The weight of supposed Sins (Absurd)

[slyracoon]

Something has been on my mind the past couple of days and has driven me crazy for the most part. Sinning claims to have the same immoral weight with any sin, whether its murder or theft, and one can be forgiven (hypothetically) by "God" if they truly show remorse for their actions. But lets take 911, a terrorist attack that was claimed to be justified by Al Qaeda as the will of "God" (or Allah, which is arabic for god). They practically committed Genocide, but if they were truly remorseful of their actions then they would be forgiven? And also, committing Genocide carries the same weight as stealing a pack of gum? (In the eyes of Christianity)

Is it me or is this completely absurd?
A lot of people would not regard theft as a terrible thing, but murder is something in this society that people can be condemned to life in prison for. Its so ridiculous that someone can get away with such atrocities (like genocide) and have it come off with the same moral weight as small things such as general shoplifting (like stealing a pack of gum)

Thanks for listening

[slyracoon]

[Replying to post 10 by Divine Insight]

I think you may be missing my point. I completly agree with you, I have looked into those verses and the Bible does seem to contradict itself in many ways. My point, to put it plainly, is that Bible doesnt teach us anything that previous religions or just good common sesne would be able to do.

[keithprosser3]

So Christianity doesn't really have anything to do with Jesus other than the fact that they try to make him out to be something that he most likely was not.

I wouldn't put it that way... Christianity has everything to do with the teachings of Jesus (as described in the NT) which are clearly completely different from those of the OT.
Jesus was 'sold' as the Messiah to the Jews but in the main the Jews didn't buy into it because his message was derived from Hellenic ideas, not traditional Judaism.

Jesus has everything to do with Christianity, nothing to do with Judaism.

[Bust Nak]

Hi sylracoon,

If you are driving a car and you crash into another car the fine/repairs/total cost you pay depends on the type of car you crash in to. Hit a Ferrari and mortgage your house, hit a 20 year old bomb and probably an apology is all you need.

So it appears that there are two conclusions. Yours or Christianity's, where we think our sins, even slight, are against something infinitely valuable. So even the smallest sins cannot be repaid.

Does that make sense now?

That scenario suggests our sins has damaged God, and we are paying compensation. What possible harm can a mortal do to a god?

[Sntrose]

Here is a question for you slyracoon (and all),

Does the Bible literally say that all sins are equal, or that all sins are indicitave of a sin-nature? Meaning that even the slightest deviance from the perfection of God would point to an imperfect being, and hence we have the evidence of mankind being inherently "sinful" since we all do at least some of those things.

I personally think that the scenario you describe would indeed be absurd, but I have never heard it said quite that way from a pulpit or Christian. I have never heard a Christian say that stealing a pack of gum is just as bad as flying an airplane into a building of innocent people.

I think the real point of contention here, at least for me, is the idea that because of "sin" (meaning we are not perfect, as Christians say God is) we all are not worthy. I think it is much more beneficial to see that we are all human. We are all capable of making the same mistakes. We can all "sin." Which ought to unite us in understanding and empathy of one another.

The arrogance of saying that because of a religion, some people are somehow now exempt from this "fault" of being human is something entirely separate...and really ruins the entire point I think the writer of the Scripture was going for....

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 13 by Bust Nak]

If we are to play that analogy out then I think we can damage God. In God's case, God cannot dwell with us as sinners - not in a logical sense but in a holy, righteous sense. Clearly God in the Bible does dwell at times with us and can interact with us. So it is not a logical position but it is a character position where God will not allow His holy and righteous character to dwell with sin. So you could say that God can either retreat from us or force us to retreat from Him as a result of our sinning.

Our sinning has a consequence.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 8 by Divine Insight]

Whilst I don't think you are using the scripture accurately I think it fair to question if you forgive everyone? Remember forgiving is easy, it comes from your mouth or your heart and it has to be to everyone. Jeffrey Dahmer for instance is one of many you think you are able to forgive. I think if we are honest we find forgiving to be one of the hardest things in the world to do - even for small issues.

