|
|
|
|
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 5:43:43 PM | You read Aquinas?
(oh, but you can't judge, as in decide who will go to heaven or hell, only God can do that...
Remember, "Do not JUdGe?" That's what He was talkin' about...betta watch your tongue boy...) I started reading the Doctor about five years ago, and I'm pretty well versed in Medieval philosophy. I've been reading Frederick Copleston's 11-volume A History of Philosophy, and this year I read the two volumes (one and a half, actually) that cover that era, along with practicing my Latin, which is - in a word - abysmal.
I do hope that one or two people might have seen that I was using irony in that last post. I don't believe in Hell, and Hell is never REALLY mentioned in the Bible, although Christian apologists have pointed to mistranslations of "Gehenna," which was a valley in the Holy Land where the bodies of people who committed suicide were cremated. Hell as we know it was created by the clergy of the Dark Ages to convince rich landowners to give their estates to the Papacy in order to avoid eternal damnation. 
Elmreich doesn't read, he Wikis and thinks he's talking about something intelligent.
Scary thing is he's a teacher. Sad testiment to our educational system. Nice spelling there, genius. Judge not, lest ye be judged much? | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 7:41:54 PM | | Nice username. Did you know that there was actually a "Rococo" period in music? It was basically the same as Baroque music, but more colorful and fanciful. The period is epitomized by the sons of Bach, who were more popular than Bach himself, revolting against the formalism of the music of their father's era. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:00:58 PM | So, it's okay for you to change the subject and post jokes, but it's not okay for other people?
IF you had read the previous 25 pages of this thread you will notice that a major topic of discussion has been creation and the origin of the universe. My little joke WAS on topic, not veering off into a political discussion, and merely trying to lighten things up a bit by making a point with humor.
Since you are a new contributor to a discussion which many of us have been contributing to for awhile, most of us would expect you to have read the rest of the thread for content and to have better manners and a less hostile attitude.
PS..IF you keep trolling this thread to take it off topic, the mods WILL send you to banned camp. Read the rules. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:13:03 PM | Thank you.Yo Yo Ma perfectly captures the vibrant spirit of rebellion you reference in his Tchaikovsky Rococo Variations. Speaking of musicians revolting against the formalism of their predecessors, sin is said to have a relationship to a greater whole in relationship to Adam, and yet we observe a "revolt" of sorts as some wish to depend more heavily on the concept of ethics over morality.
"An individual can be considered either as an individual or as part of a whole, a member of a society . . . . Considered in the second way an act can be his although he has not done it himself, nor has it been done by his free will but by the rest of the society or by its head, the nation being considered as doing what the prince does. For a society is considered as a single man of whom the individuals are the different members (St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 12). Thus the multitude of men who receive their human nature from Adam is to be considered as a single community or rather as a single body . . . . If the man, whose privation of original justice is due to Adam, is considered as a private person, this privation is not his 'fault', for a fault is essentially voluntary. If, however, we consider him as a member of the family of Adam, as if all men were only one man, then his privation partakes of the nature of sin on account of its voluntary origin, which is the actual sin of Adam" (De Malo, iv, 1). --St. Thomas
In light of the above ideas explored regarding the nature of sin, what I find fascinating is that it seems nearly impossible to intellectualize certain concepts without the Doctors of the Church and Christianity. Ethics alone seems to fall linguistically short, in my humble opinion, if that makes any sense... | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:22:58 PM | Nice transition back on topic R......
it seems nearly impossible to intellectualize certain concepts without the Doctors of the Church and Christianity.
That is because sin is primarily a theological term with a religious root from the Bible.
From Wikipedia:
Sin is a term used mainly in a religious context to describe an act that violates a moral rule, or the state of having committed such a violation. Commonly, the moral code of conduct is decreed by a divine entity, i.e. Divine law.
Sin is a rebellious act against a Holy God. To sin is to want control of one's destiny in opposition to the will of God and is also a relational problem. Sin alienates the sinner from God. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:27:26 PM | Trolling? Changing the topic is NOT against POF rules. You do not control this thread. You do not control this website. Thinking so is a sin of vanity. If I want to talk about politics after someone else has brought it up, I'm going to, whether you like it or not.
One thing I hate about the concept of sin is that people are more likely to define the sins of other people instead of the sins of themselves. The problem is that people treat themselves with pride, and others with anger. As C.S. Lewis once wrote, "Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive."
In light of the above ideas explored regarding the nature of sin, what I find fascinating is that it seems nearly impossible to intellectualize certain concepts without the Doctors of the Church and Christianity. Ethics alone seems to fall linguistically short, in my humble opinion, if that makes any sense... You should read about some of the Medieval philosophical systems. It's fascinating. They spent hundreds of years debating universals and suppressing the Aristotlean philosophy that was coming out of the Muslim world, but in between, they created whole philosophical systems based around their personal tenets. Everything that could be intellectualized was intellectualized. I like to imagine that the arguments were similar to the ones we have on message boards, only better written, and with the losers being tortured by the Papacy. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:34:08 PM | Califboomer, some suggest that ethics is a replacement for instruction on sin. So when you speak of rebellion and God--those who depend on their own understanding of ethics might be led to conclude, "so what does God have to do with it...why are you trying to make everybody feel guilty, and why do you scare little kids?" Etc.,.
