unsafe's picture

unsafe

image

Classifying Sin --Is It OK to Commit a Small Sin In God's View

 

Is there such a thing as Small Sins and Big Sins

 

Is all sin bad or do we think we can get away with committing a small sin---like for instance we say I just told a small white lie that is no big deal ---It's not like I committed murder or we say It didn't hurt anybody by my little lie so God won't mind .

 

Is all sin the same in God's view ---or do we think  we can commit some sins but not others ---

 

Any thoughts on this ???

Share this

Comments

gecko46's picture

gecko46

image

Deleted

MikePaterson's picture

MikePaterson

image

I don't think it's "god" that "gets" us. As I understand sin, it's closing yourself to "god": if you set yourself apart from the mystery, life can feel disappointing. How hellish is "boring"?  There's no "one-for-one" tit-for-tat… but we'll know all about it when our greed stalls the planet and her eco-cycles.

revjohn's picture

revjohn

image

Hi unsafe,

 

unsafe wrote:

Is there such a thing as Small Sins and Big Sins

 

No.  All sin is categorized as sin.  The distinction of major and minor sins is thoroughly extra-biblical invention.

 

unsafe wrote:

Is all sin bad

 

No.  All sin is not bad.  The whole good/bad dichotomy is falsely applied to sin.

 

While everyone is busy being outraged let me attempt to explain my point.

 

Sin is missing the mark, being less than perfect.  It doesn't take into account intent, it infers that the intent was to hit the bull's eye and the arrow failed to hit that mark.  You might get a pat on the back for trying but you will still be scored as failing.

 

Remember when Jesus healed others on the Sabbath and the complaint was that he worked on the Sabbath?

 

The literalists were right.  If the letter of the law, the actual commandment not to work on the Sabbath is supreme as the word of God then Jesus sinned.

 

And yet as Jesus points out the law was not created by God to be served by humanity it was created by God to serve humanity.  The goal that God is aiming for, the redemption and restoration of the children of God, is the Bull's eye.  Jesus by healing on the Sabbath violates the commandment not to work (which is not the bull's eye) to hit the bull's eye.

 

Something literalists, in their idolotry of the written word have a very difficult time understanding.

 

The Law never takes precedence over life and there is no commandment that can be honoured by keeping if the breaking of that commandment would spare a life.  Something our modern day Donatists deny.

 

unsafe wrote:

Is all sin the same in God's view

 

Where there is no life threatened by the keeping of any commandment all sin stands equally condemned.

 

unsafe wrote:

or do we think  we can commit some sins but not others

 

Where life is threatened by the keeping of any commandment the sin is to allow life to be lost and that will be judged accordingly.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

airclean33's picture

airclean33

image

Hi John-- You posted---

unsafe wrote:

 

Is all sin bad

 

 

 John post--

No.  All sin is not bad.  The whole good/bad dichotomy is falsely applied to sin.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------airclean --post --I know you explained your post , and it dose sound resoluble.But why not say all sin is bad. Sin the way I see it . Is not doing what God wants. Now we know Jesus , was only doing that what God said to do. It could not be a sin. Also I am not sure the Law can break it's self.  It could Judge something has  cause it to do that so , it is not a breaking of the Law.In that case would the law not be covered?  God Bless John.-------airclean33

Witch's picture

Witch

image

The religious right seems to think some sins are much, much worse than others, depending on what the fashion is that day, of course.

Obsessing over homosexuality at your ham sandwich luncheons seems to be particularly ridiculous IMHO.

revjohn's picture

revjohn

image

Hi airclean33

 

airclean33 wrote:

But why not say all sin is bad.

 

Do not steal.  That is the commandment.  A man is hungry and his family is starving.  He takes a loaf of bread which does not belong to him.  The man is a thief.  He has sinned.  Is he bad?

 

If I say that he is bad because he sinned I make the commandment not to steal more important than the man's life or the life of his family.

 

Do not commit murder.  That is the commandment.  An intruder breaks into my home and commits violence against my family I kill him in self-defence.  I am a hero,  Yet a man is still dead.  Am I good?

 

If you say I am good then you violate the scripture which says that there is no one good but God alone.  By mere technicality I have only killed and killing is not forbidden by the law as murder is.  So I have not violated the commandment and on that ground I am not a sinner.  A man is still dead.  Again, how good is that?

 

airclean33 wrote:

Sin the way I see it . Is not doing what God wants.

 

That's well and fine.  We aren't talking about how you define sin.  We are talking about sin and I am using Biblical examples of sin and how those examples have been interpreted.

 

airclean33 wrote:

Now we know Jesus , was only doing that what God said to do.

