|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 26, 2015 21:54:29 GMT -5
The fall of man was not interpreted as the origin of the doctrine of original sin until Saint Augustine invented it. That's historically documented. The Fall of Lucifer and the Fall of man are linked in scripture. You may be right. Is there scripture for that? Not really -- but it's good to stretch one's brain sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 26, 2015 23:23:27 GMT -5
The seed will grow and live forever....you need the seed. Why is this so cruel? God will give it to eveyone that wants it. Not really, you have to come on you knees believing that you are a "sinner," before the very creator who made you that way.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 26, 2015 23:26:44 GMT -5
There is a presumptuousness surrounding this whole issue of "sin" that I find disturbing. Can anyone claim to know the mind of "God"? I rather think not. Can anyone know what I value and hold sacred in my personal life? I rather think not. So I return to the original question, why the obsession with "sin". Why isn't our fellowship dominated by the joy of renewal and the gift of a generous spirit? why the obsession with sin? probably because it seperates us from God, who would want that? "why the obsession with sin?"
Easy! That is what has always been used to control people!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2015 23:33:10 GMT -5
Don't you think sin can control a person Dmmichgood? People who are loving, gracious and honest seem to have a lot fewer problems in life than those who are not.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 26, 2015 23:36:20 GMT -5
Don't you think sin can control a person Dmmichgood? People who are loving, gracious and honest seem to have a lot fewer problems in life than those who are not. Well we have the scholar again telling us things without any proof what ever!
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 26, 2015 23:37:34 GMT -5
Sin. I don't believe anyone is a sinner. We are human and we do make mistakes, we do not act as lovingly as we could or should sometimes and no one else can make mistakes/sin and by doing so make all of mankind sinners. I also do not believe that anyone needs to die for our salvation from our sins. It makes no sense to me same as it makes no sense that I am responsible or carry an original sin because someone else acted less than admirably at one time. I see the focus on sinning, believing you are a sinner and needing salvation as unhealthy. I see all the distaste for being human as sad. If there is a God that created us he made us the way we are for a reason. Coming into the physical world would be so we could experience life in all of it's wonder not deny ourselves living in order to be able to have a comfortable afterlife. I see love to be the highest state because it causes the most amount of joy and well being and it makes our living experience that much better. But I don't see the opposite as a sin, just not as enjoyable. I think God would have wanted us to enjoy all the aspects of being physical and I think it's man that has decided a person that is too happy can't be controlled so they developed ways of making sure no one was too sure about their existence. God seems to have the most problem with those things that bring the most enjoyment to humans. Sex is a huge no no in most religions. Not hard to see why that might be of course. So love and compassion are the things that I focus on because they seem to bring about the highest level of good and well being, not just for me, but others too. I believe that if there is a God he would want us to look at it's creation with awe and wonder. However, as an atheist I see the same benefit from a life of love and it has nothing to do with pleasing or appeasing a wrathful, jealous God. It has to do with making the world I live in a better, kinder more joyful place to live. Love and compassion work to make life better and when life is better we are more able to see the wonders and experience joy. Some people seem to need a God and an afterlife to experience that. I find that I don't care about those things. They aren't what matter to me anymore. But making the most of the life I currently have does make a difference and that's what I focus on. As far as Christianity and to focus on sinning goes, it seems to be more Paul that started all that. He was more into control and rules. I totally believe that Christianity as we know it today has been formed by Paul much more than Jesus. I don't see a lot of resemblance between what Jesus taught and what Paul taught, but I do see a lot of what Paul taught in the current understanding of Christianity.
By the sounds of things yknot you have it figured out for yourself. You are able to experience the wonders of living, finding joy in the ordinary and you are lucky. If it's not broken, why try to fix it. Trying to understand Christianity will cause all kinds of cognitive dissonance and for me it's not necessary. For others it brings them joy. So this world has something for everyone doesn't it. As the Buddhists say, there are many roads up the mountain, but they all end at the same place, the top. What brings joy to one person may be of little consequence to someone else. For me it's live and let live and what that means to me is this. Just because it doesn't work for me and bring me joy, doesn't mean it doesn't bring joy to someone else. I would never want to be responsible for ending someone else's 'joy'.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 26, 2015 23:45:52 GMT -5
I know, you are going to one of those "coffee shops" to buy some "White Widow" or "Northern Lights" hash. Maybe you can ogle the girls in the red light district shop windows. ehm.. for a good Christian boy how do you know about such things, Bert?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 26, 2015 23:46:47 GMT -5
People who are loving, gracious and honest seem to have a lot fewer problems in life than those who are not.Which is the best reason I know of to live that way. Focus on being loving, gracious and honest and don't worry about the rest of it. We don't need to believe in God and sin in order to see the pluses to living like that. It's probably why it's included in pretty much all religious doctrine. It just makes good sense to live that way if we want to have a better world and life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2015 23:56:18 GMT -5
I know, you are going to one of those "coffee shops" to buy some "White Widow" or "Northern Lights" hash. Maybe you can ogle the girls in the red light district shop windows. ehm.. for a good Christian boy how do you know about such things, Bert? Don't you remember Dmmichgood? We went to Holland together!
