Originally posted by FMFAnd that is why I say that we are not your trained seals, either.
The OP is asking Christians - and perhaps people who know Christians well - what's so hard about 'not sinning'. The fact that I personally believe there is morality (or a lack of it) rather than "sin" doesn't really matter.
"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." -- Matthew 7:6, KJV
Originally posted by SuzianneWhen a Christian considers the question of "What's so hard about 'not sinning'?" [perhaps in the course of trying to better themselves and live a better life], are there some "sins" that are harder or easier to avoid than others?
A "discussion" is more than simply "I'm right and you're wrong", regardless how many giggles you get out of it. You're NEVER going to entertain that you can and do sin, and so the entire effort is futile.
Simply put, your pride is getting in the way of having an actual discussion instead of a "giggle fest".
Originally posted by FMFSo you can avoid any form of sin if you wanted to? So from the start of your life till this point you could have been 'sinless' if you had wanted to? No sin was committed that you couldn't have stopped? And all sin that you have committed was because you wanted to? Is that what you are saying?
[b]"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment."
When I get angry, it is usually with some good justification. What "judgement" do you think I deserve or awaits me? I don't get angry very often. I don't think it's especially difficult to avoid this particular kind of "sin". Do you?
re: Lust Have you never? ...[text shortened]... it hard, do your religious beliefs make it OK for you (with you being "forgiven" and all that)?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkNo. Nothing of the sort, as I think you know only too well.
So you can avoid any form of sin if you wanted to? So from the start of your life till this point you could have been 'sinless' if you had wanted to? No sin was committed that you couldn't have stopped? And all sin that you have committed was because you wanted to? Is that what you are saying?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI'm just saying it's not so difficult to avoid, so what's all the fuss? I am not talking about people who believe in "sin" being "sinless". If you look at the ten commandments for instance, which ones do you find it so hard to avoid breaking? I'm not talking about never breaking them; I'm just asking what's the big deal? It doesn't seem so difficult for Christians to avoid "sin" Do you think it is?.
So if you could not refrain from doing certain sins in the past what makes you think you can stop with them now?
Originally posted by FMFSome sins I think are hard to avoid as they are ingrained in our sinful nature. The sin of pride seems somewhat unavoidable, because humility is a strange thing, as soon as you think you've got it, you've lost it. 🙂
I'm just saying it's not so difficult to avoid, so what's all the fuss? I am not talking about people who believe in "sin" being "sinless". If you look at the ten commandments for instance, which ones do you find it so hard to avoid breaking? I'm not talking about never breaking them; I'm just asking what's the big deal? It doesn't seem so difficult for Christians to avoid "sin" Do you think it is?.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkAnd according to your moral philosophy, "pride" is as equally evil as forcing 6,000,000 people into gas ovens to exterminate them, although the latter is presumably a "sin" that most of us find it easier to avoid, though we are - apparently, if you are to be believed - all guilty of the gas ovens thing anyway in the eyes of God regardless of avoiding it.
Some sins I think are hard to avoid as they are ingrained in our sinful nature. The sin of pride seems somewhat unavoidable, because humility is a strange thing, as soon as you think you've got it, you've lost it. 🙂
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFSo what you are trying to say is your moral philosophy whereby a mass murderer who kills 600,000,000 people can get away scot free and where an innocent civilian can get the death sentence is far superior to God's system of divine justice? Hmm close, but no cigar.
And according to your moral philosophy, "pride" is as equally evil as forcing 6,000,000 people into gas ovens to exterminate them, although the latter is presumably a "sin" that most of us find it easier to avoid, though we are - apparently, if you are to be believed - all guilty of the gas ovens thing anyway in the eyes of God regardless of avoiding it.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkBut you have not described or demonstrated the existence of a recognizable system of justice.
So what you are trying to say is your moral philosophy whereby a mass murderer who kills 600,000,000 people can get away scot free and where an innocent civilian can get the death sentence is far superior to God's system of divine justice? Hmm close, but no cigar.
You have simply promoted some kind of supposedly moral philosophy rooted in what amounts to gangster's logic, which makes no attempt to incorporate fairness, and you've just slapped on a few intensifiers for good measure, like "real" and "perfect".
As for "a mass murderer who kills 600,000,000 people" you've stated that he can receive "undeserved mercy" according to the incoherent moral mess that you purport is a "system of justice".
Originally posted by FMFDo you believe certain actions can be universally wrong? If not, your supposed system of justice is totally meaningless.
But you have not described or demonstrated the existence of a recognizable system of justice.
You have simply promoted some kind of supposedly moral philosophy rooted in what amounts to gangster's logic, which makes no attempt to incorporate fairness, and you've just slapped on a few intensifiers for good measure, like "real" and "perfect".
As for "a ma ...[text shortened]... served mercy" according to the incoherent moral mess that you purport is a "system of justice".