What is sin?

[uu_sage]

Sin is missing the mark. It's when we fall short of our best selves and the life to which God calls us.

 

[Danmac]

Sin is missing the mark. It's when we fall short of our best selves and the life to which God calls us.

If sin is missing the mark, what were we aiming at?

 

[Valjean]

Sin is action that retards spiritual progress or expansion of consciousness. In essence, it's bucking dharma; swimming against the current.
As a dharma-dependent phenomenon, what is sinful differs somewhat among different individuals.

 

[comradesoul]

If sin is missing the mark, what were we aiming at?

What we were aiming at depends on our motives in doing any action. As monotheists what we should be aiming at is pleasing God with our thoughts, words, and actions. We may externally do the right thing but in our hearts hold other motives.

For example it is pleasing to the Lord that we spread the the truth about Him to others but someone may be a great preacher and have crowds of millions listening to him speak but his inner motive may be to experience the sense of power and enjoy the fame that such a position brings to him and pleasing God may be the furthest thing from his mind. In that way his actions of preaching are missing the mark.
Pleasing the Lord is always the goal of all action great or small.

Hare Krishna

 

[Danmac]

Sin is action that retards spiritual progress or expansion of consciousness. In essence, it's bucking dharma; swimming against the current.
As a dharma-dependent phenomenon, what is sinful differs somewhat among different individuals.

Are you saying that culture should determine right or wrong or is morality objective?

 

[Valjean]

No, not directly, but right and wrong, or at least what's proper for you do vary according to Dharma.
Dharma's your lifeplan, a blueprint for optimum spiritual development that you're born with. A tiger's dharma is different from a sheep's. A warrior's different from a priest's, An Inuit's different from a Hippie's.

 

[Danmac]

No, not directly, but right and wrong, or at least what's proper for you do vary according to Dharma.
Dharma's your lifeplan, a blueprint for optimum spiritual development that you're born with. A tiger's dharma is different from a sheep's. A warrior's different from a priest's, An Inuit's different from a Hippie's.

I think some laws are absolute, such as the forbidding of molesting children, or raping women. A persons dharma should never make it lawful to do such things should it?

 

[J FREAK]

Sin is breaking any commandment of God as written on your heart. If you feel, guess, worry if something is wrong - it proberly is.
If you do it it becomes sin.

 

[laughing marmot]

sin does literally mean missing the mark. In Christianity sin is talked about in the sense of particular sins (such as stealing or murdering) & it is talked about in the sense that we are all in a state of sin, unless redeemed. The mark one is aiming for is perfection, the bullseye, the state of sinlessness.

Where is the bullseye located? In our center.

What are our arrows? Our thoughts, actions, & intentions.

How do we keep our arrows from missing the mark? Focus on the center.

The center is love. The center is peace. The center is joyfulness.

People often shoot their arrows off into the field of sin because they are ignorant of their center.

Aim for the center. Aim for love, peace, & joy. This is redemption & this is enlightenment.

 

[jaareshiah]

No, sin is disobeying the rules of an imaginary being.

TC

This "imaginary being" is not so imaginary when ones considers the universe with all it's structure and organization. The universe is on a scale that the human mind cannot fully fathom, with the closest star to our sun in our Milky Way galaxy, Proxima Centauri, is 4.2 light years away, or approximately 27 trillion miles away.

Though imaginary in many people's minds, yet the evidence of his existence is of such great magnitude, that an ancient writer had these words: "For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable; because, although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their unintelligent heart became darkened. "(Rom 1:20, 21)

Many are unwilling to examine the evidence that there is a Creator. Just as a jury has to give serious thought to the evidence when considering a person's innocence or guilt, so should not everyone give serious consideration to the evidence that surrounds all of us and how all this came about.

 

[McBell]

Are you saying that culture should determine right or wrong or is morality objective?

Not culture, society.
no, wait, society already decides what is right and wrong.

And their culture influences what they think is right and wrong.

 

[McBell]

This "imaginary being" is not so imaginary when ones considers the universe with all it's structure and organization. The universe is on a scale that the human mind cannot fully fathom, with the closest star to our sun in our Milky Way galaxy, Proxima Centauri, is 4.2 light years away, or approximately 27 trillion miles away.