 

Where, in scripture, is it commanded that healing be done on the Sabbath?  If we look carefully we find that the Sabbath prohibition is kept rigourously.  Do you not remember the whole Manna incident in the Wilderness?  For 40 years in the wilderness God sent Manna every day but one, the Sabbath, on the day of preparation he would allow the Isrealites to collect enough Manna for the day of preparation and the Sabbath.  On every other day they were prohibited from taking more than their family would need for the day and those who cheated were treated to worm infested Manna on the day following.

 

And the healing that Jesus performed on the Sabbath, was any of it life-threatening?  Was it an emergency that couldn't have waited until Sunday?  No, it was a withered hand it wasn't going anywhere.

 

Jesus was well aware of the prohibition against working on the Sabbath and he challenges the commandment by asking if it is lawful to do good or evil on the Sabbath.  In your own words sin is not doing what God wants and God wants everyone to rest on the Sabbath.  That means, nobody works on the Sabbath.  To work on the Sabbath is what?  Is it good (honours the commandment) or is it evil ( violates the commandment)?

 

And what about when the disciples picked grain on the Sabbath?  Forget about the Sabbath commandment.  What would you call it if I walked through a farmer's field and helped myself to the produce?  I'm reasonably certain that the farmer would call it theft.

 

And yet Jesus brushes that off as well claiming to be Lord of the Sabbath.  I guess the potential theft is covered under his being Lord of heaven and earth.  Diplomatic immunity all around.

 

Jesus is trying to prove a point.  The Pharisees got it and they were angered.  We don't get it so we make excuses.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

unsafe's picture

unsafe

image

 

This is the scripture revjohn referes to ----above 

 

Luke 6:1-4

Amplified Bible (AMP)

Luke 6

 1ONE SABBATH while Jesus was passing through the fields of standing grain, it occurred that His disciples picked some of the spikes and ate [of the grain], rubbing it out in their hands.(A)

    2But some of the Pharisees asked them, Why are you doing what is not permitted to be done on the Sabbath days?(B)

    3And Jesus replied to them, saying, Have you never so much as read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him?--[I Sam. 21:1-6.]

    4How he went into the house of God and took and ate the [sacred] loaves of the showbread, which it is not permitted for any except only the priests to eat, and also gave to those [who were] with him?

 

The controversy is ---Is it work or not or were they just hungry for food ---The law prevents work on the sabbath  --

 

This is an explaination of this passage which is also in Matthew ---you can judge for yourselves http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/211222/picking-grain-sabbath

 

Reflections

Picking grain on the Sabbath

July 16, 2009, 5:29pm

Matthew 12:1-8

At that time Jesus was going through a field of grain on the sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat them. When the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “See, Your disciples are doing what is unlawful to do on the sabbath.” He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry, how he went into the house of God and ate the bread of offering, which neither he nor his companions but only the priests could lawfully eat? Or have you not read in the law that on the sabbath the priests serving in the temple violate the sabbath and are innocent? I say to you, something greater than the temple is here. If you knew what this meant, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned these innocent
men. For the Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath.”

Reflection

People versus law: The basic issue here is Sabbath observance.

Because of their hunger, Jesus’ disciples pick grain on the Sabbath. Since this action is considered equivalent to harvesting, the Pharisees deem it unlawful.

Jesus counters the Pharisees’ argument by reminding them of an Old Testament incident: The eating of the holy bread by David and His men (cf 1 Sm 21:2-7). This account, however, does not deal with the breaking of the Sabbath rest but with a violation of the law because David and His men were hungry and without food.

This example is typical of Jesus’ perspective on the law in the Gospel of Matthew. Human need, such as hunger (of the disciples and David and his men), takes precedence over the law. People are more important than the law.

Moreover, Jesus uses a legal example which contradicts itself. In order to observe the Sabbath laws concerning their Temple duties, the priests must break the law concerning Sabbath rest from work.

What Matthew is arguing is this: Even the law recognized that Temple duty was more important than observance of the Sabbath rest. In other words, there is a hierarchy of mandatory observance built into the law. One part of the law can be violated — indeed, is mandated by the law itself! — in favor of a more important part of the law.

Therefore, the satisfying of a human need — food — cannot be a violation of the Sabbath observance.
SOURCE: “365 Days with the Lord,” ST. PAULS, 7708 St. Paul Rd., SAV, Makati City (Phils.,); Tel.: 895-9701; Fax 895-7328; E-mail: publishing@stpauls.ph; Website: http://www.stpauls.ph.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

airclean33's picture

airclean33

image

Hi unsafe- I was just thinking on this and you posted . I agree, and more.----------------

   
  Gal 3:23 Now before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until faith should be revealed.
  Gal 3:24 So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith.
  Gal 3:25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian;
  Gal 3:26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.
  Gal 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
  Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
  Gal 3:29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.

 

Rev. Steven Davis's picture

Rev. Steven Davis

image

unsafe wrote:

... do we think  we can commit some sins but not others ---

 

John has responded well, and I agree with most of what he said. I would just make the point that we "can" commit any sin we want to commit - from little white lies to mass murder. It's a matter of choice and self-control for the most part.

