Quoting Post Archived Topic: It will not be bumped to the top of the forum. Topic Sin versus Sins Membername   Not a member? Sign Up Free (takes 20 seconds) Password   Forgotten your password? Post Font: Verdana Arial Black Georgia Comic Sans Impact   Size: Tiny Normal Big Huge   Color: Default Dark Red Red Orange Brown Green Olive Cyan Blue Dark Blue Indigo Black [ Check Spelling ] [ Post Preview ] [ LiveTags ] Quote: from [mod]greatescape[/mod] at 5:01 pm on Nov. 5, 2008[quote][i]"Watch your thoughts, for they become words. Watch your words, for they become actions. Watch your actions, for they become habits. Watch your habits, for they become character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny."[/i] Behavior is essentially our only outward form of portraying who we are as a person.  Since no one besides ourselves can possibly be conscious of what our true beliefs, attitudes, feelings and morals are; our actions must speak for us.  Therefore, sin (to me) has to be a state you exist in.   True, sin is an action.  But those actions are the basis for how you are perceived before others, and before God.  It would be ridiculous to say, "Yes, I sinned but that's not what I really believe so therefore I'm not a sinner."  That's like saying, "Yeah I smoke but I don't think I should....so I'm not a smoker."  Intention does not negate action. That being said, of course people make mistakes and no can be expected to never sin.  I believe that ties in more to the idea of free will....we have the ability to create that seperation from God, and (in my opinion) everyone does it at some point. In the end, we all may be considered sinners to some degree.  Ehhh....Romans 3:10 [/quote] FAQ Keyword Search: Post Options Favorites Manager Notify me of new replies to this topic by email Notify me of new replies to this topic by private message Original Post barnabas Posted at 11:33 am on Nov. 5, 2008 We were talking about sin in one of my classes today and a debate sprung up over whether or not sin was a state you exist in, a seperation from God that exists down to the very marrow of your bones, or if sin is an act, something you can choose not to do everytime a situation occurs and theoretically be perfect. what are your thoughts?

Replies barnabas Posted at 2:21 pm on Nov. 11, 2008 Quote: from nik1 at 1:39 pm on Nov. 11, 2008 I don't like any of the choices. I think the list of sins can start with the Ten Commandments for which needs to be updated.   Rape, molestation and incest should be added and anyone committing these plus murder should be executed. that has nothing do to with what we are talking about. nik1 Posted at 11:39 am on Nov. 11, 2008 I don't like any of the choices.  I think the list of sins can start with the Ten Commandments for which needs to be updated. Rape, molestation and incest should be added and anyone committing these plus murder should be executed. Shaknbake Posted at 5:21 pm on Nov. 7, 2008 I'm not a Christian, and I don't believe in sin.   However, I have plenty of pennies and will deign to give you two. If we don't accept a literal understanding of The Fall of man, there's no reason to think that any event brought man into a state of sin. If that is so, then we are now just as God created us, and just as he intended for us to be. Unless God intended a sinful creation from the beginning, it doesn't follow that sin is a state, but that sinfulness is our tendency. I'd be inclined to say that to sin is to act in a way out of accordance with God's prescribed ways, and if a human somehow had the capacity to avoid doing that, they would live and die sinless*. Edit: Having read some of the discussion, I'll add that I think with (*) there'd be no need for salvation. barnabas Posted at 12:54 pm on Nov. 6, 2008 Quote: from Prince o palities at 2:46 pm on Nov. 6, 2008 I'm just giving you a hard time. The point is that I can't imagine a way to safely say that man cannot be sinless of his own free will. Are Luther and Bonhoffer disagreeing? Don't you read any proper theologians? I had a debate with him recently. it hurt my brain. I hope I am not that bad at arguing theology. bonhoffer and luther compare sin to cancer. they claim it impact the very marrow of our bones. hello, have you met me? I am at a lutheran seminary. Prince o palities Posted at 12:46 pm on Nov. 6, 2008 I'm just giving you a hard time.  The point is that I can't imagine a way to safely say that man cannot be sinless of his own free will. Are Luther and Bonhoffer disagreeing?  Don't you read any proper theologians? barnabas Posted at 12:21 pm on Nov. 6, 2008 Quote: from Prince o palities at 11:49 am on Nov. 6, 2008 You're arguing like Jesse. You can't just ignore the facts and keep saying "but I just can't accept that." Sin separates from God, yes? Then without sin, there is nothing to separate men from God. You have to either assert that God ordained man to sin or that man is capable of not sinning. how rude. I am not. I am just struggling to put it all together.  I am reading bonhoffer, luther, and moltmann who all have a lot to say about the sinful state and I am struggling to get an answer that I find to be true. I was speaking of a personal struggle, not a theological disacceptance. I apologize. Prince o palities Posted at 9:49 am on Nov. 6, 2008 You're arguing like Jesse.  You can't just ignore the facts and keep saying "but I just can't accept that." Sin separates from God, yes?  Then without sin, there is nothing to separate men from God.  You have to either assert that God ordained man to sin or that man is capable of not sinning. barnabas Posted at 9:41 am on Nov. 6, 2008 Quote: from Prince o palities at 11:35 am on Nov. 6, 2008 If Josephine has never sinned. Of course, Josephine has sinned so she's in real trouble if she tries to manage on her own. But I cannot bring myself to admit the possibility that she could be in a sinless state. sigh. off to read some theology, which will only further confuse me. Prince o palities Posted at 9:35 am on Nov. 6, 2008 If Josephine has never sinned.  Of course, Josephine has sinned so she's in real trouble if she tries to manage on her own. barnabas Posted at 9:24 am on Nov. 6, 2008 Right. can we say that we do not need salvation? can we make that claim about a person?   oh. .well..Josephine doesnt need salvation. she got into heaven on her own? throwing in your favorite gospel: all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.. what are we to make of that in light of this thought that sinlessness is theoretically possible? Prince o palities Posted at 9:23 am on Nov. 6, 2008 Universally, entering Christ is about our sins being atoned for.  I Peter 3, the washing of sins in baptism by the pledge of a clean conscience.  Acts 2, baptism for the forgiveness of your sins.  1 John 1 walking in the light allows for the blood of Jesus to cover all our sins.  Romans 6 (?) to become alive in Christ we must die to sin. Sin is what creates the need for an atoning savior.  Belief in that savior is what gives man a conduit for becoming sinless because he has no way to atone for his own sins except through death and damnation.  Being sinless doesn't save us because to be sinless would be to not need salvation. barnabas Posted at 9:12 am on Nov. 6, 2008 because sinlessness is not what saves us, belief in Christ is. Prince o palities Posted at 9:09 am on Nov. 6, 2008 Why shouldn't they? barnabas Posted at 9:03 am on Nov. 6, 2008 Could A person born on this earth, achieve sinlessness? if so, would they go to heaven? Prince o palities Posted at 8:57 am on Nov. 6, 2008 It's important to you because you haven't been sinless in practice.  If you cannot achieve a sinless state on your own, then you proclaim that God has ordained sin, predetermined you for damnation. Most recent 15 of 25 previous replies displayed.