Is breaking the law a sin?

[dmart]

Under a Christian perspective is breaking the law always a sin?

For example under age drinking, smoking marijuana, and speeding.

I'd like to think not, which may or may not be from personal experience.

I know Jesus said to give unto caesar what is caesars and to give unto god what is gods, could this also be implied to all laws?

[Chaplinsky]

Under a Christian perspective is breaking the law always a sin?

For example under age drinking, smoking marijuana, and speeding.

I understand why you may think that, because they seem relatively harmless, however a sin is a sin. and God is clear we should follow the laws of men. Unless of course that prevents us from worshiping Him.

1 Peter 2:13 "Submit yourself to every ordinance of man . . . to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors."

Acts 5:29 "We ought to obey God rather then men."

note in acts it is talking about when the law coutermands God's requirements.


also about drinking in general and smoking pot i believe applies to this also

Ephesians 5:18"And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;"

Proverbs 23:"29Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause? who hath redness of eyes?

30They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine.

31Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

32At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder.

33Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things.

34Yea, thou shalt be as he that lieth down in the midst of the sea, or as he that lieth upon the top of a mast.

35They have stricken me, shalt thou say, and I was not sick; they have beaten me, and I felt it not: when shall I awake? I will seek it yet again."

I feel like this is a possibility that it should imply to getting high also. As it induces a state of mind in which many people will not worship Jesus, or they will put him aside until they can think straight. How much easier is it to forget to pray when your stoned. Anyways I understand why you would think this as they seem harmless, but rest assured God has reasoning for everything.

[Greatest I Am]

Under a Christian perspective is breaking the law always a sin?

For example under age drinking, smoking marijuana, and speeding.

I understand why you may think that, because they seem relatively harmless, however a sin is a sin. and God is clear we should follow the laws of men. Unless of course that prevents us from worshiping Him.

1 Peter 2:13 "Submit yourself to every ordinance of man . . . to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors."

Acts 5:29 "We ought to obey God rather then men."

note in acts it is talking about when the law coutermands God's requirements.


also about drinking in general and smoking pot i believe applies to this also

Ephesians 5:18"And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;"

Proverbs 23:"29Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause? who hath redness of eyes?

30They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine.

31Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

32At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder.

33Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things.

34Yea, thou shalt be as he that lieth down in the midst of the sea, or as he that lieth upon the top of a mast.

35They have stricken me, shalt thou say, and I was not sick; they have beaten me, and I felt it not: when shall I awake? I will seek it yet again."

I feel like this is a possibility that it should imply to getting high also. As it induces a state of mind in which many people will not worship Jesus, or they will put him aside until they can think straight. How much easier is it to forget to pray when your stoned. Anyways I understand why you would think this as they seem harmless, but rest assured God has reasoning for everything.

Jesus is said to have turned water into wine.

This indicates that intoxication is allowed. If we apply intoxication to drug use as well, this indicates that other intoxicant can be lumped in with alcohol. Especially if we consider that alcohol creates more problems for us than all the other drugs combined except for tobacco which is the number one killer.

Regards
DL

[Chaplinsky]

it also should be noted that during Jesus' time the water was unpure. And also the wine was not the same strength as modern wine. I believe that Jesus simply didn't want us doing something that had the potentential to move him further from him. I am sorry I cannot agree that intoxication should be allowed after reading the versus instructing not be as drunkards. Also note that in the story you are talking about the people were upset they no longer had any wine. How many people know of a drinking party that turned out violent. Jesus tells them it is not his time yet. (possibly implied crucifixion?)

NIV John 2:"3When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to him, "They have no more wine."
4"Dear woman, why do you involve me?" Jesus replied, "My time has not yet come." "

and Jesus note's that they were already drunk.

NIV John 2:"10and said, "Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now." "

since they were already drunk Jesus, was not contributing to making them drunkards, he was possibly protecting himself by providing for them, doing the request of his mother, and was not partaking in the wine to intoxicate himself. It must be true that if he did drink of the wine it was not enough to intoxicate him. If drunkards will not inherit the kingdom of God, then surely the perfect sinless being would not be a drunkard.

can you show how this implies intoxication is allowed. while still confronting the issue that other versus that state not to be as drunkards and be sober.