Boomer(hug), Elmen(xo), I'm curious...
Would you both perhaps care to discuss the limits of ethics in relationship to approaching right and wrong in theological terms? Or vice versa? In other words, to answer the question of what is right and what is wrong when a person lives in a society, where does ethics fall short? Where does theology fall short Elmen, in contrast perhaps to your familiarity with medieval philosophical systems?
I'm just tossing some questions around here... | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:40:51 PM | Would you both perhaps care to discuss the limits of ethics in relationship to approaching right and wrong in theological terms?
The OP answered that question when he started this thread: It is a discussion about sin are it relates to God and falling out of alignment to Him. | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:44:21 PM | I'm not sure I understand your concept of "those who depend on their own understanding" To me you seem to keep saying people shouldn't think for themselves and should just go through life with some blind faith concept... Of what someone else is teaching you.... Is this what you mean? Or am I misunderstanding you?
Just trying to figure this out.... | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:49:19 PM | | Well, for example Jack, Elmen is familiar with midevil philosophical systems--so I'm sure ethics is addressed in those. How many today have a concrete ethics system they understand in lieu of not having a strong grasp on theology and sin? Or, are our natures and hearts enough to steer us on a good course as we create and reinvent society, collectively? | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:51:11 PM | Boomer(hug), Elmen(xo), I'm curious...
Would you both perhaps care to discuss the limits of ethics in relationship to approaching right and wrong in theological terms? Or vice versa? In other words, to answer the question of what is right and what is wrong when a person lives in a society, where does ethics fall short? Where does theology fall short? I believe that going further than ethics only gets you into trouble. Generally what is considered "right" and "wrong" is no different from what clothes are "fashionable" and which aren't. One of the most interesting books about sin is Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe. Although through various movie adaptations, the novel is thought of by most people as a simple adventure, Crusoe is alone with his thoughts for 27 years, and he spends most of that time thinking about what is right or wrong about his actions. In the end, he comes to a sort of cultural ethos after coming into contact with a cannibalistic tribe. At first, he seeks to strike the "sinners" with the fury of God and gunpowder, but eventually, he decides that if eating people is normal to those people, it isn't a sin.
I don't believe in a concept of a universal sin; sin is something you give to yourself, whether you believe in God or you don't believe in God. It is only the right of a society to grant an ethical system to its citizens. Theology is something that can only be done on a personal basis. In fact, I find it fairly funny when people pass rules and laws based on a book they can't even read in its original language. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:56:06 PM | I see. Very interesting. What year was Robinson Crusoe written?
To keep this brief, do you view Jesus Christ and the Church as being a merely invented "cultural ethos" of sorts with no inherent relationship to truth? Or is this faintly detectable disdain of public religious (believing) more about what people have done in the name of God?
I guess that many will not agree that theology is strictly personal. We have no shared ethics system at work in this society--all we had/have was Christianity and Judaism it seems...One Nation, Under God, Indivisible, With Liberty And Justice For All... Its like this country has no cohesive allegiance anymore too, I digress...but I struggle to understand why we would elect to treat our nation this way... where is our shared "system" now? Who shall "grant" our shared ethics system next, our Presidents?
| |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 9:10:39 PM | I see. Very interesting. What year was Robinson Crusoe written? 1719. In Emile, published in 1762, Jean-Jacques Rousseau says that Robinson Crusoe is the only novel children should be allowed to read before they become adults.
To keep this brief, do you view Jesus Christ and the Church as being a merely invented "cultural ethos" of sorts with no inherent relationship to truth? Or is this faintly detectable disdain of public religious (believing) more about what people have done in the name of God? No, what people have done in the name of God doesn't influence my view of cultural ethos. I just never have felt a connection to the New Testament and to Christian philosophy, and even if my connection to the New Testament was as strong as my connection to the Torah, I wouldn't view it as truth.
I guess that many will not agree that theology is strictly personal. We have no shared ethics system at work in this society--all we had/have was Christianity and Judaism it seems...One Nation, Under God, Indivisible, With Liberty And Justice For All... Its like this country has no cohesive allegiance anymore too, I digress...but I struggle to understand why we would elect to treat our nation this way... where is our shared "system" now? Who shall "grant" our shared ethics system next, our Presidents
I find evangelical religions troubling, to say the least. In general, they are more suited to imperialism and the acquisition of property than to enlightenment and good will towards Man. Basically, my problem with the New Testament stems not in Jesus, but in Paul. The New Testament is more about Paul than it is about Jesus, with Acts and Paul's epistles taking up more space than the Gospels. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 9:14:08 PM | Thank you for sharing your view and the year. I thought it was more recent. Interesting that it was not, very interesting. Yes, many have a beef with Paul. I've even heard that Paul set all of us Christians to be dominated by the sons of Cain, and all kinds of other things.
| |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 9:21:16 PM | | I think that only time can create a cultural ethos. What is good for people now is completely different from what was good for people in 1791, and really, really, really, really different from what was good for people when the Bible was written. The Bible is full of a lot of stupid laws. Raping a woman is okay. Homosexuality is bad. Wearing a shirt with two types of fabric is bad. Slaves must obey their masters. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 9:25:12 PM | r
To me... your faith isn't in Christ.... It's in the Catholic Church. You seem to put that theology above all else.... I could be wrong... But this is how I view you... Your arguments are not based on what is taught or directed to us by God... But by the Church... I get it... You believe the Catholic church is the true church.... I won't tell you to think any different.... But I believe in God... not a church.... I can be fellow-shipped by a church... But I won't let the church dictate to me my faith... and tell me what is and what is not sin.