Though imaginary in many people's minds, yet the evidence of his existence is of such great magnitude, that an ancient writer had these words: "For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable; because, although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their unintelligent heart became darkened. "(Rom 1:20, 21)

Many are unwilling to examine the evidence that there is a Creator. Just as a jury has to give serious thought to the evidence when considering a person's innocence or guilt, so should not everyone give serious consideration to the evidence that surrounds all of us and how all this came about.

But I want facts, not beliefs, presented as evidence.

 

[jaareshiah]

If sin is missing the mark, what were we aiming at?

All persons born from Adam and Eve have had sin in their members or bodies, with the exception of Jesus Christ. We are all flawed, for the apostle Paul wrote that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."(Rom 3:23)

What then are we aiming at, in order to please God ? Peter wrote that "Christ suffered for you, leaving you a model for you to follow his steps closely. He committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth."(2 Pet 2:21, 22)

In order to attain to eventual perfection, being without sin within us, as Adam and Eve were before their rebellion in the Garden of Eden, Jesus said that "everyone exercising faith in him (as the Christ of God) might not be destroyed but have everlasting life."(John 3:16)

 

[jaareshiah]

But I want facts, not beliefs, presented as evidence.

I feel the same way you do Mestemia, for when someone makes a statement, facts should always be forthcoming, not just an opinionated expression. Just as a house has a builder, and displays his qualities, likewise, the universe displays characteristics of it's maker. Concerning the existence of a Creator, consider our Milky Way galaxy.

For example, it is estimated to contain over 100 billion stars. If we were to try and count the stars by comparing each star to a page in a book, how long would it take to count these stars ? At the rate of a page per second, it would require over 3000 years. In order to count them in a person's lifetime, they would have to turn about fifty pages per second.

Even at the colossal scale of the universe, it is perfectly organized. Is it not so, that the larger a project is, the more likelyhood of disorganization, of missed communication, missed assignments. The universe, on the other hand, makes everything pale in comparison to it in organization, and is likened to an elaborate ballet.

A question arises: How can the billions of galaxies, not just stars, moving at the rate of 1/2 the speed of light apart, be so well orchestrated, with so much precision ? If these are flying apart at such vast speeds and there were no one to guide them, why has the universe not collided within itself ?

How can it be so well orchestrated that it flawlessly continues to expand, growing ever larger year by year instead of self-destructing ? What if all the cars of a large city, such as Houston, Texas, USA, while being driven, were suddenly without someone to guide them, even for a moment ? What would the result be ?

Yet, the universe is on such a far grander scale in comparison and all the galaxies, each being composed of billions of stars, are like an elegant ballet dancer, choreographed to a precise degree. How is this possible without a Supreme Being to guide them as they are in constant motion and yet galaxies are not colliding ?

On much closer note to home, consider a water molecule. It is composed of two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen. The oxygen atom has a slightly negative charge and the hydrogen atom has a slightly positive charge. As a result, these opposite charges attract each other like tiny magnets, forming what is called a hydrogen bond. What results from this simple yet elegant design ?

As water gets colder, it contracts and grows more dense. Unlike most liquids, as it approaches the freezing point, something unexpected happens. Water begins to expand. As it freezes into ice, the hydrogen bonds between water molecules lock into place , crystallizing into a very open lattice. Due to this unique design, ice is less dense than liquid water and floats on top. This quality in rivers, lakes and even the oceans prevents these from becoming solid ice. Thus, a natural insulator is formed that preserves the life beneath the surface. Could this have been a product of an accident ?

Concerning the earth, had it been situated only 5 percent closer to the sun, scorching heat would have made life impossible. On the other hand, if the earth were placed just 1 percent farther away from the sun, huge sheets of ice would cover much of the earth. In addition, how crucial is the size of the earth ? If the earth were slightly larger, it's gravity would be stronger. As a result, hydrogen, a light gas, would collect, unable to escape the earth's pull. In time, the atmosphere would be inhospitable to life.

If, on the other hand, the earth were slightly smaller, life sustaining oxygen and surface water would escape. In either case, were the earth larger or smaller, life would not exist. How did this precision of size and distance from the sun come to be ? Accidently ?

Now consider the moon. What purpose does it serve ? With a diameter 1/4 that of the earth, the moon exerts a strong gravitational force on our planet, stabilizing the tilt of the earth's axis of rotation. Without the moon, the earth would wobble over long periods of time from nearly zero to 85 degrees. This would have an extreme effect on our climate.