 

The fundamental issue for me is relationship. Is what we're doing going to have an adverse effect on our relationships either with each other or God; is it going to do harm to another person? If the answer is yes I'd categorize that as sin. 

spiritbear's picture

spiritbear

image

One of the major problems in dividing "sins" into major and minor is that we then start comparing ourselves with others as we put ourselves into a "pecking order of goodness".  We think of ourselves as better than some because they have committed more major or minor sins, and therefore we can judge them as being somewhat lower than the "good persons" we are. The irony is that even members of the Mafia (as studies have shown) think that they are "good people" - they've just made a few mistakes. Truth is that when judging or comparing ourselves with others, we rarely do so on an equal footing - were we exposed to the same temptation would we have done likewise (it's easier being "moral" when you're affluent frown); would we have had the smarts to work out the better/moral way; had we had a different (eg more difficult) upbringing or life would we have responded the same way?  So to say that all have sinned is a great leveler.  But it is not intended to paralyse right action. For we are forgiven - that gives us the knowledge that no matter how we have wronged or failed another (or God), we can start again from scratch. And not be stuck in the rut of having been a little selfish here or a little hurtful there and coming to the conclusion that "I can't do anything right, so why try?". Because God believes that there is a lot that we can do right and is always there, acting as a cheering section for us to pick ourselves up and carry on, but not at someone else's expense. There is a reason why pride is one of the "cardinal" sins - it's because when we suppose ourselves to be better than others, we damage our relationship with them.

Pinga's picture

Pinga

image

I swear..... lately a lot.....is that a sin?

Rev. Steven Davis's picture

Rev. Steven Davis

image

Pinga wrote:

I swear..... lately a lot.....is that a sin?

 

Matthew 5:33-37 -

“Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’ But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one."

 

Or, by chance, did you mean some other kind of swearing?

 

 

revjohn's picture

revjohn

image

Hi Pinga,

 

Pinga wrote:

I swear..... lately a lot.....is that a sin?

 

Thou Shalt not have a Potty mouth.

 

It would depend.

 

If you are taking the name of the Lord in vain, then yes.

 

If you are cursing someone or something (ie, damning them), then yes.

 

Shouting something excrement based, no.  Paul wrote something excrement based in scripture which we clean up regularly so it isn't too much for our delicate sensibilities.

 

It may signal that you are tired or irritated with someone or something in someway.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

 

unsafe's picture

unsafe

image

 

I found this on this word vain and to me it much more than swearing ----http://www.eliyah.com/3rdcom.htm

 

 

The Third Commandment: What does it mean?

RealAudio version
 | MP3 version


Many take the third commandment to mean that we should not use the Heavenly Father's name alongside a swear word or profanity. I could see where it certainly might mean this. Others say that taking His name on our lips while living a life of sin is another way of taking His name in vain. I agree with this also. 

However, I have found that the third commandment means much more than this. Replacing the Heavenly Father's name with a title of our own choosing such as "the LORD", "GOD", "Adonai", or "Ha Shem" is another way of taking His name in vain. Let's look at the third commandment as written in the King James Bible:

Deuteronomy 5:11 "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold [him] guiltless that taketh his name in vain."

If we examine this verse in the Hebrew text that the King James Bible was translated from, we would not find "The LORD" or any word that carries such a meaning. What is actually there is the Heavenly Father's true name, "Yahweh". I believe it is important to consider whether or not this tradition is something the Heavenly Father would desire us to follow. 

Let's take a moment and look at the Webster's dictionary definition of the word "vain":

vain 1. Having no real substance, value, or importance; empty; void; worthless; unsatisfying. ``Thy vain excuse.'' ... 2. Destitute of forge or efficacy; effecting no purpose; fruitless; ineffectual; as, vain toil; a vain attempt. ... 

Considering the meaning of the word 'vain', what greater way to bring Yahweh's name to emptiness,  worthlessness, and having no real substance, value or purpose than to remove His name altogether from scripture and substitute it with a title of our own choosing?

Those who have chosen to practice this are doing just that. This practice is so widespread and so complete that few people even know the Heavenly Father has a personal name. Yahweh chose to place His name in scripture nearly 7,000 times. And each one of those 7,000 times it is replaced with a title (such as "The LORD") in 99% of all translations. In fact, in most translations the third commandment (as written) is a transgression of itself! Why? Because the third commandment forbids bringing His name to nothing, yet most translations do just that.

To further demonstrate this point, let's look at the Hebrew word that is translated "vain" in this verse.

Deuteronomy 5:11 (KJV) Thou shalt not take the name of Yahweh thy Elohim in vain <7723>: for Yahweh will not hold [him] guiltless that taketh his name in vain <7723>.

