What Is the Worst Sin?

Who gets to keep the coin?? Twisted Evil

Frank; I wonder if we could have a discussion entirely with the use of our paste buffers, without access to "original thoughts"! Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

BoGoWo wrote:

Who gets to keep the coin??

Frank; I wonder if we could have a discussion entirely with the use of our paste buffers, without access to "original thoughts"!

Bo

Not trying to be a wiss-ass here, but I truly do not know what a "paste buffer" is (and I hope it is not that white thing up above this sentence).

And I'm not sure what you mean by "without access to original thoughts."

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

BoGoWo wrote:
Mech (newbie?);You see Frank has the most solidly in "amber"ed thoughts on the subject of intelectual "avoidance of make a decision "in order to "take a stand" on something"ness". (did that end up being a sentence? Wel maybe it did, and maybe it didn't, I just can't be sure!)

Almost, Bo, almost!

I would prefer, instead of "avoidance of make a decision" to use...

..."acknowledge that a decision (or guess) is meaningless because there is no unambiguous evidence upon which to make a meaningful decision."

I could get off the "avoidance of making a decision" by just tossing a coin (something I've done on several occasions) but to what profit???

Matthew 16:26
For what would it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul?

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Matthew 16:26
For what would it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul?

Deuteronomy 22:18ff

"If a man has a stubborn and unruly son who will not listen to
his father or mother, and will not obey them even though they
chastise him, his father and mother shall have him apprehended
and brought out to the elders at the gate of his home city, where
...his fellow citizens shall stone him to death."

0 Replies

truth
Wow, Frank, that's what I call tough love!
BYW, I've always thought of "hypothetsis" as a testable conjecture and Theory as an at least tentatively established set of theories, i.e., tested hypotheses, as in "evolutionary theory" (an organization of established theories from geology, biology, genetics, paleonthology, etc.) not the "theory"--as in hypothesis or conjecture--of evolution. A "law" I think of as a very general and revered Theory, one that is overthrown not by a particular finding but by a revolutionary Paradigm Shift. Paradigm as in "brother can you paradigm?" These are only definitional preferences on my part (including theory vs. Theory) and should not bend too many noses.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

snood wrote:
Matthew 16:26
For what would it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul?

Deuteronomy 22:18ff

"If a man has a stubborn and unruly son who will not listen to
his father or mother, and will not obey them even though they
chastise him, his father and mother shall have him apprehended
and brought out to the elders at the gate of his home city, where
...his fellow citizens shall stone him to death."

You're aware, I take it, of the difference between the "authority" of old, versus new testament teaching?

0 Replies

Any "would be" authority must first demonstrate a respectable track record by which to gain respect; neither testament has done that yet!

Look at the results!!

And Frank; by "paste buffer" I am refering to the computer's facility to copy text by cutting and "paste"ing under "edit" of via ctrl "X"; ctrl "C"; and ctrl "V". And there is software available to maintain multiple "pasteable" strings of words for dropping into various writings as one proceeds. It avoids repeating more frequently used phrases.

0 Replies

I'm terribly sorry the bible hasn't "earned" your respect, Bo, but I was referring to the literal difference between teachings under the covenant of the old testament, and then the covenant that came into being after the coming of Christ. It's okay if you simply don't know what I'm talking about...

0 Replies

I Did not read anything except the original post so sorry for being so lazy.

If you mean by Christian standards, all sins are based as equal in the eyes of God and in Baptist, none of them count. (Ha ha ha.. hum.)

Man made ideals of which is best and worst are all based on ethics. It's a bit hard to get an intelligent answer on that if it's built on something so inane as ethics.

Ethics do not count. Neither does anything else really, but I truly am disgusted be those... So annoying, Like the roach Mr. Samba...

0 Replies

Snood;

I am distantly familiar with both having read them cover to cover, except Genesis naturally (kind of like wading through Dante's Inferno, and not dissimilar), and would agree both contain much worth digesting, many ideas worth adopting, and I'm sure you will concede, much that would lead a thoughtful person to throw up! But taking the good with the bad, my complaint is with the actual application over the centuries; it seems that the "eye for an eye"s have out weighed the "love thy neighbour"s.

And NNY;

I would suggest you do more reading!

0 Replies

snood wrote:

You're aware, I take it, of the difference between the "authority" of old, versus new testament teaching?

I am aware that Christians try to disassociate themselves from Old Testament Law -- but that is because the ones who do are hypocrites.

At Matthew 5:17, Jesus says: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill themj. Of this much I assure you: until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter of the law, not the smallest part of a letter, shall be done away with until it all comes true."

