-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Has Sin Become a Joke?
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
The economic status of women has changed a lot since biblical times, and gone up several gears since the feminist revolution, with roots going back long before the suffragettes. Feminism also gained important traction with the arrival of oral contraception, that is, personal female control of fertility.
The setting for biblical concepts of divorce may have been relevant in their time, but they have no useful practical relevance in Western society; and the idea that there's no escape from a disastrous marriage is not just absurd but repugnant.
Golly, you'd think God would have better things to do with [his] time than obsess about people's genitals and take lots of notes!
Do you think [he]'s just frustrated since [he] divorced Asherah? Or is that why she divorced [him]?
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
At least you make me laugh.
In various cultures, marriage was a matter of that culture. At the time of Abraham, Sarah gave her maidservant as a concubine to A.:
Genesis 16:2 . . .. Please, have relations with my maidservant. Perhaps I may get children from her. . .
He accepted this and had intercourse with her; they were now married.
Genesis 24:57-58 57 So they said: “Let us call the young woman and inquire at her mouth.” 58 Then they called Re‧bek′ah and said to her: “Will you go with this man?” In turn she said: “I am willing to go.”
Genesis 24:66-67 . . .. 67 After that Isaac brought her into the tent of Sarah his mother. Thus he took Re‧bek′ah and she became his wife; and he fell in love with her, and Isaac found comfort after the loss of his mother.
Not very complicated. The woman agreed, the man agreed to be man and wife, and they had sex. End of story. Except if the man married again, then repetition of ohh so formal procedures.Genesis 24:66-67 . . .. 67 After that Isaac brought her into the tent of Sarah his mother. Thus he took Re‧bek′ah and she became his wife; and he fell in love with her, and Isaac found comfort after the loss of his mother.
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
Well, again I will say, church teaching and Bible doctrine tends to differ.
Divorce according to scripture has a strong reason for doing so when adultery is committed; this is by no means the only reason!
Paul said this:
12 But to the rest say I, not the Lord: If any brother hath an unbelieving wife, and she is content to dwell with him, let him not leave her. 13 And the woman that hath an unbelieving husband, and he is content to dwell with her, let her not leave her husband. 14 . . .
15 Yet if the unbelieving departeth, let him depart: the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases : but God hath called us in peace.
If a person in a marriage is being abused, assuredly this is not being "content to dwell with" that person! An abusive relationship, hitting, etc. means that the abuser is not behaving in the Christian way - that person has earned the "unbeliever" status. This does not in any way mean that a Christian can permit him or herself to fall in love with another outside marriage and quit because of this. We must not forget the promise:15 Yet if the unbelieving departeth, let him depart: the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases : but God hath called us in peace.
Hebrews 13:4 Let marriage be had in honor among all, and let the bed be undefiled: for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
In this then, if in good conscience we can say that the other party is abusing the other one in the marriage bond, then we have the right to depart. I try to go by the Bible always.
I knew my poor wording and short explanation would come back to bite my tail feathers. It could have been explained better than I did. God is not standing over us tallying every little wrong or minor good thing we do. But, the big stuff, good or bad shall be paid back.
Underhill
Well-Known Member
I think what you are describing is right and wrong. I think the term sin implies some divine rule.
Lusting after another mans wife, sin. But 99 men out of 100 would look at the ladies nicely shaped backside as she walks by. And the last guy is legally blind.
Murder is wrong and a sin.
Swindling old people out of their life savings so you can buy a bigger jet, certainly wrong but god has deemed it his will!
The reasoning is that no man should be tricked into paying for the upbringing of a cuckoo. It's a part of human nature, part of the 'selfish gene' phenomenon. (For example, the greatest single predictor of whether a child will be murdered is whether it's living with its mother and her partner who isn't the child's father.)
All this stuff greatly complicates a very straightforward proposition.
If it's God's business, why did he design human desires and mating rituals as he did? Or step in to help? It makes much more sense if we realize that evolution set us up in these matters and that human decency is the standard, not weirdo Paul's opinions from the time of Claudius.
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
Once you dismiss God, anything goes, even the shootings we so recently read about. Then there is neither good nor evil, only what is expedient, what is profitable, and what serves my own agenda.
With Stalin's, Mao's, and Hitler's millions dead - all applauding the rule of the strongest, I think in that context, I will repeat the words of an apostle, "are you (as in we) stronger than God? (paraphrasing Paul in 1 Cor) So, if the strongest rule, let's see what happens perhaps in our lifetime if we are lucky. It really matters little at the moment in our small insignificant lives.