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 27, 2015 6:05:39 GMT -5
The wiki article on the subject of 'Original Sin' is very good. The 1938 explanation from the Church of England is the most succinct of all. Man is by nature capable of communion with God, and only through such communion can he become what he was created to be. "Original sin" stands for the fact that from a time apparently prior to any responsible act of choice man is lacking in this communion, and if left to his own resources and to the influence of his natural environment cannot attain to his destiny as a child of God. There is a significant difference in shade of meaning between Catholic and Protestant views of the concept of Original sin. Surprisingly the Catholic doctrine is more plausible than the Protestant one. But the Catholics often have the edge on doctrine having had 1500 more years to think about things. I will check out the wiki article later this evening. Building off the 1938 explanation you provided, I remain terribly confused. Who among us (all 7 billion of us) can claim to "know/have known" if a Nez Perce native boy walking up an Idaho river value in 1859 had the experience of communion with his creator? Obviously, all 7 billion of us can "claim to know" that such communion did not occur, but my question is who "knows/knew" that it did not occur. For a more contemporary example who among us (all 7 billion of us) knows whether or not I have experienced communion with my creator in the last 48 hours. There is a presumptuousness surrounding this whole issue of "sin" that I find disturbing. Can anyone claim to know the mind of "God"? I rather think not. Can anyone know what I value and hold sacred in my personal life? I rather think not. So I return to the original question, why the obsession with "sin". Why isn't our fellowship dominated by the joy of renewal and the gift of a generous spirit? I will have to quit soon but I have truly enjoyed, learned from and appreciated everyone's contribution to this thread. It has been a true delight for me. Thank you. One interesting aspect of the article is the impact of the theory of Evolution on the doctrine. I suppose the difficulty is in determining the point in history at which our reprobate actions are explainable as simple animal behaviour rather than a fall from a condition of grace, i.e. original sin. The doctrine satisfies me as an explanation of the general human condition. The difference with most Christians, as a universalist, is that I don't find the condition of grace to be lacking for the Navajo boy of your example.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jul 27, 2015 9:42:43 GMT -5
Are you looking for an explanation of why Christianity doesn't add up for you, or are you looking for someone to help you make sense of Christianity? Fair question. Although getting on in years I still do sums reasonably well so I am not looking for an explanation of "why Christianity doesn't add up", suspect I will be able to handle that 'rithmetic. I am not really looking for anyone to help make sense of Christianity. Religion has become such a cacophony of competing assertions, I shan't be around long enough for it to get all sorted out. No, I want to come in from wandering the wilderness. I am looking for a few individuals who really know what they (themselves) feel and believe and who actually live out their lives with purpose and meaning according to the beliefs that they hold sacred. I know that what they feel will be different from what I feel, we will have had much different experiences. I suspect and even hope that their beliefs will differ from mine. My only selection criteria are that they be sincere (actually live what they preach) and that they have retained their capacity to experience awe, pleasure, wonder and ecstasy. The conjured fellowship would be most complete were there to be some open to the idea of the numinous. I have grown weary of the inability to express beliefs without quoting scripture. I am weary of those who profess a faith in Christ and then choose to judge their neighbor. I am growing tired of those who proclaim their freedom from sin and then mock and ridicule their neighbor (committing actual sin by violating one of the most sacred commandments). I respect those who have chosen to deny or ignore the transcendent. I do not count myself among their number. But, here too, I grow weary of requests for proof where, by definition, proofs do not exist, save in one's individual experience. My experience most closely approaching the fellowship I seek is limited to one, the F&W Fellowship. I have no experiences beyond that. At the time I was part of that community, it satisfied my needs. Much time has passed. It was my experience that the elders actually nourished the young. That may no longer be true. My experience was of a hierarchy based on spiritual respect not the exertion of control. Some now believe that the Friends have chosen to cede personal responsibility to the Workers, I chaff at the thought. As our culture has changed through the years and new challenges arise, it appears to me that those responsible for the spiritual growth of the flock have chosen instead to go along to get along. My appreciation of the "old time religion" that I grew up with is not based on the rules imposed, it is based on the humble but certain moral integrity of the elders that I knew. Returning now, many years later, I am appalled by the acknowledgement of sexual abuse and how it is said to be handled. Without the integrity to deal with abuse swiftly and surely, all the babel about forgiveness, atonement, grace, being saved and Christ dying for our sins falls on deafened ears. I hope I am wrong. I hope that there is still a fellowship of sincere individuals who are living out their lives of meaning and purpose with a commitment to principles they hold sacred.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 27, 2015 12:19:46 GMT -5