The number after the word "vain" in this passage refers to Strong's word #7723 in the Hebrew Lexicon. This same Hebrew word (#7723 'Shav') can also be found in another commandment just a few verses later. But in this instance, it is translated differently:

Deuteronomy 5:20 (KJV) Neither shalt thou bear false <7723> witness against thy neighbour.

Here we have the same Hebrew word <7723> translated "false." Might this shed light on the third commandment as well? We know that to say that the name of the Heavenly Father is "The LORD" is actually a false statement. Most translations are full of false statements. For instance, the King James Version reads:

Isaiah 42:8 - I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.  

The above is not a true statement. His name is not "the LORD". His name is Yahweh. "The LORD" is not a translation of the original, it is asubstitution of the original. The translators did not translate, they purposely substituted the true name of the Heavenly Father for something else so that they could follow their tradition. It should instead read:

Isaiah 42:8 (RNKJV) I am Yahweh: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.  

So if we want to keep the ten commandments, we should never replace Yahweh's name with a false name or title of our own choosing. Doing so would be breaking the third commandment. This is not the only way to break the third commandment, but we can see that it is certainly one way of doing so. We are not supposed to add or take away from the scriptures. But in doing this, man has chosen to both add and take away. 

Yahweh considered it important enough to include something about His name in the Ten Commandments. He considered it important enough to include a warning that we would not be held "guiltless" if we choose to break it. Therefore, in spite of what others may think, let's keep His commandments by restoring what Yahweh placed there originally. Let's set aside vain tradition and walk in the original truth of Yahweh... just as He inspired it.



 

Mahakala's picture

Mahakala

image

I believe people are sinful by nature and God (that's today's God, not the Old Testament God!) is not too concerned about whether or not we commit sin, because he knows that we will. God is more concerned whether we accept his forgiveness and more on to a life free of guilt about things we can't help doing anyway. In my opinion, a guilty conscienceous causes more trouble than the "small sins" in the first place.

Pinga's picture

Pinga

image

Rev Steven Davis.....I had to read that one twice!  Correct, I did not mean swearing an oath, but rather saying a word considered inappropriate....you made me chuckle though!

 

RevJohn.....hmm, so if I am up to my hips in shit, I can say that?  Yeah!   My swearing occurs out of frustration, you are correct.  The games people play, you know?  Thanks for your thoughtful response as well.

 

*****************************************

Next sin:    Let me think, which other one can I throw out to you.    Gluttony I already know is a sin, and, is quite in evidence by my waistline, or maybe that is sloth.

 

hmmmm.....I am envious of organizations and churches that don't seem to eat their own. I keep trying to be a positive person ; however, at times, I fail....is that a sin?

revjohn's picture

revjohn

image

Hi Pinga,

 

Pinga wrote:

RevJohn.....hmm, so if I am up to my hips in shit, I can say that?  Yeah!   

 

It is not necessarily polite speech.  It breaks no commandment.  If you want to be on the safe side and use only the finest Biblical quality of impolite speech Paul used the word Skubula.

 

Pinga wrote:

Next sin:    Let me think, which other one can I throw out to you.    Gluttony I already know is a sin, and, is quite in evidence by my waistline, or maybe that is sloth.

 

Perhaps it isn't either/or so much as both/and.

 

At any rate Gluttony is not forbidden in scripture.  Slothfulness gets quite the drubbing.

 

Pinga wrote:

hmmmm.....I am envious of organizations and churches that don't seem to eat their own.

 

Then you want the Salvation Army.  I don't believe they celebrate the Lord's Supper.

 

Pinga wrote:

I keep trying to be a positive person

 

If you are a neutral conducting agent you could try a process called induction.  Bear in mind that no electron will actually leave your person.  They will simply migrate away from the charged object (that you are using in the induction process naturally).  Be careful not to allow the charged object to come into contact with you (the neutral conducting agent).  That, I'm guessing, could be painful.

 

I also understand that you are familiar with the World of Warcraft.  You should have access to the Positive Charge Spell

 

Pinga wrote:

; however, at times, I fail....is that a sin?

 

Failure is sin.

 

It is forgiveable so repent and move on.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

unsafe's picture

unsafe

image

 

Hi Mahakala     Your Quote    a guilty conscienceous causes more trouble than the "small sins" in the first place.yes

 

Great Posting -----That is God convicting our sin conscienceous   -----

 

Satan on the other hand loves it when we sin and feel quilty as he knows ---it makes us feel unworthy of God's forgiveness and love and keeps us away from the truth.

 

Peace

 

 

crazyheart's picture

crazyheart

image

Years ago, I was told dancing is a sin by some of my church friends. I have danced for many years. So many years. So many sins. Or just one big sin that accumulates over the years.

unsafe's picture

unsafe

image

 

Hi revjohn    Your Quote   ---At any rate Gluttony is not forbidden in scripture.