I believe our Founding Fathers set it up this way... not having that church control us like it did for centuries in Europe... to allow us to have a choice... To believe in God, How ever we find that Truth. God is Truth... Not your Church.... To me.
So your church doctors, and leaders don't have any say in my Faith. And when it comes to discussing Gods plan and what he wants from us... Using your dogma works for you... but is useless in a debate with other Christians who don't believe in that dogma.
edit: I just want to make it clear... I'm not saying your wrong... I'm right... I'm saying you can share your beliefs... about those things.... But you can't expect others to go along when they see it different... I'm actually tired of other Christians just simply telling me I'm not a Christian... because I don't believe in Him the same way they do.... Again... not telling you how to think... or what to say... just know that the Catholic Church doesn't speak for God or Christians... Only Catholics. (Who are Christians... Just not the only ones) | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 9:46:41 PM | To me... your faith isn't in Christ.... It's in the Catholic Church.
What the? How incredibly off topic is that comment?
Wow! MAJOR BOUNDARY VIOLATION ALERT
That was the nastiest thing I've read in a long, long, long, long...time. Wait, in my entire life!
You want to fight? Leave faith out of this and let's get down then. There is PLENTY of subject matter related to sin to be discussed on this page. If you are in a bad mood, go lecture someone who might care and stop acting like a bigot--you would not dare speak so generally to a Jew this way so don't try to pull this crap me all randomly. I am not your punching bag, jerk--nor is it your role to define me. Let's stick to the subject at hand, shall we? I've posed no arguments only questions, can you focus long enough to answer them?
| |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 9:58:43 PM | This reminds me of a Joke... and you can plug in Catholics, Mormons... whoever... (Just to lighten this up a little)
This guy dies and goes to Heaven... and when he meets St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, St Peter asks him if he would like to take a tour. So the guy agrees to go on this tour.
First St. Peter takes him up into the clouds where there are Angels painting and doing pottery and writing.... Then St. Peter takes him into a pretty Garden, where off in the distance, up in the clouds, he explains that this is the Castle of God.
Then as they started leaving the garden the guy saw a ridge and noticed a valley and walked over and looked down into the pretty valley and saw all these people... and the guy asks, "what is this place?"
St. Peter tells him this is the Catholics, and if he wanted to get closer and take a better look that he would need to be really quite... Not to be noticed by anyone.
The guy was a bit puzzled... and asks St Peter..... "Why wouldn't I want them to see me?"
St. Peter replied..... "Because they think they're the only ones here!" | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 10:00:12 PM | | Paul took what became the Catholic Church away from the principals that Christ believed in. According to Paul, the Covenant of Christ supersedes the Covenant of Moses, and the Covenant of Christ, in the end, was whatever Paul said. Over the past two millennia, the Catholic Church has picked and chosen which laws to enforce and which parts of the Bible mean what, with an eye to do nothing more than expand its power. Because of that, the ethos of practically any modern society are superior to those of the Catholic Church. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 10:06:17 PM | Hey r
Look, I'm sorry if that offended you...... It wasn't meant to be mean.... I'm trying to understand your viewpoint... If you want to say that I was wrong in thinking that way ok.... But your not understanding what I am asking? And I am not jumping on you because your Catholic.... If you were Jewish, or a Mormon or anything else... and you keep using the doctrine of that belief to make your points... and seem like you deny others to believe differently... I am only wanting to try and understand... why someone would be so attached to their religion... that they would not discuss things without backing things up in general terms....
You can't always win an discussion when you only play by your rules... You have to find some common ground.
again... sorry if that upset you... wasn't meaning to be a jerk... I'm not looking for a fight... just an understanding | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 10:45:08 PM |
You do not control this thread. You do not control this website.
No, of course not. But the sin of vanity may make someone *act like* they do. We recently saw someone who acted like that, on this very thread. He left rather suddenly--but for a moment, it almost seemed like he was still here, under a different name. Probably not. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/4/2009 10:55:37 PM |
No, of course not. But the sin of vanity may make someone *act like* they do. We recently saw someone who acted like that, on this very thread. He left rather suddenly--but for a moment, it almost seemed like he was still here, under a different name. Probably not. Are you accusing someone of posting using another name? Really? Why the hell would anyone do that? Jesus. | |
|
|
| Page 26 of 47
|
7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 |
|
Home
login 