Are you looking for an explanation of why Christianity doesn't add up for you, or are you looking for someone to help you make sense of Christianity? Fair question. Although getting on in years I still do sums reasonably well so I am not looking for an explanation of "why Christianity doesn't add up", suspect I will be able to handle that 'rithmetic. I am not really looking for anyone to help make sense of Christianity. Religion has become such a cacophony of competing assertions, I shan't be around long enough for it to get all sorted out. No, I want to come in from wandering the wilderness. I am looking for a few individuals who really know what they (themselves) feel and believe and who actually live out their lives with purpose and meaning according to the beliefs that they hold sacred. I know that what they feel will be different from what I feel, we will have had much different experiences. I suspect and even hope that their beliefs will differ from mine. My only selection criteria are that they be sincere (actually live what they preach) and that they have retained their capacity to experience awe, pleasure, wonder and ecstasy. The conjured fellowship would be most complete were there to be some open to the idea of the numinous. I have grown weary of the inability to express beliefs without quoting scripture. I am weary of those who profess a faith in Christ and then choose to judge their neighbor. I am growing tired of those who proclaim their freedom from sin and then mock and ridicule their neighbor (committing actual sin by violating one of the most sacred commandments). I respect those who have chosen to deny or ignore the transcendent. I do not count myself among their number. But, here too, I grow weary of requests for proof where, by definition, proofs do not exist, save in one's individual experience. My experience most closely approaching the fellowship I seek is limited to one, the F&W Fellowship. I have no experiences beyond that. At the time I was part of that community, it satisfied my needs. Much time has passed. It was my experience that the elders actually nourished the young. That may no longer be true. My experience was of a hierarchy based on spiritual respect not the exertion of control. Some now believe that the Friends have chosen to cede personal responsibility to the Workers, I chaff at the thought. As our culture has changed through the years and new challenges arise, it appears to me that those responsible for the spiritual growth of the flock have chosen instead to go along to get along. My appreciation of the "old time religion" that I grew up with is not based on the rules imposed, it is based on the humble but certain moral integrity of the elders that I knew. Returning now, many years later, I am appalled by the acknowledgement of sexual abuse and how it is said to be handled. Without the integrity to deal with abuse swiftly and surely, all the babel about forgiveness, atonement, grace, being saved and Christ dying for our sins falls on deafened ears. I hope I am wrong. I hope that there is still a fellowship of sincere individuals who are living out their lives of meaning and purpose with a commitment to principles they hold sacred. yknot, are you thinking of returning to the F&W's? Is this why the questions re focus on sin? I haven't quite figured out why you are concerned with why religions focus on sin? If you are agnostic and do believe there could be something to transcendence, why not just live like you have been. It sounds as though you have figured it pretty good on your own something that works for you. Does it matter what religions do and what they focus on? I guess I am not understanding your concerns regarding sin. Once you let go of religion, you realize sin is more a way of keeping people off balance. Guilt is a very big aspect of religion. No matter what you do you cannot 'not' sin. Then you feel guilty about your lack of ability in being better and when you are told to turn to God you try but it still keeps on happening. It becomes a vicious cycle of the person doing something they are told God regards as a sin and the person praying for strength not to sin but it never quite works. So the person feels less and less capable of living a good life on their own and they keep turning to God to try and do better. But it never fully works of course. But it does keep people believing they are weak and sinners. Something I think is unfortunate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2015 12:30:44 GMT -5
As I see it, acknowledging sin is a form of empowerment. And seeing a "higher power," as the AA group call it, can be humbling and quite instructive. Since the Renaissance the West has lost its sense of family honor, and now, personal honor as well. People are simply not ashamed of things they were once ashamed of. Now its harder to get people to pay fines or avoid bankruptcy. Modern media has brought to your attention the fact there are others like you with deviancy issues, so don't be ashamed. It's been my observation that people who have strong religious commitments (inc 2x2, JW, Mormons etc..) seem to do better, have larger families, are more honest, more assured, have a sense of purpose, are well regarded in their employment, more socially minded etc..
As an aside, I wrote this to Dmmichgood, it sums up my feelings on this "better world" we are creating.
Quote And I suppose, as the world gets more moral, that we are going to put locksmiths, security control rooms, security forces, police, paramilitary, airport security, border control, drug enforcement and the like out of a job.
And suppliers of security videos, drone surveillance, bullet proof vests, riot shields, tasers, tear gas, bomb proofing for aircraft, automotive engine locks, ATM/Bank hardening technology and the like will be out of business.
It's interesting to note that during the "Wild West" of the USA, about a dozen bank robberies over fifty years were recorded. And they didn't even have a police force.
We simply have no idea how other generations lived, do we?