 

Proverbs 23:2

New International Version (NIV)

and put a knife to your throat
    if you are given to gluttony.

 

 

 

 

 

Proverbs 23:20-21

Amplified Bible (AMP)

 

20Do not associate with winebibbers; be not among them nor among gluttonous eaters of meat,(A)

    

21For the drunkard and the glutton shall come to poverty, and drowsiness shall clothe a man with rags.

 

7 deadly Sins ----http://deadlysins.com/sins/index.htm

 

Pride is excessive belief in one's own abilities, that interferes with the individual's recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity.

Envy is the desire for others' traits, status, abilities, or situation.

Gluttony is an inordinate desire to consume more than that which one requires.

Lust is an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body.

Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath.

Greed is the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual. It is also called Avarice or Covetousness.

Sloth is the avoidance of physical or spiritual work.

 

revjohn's picture

revjohn

image

Hi unsafe,

 

unsafe wrote:

Hi revjohn    Your Quote   ---At any rate Gluttony is not forbidden in scripture.

 

You understand that Proverbs are not Commands right?

 

You get that there is a difference between advice and the law right?

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

unsafe's picture

unsafe

image

 

This is from  ------http://www.allyoucaneatcatholics.com/2012/02/seven-deadly-sins-gluttony.html

 

Gluttony can be defined as either a venial sin or a mortal sin depending on the situation. When one overeats or drinks too much, then they have committed a venial sin. On the other hand, “By excesses in eating and drinking, [if one] would have greatly impaired his health, or unfitted himself for duties for the performance of which he has a grave obligation, [he] would be justly chargeable with mortal sin.”3

 


Gluttony and Temperance
Overeating is a Sin

 

http://www.internetdynamics.com/home/spadkins/god/virtue/gluttony.html

 

 

Colossians 3:5

New International Version (NIV)

Put to death,(A) therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature:(B) sexual immorality,(C) impurity, lust, evil desires and greed,(D) which is idolatry.

 

Gluttony would be greed or lust which is Idolatry and Idolatry is the 1st Commandment  ---

 

And God spoke all these words, saying: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.  http://www.bible-knowledge.com/10-commandments/

  1. You shall have no other gods before me.

 

Rev. Steven Davis's picture

Rev. Steven Davis

image

crazyheart wrote:

Years ago, I was told dancing is a sin by some of my church friends. I have danced for many years. So many years. So many sins. Or just one big sin that accumulates over the years.

 

I was once told that Christians who believe dancing is a sin solve the problem by calling it "foot fellowship."

Pinga's picture

Pinga

image

foot fellowship sounds like something you do when lying down

StephenBoothoot's picture

StephenBoothoot

image

you wrote:"
Do not steal. That is the commandment. A man is hungry and his family is starving. He takes a loaf of bread which does not belong to him. The man is a thief. He has sinned. Is he bad?
"

yes, he would have participated in thievery.




there is teachings regarding denying oneself, and more.



i guess i would ask why one would need to steal a loaf of bread when there is many given for those in need for free.


is it a matter of convenience?

you wrote:"

If I say that he is bad because he sinned I make the commandment not to steal more important than the man's life or the life of his family.
"

not necessarily, one could explore alternative measures.

you wrote:"Do not commit murder. That is the commandment. An intruder breaks into my home and commits violence against my family I kill him in self-defence. I am a hero, Yet a man is still dead. Am I good?

"

imo, that would not make one a hero.



38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
(Matthew 5:28-42)


21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[b][c] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
(Matthew 5:21-22)


i wonder if there is a solution in which nobody is dead?, a taking up of ones cross maybe?



you wrote:"
If you say I am good then you violate the scripture which says that there is no one good but God alone. By mere technicality I have only killed and killing is not forbidden by the law as murder is. So I have not violated the commandment and on that ground I am not a sinner. A man is still dead. Again, how good is that?"
"


Yes, Jesus does ask :


"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone.(Luke 18:19)


that is interesting.
21 “All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.

22 When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
(Luke 18:21-22)





"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.(John 10:11)


we know Jesus didnt come to abolish the law.


17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.



those who consider themselves 'teachers' should consider verse 19


so we can now consider:


5 Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we[a] have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we[b] boast in the hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only so, but we[c] also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4 perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5 And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.
(Romans 5:5-11)


now we can consider the relevance of such as this in regards to enviroments that to embrace sins or, make excuses for them in others and encourage sinful lifestyles, and the concern for a enviroment where truths in Jesus words and the very scriptures we get the teachings from.