In any case you have to interpret scripture with scripture. If you actually believe 'forgive, and ye shall be forgiven' gets you into Heaven then how do you interpret that with 'none come to the father but through me'. For one of many examples?

[Goat]

[Replying to post 8 by Divine Insight]

Whilst I don't think you are using the scripture accurately I think it fair to question if you forgive everyone? Remember forgiving is easy, it comes from your mouth or your heart and it has to be to everyone. Jeffrey Dahmer for instance is one of many you think you are able to forgive. I think if we are honest we find forgiving to be one of the hardest things in the world to do - even for small issues.

In any case you have to interpret scripture with scripture. If you actually believe 'forgive, and ye shall be forgiven' gets you into Heaven then how do you interpret that with 'none come to the father but through me'. For one of many examples?

Well, Jewish traditoin, since the people Jeffery Dahmer killed are ones he 'sinned' against, it's sort of hard for him to ask for forgiveness from them.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 8 by Divine Insight]

Whilst I don't think you are using the scripture accurately I think it fair to question if you forgive everyone? Remember forgiving is easy, it comes from your mouth or your heart and it has to be to everyone. Jeffrey Dahmer for instance is one of many you think you are able to forgive. I think if we are honest we find forgiving to be one of the hardest things in the world to do - even for small issues.

In any case you have to interpret scripture with scripture. If you actually believe 'forgive, and ye shall be forgiven' gets you into Heaven then how do you interpret that with 'none come to the father but through me'. For one of many examples?

Well, Jewish traditoin, since the people Jeffery Dahmer killed are ones he 'sinned' against, it's sort of hard for him to ask for forgiveness from them.

So when someone commits a crime in your neighbourhood but not against you - you feel there is nothing for you to forgive. Even though in many cases the crime affects society deeply?

[Goat]

[Replying to post 8 by Divine Insight]

Whilst I don't think you are using the scripture accurately I think it fair to question if you forgive everyone? Remember forgiving is easy, it comes from your mouth or your heart and it has to be to everyone. Jeffrey Dahmer for instance is one of many you think you are able to forgive. I think if we are honest we find forgiving to be one of the hardest things in the world to do - even for small issues.

In any case you have to interpret scripture with scripture. If you actually believe 'forgive, and ye shall be forgiven' gets you into Heaven then how do you interpret that with 'none come to the father but through me'. For one of many examples?

Well, Jewish traditoin, since the people Jeffery Dahmer killed are ones he 'sinned' against, it's sort of hard for him to ask for forgiveness from them.

So when someone commits a crime in your neighbourhood but not against you - you feel there is nothing for you to forgive. Even though in many cases the crime affects society deeply?

It someone commits a crime in my neighborhood, but not against me, it's not my job to 'forgive him'. On the other hand, if I am a witness, I can certainly give testimony to insure he can pay for his crime.

[ttruscott]

...

There are sins that are worse than others. I don't know where you get the dogma that all sins are equal. That's not sound doctrine.

...

Consider this,
All sinners carry the full weight of their sin but the elect will be redeemed from that weight while the non-elect will be crushed under it.

The doctrine of the ultimate disvalue of sin (every sin has full ultimate disvalue in GOD's eyes) means all sins are equal in their weight against GOD's purity but 1. any sin by an elect person (under GOD's promise of election and salvation) puts Christ on the cross while 2. any sin by a non-elect tare puts them in hell.

The difference is not to be found in what the sin is but in who is doing the sinning. A non-elect who steals is going to have that sin judged and punished while in hell. An elect who kills millions (if this is possible which I tend to think not, since it is suggested that GOD mitigates the sins the elect wish to do to save them the suffering of their repentance and all their suffering is perfectly proportioned to bring them to repentance) will be redeemed and saved.

This just means that it is our eternal relationship with GOD that decides whether we are punished in hell or forgiven our sins, NOT the supposed evilness of any particular sin.

Peace, Ted