KJV 1 Peter 5: 8 "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:"

[Greatest I Am]

it also should be noted that during Jesus' time the water was unpure. And also the wine was not the same strength as modern wine. I believe that Jesus simply didn't want us doing something that had the potentential to move him further from him. I am sorry I cannot agree that intoxication should be allowed after reading the versus instructing not be as drunkards. Also note that in the story you are talking about the people were upset they no longer had any wine. How many people know of a drinking party that turned out violent. Jesus tells them it is not his time yet. (possibly implied crucifixion?)

NIV John 2:"3When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to him, "They have no more wine."
4"Dear woman, why do you involve me?" Jesus replied, "My time has not yet come." "

and Jesus note's that they were already drunk.

NIV John 2:"10and said, "Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now." "

since they were already drunk Jesus, was not contributing to making them drunkards, he was possibly protecting himself by providing for them, doing the request of his mother, and was not partaking in the wine to intoxicate himself. It must be true that if he did drink of the wine it was not enough to intoxicate him. If drunkards will not inherit the kingdom of God, then surely the perfect sinless being would not be a drunkard.

can you show how this implies intoxication is allowed. while still confronting the issue that other versus that state not to be as drunkards and be sober.

KJV 1 Peter 5: 8 "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:"

The last supper included wine. This should indicate that there is no firm injunction against wine.

To think that Jesus would bow down to any fears should be ignored as fals, after all He did tolerate being crucified. He had no fears.

Regards
DL

[Chaplinsky]

The last supper included wine. This should indicate that there is no firm injunction against wine.

To think that Jesus would bow down to any fears should be ignored as fals, after all He did tolerate being crucified. He had no fears.

Regards
DL

Instead of being against wine, I am more against intoxication, as I do not see any proof of Jesus being intoxicated. Or drinking for anything other than noursment. I see wine as something that was generally mixed with water to help with water purity issues. However, I am not ignorant I am sure many people still induldged to become intoxicated.
I do agree that Jesus would not bow down to any fears. I instead think that he knew he had more teaching to do, before it was time for him to become crucified. Sorry if I was misleading about Jesus and fear.

[WafflesFTW]

Sin? Sin is just part of a fairy tale written up by men. Therefore what ever these fairy tale authorities determine will be your sin. Why should you care however? Sin is completely irrelevant.

[cnorman18]

Sin? Sin is just part of a fairy tale written up by men. Therefore what ever these fairy tale authorities determine will be your sin. Why should you care however? Sin is completely irrelevant.

Just a word of friendly advice:

The practice of posting a message for the sole purpose of picking a fight or of ridiculing another point of view isn't much tolerated around here. We like to discuss actual issues with an eye to exchanging information and comparing our points of view, as opposed to merely throwing rocks. It's much more interesting and much more fun to argue with respect, grace and courtesy than with disdain, contempt and hostility. We aren't always successful, but we do try.

That said, welcome to the forum. I think you'l catch on pretty quickly.

And with that in mind, I decline to respond to your post.

We Jews don't talk in terms of "sin" much anyway. We prefer to focus our attention on what we should do, as opposed to what we shouldn't.

[WafflesFTW]

Who is ridiculing? That is my point of view. It's a shame it clashes with yours.

[sirunknown]

This should only be considered "odd" if your not a christian, the question relates to specific "christian" guidelines.

For my question, which form of christianity are you referring to? I mean far as the true christians of this world, who love everyone the same and do not pass judgement on others, which seems to be a very small amount, compared to the "social" christian.

Its seems to me, that its going to depend on how your "teacher" or you, translated the words into meaning. Personally the rules on some aspects, has been "added" over time and was never originally in some of the "older" scriptures or books. Lots of man made authors over time and left out books of the bible, has led me to believe, that there are SO many different stages of the bible, the question should have questions before the questions, in regards to a set of "laws".

Of course this could take a whole "new" turn, in reply to this. Then again as it should, so it could be clarified to which "bible" version or scriptures are the "absolute", if not, you could be doing the whole entire "apples vs oranges" and not even be aware, since their is assumption of everyone only "knowing" a certain particular version.


Take Care

[preacher]

depends on the law. if the man-made law contradicts God's law, then you'll have to break man-made law and uphold God's law, just like Daniel and friends when King Nebuchadnezzar passed the law to bow before the statue.