21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22 Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.
24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life. 25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.
(John 5:21-27)

47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day.(John 12:47-49)

i I dont think Grace is to be a excuse to continue sinning

What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.(Romans 6:1-4)



------------------------------------



8 “I tell you, whoever publicly acknowledges me before others, the Son of Man will also acknowledge before the angels of God. 9 But whoever disowns me before others will be disowned before the angels of God. (Luke 12:8)


excuses to sin can be made, did we search for alternatives first?


Faith is a great part of Christs message.


4 “I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. 5 But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. 6 Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. 7 Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.
(Luke 12:4-7)


--------------------


8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,”[a] you are doing right. 9 But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. 11 For he who said, “You shall not commit adultery,”[b] also said, “You shall not murder.”[c] If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker.

12 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.
(James 8-13)

much to consider, much to balance.

Tyson's picture

Tyson

image

revjohn wrote:

Hi Pinga,

 

Pinga wrote:

RevJohn.....hmm, so if I am up to my hips in shit, I can say that?  Yeah!   

 

It is not necessarily polite speech.  It breaks no commandment.  If you want to be on the safe side and use only the finest Biblical quality of impolite speech Paul used the word Skubula.

 

 

Up skubula's creek without a paddle just doesn't have quite the same ring. And, I will never read Philippians 3:8 the same way again. wink

 

Also. Is it spelled skubula or skubala?

Baylacey's picture

Baylacey

image

Pinga, revjohn and rev.steven,  you are making me laugh.  

I try not to have a potty mouth but every now and again.............which leads me to a question.  I get that taking the lord's name in vain is bad, as is damning someone.  Excrement is apparently ok.  What about holy animals eg. cow or holy excrement?  Sorry to be silly,  but I have wondered.........

Baylacey's picture

Baylacey

image

Tyson, I looked it up,  it is skubala.  I made a note of it for future reference, you just never know when you might have the opportunity to use a cool word like that.  

Tyson's picture

Tyson

image

Baylacey wrote:

Tyson, I looked it up,  it is skubala.  I made a note of it for future reference, you just never know when you might have the opportunity to use a cool word like that.  

 

I have already used it at least 4 times in the last 30 minutes. smiley

Pinga's picture

Pinga

image

It's Tyson, It's Tyson, oh my goodness, it's Tyson, holy skubala!

Pinga's picture

Pinga

image

revjohn wrote:

 

I also understand that you are familiar with the World of Warcraft.  You should have access to the Positive Charge Spell

 

 

 

oooh, revjohn.  I was a shaman.  I raised people from the dead......I don't think it would be a sin, would it?

 

ps...the only person who can do the positive charge spell is Mechano-Lord Capacitus. He's a boss.  I'm not.

Dcn. Jae's picture

Dcn. Jae

image

Baylacey wrote:
...it is skubala.  I made a note of it for future reference, you just never know when you might have the opportunity to use a cool word like that.

 

Next Thursday I have to give an eight minute sermon in class. I'll try to work that in somewhere.

 

Rich blessings.

Tyson's picture

Tyson

image

Pinga wrote:

It's Tyson, It's Tyson, oh my goodness, it's Tyson, holy skubala!

 

smiley

revjohn's picture

revjohn

image

Hi Tyson,

 

Tyson wrote:

Also. Is it spelled skubula or skubala?

 

My apologies it is skubala.

 

Still, a turd by any other name . . .

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Tyson's picture

Tyson

image

revjohn wrote:

Hi Tyson,

 

Tyson wrote:

Also. Is it spelled skubula or skubala?

 

 

Still, a turd by any other name . . .

 

 

 

....would smell as sweet?

GordW's picture

GordW

image

Tyson wrote:

revjohn wrote:

Hi Tyson,

 

Tyson wrote:

Also. Is it spelled skubula or skubala?

 

 

Still, a turd by any other name . . .

 

....would smell as sweet?

I believe that is a rose.  Or perhaps a Montague

dreamerman's picture

dreamerman

image

So SB if you had a child who was hungry and wanted bread you would rather give your child a snake than steal that bread? There are people around the world who don't live in a country of abundance. Some people have no other option but to steal food in order to feed their family.

MistsOfSpring's picture

MistsOfSpring

image

There are a great many places in the world where someone stealing to feed his/her family would be arrested, imprisoned, possibly have a hand cut off.  Which is the real sin: stealing to feed your family or withholding the bread from the poor in the first place?

airclean33's picture

airclean33

image

dreamerman wrote:

So SB if you had a child who was hungry and wanted bread you would rather give your child a snake than steal that bread? There are people around the world who don't live in a country of abundance. Some people have no other option but to steal food in order to feed their family.

- Hi dreamerman-- This is wrong , there is no country GOD can not go to. There is no one God will not hear if they ask. Ask and you shell recive . Knock and the door will be open . Seek and you will fined. ( I do not find steal it if you can't).As a Father myself , my children eat befor me . They got what they needed befor me. I am just Flesh, an am evil. If I can think this way, about my children , how much more does God think about His.You have a great day .  airclean33

blackbelt's picture

blackbelt

image

airclean33 wrote:

dreamerman wrote:

So SB if you had a child who was hungry and wanted bread you would rather give your child a snake than steal that bread? There are people around the world who don't live in a country of abundance. Some people have no other option but to steal food in order to feed their family.