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on Jul 27, 2015 12:38:30 GMT -5
I have grown weary of the inability to express beliefs without quoting scripture. I am weary of those who profess a faith in Christ and then choose to judge their neighbor. I am growing tired of those who proclaim their freedom from sin and then mock and ridicule their neighbor (committing actual sin by violating one of the most sacred commandments). (snip) I hope I am wrong. I hope that there is still a fellowship of sincere individuals who are living out their lives of meaning and purpose with a commitment to principles they hold sacred. I have fellowship at my church with "sincere individuals who are living out their lives of meaning and purpose with a commitment to principles they hold sacred," but the principles they hold sacred are the scriptures--which they would quote. I'm puzzled why quoting scripture to explain the reason for one's beliefs is wearisome to you. After all, isn't the "one of the most sacred commandments" you refer to scripture? I'm also puzzled about your comment about some proclaiming their freedom from sin--but perhaps you are referring to the freedom from the penalty of sin some allude to who believe "there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." (I couldn't resist quoting brother Paul )
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jul 27, 2015 14:10:20 GMT -5
yknot, are you thinking of returning to the F&W's? Is this why the questions re focus on sin? I haven't quite figured out why you are concerned with why religions focus on sin? If you are agnostic and do believe there could be something to transcendence, why not just live like you have been. It sounds as though you have figured it pretty good on your own something that works for you. Does it matter what religions do and what they focus on? I guess I am not understanding your concerns regarding sin. Once you let go of religion, you realize sin is more a way of keeping people off balance. Guilt is a very big aspect of religion. No matter what you do you cannot 'not' sin. Then you feel guilty about your lack of ability in being better and when you are told to turn to God you try but it still keeps on happening. It becomes a vicious cycle of the person doing something they are told God regards as a sin and the person praying for strength not to sin but it never quite works. So the person feels less and less capable of living a good life on their own and they keep turning to God to try and do better. But it never fully works of course. But it does keep people believing they are weak and sinners. Something I think is unfortunate. No, snow, a return to the F&W's is highly improbable and that is not why I am curious about the accentuated role of sin in modern religion. It is a real challenge for me to grasp the importance/significance of sin in any spiritual practice. The reason I asked for the tutorial is because I would like to understand the basis of this phenomena and I feel it is important to challenge my own beliefs. Perhaps I am naive about the importance of sin, perhaps I am missing a really important point. For me, personally, the tutorial has been fantastic, I feel that I have learned much about how others view the importance/significance of sin in their religious practices. It has also helped me sort a few things out in my own mind. My thinking aligns very closely with the perspectives that you have expressed in your posts on this topic. By the way, I thought your previous post provided us all with a very concise but comprehensive summary of the major points brought out in the thread. Nice job and thanks.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jul 27, 2015 15:36:27 GMT -5
I have fellowship at my church with "sincere individuals who are living out their lives of meaning and purpose with a commitment to principles they hold sacred," but the principles they hold sacred are the scriptures--which they would quote. I'm puzzled why quoting scripture to explain the reason for one's beliefs is wearisome to you. After all, isn't the "one of the most sacred commandments" you refer to scripture? I'm also puzzled about your comment about some proclaiming their freedom from sin--but perhaps you are referring to the freedom from the penalty of sin some allude to who believe "there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." (I couldn't resist quoting brother Paul ) If I could go to lunch with anyone I wanted throughout history, Paul would definitely make the list and would probably be pretty high up the list. The man had convictions and the man had passion for his profession. I love passion! Someday I would be delighted if someone started a thread just to talk about Paul. One of the unspoken truths running through this thread might be that Paul had more to do with the way Christianity is practiced today than did Jesus. I suspect such a statement is blasphemous to many but I wonder if there might be merit to considering the premise. One of the things that I find so fascinating about Paul's writings is that he is so human. Everyone of us carries our experiences with us as we move through life. Yes, we may say we are born again and spiritually that may be true, but our behaviors and approach to life remain pretty consistent throughout our life. Paul was a devout Pharisee, he was tutored and trained as a Pharisee. Do others perceive elements of that Pharisee training in Paul's later ministry? Paul was pretty fervent, zealous and uncompromising in his Jewish nationalism. Some of these characteristics can be seen in his later writings. Fervent, zealous and uncompromising are not words that snap to mind when I think of Jesus's ministry. I am sure others have reflected on these questions, I am unfamiliar with those discussions. Now, back to your questions. "Why is quoting scripture to explain the reason for one's beliefs wearisome?" First, it is a practice reserved almost exclusively to the realm of religion. It is not customary to quote Louis Pasteur when we savor a glass of wine or decide to get a vaccination. It is not customary to quote Issac Newton when we witness a tree branch fall. It is not customary to quote the Merck Index when we consider the latest digestive aid. We go about our lives fundamentally informed by all of these inspired authors and their manuscripts but we feel no compulsion to explain our behavior based on the authority of their work. For some reason it seems to be of critical importance to many religious practices to justify each thought and action with the presumed authority of ancient scriptural texts. I cannot readily identify any text that has more influenced the course of human history than the sacred religious texts. On balance, I think a case can be made that these texts have inspired more good than harm in peoples lives. But at the end of the day, these texts are guides to deeper self-awareness, I do not understand them to be rule books or law books (if I am wrong then I do not understand Romans 7). I do not perceive the scriptures to be justification for behavior. I am able to "connect" with a person describing their hopes, dreams, expectations, and faith, in their own words, in their own way. I find it difficult to "connect" to a scriptural verse. After a conversation with someone who explains their hopes, dreams, expectations and faith by a series of scriptural quotes, I walk away, still detached from that individual, no lasting connection has been made. I am much more attracted to the real experiences of a person rather than the rote classifications and explanation of those experiences based on scriptural quotes. I understand that a person remains much less vulnerable by quoting scripture than they would be if they related their own joys and fears. But for me at least, compassion flows toward the vulnerable, not the buttoned up and well defended. Regarding your second question, I am sorry that was so confusing. Perhaps it would help if I pointed out that my weariness is not a consequence of misgivings about scripture. Far from it. My weariness is with those who profess a conviction and then either as a consequence of misunderstanding or the presumption of salvation proceed to offend their neighbor. Consider the formal definition of a "sin", to treat my neighbor in anyway different from how I would like to be treated is by definition a "sin". I don't see how it can be considered otherwise by the faithful. Hope that helps.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on Jul 27, 2015 17:12:09 GMT -5
Now, back to your questions. "Why is quoting scripture to explain the reason for one's beliefs wearisome?" First, it is a practice reserved almost exclusively to the realm of religion. It is not customary to quote Louis Pasteur when we savor a glass of wine or decide to get a vaccination. It is not customary to quote Issac Newton when we witness a tree branch fall. It is not customary to quote the Merck Index when we consider the latest digestive aid. We go about our lives fundamentally informed by all of these inspired authors and their manuscripts but we feel no compulsion to explain our behavior based on the authority of their work.