And as you know Snood, Leviticus and Deuteronomy ARE THE LAW.

0 Replies

Christ became the new Lawgiver and Judge.

I see Matt 5:17--Christ changed the Law. Didn't wipe it away, but did change it. He changed ALL the rules, and rewards, and consequences, and the path. It was no longer hitting the marks set by Moses and God, as interpreted by Pharisees and nosy neighbors. He added a dimension that I obviously can't seem to explain, even to my satisfaction--partially, because of the inability to prove what I feel I know re: the spiritual realm.

I thought I'd put my opinion out here.

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

I thought I'd put my opinion out here.

Sofia

Always glad to have your opinion.

I think if you look at it dispassionately, however, you will see that Jesus not only did NOT change the law -- he specifically said he had no intention to do so.

Paul certainly made lots of changes.

And I suspect those are the changes to which you make reference.

But any impartial reading of the words of Jesus as reported in the Gospels would lead one to suppose that Paul made those changes in direct opposition to the sensibilities of Jesus.

We may never reach a meeting of the minds on this, Sofia, but the reason it is being discussed is because Snood is trying to disassociate Christianity from the Old Testament teachings.

Lots of Christians do -- unless the Old Testament is of use to them -- as in "Jesus has fulfilled 347 prophecies!"

And that -- the disassociation -- is absolute nonsense.

0 Replies

BTW, Sofia, I am not saying that Jesus did not stregnthen some of the OT laws. He certainly did that.

But he did not eliminate any of them.

0 Replies

Thanks Frank,
The Knowing, thinking, believing comments were intended to be more poetic than precise.
I knew, oops; thought, that you would probably pick up on that and hopefully find it amusing, and perhaps succinct. Best M.

0 Replies

I don't need to read the topics (lying) I'll just write stuff that looks like im involved in some type of debate.

Well how do you suppose you can say anything is worse than anything?
Theft, Killing, peaches and apples? Sin is a sin, how wonderfully vivid.

Church man that reminds me of Santa Clause told me SO

According to the teachings of the great God Cathol, they vary... for worse sins you have to drink more bloody mary's.

Bible is taken as fact
Other books are taken as fact because they are books.
I like muenster cheese, I think that's how you spell it.
Not to rich, perfect amount of everything expected out of a cheese of such caliber.

0 Replies

I support Frank here, Christ didn't try to change the law(for the few things i know about it, no exucse my ignorance in this matter, however i'd like to give my opinion).
Paul did made a lot change to the religion, & like Nietszche said, he did it because he couldn't bare the idea that his master let himself be captured by the authorities, & all he was driven by pain, probably he didn't accept it to himself, but maybe he didn't believe that Christ was the son of God.
Once again, excuse my ignorance, this opinion is a GUESS, like other more i have bout these importants humans who shaped History.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

dov, If you wish to discuss the transgression of moral law, the worst one would be the killing of thousands of innocent humans without cause - such as what our president has done to the Iraqis. Saddam did not pose any threat to our security. He did not have missiles that would have reached us. There's a big question as to whether he had chemical and biological weapons. None has been found as of this date. He did not have any connections to Osama and his terrorists; there is no proof. This much we know. If this president and his administration lied or deceived the American people to justify this war with Iraq, that would be the ultimate sin. c.i.

Actually he did. Thats like saying the world attacking Nazi Germany in world war II for no reason before Pearl Harboris a sin. Also, if you saw the special on the History Channel about Sadam and his sons, you would know about the hell the Iraqis went through (constant torture on television, getting killed/beaten for not winning sports, "emptying" jails, etc.) They also said that Qusay or Uday( i dont remember) killed 400,000 Kuwaitis and Iraqis in a few hours, just to empty the jail, some were buried alive and some were shot. So, yeah, you should have thought a little more then directly saying that but anyway, I think the worse sin is Necrophelia...nasty. O yeah, no offense C.I, I was just making a statement about the whole Operation: Iraqi freedom thing so no hard feelings...ok?

0 Replies

truth
Yes, Dux and Frank. It seems to me that Paul created his church because he could not live up to the laws of the Jews. He also seems to have changed "Jesus died for HIS sin (as they were pronounced by the legal system of the time) to "Jesus died for OUR sins. Similarly, at that time crucificion was a very shameful death, but Paul converted it into a sacred death.

0 Replies

The funny thing though is that he just started preaching & people started to believe him, circunstances helped him alot. & most people he preached for were ignorants.

He was the ancient top salesman. He was the equivalent to those salesmen who go from door to door selling their product, except that he was the best.

0 Replies

What Is the Worst Sin?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know