What matters is that people live their lives without guilt and a feeling of having done wrong. Many need the guidance of scripture; many do not.
What matters to me is that I try to live my life without regrets.
-----------
Evolution is one of those things I relegate to the realms of fairy-tales. It has no realm in reality, in exquisite programming designing itself. But, you have the right to your fantasy as do I to mine.
What makes you think God is required for there to be good and evil? isn't it enough that some activities kill others or put them in jeopardy?
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
I say, you say - NK says that it is good for them to develop atomic weapons, we - many of us - say it is a bad thing.
You may claim something to be good, I don't have to agree. I may claim something to be good, and, again, you may not agree. It gets us nowhere. There is no resolution to such arguments.
Just look at the abortion argument. Some think it OK to kill millions of innocent lives. I say, NO! It isn't good.
Do all agree? Not all all. If some can kill innocent lives, millions, who cares (in the context of this exchange) about a few tens of lives in L.Vegas? (Of course, it was evil, but... next to millions of innocent babies!!!) Reflection is a must.
1robin
Christian/Baptist
I didn't suggest that the bulk (or anything similar) of Christianity is living in blind disobedience of the moral values and duties contained in the bible. I simply said that the bible it's self plainly and emphatically states that we will all fail to perfectly meet God's standards.
However pointing out the obvious fact that Christians are imperfect to varying degrees doesn't serve as a premise to any meaningful conclusion I can think of. It doesn't even hint that the bible is wrong, God does not exist, we are not in need of a savior, or that Christianity is on the decline in any respect. I have yet to see the point.
Skwim
Veteran Member
And I didn't imply you did.
And that's just fine if you can't think of any.
I posted the OP because it appears that a very large percentage of Christians don't care what the Bible says about sex and don't care what god thinks of their behavior, which seems to be a large departure from past Christian thinking. Subsequently, I wanted to see if anyone knew of a reason. Now, if all this isn't news to you, so be it. It is to me.
Nor does it hint at why Donald Trump is such a moron. Point being: so what?
.
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
you would think if God made us we would be created with the capacity to do good in our own integrity by volition of choice. you would think God would lay down a clear law, and then govern and defend it Godself.
the foundations of justice would be laid out, and human nature would not be left to blindness and indifference, and sin.
God should stand on a hilltop, and not remain invisible.
at instant God would let the sinner know at heart their fault, and deliver swift judgment or it's possible recompense.
what does it really mean for a creature to be a born sinner? you would think any new creature would be afforded the obviousness of God's laws, and expected ways.
God would have created us with divine conscience, and then leave it up to us to love or reject that conscience.
God would work in the light of obviousness to all, and not in invisibility.
sin runs rampant and unrestrained to do whatsoever it wishes. i.e. Vegas murder.
where is God's courtroom, on earth?
why should omnipotent justice be executed on a tree? and not rather defeat death with will and principle, and power of defense ?
are we to lay down our bodies to be executed as well? what justice does that serve?
shouldn't we all have our opportunity to face God.
and if a sinner is to repent, why is it God's doing, and not the sinners own relenting?
if God is, then we'd all know everything we need to know, sinners and saints both. we would have been created that way. bottoms up, and top down sufficiently made.
the foundations of justice would be laid out, and human nature would not be left to blindness and indifference, and sin.
God should stand on a hilltop, and not remain invisible.
at instant God would let the sinner know at heart their fault, and deliver swift judgment or it's possible recompense.
what does it really mean for a creature to be a born sinner? you would think any new creature would be afforded the obviousness of God's laws, and expected ways.
God would have created us with divine conscience, and then leave it up to us to love or reject that conscience.
God would work in the light of obviousness to all, and not in invisibility.
sin runs rampant and unrestrained to do whatsoever it wishes. i.e. Vegas murder.
where is God's courtroom, on earth?
why should omnipotent justice be executed on a tree? and not rather defeat death with will and principle, and power of defense ?
are we to lay down our bodies to be executed as well? what justice does that serve?
shouldn't we all have our opportunity to face God.
and if a sinner is to repent, why is it God's doing, and not the sinners own relenting?
if God is, then we'd all know everything we need to know, sinners and saints both. we would have been created that way. bottoms up, and top down sufficiently made.
That's not even faintly credible. Countries that have useful gun laws, whether they rate high or low in religiosity, don't have routine massacres. 'Christian' USA has routine massacres.
