Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Felsic]

I'm agnostic and don't belong to my country's state religion anymore (it's Evangelical Lutheran), but I've studied for several years in an evangelical boarding school (they don't mandate faith and I don't mind coming into contact with their religion on a daily basis).

Regarding gays, the discussion here surged in popularity a while back when they televised a bunch of pro-gay and anti-gay people arguing about the legalization of gay marriage and gay adopting rights. It caused a huge wave of people resigning from their church membership, about 40 000, which is a lot here in Finland. Most resigned because of the anti-gay statements made by some well-known politicians and religious figures, which were along the lines of "PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!", "gays getting married will lead to people marrying dogs, it's a slippery slope durrrr!" and "homosex is a sin but being gay isn't hurrrr!" (same stuff has been said for decades here, but it's curious how people have reacted only now). Some christians that I know concur with them, but not all are that condemning even if they belong to a certain movement. Acting upon any sexual temptation could be seen as a sin if it brings complications and misery, which is also why they preach about abstinence.

[Heron TSG]

A sin is something you know is wrong, but you do it anyway.

If the Christians are right, I'm in for a fantastic 'afterlife'. I don't believe anything is inherently wrong by any measurable scale.

This talk about old verses of the Bible reminds me strongly of a book I bought recently - The Year of Living Biblically. It is the tale of one man who attempted to follow every single rule of the Bible for a year while living in New York City. He even includes such rules as stoning adulterers (consensual-ish), wearing no garments that include mixed fibers, and standing in the presence of anyone older than him. When taken literally, the rules can get silly. He wrote it as a response to those who dislike 'cafeteria Christianity', where people pick only some of the laws to follow. He followed ALL of them.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

If you want to know more about Christianity beyond that Jesus died to cleanse the sins of those who accept and believe in Him as the Son of God ans Saviour, should ask local priests and theologians.  Any answers you get here on these forums are going to be misinterpreted, misunderstood or just plain made up somewhere and then passed on like, "God helps those who help themselves.", which of course isnt in the bible.  I am not saying no one here can be right about a particular question, but the likely hood on someone knowing everything about such a theoligical subject like sin (as used in the Christian context) is very very very slim, unless they themselves have aquired a degree in Christian theology.

Answer I got from a theologian (not me): Sin is a departure from the Will of God.

[Strife26]

Bam. Point for Strifey!


Yeah, I sin all the time, mostly because I draw a distinction between sin, evil, and justifible evil.

[Max White]

Here is something I don't understand... but I am an atheist so maybe a Christian can shed some light on this issue for me?

Sins are things we are tempted to do right? I've been tempted to steal, murder, lie, and do many things that are considered sins but my values and morality(both based on empathy and experience) stop me(usually hehe).

I don't really consider homosexuality to be a sin because it isn't something I am tempted to take part in. I can go to gay bars and hang out with gay people, and yet not once have I had to fight the urge to have sex with a guy because I simply don't have the urge.

Now I am not trying to judge and I know not all Christians are anti-gay, in fact most are pretty cool people. I have to wonder though, isn't temptation the cause of sin? So how can you label something as a sin unless it tempts you?

I'm sort of a 'born again atheist', originally being Roman Catholic.
Homosexuality is a sin for the same reason that fortune telling and being very short is a sin. Because the bible is based on a moral code that is horribly outdated an from a time before human rights. It was a sin 2,000 years ago because nobody was in the state of mind to wonder why it was a sin, so everybody just agreed it was.

[devek]

If you want to know more about Christianity beyond that Jesus died to cleanse the sins of those who accept and believe in Him as the Son of God ans Saviour, should ask local priests and theologians.

I don't argue with priests and theologians, I argue with redneck bigots so truth is a murkier issue.

If someone is intelligent on the issues it is a lot easier to slam them with facts like the church forging sexist letters from Paul to keep women down. If they pull the pseudepigrapha defense, coup de grace. It is all pointless because people this well informed on the issue are usually not loudly trying to force social agendas on people. The only issue I have with them is how they tend to take an ends justify the means approach to teaching. For example, you never see a priest pointing out that the bible never said the world was 6000 years old and that there is no creation story.