For some reason it seems to be of critical importance to many religious practices to justify each thought and action with the presumed authority of ancient scriptural texts. I cannot readily identify any text that has more influenced the course of human history than the sacred religious texts. On balance, I think a case can be made that these texts have inspired more good than harm in peoples lives. But at the end of the day, these texts are guides to deeper self-awareness, I do not understand them to be rule books or law books (if I am wrong then I do not understand Romans 7). I do not perceive the scriptures to be justification for behavior. I am able to "connect" with a person describing their hopes, dreams, expectations, and faith, in their own words, in their own way. I find it difficult to "connect" to a scriptural verse. After a conversation with someone who explains their hopes, dreams, expectations and faith by a series of scriptural quotes, I walk away, still detached from that individual, no lasting connection has been made. I am much more attracted to the real experiences of a person rather than the rote classifications and explanation of those experiences based on scriptural quotes. I understand that a person remains much less vulnerable by quoting scripture than they would be if they related their own joys and fears. But for me at least, compassion flows toward the vulnerable, not the buttoned up and well defended. Regarding your second question, I am sorry that was so confusing. Perhaps it would help if I pointed out that my weariness is not a consequence of misgivings about scripture. Far from it. My weariness is with those who profess a conviction and then either as a consequence of misunderstanding or the presumption of salvation proceed to offend their neighbor. Consider the formal definition of a "sin", to treat my neighbor in anyway different from how I would like to be treated is by definition a "sin". I don't see how it can be considered otherwise by the faithful. Hope that helps. (As to Paul: I agree, Paul is fascinating. However, I see Jesus as just as fervent, zealous, and uncompromising as Paul. And like Jesus, Paul can be a bit obscure at times. It would be a great thread.) 2 Tim 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right." (NLT) Scripture, for the believer is their bedrock foundation; it informs their moral compass and their life's choices. Newton's law teaches us what is true, but his law doesn't teach us about right and wrong. Vaccinations and digestive aids help improve our physical condition, but again, the formulas of their respective creators don't help us make critical ethical decisions. So yes, quoting scripture is unique to the realm of explaining how the Christian is living their life. Depending on the foundation on which you are building your spiritual life, you might quote something or someone else. You might even quote yourself. As an accountant, I would quote GAAP when explaining why I booked a transaction in a certain way: that's my touchstone for correctness. And I'm expected to do so with the accounting community. And so it goes for scripture within the faith community. And yes, I agree: you are more vulnerable when you simply say "I just believe this is true." I would be equally vulnerable as an accountant if I kept my employer's books that way. However, to add the experiential side of one's beliefs would certainly make your beliefs more alive for others. The "felt" side of my convictions are important to me, but they shouldn't be a guide to others. (Yes, I have a scripture for that ) And I agree that bashing one another over the head with various verses does nothing to further anyone's spiritual growth. But this isn't a board about spiritual growth, it is mostly about defending your point of view as it relates to the F&Ws. Nonetheless, telling spiritual truths can be done kindly and with respect for others. Thanks for explaining; I appreciate your insight.