On parts of the earth, temperatures would soar, while elsewhere they would plummet. By the gravitational pull of the moon, our axis of rotation is only 23 1/2 degrees, allowing for the four seasons over much of the earth. Could this be said to be just an accident or is the more reasonable conclusion that there is a Supreme Designer ? What well designed house has ever built itself, so that the home fuctions as one unit ?

Going down to molecular level, a protein molecule is necessary for life to exist. What are the odds that this could have been caused at random ? There are over 100 amino acids, but only 20 are needed for life’s proteins. Moreover, they come in two shapes: Some of the molecules are “right-handed” and others are “left-handed.” Should they be formed at random, as in a theoretical organic soup, it is most likely that half would be right-handed and half left-handed. And there is no known reason why either shape should be preferred in living things. Yet, of the 20 amino acids used in producing life’s proteins, all are left-handed !

The proteins needed for life have very complex molecules. What is the chance of even a simple protein molecule forming at random in an organic soup? Evolutionists acknowledge it to be only one in 10113 (1 followed by 113 zeros). But any event that has one chance in just 1050 is dismissed by mathematicians as never happening. An idea of the odds, or probability, involved is seen in the fact that the number 10113 is larger than the estimated total number of all the atoms in the universe !

Just these few "tidbits" of information, has made some reconsider their view on how life on the earth and all the universe originated.

 

[McBell]

I feel the same way you do Mestemia, for when someone makes a statement, facts should always be forthcoming, not just an opinionated expression. Just as a house has a builder, and displays his qualities, likewise, the universe displays characteristics of it's maker. Concerning the existence of a Creator, consider our Milky Way galaxy.

For example, it is estimated to contain over 100 billion stars. If we were to try and count the stars by comparing each star to a page in a book, how long would it take to count these stars ? At the rate of a page per second, it would require over 3000 years. In order to count them in a person's lifetime, they would have to turn about fifty pages per second.

Even at the colossal scale of the universe, it is perfectly organized. Is it not so, that the larger a project is, the more likelyhood of disorganization, of missed communication, missed assignments. The universe, on the other hand, makes everything pale in comparison to it in organization, and is likened to an elaborate ballet.

A question arises: How can the billions of galaxies, not just stars, moving at 1/2 the speed of light apart, be so well orchestrated, with so much precision ? If these are flying apart at such vast speeds and there were no one to guide them, why has the universe not collided within itself ?

How can it be so well orchestrated that it flawlessly continues to expand, growing ever larger year by year instead of self-destructing ? What if all the cars of a large city, such as Houston, Texas, USA, while being driven, were suddenly without someone to guide them, even for a moment ? What would the result be ?

Yet, the universe is on such a far grander scale in comparison and all the galaxies, each being composed of billions of stars, are like an elegant ballet dancer, choreographed to a precise degree. How is this possible without a Supreme Being to guide them as they are in constant motion and yet galaxies are not colliding ?

On much closer note to home, consider a water molecule. It is composed of two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen. The oxygen atom has a slightly negative charge and the hydrogen atom has a slightly positive charge. As a result, these opposite charges attract each other like tiny magnets, forming what is called hydrogen bonds. What results from this simple yet elegant design ?

As water gets colder, it contracts and grows more dense. Unlike most liquids, as it approaches the freezing point, something unexpected happens. Water begins to expand. As it freezes into ice, the hydrogen bonds between water molecules lock into place , crystallizing into a very open lattice. Due to this unique design, ice is less dense than liquid water and floats on top. This quality in rivers, lakes and even the oceans prevents these from becoming solid ice. Thus, a natural insulator is formed that preserves the life beneath the surface. Could this have been a product of an accident ?

Concerning the earth, had it been situated only 5 percent closer to the sun, scorching heat would have made life impossible. On the other hand, if the earth were placed just 1 percent farther away from the sun, huge sheets of ice would cover much of the earth. In addition, how crucial is the size of the earth ? If the earth were slightly larger, it's gravity would be stronger. As a result, hydrogen, a light gas, would collect, unable to escape the earth's pull. In time, the atmosphere would be inhospitable to life.

