I who are very interested in the topic of religion in the world learns a lot from both theists and atheists about religion, what they believe and why they believe.
By original christians I meant mostly people between Jesus and middle ages. Large groups of modern christians are going to keep using the old testament to excuse their immoral actions(which are worth more than words) while other modern christians are going to defend their shared religious sources by saying that those christians are not real christians.
Note: While writing the internet connection disappeared temporarely and I lost my first post when submitting it so I had to rewrite it. I could have forgotten something.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2013 09:05 AM |
|
|
If "sin" is supposed to be the reason for evil, it may pay to look at it.
Why did god have to put the apple tree directly in fron of Adam and Eve AND allow the serpent access to them?
As a father, you wouldn't do that, right? You wouldn't WANT to test your children, whether they are obeying you, by forbidding something without explanation, leave the forbidden thing directly before them and have a third person telling them to disobey with a silver tongue - not, if there were really something depending on it.
Because ultimately such a test will either prove that you educated your children to be robots (and obey unthinkingly - the Nazi-SS education goal) or it will end in disaster.
Ultimately, they sinned because there was no other choice - ALL children have to break away from their parents eventually, and if the children wouldn't do things differently than their parents sometimes, there was no development.
Saying that sin is the source of evil, is saying that not hiding in caves for all eternity is the source of it.
Ultimately EVIL creates more evil, but evil is older than humans because it comes naturally: natural deasster, death, sickness, poverty, hardship, ignorance. For life to prevail a certain amount of fighting for it is necessary, but even then victories are only temporary - so there is your evil.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted September 01, 2013 10:15 AM |
|
|
JJ said:
Why did god have to put the apple tree directly in fron of Adam and Eve AND allow the serpent access to them?
You know, in the Bible there's nothing about apples, right? People only think of an apple tree because of paintings. It's actually the forbidden fruit of the tree of KNOWLEDGE. My understanding is that knowledge is specifically of sex, since when they eat it, they immediately need to cover their genital areas. (It can even be considered a metaphor for reaching puberty). Of course, since the myth is written by men, it's presented as Eve's "fault" to turn sexual. Typical of Abrahamic religions, it's the woman who should not arouse.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2013 12:07 PM |
|
|
It's not about sex, it's about the realization of past and present, the step from an existence of living firmly anchored in the present and simply LIVE to realization, conscious thought and everything that comes with it (the realization of the finiteness of the physical existence and that everything must die eventuelly, including yourself and your beloved.
It's about the dawn of humanity as we know it.
It's what MAKES us what we are, and I suppose in ancient times, when there was big need and hardships people say that as very sharp two-edges sword.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted September 01, 2013 12:35 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 12:36, 01 Sep 2013.
|
Easy there Martin Luther, that's a lot to conclude from that myth The immediate covering of themselves and the woman giving the fruit to Adam instead of the serpent tricking them both at the same time suggests that their "awakening" is definitely not non-sexual. On the contrary, sex is very central to the story. It may not be the only theme though.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2013 12:56 PM |
|
|
The assumption makes no sense, because that would assume that SEX would have been the sin, which cannot be, since obviously not only every creature multiplied, but Eve was made differently from the start, so having sex has been part of existing anyway.
Why would people a couple thousand years ago would assume the problems - and sin - would start with having sex, when sex was natural for every creature?
So you should be a little more careful here. Sex has never been the problem, even though one might assume something like that at first, but it definitely makes no sense when you really start thinking about it.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted September 01, 2013 04:07 PM |
|
|
|
Eve was made as a companion not as a sex partner and since sex IS a sin in Abrahamic religions, it is obvious the taboo already existed. I will elaborate but I am not home now and I really hate to type long things on iPad so later...
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 01, 2013 04:52 PM |
|
|
It's neither sin, nor a taboo.
They just had a slightly different morale than, say, the Egyptians. No people of old ccould have survived when their religion would declare sex a sin, since sex is necessary to survive as a people.
And the claim that Eve was made as a companion is rather silly; why would god make a companion for Adam as a perfect fit in every respect, if they didn't want them to "fit"?
Makes no sense.
Think about what the serpent says: "God doesn't want you to become like him." Do you really think the Serpent meant "like him", as in "havin sex"?
Nope.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted September 01, 2013 06:40 PM |
|
|
|
JJ it's obvious not ALL sex was sin, I didnt even feel the need to mention that. As I said, Im gonna elaborate when I return home.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