And since most massacres (outside of terrorism) are directly linked to forms of mental illness, why does God sit on his hands instead of fixing that problem?
It's exactly as if the only place gods exist is in the imagination of individuals.
Oh dear, not this old nonsense again! If no one thinks there's a god to be offended, then the notion of 'sin' disappears, but the concepts of right and wrong, of good and bad conduct, ethics and decency, continue as strongly as ever.
Religion is the prodigy in the production of guilt, not least arbitrary guilt through intolerance of sexuality except via 'approved' methods, intolerance of menstruation, intolerance of homosexuality, other religions, irreligion and so on. Even encouraging guilt in believers because they admit to having doubts. Not all of religion, but too much of it, generates guilt to stay in business.
Quite right. There are lots of absurd notions going round out there ─ why, only the other day they were saying the earth is a sphere! ─ AND that the stars don't go round it! Ludicrous! Don't they read their bibles?
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
It sure ain't easy to understand at times. That must be said.
I don't see that - I see everyone doing what is profitable to them, money wise, sexual gratification wise. I pass poor people on the street. They have succeeded in something scientists have sought for decades - becoming invisible. I passed a beautiful young woman yesterday sitting on a city bench. I have seen her many times. She was sleeping, and she is always wearing the same clothes. I think next time, if I get the chance I will ask her if she has had supper, and, get her some if needed.
Guilt is a normal response to various actions and situations. It is not just a religious phantom, or fatamorgana. It is real, a normal human response that many times is incapacitating some. At times it is healthy, other times not so. It speaks to the ability to have empathy. Those who cannot feel this, are monsters.
Please don't blame the Bible in this. I am happy in my conviction that the earth is a sphere (more or less - oblate spheroid is too big a mouthful for me.) Perhaps saying round is better.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Doesn't god have more important and better things to do?
When I hear (or read, in this case) a believer saying such a thing, what I am hearing is "without god I will have no moral basis and turn into a thieve, murderer, and rapist." I don't have god and I'm doing just fine. We are social animals, we evolved to display pro-social behaviors, and if you really need a god or book to tell you they are wrong then you have problems. And, of course, there have been violent and nasty Christians who turn to the Bible to justify their wickedness.
As for how offensive such a statement is, it's about on par when an atheist states a theist is dumb for believing, and can't be certain things like a scientist just because they believe.
Such self-contained and circular reasoning is blind obedience.
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
I see.
So, you are saying that all atheists share the same morality on abortion, adultery, homosexuality, theft -
It is fairly plain to see that 'the moral basis' is no foundation of morality at all. Each has his own idea what is right and wrong - though most think that murder is wrong most of the time.
While most share the somewhat common conscience - many, my self included, modify this conscience as time goes by, as they grow up, or old. I sure have. What some may think wrong, is no necessarily what I think wrong, and vice versa. I recently came to a cliffhanger of a change of opinion on one subject. So, to some who object to a particular action, I say 'screw you.' (not referring to you. I am talking about moral equality and agreement - it simply does not exist among free individuals.)
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
What I am saying is that when a believer says that, they are saying "I would be immoral and have no problems with it if I didn't have this religious book telling me otherwise." Things like theft and murder almost everyone will view as wrong because we are social animals. We don't need any religion, book, or god to tell us these things are wrong because of our own inner biological and psychological needs for group cohesion.
Religion, however, takes it a step further to regulate behaviors that aren't anti-social, and may even be pro-social. It also often goes a step further to prevent evaluating its prescribed set of morality, setting in stone things change over time (such as today's views of women and slavery compared to Biblical views of centuries ago).
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
This is culture dependent. Just because you don't like a culture does prevent its existence.
Many churches may actually flourish because their flock is being protected from the influence of the world to an extend due to their cultures, e.g. Amish, JWs to an extend, perhaps even the LDS.
Thus, what you dislike, makes them flourish. It is their right, as you have the right to not be directed in your life by anything other than the latest Predator, Alien or Donald Duck movie, or some other material of your choice.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
I wouldn't be so quick to state those without god are turning to pop-culture for guidance (I do love the Alien franchise, though). Myself, to find my sources of guidance, you're better off going to library and reading a huge variety of economic, philosophy, and social sciences books. And make sure you get lots of opposing viewpoints, like reading Marx and Milton, Rawls and Nozick, Nietzsche and Plato, Mill and Rand, Wollstonecraft and Schopenhauer, and so on. The more the better.