If, on the other hand, the earth were slightly smaller, life sustaining oxygen and surface water would escape. In either case, were the earth larger or smaller, life would not exist. How did this precision of size and distance from the sun come to be ? Accidently ?

Now consider the moon. What purpose does it serve ? With a diameter 1/4 that of the earth, the moon exerts a strong gravitational force on our planet, stabilizing the tilt of the earth's axis of rotation. Without the moon, the earth would wobble over long periods of time from nearly zero to 85 degrees. This would have an extreme effect on our climate.

On parts of the earth, temperatures would soar, while elsewhere they would plummet. By the gravitational pull of the moon, our axis of rotation is only 23 1/2 degrees, allowing for the four seasons over much of the earth. Could this be said to be just an accident or is the more reasonable conclusion that there is a Supreme Designer ? What well designed house has ever built itself, so that the home fuctions as one unit ?

Going down to molecular level, a protein molecule is necessary for life to exist. What are the odds that this could have been caused at random ? There are over 100 amino acids, but only 20 are needed for life’s proteins. Moreover, they come in two shapes: Some of the molecules are “right-handed” and others are “left-handed.” Should they be formed at random, as in a theoretical organic soup, it is most likely that half would be right-handed and half left-handed. And there is no known reason why either shape should be preferred in living things. Yet, of the 20 amino acids used in producing life’s proteins, all are left-handed !

The proteins needed for life have very complex molecules. What is the chance of even a simple protein molecule forming at random in an organic soup? Evolutionists acknowledge it to be only one in 10113 (1 followed by 113 zeros). But any event that has one chance in just 1050 is dismissed by mathematicians as never happening. An idea of the odds, or probability, involved is seen in the fact that the number 10113 is larger than the estimated total number of all the atoms in the universe !

Just these few "tidbits" of information, has made some reconsider their view on how life on the earth and all the universe originated.

The assumptions you have to make in order to hold the beliefs that you present as your premise are truly amazing.

Do not get me wrong.
I do not automatically dismiss the possibility of a creator.
But I need something other than your mixture of assumptions and beliefs to convince me.

 

[Danmac]

Not culture, society.
no, wait, society already decides what is right and wrong.

And their culture influences what they think is right and wrong.

OK, lets assume that laws were passed in a particular society that permitted the raping of women, and the molesting of children. If you lived in that society would you agree with those laws? If not, why?

 

[McBell]

OK, lets assume that laws were passed in a particular society that permitted the raping of women, and the molesting of children. If you lived in that society would you agree with those laws? If not, why?

Wait...
I thought we were talking about morals...?
Why the swap from morals to laws?
Or are you claiming them to be one and the same?

To answer your seemingly off topic and transparent trap...I mean scenario...
I would not agree with said laws.
Because I find said laws to be wrong.
Your point?

Interesting how you chose rape and molestation instead of say abortion.

 

[Danmac]

Wait...
I thought we were talking about morals...?
Why the swap from morals to laws?
Or are you claiming them to be one and the same?

To answer your seemingly off topic and transparent trap...I mean scenario...
I would not agree with said laws.
Because I find said laws to be wrong.
Your point?

Interesting how you chose rape and molestation instead of say abortion.

1) We are talking about how morals shape laws

2) Are you saying that societies laws should be measured by a higher moral law? If not why would you disagree with such laws?

3) Maybe abortion is one of the laws that I disagree with even though it is legal?????

________________________________________________
Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true. -Bacon

 

[McBell]

1) We are talking about how morals shape laws

Fair enough.

2) Are you saying that societies laws should be measured by a higher moral law?

There is no "higher law" than mans law.

If not why would you disagree with such laws?

Simply because my morals do not align with everyone else's morals.
Abortion is a prime example.
Same sex marriage is another.

3) Maybe abortion is one of the laws that I disagree with even though it is legal?????

Yet I say that making abortions illegal would not only be im-moral, but also down right wrong.

Same with capital punishment.

 

[Danmac]

Fair enough.


There is no "higher law" than mans law.


Simply because my morals do not align with everyone else's morals.
Abortion is a prime example.
Same sex marriage is another.


Yet I say that making abortions illegal would not only be im-moral, but also down right wrong.

Same with capital punishment.

So when you say that raping women is wrong, are you suggesting that it is wrong for you, or are you saying that it should be wrong for everyone?