When dealing with people like my brother, who said that the only reason someone in China has empathy or morality is because at some point a Christian missionary introduced the concept to their culture, you face Dwarf Fortress difficulty trying to reason with him. He knows the Bible pretty well, and unlike theologians he believes every word is written by God and true. For every logical fallacy you point out, he can pull out 10 more and I don't have enough intelligence to manage all of it at once. The good news is that people like him are rather harmless, as long as you don't put him in a situation to decide what the science curriculum should be in schools. His beliefs are mostly self-defeating and hurt him more than it hurts anyone else.

When dealing with racists and bigots, I take the fight to them. The only know the Bible well enough to justify their own negative behaviors and trying to point that out is impossible. They push hate and ignorance every chance they get as loudly as they can, and beating on them is fun and worthwhile.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

If you want to know more about Christianity beyond that Jesus died to cleanse the sins of those who accept and believe in Him as the Son of God ans Saviour, should ask local priests and theologians.

stuff...

So, what your saying is:  You, by your own admission, dont know a large amount about sin/the Bible/Christian theology and you are are arguing with people who also dont know a large amount concerning sin/the Bible/Christian theology about the subjects of sin/the Bible/Christian theology.  Wow.  I wish I had tickets to this.

Could you link some evidence to the forged letters of Paul.  I haven't ever heard that and I am intrigued.  Was it the eastern church in Rome or the Orthodox church in Constantinople, or was it latter on in history?  Were they written as counterpoints to Coptic Christian views about female equiality in the church and worship (they included the gospel of Mary among their holy books)?  Just Curious.

I will pray for your brother, who sounds (from your description) somewhat misguided.  But that of course is just my opinion.  I will pray for his wellbeing only.  And yours, when you face off against racists and bigots. 

EDIT:  Heck, while I am at it, I guess I better pray for the bigot and racists.

[GlyphGryph]

Then, of course, you get the fact that a lot of Christian sects are very extra-biblical in many of their tenants (see, Catholic Church, Calvinists, Mormons) and may very well have their very own super special definitions of sin and how things like that work, only loosely inspired from their source documents.

[devek]

So, what your saying is:  You, by your own admission, dont know a large amount about sin/the Bible/Christian theology and you are are arguing with people who also dont know a large amount concerning sin/the Bible/Christian theology about the subjects of sin/the Bible/Christian theology.  Wow.  I wish I had tickets to this.

Exactly, it is fun. If I did know a lot and had credentials to back it up, I would just be some liberal elite so they wouldn't listen to what I had to say.

Could you link some evidence to the forged letters of Paul.  I haven't ever heard that and I am intrigued.  Was it the eastern church in Rome or the Orthodox church in Constantinople, or was it latter on in history?  Were they written as counterpoints to Coptic Christian views about female equiality in the church and worship (they included the gospel of Mary among their holy books)?  Just Curious.

Well, it isn't an open and shut case but there is a lot of evidence that it was written by an unknown author in the second century. Unlike alterations made later to the Bible at later dates such as the addition of the trinity, it is impossible to really know for certain what happened and when. I just know what I learned in school.

If you want I can Google it for you http://lmgtfy.com/?q=who+wrote+1st+timothy or direct you to single site that has a lot of the information regarding the issue http://bible.org/seriespage/1-timothy-introduction-argument-outline

Even if you accept that Paul actually wrote 1st Timothy, you still have to wrestle with how it is translated, then wrestle even further with how people always interpret it when justifying their stance against women and homosexuals, and finally wrestle why something that is good would have to be justified in the first place.

[Euld]

Not sure if I can build on the current discussion, I guess I'll toss in my view and see how it works out.  Sin is a willful act of rebellion against God's laws.  Cue the usual rabblerabblerabble about Old Testament Jewish laws being Christian laws.  Temptation is not sinful.  Temptation comes from demons and our sinful nature, which we can't do much about besides clearing our minds by remembering Bible verses.  However, giving in to temptation and mentally savoring temptation is sinful.  I base that last belief on a Jesus quote that goes, anyone who is angry at someone is subject to judgment.  He said the same about lust.  Yet also made an interesting distinction: it's only a sin if you look at a woman lustfully, therefore, it's ok to simply look at a woman.  Or, perhaps, look at a woman to appreciate her beauty.  So I (and other people who agree with me, I suppose) believe it's ok to be angry, provided your next action is a righteous action, either dispelling the anger with prayer/Bible verses or taking steps to solve the problem.

