The Root of Sin
Why is it that we seem to catagorize sin the same way the world does?
If you were to go out and ask unbelievers what the worst sins were they would list off murder, rape, stealing...
...very few [if any] would list idolatry or heresy as wicked sins.
And it is because of idolatry and false teaching that all of these other sins entered into the world.
Satan tempted Adam and Eve with a lie, with a false view of God.
"Has God said"?
Many Christians would fight against homosexual ministers being allowed into their Church but sit back and do nothing when doctrinal errors seep in.
posted by Dale Callahan at 7:42 AM
14 Comments:
Good thoughts, bro. What always amazes me is when some errors come, not seeping, but crashing in the door and still the faithful sit back and do nothing.
I agree bro. I have heard Christians say things like "why do so many Christians nit pick at doctrinal issues, when there are so many gross sins out there [pointing to the world]. This is tolerable when those who say it are young in the faith, and not knowing better...but when the white haired folks talk like this...you can see why the ball was dropped in the first place. Judgment starts at the house of God, the Church. We need to deal with our own sin, and then we will be truly salty for the world around us.
Heresy is hardly in the same league with murder, rape or theft. Everyone agrees on the definition of murder, rape and theft, but what is heresy to you may be the absolute truth to someone else.
Idolatry is heresy in another form. What you consider an idol, another man might consider an object of worship and vice versa.
When you decide that you can fix the problems of the world by getting everyone to agree with your ideas, then you're contributing to the problems by your failure to engage them.
As "Democracy Lover" I understand why you say these things. But what you say assumes your point of view
[all views are equal] to be correct...while at the same time showing the Christian view to be wrong [heretical or idolatrous to your view point].
You are not consistent with your own rebuttal.
Your real problem isn't with an absolute standard by which something is defined as heretical or idolatrous BUT your problem is with what I say the standard is.
My standard is God's revelation to man [The Holy Bible].
And it is with this standard that I can make sense of anything...absolute universal laws [thought, experience, morality].
With the foundational belief that each man has a right to decide what is right in his own eyes you really don't have an absolute, universal standard of morality by which you judge the Christian [or anyone else for that matter].
All you have is you finite opinion, just like the other 5 + billion people on this mud ball hurling through the emptiness of outer space.
BTW-thanks for stopping by. I know I can come across hard at times but I really do share with you because I want whats best for you [all the while realizing that you don't see it this way].
You're making more assumptions. I certainly do NOT think that all views are equal. There was not a hint of such a viewpoint in my response. I wasn't dealing in viewpoints, just in simple definitions of terms. Pointing out that heresy and idolatry have different meanings to different people is fact, not opinion.
You seem to have the opinion that those who do not accept your concept of the bible as the ultimate authority do not have a moral compass. That's simply untrue.
You seem to be oblivious to the fact that you also only have your finite opinion. You have found a way to justify your opinion through a circuitous interpretation of the bible, but that doesn't give it any credence except among those who share your opinion. If you need the bible as a crutch to be a moral person, then that's OK. Many of us are quite able to live moral lives without that assistance.
Yeh you believe in a moral life...but you borrow from my outlook on life [although you would never admit this].
Please take a few moments and share with me what your moral compass is...I am really interested in hearing how your justify an absolute, universal moral standard.
Do also note that from a Calvinistic [Reformed] view of Christianity I believe that God is so sovereign [also He is infinite, even though I am not] that He can make sure that His truth is known by His people. His Spirit works through His Word to enlighten His people. This isn't a view I made it, it is a revelation that God gave to me. I can justify this belief philosophically but why should I at this point because you as the unbeliever feel no need to justify any of your beliefs. You just believe them...because they seem to work.
I don't need an absolute, inviolable moral standard. To have one is to assume I know everything and am capable to judge everyone else's behavior.
The primary standard I have is that I should not harm others and that I should respect their right to behave as they wish provided they do not harm others. When a fellow human is in need, I should do what is in my power to help him/her. I should also conduct myself in a way that does not expose me to harm unnecessarily and displays self-respect.
What is your problem with that?
So if God can "make His truth known by His people" does that mean that God is unable or unwilling to make his truth known to other people? I'm sure you believe God has revealed truth to you, but you must surely understand that many throughout history have believed that God revealed His truth to them, and the results were often horrific (9/11 for example).
When people talk about God speaking to them, I recognize their deep belief that they have had a revelation, but think it more likely that they are trying to find a external explanation and reinforcement for something they came up with in their mortal mind.
There is a very serious teaching in the Bible that reveals that God will have mercy on whom He wills and He will harden whom He wills.
God predestines the end [that a man will be saved or lost] but He also predestines all the "means" to that end.
Another thing that will drive the autonomous mind crazy is that God can do what we cannot.
God predestines man's free choices.
How does He do this? I don't know.
When I speak of free will I do so in two different ways. The first is metaphyical and the second is moral.
Man does not have moral free will but he is metaphyically free in his will. If you already understand this...cool...if you would like to know what I mean let me know.
I'll skip your laborious mental pretzel twisting to fit the bible's many concepts of God into one.
One big problem with the pre-destination idea is that it conveniently absolves humans from responsibility. If God has decided everything in advance, let's just sit around and see what's in store for us.
What kind of moral compass is that?
If good things happen, it's so great that God has blessed us. If bad things happen, it must be God's will and his ways are above our ways. Either way, it sure as heck isn't our fault! -- Nice job!
All you are showing is that you are placing your mind in the highest court of appeal.
But according to the Christian world view God stands in those shoes.
Because God is infinite He can do what we cannot.
He can predestine man's free choices.
This is mystery and not contradiction.
This is not saying "A" and "not A".
You don't like it because your pea brain can't figure it out.
Don't get anger with me, because all humans stand in the "pea brain" category in comparison to the infinite God.
I would have to concede that all humans stand in the "pea brain" category against any reasonable concept of God.
When you put God (or to be more precise, your concept of God) as the "highest court of appeal" on moral/ethical issues, you are merely using your brain to come up with an external justification for the moral stance you have already adopted. (Of course, you have a set of 66 books which you can misinterpret to support your thinking). The particular flavor of Christian belief you have adopted is a truly clever evasion of personal responsibility. Not much of a moral compass really.
You may not like my moral compass[66 books] but interestingly enough my worldview does answer the enduring questions of philosophy. It is the only worldview that does.
You can mock, laugh, or scream against it but in the end you still haven't given me an answer of why you can use concepts, believe that the future is going to be like the past or have any law-like beliefs whatsoever.
The Bible does give these answers...but guess what...you don't like this answers because "light has come into the world but men loved darkness rather then light because their deeds were evil".
In the end you don't like the Bible because you love your sinful life and you want to continue to be your own "god".
Post a Comment
<< Home