|
|
|
Post by bubbles on Jul 27, 2015 19:56:14 GMT -5
The Fall of Lucifer and the Fall of man are linked in scripture. You may be right. Is there scripture for that? Not really -- but it's good to stretch one's brain sometimes. I agree. I would have been referring to lucifers form being changed from glorious as the arch angel into the serpent that seduced the minds of Adam and Eve in the garden. Which caused them to go against what the father had recommended not to partake of the tree of knowledge and good and evil.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 28, 2015 5:56:02 GMT -5
Sin. I don't believe anyone is a sinner. We are human and we do make mistakes, we do not act as lovingly as we could or should sometimes and no one else can make mistakes/sin and by doing so make all of mankind sinners. I also do not believe that anyone needs to die for our salvation from our sins. It makes no sense to me same as it makes no sense that I am responsible or carry an original sin because someone else acted less than admirably at one time. I see the focus on sinning, believing you are a sinner and needing salvation as unhealthy. I see all the distaste for being human as sad. If there is a God that created us he made us the way we are for a reason. Coming into the physical world would be so we could experience life in all of it's wonder not deny ourselves living in order to be able to have a comfortable afterlife. I see love to be the highest state because it causes the most amount of joy and well being and it makes our living experience that much better. But I don't see the opposite as a sin, just not as enjoyable. I think God would have wanted us to enjoy all the aspects of being physical and I think it's man that has decided a person that is too happy can't be controlled so they developed ways of making sure no one was too sure about their existence. God seems to have the most problem with those things that bring the most enjoyment to humans. Sex is a huge no no in most religions. Not hard to see why that might be of course. So love and compassion are the things that I focus on because they seem to bring about the highest level of good and well being, not just for me, but others too. I believe that if there is a God he would want us to look at it's creation with awe and wonder. However, as an atheist I see the same benefit from a life of love and it has nothing to do with pleasing or appeasing a wrathful, jealous God. It has to do with making the world I live in a better, kinder more joyful place to live. Love and compassion work to make life better and when life is better we are more able to see the wonders and experience joy. Some people seem to need a God and an afterlife to experience that. I find that I don't care about those things. They aren't what matter to me anymore. But making the most of the life I currently have does make a difference and that's what I focus on. As far as Christianity and to focus on sinning goes, it seems to be more Paul that started all that. He was more into control and rules. I totally believe that Christianity as we know it today has been formed by Paul much more than Jesus. I don't see a lot of resemblance between what Jesus taught and what Paul taught, but I do see a lot of what Paul taught in the current understanding of Christianity. By the sounds of things yknot you have it figured out for yourself. You are able to experience the wonders of living, finding joy in the ordinary and you are lucky. If it's not broken, why try to fix it. Trying to understand Christianity will cause all kinds of cognitive dissonance and for me it's not necessary. For others it brings them joy. So this world has something for everyone doesn't it. As the Buddhists say, there are many roads up the mountain, but they all end at the same place, the top. What brings joy to one person may be of little consequence to someone else. For me it's live and let live and what that means to me is this. Just because it doesn't work for me and bring me joy, doesn't mean it doesn't bring joy to someone else. I would never want to be responsible for ending someone else's 'joy'. I agree that Christianity has a lot of unnecessary hand wringing and prohibitions. But the thread reminded me of this recent podcast on NPR, www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/07/03/419543470/episode-363-why-people-do-bad-thingsIt's not necessary to listen to the whole thing. The idea is that we as humans are not inclined to ethical behaviour without some guidance along that line. Another way of saying that we are sinful by nature? Another way of looking at it is that evolution has left us with a nature, impulses and instincts, contiguous with the animal world. Only a process of reason and faith will lift us above it.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 28, 2015 5:59:31 GMT -5
People who are loving, gracious and honest seem to have a lot fewer problems in life than those who are not.Which is the best reason I know of to live that way. Focus on being loving, gracious and honest and don't worry about the rest of it. We don't need to believe in God and sin in order to see the pluses to living like that. It's probably why it's included in pretty much all religious doctrine. It just makes good sense to live that way if we want to have a better world and life. Clearly some people don't need the concepts of God and sin to live a virtuous life. But whether that will work for the country as a whole is still an open question.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Jul 28, 2015 8:37:34 GMT -5
Hi YKnot,
For me, I'd suggest that sin is not primarily what we do or don't do to each other, or how we fail and make mistakes.
Sin is, first and foremost, rejection of God. You can be the best, kindest, most loving person on earth, but still be separated from God if you are still at enmity with him.
God has set eternity in the heart of man. I doubt the animals worry about it. But there is a reason we morally accountable humans do.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 28, 2015 9:48:53 GMT -5
placid-void I'm getting the impression what's important to you is the walk, not the talk. The walk is where the rubber meets the road, the boots on the ground where the loving of our neighbor happens. The walk is what talks without words: Like your dog and the frisbee, no words are necessary. That might be why TMB is a disappointment, it's really all talk here - unless you know the posters in person and can verify they walk the talk where they live and work. That's one thing I've tried to do with my Sunday morning thoughts - give examples of the how and why of actually living the thoughts - examples of how they apply to and work in real life. If what we say and think doesn't affect the way we live what is the point? And it's not about how we live them on Sunday mornings, it's how we walk the talk with our neighbors - those who are those closest to us at any given moment. ~ "I do not perceive the scriptures to be justification for behavior." I wonder why you said that - do you see scripture used for justification for behavior more than for inspiration of behavior?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 28, 2015 13:38:15 GMT -5