And, oh boy homosexuality again?  I'm going to get yelled at, I know it    I believe homosexuals did NOT get a choice about being gay or not.  It simply snuck up on them and they weren't given a yay nor nay.  I still believe it's a sin though.  Why?  It's a generally accepted idea among Christians that no one decides what sins they'll be tempted by.  For some, it's witchcraft, others, its anger, or lying, or theft, or murder, or various sexual sins.  Even older Christians still note they still have the same weaknesses from their early years.  I do NOT approve of people harassing homosexuals or singling them out.  Everyone is going to hell equally, no need to single out certain groups for no apparent reason   I don't believe being gay is a sin (since there's no choice involved) but lusting and gay sex are sins, marriage or not.  I believe gays can change.  *insert laughter here <_<* 

Oops gotta go.  Have fun tearing my post up while I'm busy fixing the internet.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

homosexually is no more a sin than to have sex with a condom, i think... the churches' problem with it is because of sex practiced lustfully instead of for reproductive purposes, so, they who hast had sex with another and hath not planned to impregnate hast committed sodomy in the eyes of the lord
also, even if you define a sin as "giving in to temptation", remember that not everybody is tempted by the same things, and same sex intercourse sure is tempting for homosexuals. you'll not accomplish anything with that argument

[GlyphGryph]

Yeah, according to the bible homosexuality is a sin on part with anything remotely sexual during a menstrual period, eating shellfish or pork or rabbit, mixing fabrics, etc and so on - modern christianity has generally agreed most of the bits in that section no longer apply, but they make an exception for the homosexuality one. It also requires new mothers to avoid church for a month or two, and then make animal sacrifices 0_0

Not exactly consistent.

Other bits say that anyone who does anything effeminate is barred from the kingdom of god along with homosexuals (Corinthians, looking at you) and anyone who has sex for reasons other than reproduction.

In fact, pretty much everywhere in the bible where its mentioned, its mentioned alongside sex not to make babies is bad (and yes, that includes gay sex).

[Hubris Incalculable]

Everyone is going to hell

0.o i do not want to know what denomination you are from...

[Euld]

Spoiler: Inconsistency ramble (click to show/hide)

Yeah, according to the bible homosexuality is a sin on part with anything remotely sexual during a menstrual period, eating shellfish or pork or rabbit, mixing fabrics, etc and so on - modern christianity has generally agreed most of the bits in that section no longer apply, but they make an exception for the homosexuality one. It also requires new mothers to avoid church for a month or two, and then make animal sacrifices 0_0

Our "inconsistency" was long in the making.  Jesus started it by declaring all food clean to eat.  He also said his role at the time was to fulfill the law.  What that exactly means is heavily debated, since laws can really only be followed, broken, or abolished.  My take (most Christians I know believe this too) is the laws were right and good until Jesus's sacrifice, at which point the laws were "fulfilled," and now longer necessary.  Much, much later in the book of Acts, the next book after the four gospels of Jesus in the New Testament, and after the Holy Spirit is given freely to the first Jewish Christians, the disciple Peter gets a vision and is prompted by the Holy Spirit to visit a Roman centurion who converted to Judaism previously.

After that, Peter was questioned by the Jewish Christians about why he defiled himself by eating with Gentiles.  He explains how the Holy Spirit was given to them freely, like it was on the new Jewish Christians early on in Acts.  Essentially, God was actively saving and converting people in general, with no distinction between Jews (who followed all the old Testament laws) and Gentiles (who never followed those laws).  Everything came together here.  Sorry about the long read, but it's important.

Not exactly consistent.

Leviticus 18:22 is the verse in question on homosexuality.  But, you might want to read the context in which that verse in mentioned.  We obey a little more in that chapter than just that one verse.

Spoiler: Ninja edit (click to show/hide)

Everyone is going to hell

0.o i do not want to know what denomination you are from...

Yeah... I left out part of that statement, which strangely enough the is part most people hate.  Everyone is going to hell except those who put faith in Jesus Christ.  I should note... I don't like this belief at all.  If I had a choice, I'd believe everyone would get a second chance and get to heaven no matter what.  But I don't have a choice, like how nobody can deny that everyone is going to die someday.  Death is a fact of life that can't be denied.  From my experiences as being a Christian, I can't honestly deny the existence of God, and I know what God says about heaven and hell.  I don't want to believe in hell, I don't want people to end up there... but I'd be sticking my head in the sand if I chose to believe something else.

Good grief I write too much o_O

[Shambling Zombie]

Makes the fact that a good percentage of people are never have a chance to convert or accept Jesus before they die, meaning they'd probably be better off not being born in the Christian worldview.