- Hi dreamerman-- This is wrong , there is no country GOD can not go to. There is no one God will not hear if they ask. Ask and you shell recive . Knock and the door will be open . Seek and you will fined. ( I do not find steal it if you can't).As a Father myself , my children eat befor me . They got what they needed befor me. I am just Flesh, an am evil. If I can think this way, about my children , how much more does God think about His.You have a great day .  airclean33

 

I rember My grandfather telling me stories in Italy of starvation after the war, my grandfather had 2 sons, a wife and a nephew to take care of , Italy was pretty  much destroyed , epically  after Mussolini was killed by his countrymen, now my grandfather was a big believer in Jesus , yet to survive he stole food so his family could eat.

 

Now I remember reading a story about a God who over came sin by Love &Life , now this is not to say that sin is right , no not at all, but it does show that Life and Love takes precedence , and that Life over comes. I remember reading that this God when he manifested himself into man did not teach legalities or accuse of sin, there is another who does a great job at that,  but this God gave life and gave it more abundantly.

 

Where there was sin , He gave Grace

Where there was debts, he discharged debtors

Where there was sickness, he healed

Where there were captives, he freed them

Where there was the unfortunate, He served them

 

At the end of the day after we speak Life into another’s life, we hand them over to the Life giver to finish the job, just like I was given over and the next generation and so forth, like the movie title, “Pay it Forward”.

 

 

Personally, and im not saying you Aircleen brother, im just speaking generally , im tired of the church categorizing   sin , and pointing fingers, condemnation just spiritually destroys being further. 

dreamerman's picture

dreamerman

image

airclean33 wrote:

dreamerman wrote:

So SB if you had a child who was hungry and wanted bread you would rather give your child a snake than steal that bread? There are people around the world who don't live in a country of abundance. Some people have no other option but to steal food in order to feed their family.

- Hi dreamerman-- This is wrong , there is no country GOD can not go to. There is no one God will not hear if they ask. Ask and you shell recive . Knock and the door will be open . Seek and you will fined. ( I do not find steal it if you can't).As a Father myself , my children eat befor me . They got what they needed befor me. I am just Flesh, an am evil. If I can think this way, about my children , how much more does God think about His.You have a great day .  airclean33

What exactly are you trying to say ac33? Are you implying that children dying of starvation in third world countries are dying because they haven't asked your god to give them food? If this is the case then your god is everything chansen says he is. If your god needs to be asked first before he will help those starving and since he is all knowing yet doesn't give food to those that are starving then what would you call this god? Unless of course you don't believe people are dying of malnutrition or they are dying of malnutrition because they don't believe in your god.

airclean33's picture

airclean33

image

Hi Blackbelt --It's ok Brother  for you to believe what you want. But I have to say a war don't make it ok to stop doing Gods will.I myself will not teach that it is ok to steel , or Lie, or Kill . Not because a church is telling me. I just don't think Jesus wanted us to do those things. I know some Churchs are very stricked on those who would break Gods Laws.  As you can see in my first post ,I ask where in Gods word did He say it was ok to steel?I also understand things can happen , to make you walk off the path.You know we have a God that judges all things ,  and He knows what you were thinking when you did it.In the end it is GOD that judges .

blackbelt's picture

blackbelt

image

airclean33 wrote:

Hi Blackbelt --It's ok Brother  for you to believe what you want. But I have to say a war don't make it ok to stop doing Gods will.I myself will not teach that it is ok to steel , or Lie, or Kill . Not because a church is telling me. I just don't think Jesus wanted us to do those things. I know some Churchs are very stricked on those who would break Gods Laws.  As you can see in my first post ,I ask where in Gods word did He say it was ok to steel?I also understand things can happen , to make you walk off the path.You know we have a God that judges all things ,  and He knows what you were thinking when you did it.In the end it is GOD that judges .

 

Hi brother

 

no one has said its ok to sin, there are circumstances that cause us to , that plays on our human nature. Remember when Jesus was tempted? At his most weakest  time, Jesus prevails, why? Because Jesus has a nature that we do not , Christ over came for us what we could never do for ourselves, I know you understand this brother.

 

The question is , not if we sin, but when, because Christian or no Christian, we will all fail and sin, so when we do, we don’t need an accuser, we need a Life giver.

unsafe's picture

unsafe

image

 

Hi blackbelt   Your Quote -----no one has said its ok to sin, there are circumstances that cause us to , that plays on our human nature

 

I personally have to disagree with this ---I personally believe -nothing can make us sin ----no circumstance can arise that would cause us to sin ---God always gives us a way out of every situation  ---We sin because we want to not because we have to -----This is again my personal view. I am talking about Born Again people not  People who live by this world's standards.