Sin. I don't believe anyone is a sinner. We are human and we do make mistakes, we do not act as lovingly as we could or should sometimes and no one else can make mistakes/sin and by doing so make all of mankind sinners. I also do not believe that anyone needs to die for our salvation from our sins. It makes no sense to me same as it makes no sense that I am responsible or carry an original sin because someone else acted less than admirably at one time. I see the focus on sinning, believing you are a sinner and needing salvation as unhealthy. I see all the distaste for being human as sad. If there is a God that created us he made us the way we are for a reason. Coming into the physical world would be so we could experience life in all of it's wonder not deny ourselves living in order to be able to have a comfortable afterlife. I see love to be the highest state because it causes the most amount of joy and well being and it makes our living experience that much better. But I don't see the opposite as a sin, just not as enjoyable. I think God would have wanted us to enjoy all the aspects of being physical and I think it's man that has decided a person that is too happy can't be controlled so they developed ways of making sure no one was too sure about their existence. God seems to have the most problem with those things that bring the most enjoyment to humans. Sex is a huge no no in most religions. Not hard to see why that might be of course. So love and compassion are the things that I focus on because they seem to bring about the highest level of good and well being, not just for me, but others too. I believe that if there is a God he would want us to look at it's creation with awe and wonder. However, as an atheist I see the same benefit from a life of love and it has nothing to do with pleasing or appeasing a wrathful, jealous God. It has to do with making the world I live in a better, kinder more joyful place to live. Love and compassion work to make life better and when life is better we are more able to see the wonders and experience joy. Some people seem to need a God and an afterlife to experience that. I find that I don't care about those things. They aren't what matter to me anymore. But making the most of the life I currently have does make a difference and that's what I focus on. As far as Christianity and to focus on sinning goes, it seems to be more Paul that started all that. He was more into control and rules. I totally believe that Christianity as we know it today has been formed by Paul much more than Jesus. I don't see a lot of resemblance between what Jesus taught and what Paul taught, but I do see a lot of what Paul taught in the current understanding of Christianity. By the sounds of things yknot you have it figured out for yourself. You are able to experience the wonders of living, finding joy in the ordinary and you are lucky. If it's not broken, why try to fix it. Trying to understand Christianity will cause all kinds of cognitive dissonance and for me it's not necessary. For others it brings them joy. So this world has something for everyone doesn't it. As the Buddhists say, there are many roads up the mountain, but they all end at the same place, the top. What brings joy to one person may be of little consequence to someone else. For me it's live and let live and what that means to me is this. Just because it doesn't work for me and bring me joy, doesn't mean it doesn't bring joy to someone else. I would never want to be responsible for ending someone else's 'joy'. I agree that Christianity has a lot of unnecessary hand wringing and prohibitions. But the thread reminded me of this recent podcast on NPR, www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/07/03/419543470/episode-363-why-people-do-bad-thingsIt's not necessary to listen to the whole thing. The idea is that we as humans are not inclined to ethical behaviour without some guidance along that line. Another way of saying that we are sinful by nature? Another way of looking at it is that evolution has left us with a nature, impulses and instincts, contiguous with the animal world. Only a process of reason and faith will lift us above it. We are animals and sure we have all the same instincts. I do see our ability to reason as our reason we can think about things in an ethical manner rather than just instinctual. I really don't see that faith factors into it much because people who have no faith are still capable of living loving, compassionate existences by just using reason. I do see that some people do not feel strong enough within themselves to do all the things religion wants them to do and so they turn to God for strength to do what non believers just do through reasoning that it is the better way for society to exist and co-habitate in a successful manner. If that's what makes it work for some people then 'may their faith make them stronger'. But mostly what I see is failing, blaming themselves for not letting God guide them better and feeling shame and guilt, then turning back to God for strength and on it goes. I just depend on myself and my belief that I do have impact on this world in the things I say and do. If I want a better world to live in then it is my responsibility to do my part.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 28, 2015 13:40:45 GMT -5
Which is the best reason I know of to live that way. Focus on being loving, gracious and honest and don't worry about the rest of it. We don't need to believe in God and sin in order to see the pluses to living like that. It's probably why it's included in pretty much all religious doctrine. It just makes good sense to live that way if we want to have a better world and life. Clearly some people don't need the concepts of God and sin to live a virtuous life. But whether that will work for the country as a whole is still an open question. Well clearly it doesn't seem to work for politicians, even those who claim to be 'born again'. Stephen Harper has got to be our worst PM in a long time and he's a born again Christian. So obviously it takes a bit more when it comes to politicians. Mostly spoken tongue in cheek, but there is an element of truth to it also.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 28, 2015 13:44:39 GMT -5
placid-void I'm getting the impression what's important to you is the walk, not the talk. The walk is where the rubber meets the road, the boots on the ground where the loving of our neighbor happens. The walk is what talks without words: Like your dog and the frisbee, no words are necessary. That might be why TMB is a disappointment, it's really all talk here - unless you know the posters in person and can verify they walk the talk where they live and work. That's one thing I've tried to do with my Sunday morning thoughts - give examples of the how and why of actually living the thoughts - examples of how they apply to and work in real life. If what we say and think doesn't affect the way we live what is the point? And it's not about how we live them on Sunday mornings, it's how we walk the talk with our neighbors - those who are those closest to us at any given moment. ~ "I do not perceive the scriptures to be justification for behavior." I wonder why you said that - do you see scripture used for justification for behavior more than for inspiration of behavior? Really though, isn't the walk all there is? What you do reflects what you believe and all the talk in the world doesn't do anything for you until you actually live it. However, on a forum like this all there is available is talk and trying to express beliefs in words. It would be a really quiet place if you were coming here for something other than talk.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 28, 2015 14:20:05 GMT -5
Fair question. Although getting on in years I still do sums reasonably well so I am not looking for an explanation of "why Christianity doesn't add up", suspect I will be able to handle that 'rithmetic. I am not really looking for anyone to help make sense of Christianity. Religion has become such a cacophony of competing assertions, I shan't be around long enough for it to get all sorted out. No, I want to come in from wandering the wilderness. I am looking for a few individuals who really know what they (themselves) feel and believe and who actually live out their lives with purpose and meaning according to the beliefs that they hold sacred. I know that what they feel will be different from what I feel, we will have had much different experiences. I suspect and even hope that their beliefs will differ from mine. My only selection criteria are that they be sincere (actually live what they preach) and that they have retained their capacity to experience awe, pleasure, wonder and ecstasy. The conjured fellowship would be most complete were there to be some open to the idea of the numinous. I have grown weary of the inability to express beliefs without quoting scripture. I am weary of those who profess a faith in Christ and then choose to judge their neighbor. I am growing tired of those who proclaim their freedom from sin and then mock and ridicule their neighbor (committing actual sin by violating one of the most sacred commandments). I respect those who have chosen to deny or ignore the transcendent. I do not count myself among their number. But, here too, I grow weary of requests for proof where, by definition, proofs do not exist, save in one's individual experience. My experience most closely approaching the fellowship I seek is limited to one, the F&W Fellowship. I have no experiences beyond that. At the time I was part of that community, it satisfied my needs. Much time has passed. It was my experience that the elders actually nourished the young. That may no longer be true. My experience was of a hierarchy based on spiritual respect not the exertion of control. Some now believe that the Friends have chosen to cede personal responsibility to the Workers, I chaff at the thought. As our culture has changed through the years and new challenges arise, it appears to me that those responsible for the spiritual growth of the flock have chosen instead to go along to get along. My appreciation of the "old time religion" that I grew up with is not based on the rules imposed, it is based on the humble but certain moral integrity of the elders that I knew. Returning now, many years later, I am appalled by the acknowledgement of sexual abuse and how it is said to be handled. Without the integrity to deal with abuse swiftly and surely, all the babel about forgiveness, atonement, grace, being saved and Christ dying for our sins falls on deafened ears. I hope I am wrong. I hope that there is still a fellowship of sincere individuals who are living out their lives of meaning and purpose with a commitment to principles they hold sacred. yknot, are you thinking of returning to the F&W's? Is this why the questions re focus on sin? I haven't quite figured out why you are concerned with why religions focus on sin? If you are agnostic and do believe there could be something to transcendence, why not just live like you have been. It sounds as though you have figured it pretty good on your own something that works for you. Does it matter what religions do and what they focus on? I guess I am not understanding your concerns regarding sin. Once you let go of religion, you realize sin is more a way of keeping people off balance. Guilt is a very big aspect of religion. No matter what you do you cannot 'not' sin. Then you feel guilty about your lack of ability in being better and when you are told to turn to God you try but it still keeps on happening. It becomes a vicious cycle of the person doing something they are told God regards as a sin and the person praying for strength not to sin but it never quite works. So the person feels less and less capable of living a good life on their own and they keep turning to God to try and do better. But it never fully works of course. But it does keep people believing they are weak and sinners. Something I think is unfortunate. Quite a few Christians are past that point, I believe. I think the attitude you are describing is somewhat parodied by the Man's Prayer authored by Red Green. A little weariness at the constant expectation for improvement is indicated in the prayer; I think most men in this day and age can relate.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on Jul 28, 2015 14:27:40 GMT -5
WhatHat, what would you need to change? I've seen your cooking on FB and I think you are as close to perfection as any one man needs to be~
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 28, 2015 14:28:58 GMT -5
Hi YKnot, For me, I'd suggest that sin is not primarily what we do or don't do to each other, or how we fail and make mistakes. Sin is, first and foremost, rejection of God. You can be the best, kindest, most loving person on earth, but still be separated from God if you are still at enmity with him. God has set eternity in the heart of man. I doubt the animals worry about it. But there is a reason we morally accountable humans do. Isn't that a picture of an unjust God? Here are a few verses I've conveniently copied from tentmaker.org. Why the word "all" and "every" in so many of the verses? Does "all" somehow mean "some"? Christ, to whom, in whom, and for whom are all things will reconcile all things unto God (Colossians 1:15-20). He makes all things new. (Rev. 21:5) Hence His work is the restitution of all things (Acts 3:21); He is Heir of all things (Hebrews 1:2); in Him not only all nations will be blessed (Galatians 3:8), but even every family of the earth will be blessed (Gen 12:32; 28:14); for the Father has given Him authority over all flesh, to give to whosoever was given to Him eternal life (John 17:2); and so all flesh shall see the salvation of God (Luke 3:6) since the Father has given all things into His hands. (John 3:35) Therefore, contrary to popular Christian opinion, we do not find billions in a Hell cursing God but we find every creature which is in heaven, and on earth, and UNDER the earth saying blessing and honour and glory and power be unto Him that sits upon the throne and unto the Lamb (Rev. 5:13). We find every knee of things in heaven and earth, and under the earth, bends to Him and every tongue confesses Him as their Lord (Philippians 2:10) and we know that no one can confess Jesus as Lord except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3). (From - tentmaker.org) (There's another 5 paragraphs like this on the site - www.tentmaker.org/articles/savior-of-all-mankind.html )
|
|