 

 

1 Corinthians 10:13

Amplified Bible (AMP)

13For no temptation (no trial regarded as enticing to sin), [no matter how it comes or where it leads] has overtaken you and laid hold on you that is not common to man [that is, no temptation or trial has come to you that is beyond human resistance and that is not [a]adjusted and [b]adapted and belonging to human experience, and such as man can bear]. But God is faithful [to His Word and to His compassionate nature], and He [can be trusted] not to let you be tempted and tried and assayed beyond your ability and strength of resistance and power to endure, but with the temptation He will [always] also provide the way out (the means of escape to [c]a landing place), that you may be capable and strong and powerful to bear up under it patiently.
 
 
 
Peace Brother 
airclean33's picture

airclean33

image

Hi blackbelt ---You posted--

The question is , not if we sin, but when, because Christian or no Christian, we will all fail and sin, so when we do, we don’t need an accuser, we need a Life giver.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Airclean--post---We need a Life giver?I have one  Blackbelt  His name is Jesus. I or you ,are not the perfact one He is. We are to try and be like Him. Who told you that you had to be Perfect?  I'v walked with Christ now a few years , an I can tell you I am not perfect. We are not under the Law Blackbelt. We are under Christ Jesus .He and He alone is Perfect. You and me Brother will make mistakes as did our Brothers of long ago . We are not yet, what God wants us to be .He is working on us.The Flesh does not bow to God , so as long as your in the flesh, you must be ungaurd .The flesh is weak.Your Spirit Brother is one with God , How can God lose God? God Bless----- airclean33

blackbelt's picture

blackbelt

image

unsafe wrote:

 

Hi blackbelt   Your Quote -----no one has said its ok to sin, there are circumstances that cause us to , that plays on our human nature

 

I personally have to disagree with this ---I personally believe -nothing can make us sin ----no circumstance can arise that would cause us to sin ---God always gives us a way out of every situation  ---We sin because we want to not because we have to -----This is again my personal view. I am talking about Born Again people not  People who live by this world's standards.

 

 

1 Corinthians 10:13

Amplified Bible (AMP)

13For no temptation (no trial regarded as enticing to sin), [no matter how it comes or where it leads] has overtaken you and laid hold on you that is not common to man [that is, no temptation or trial has come to you that is beyond human resistance and that is not [a]adjusted and [b]adapted and belonging to human experience, and such as man can bear]. But God is faithful [to His Word and to His compassionate nature], and He [can be trusted] not to let you be tempted and tried and assayed beyond your ability and strength of resistance and power to endure, but with the temptation He will [always] also provide the way out (the means of escape to [c]a landing place), that you may be capable and strong and powerful to bear up under it patiently.
 
 
 
Peace Brother 

 

yes its a choice, but we sin because its our nature, and its our nature that satan works on, notice i said cause us to sin not that we willfully do so. there are thouse who are stronger willed, there are thouse are weeker, regardless, sooner or latter we all sin, we all fail, becuase it is a part of us, like DNA. 

 

Just like satan causes us to sin, the life of Jesus preavles, 

blackbelt's picture

blackbelt

image

airclean33 wrote:

Hi blackbelt ---You posted--

The question is , not if we sin, but when, because Christian or no Christian, we will all fail and sin, so when we do, we don’t need an accuser, we need a Life giver.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Airclean--post---We need a Life giver?I have one  Blackbelt  His name is Jesus. I or you ,are not the perfact one He is. We are to try and be like Him. Who told you that you had to be Perfect?  I'v walked with Christ now a few years , an I can tell you I am not perfect. We are not under the Law Blackbelt. We are under Christ Jesus .He and He alone is Perfect. You and me Brother will make mistakes as did our Brothers of long ago . We are not yet, what God wants us to be .He is working on us.The Flesh does not bow to God , so as long as your in the flesh, you must be ungaurd .The flesh is weak.Your Spirit Brother is one with God , How can God lose God? God Bless----- airclean33

that was my point , Jesus is the Life Giver, lets not point out sin, lets point of Jesus , let God do teh rest

unsafe's picture

unsafe

image

 

Hi blackbelt

 

Thanks for your response ----yes

 

Peace Brother

Dcn. Jae's picture

Dcn. Jae

image

MistsOfSpring wrote:

Which is the real sin: stealing to feed your family or withholding the bread from the poor in the first place?

Stealing the food.

 

The state should not be in the business of providing food for the poor. That is simply not one of its responsibilities.

 

Rich blessings.

Dcn. Jae's picture

Dcn. Jae

image

Deleted by MC jae due to duplication.

Back to Religion and Faith topics
cafe