I don't think that we are evil either.

Some people do commit some terrible atrocities, but most people just want to get on with their lives.

I used to go around worrying about the sin that I carried around with me, until one day I suddenly realised the truth - I am not carrying that much sin at all.

I don't claim to be perfect, but I can't think of anything too terrible that I have done and, as you say, if I have done wrong I should apologise and try to make amends - here, now, and with the person in question.

Do we really believe that we have to be Christian to realise that such behaviour is negative and bad for society?

Do non-Jews and non-Christians not have laws forbidding theft and murder, etc?

See:
Topic: Thou Shalt Not Steal - What is Theft?
http://www.wineintro.com/forum/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=000319

Good point. No you can be an athiest and be against killing, stealing... But when it comes to sin against God that's not really the problem.

This is. You see while you're not carrying that much sin you're still carrying sin. While you haven't been as bad as the next guy you still haven't been perfect. And God is.

I just came back from my son's JHS ceremony, and they gave some awards for PERFECT attendance. They didn't give any to people who just missed one day, just to the kids who managed to make it every day. See while those kids who only missed a day did very well compared to, well even my son who missed 3 days, they still weren't perfect.

Now I don't want to trivialize heaven, but it's similar in the sense that only the perfect get the reward. (I can't wait for the responses to this one.) Now all of you read my response where I acknowledged that I wasn't perfect. So how am I getting into heaven?

Simple it's not me. It's not something I did, could do or could even attempt to do, that gets me into heaven. It's the sacrifice that Christ payed for my sin. So while I'm not perfect, just ask my wife and kids, I am forgiven. I will still stumble, I will still sin, but my life has been changed as a result of what Jesus did for me.

I do understand you, Believer, but you have misunderstood me.

I know that I am not perfect. I feel immense guilt for the most minor things. I have a conscience. But I do not believe that there is meant to be this weight of sin on the shoulders of ordinary people - with or without the intervention of Jesus.

If I have said something I shouldn't have, I should vow to apologise and not to do it again. I don't really think that the Church / religion should come into it.

I don't think that I should assume that Jesus should wipe my 'sins' away - I should sort them out for myself. I don't like the word 'sin'. It has too many religious implications.

'Now I don't want to trivialize heaven, but it's similar in the sense that only the perfect get the reward. (I can't wait for the responses to this one.) Now all of you read my response where I acknowledged that I wasn't perfect. So how am I getting into heaven?'

How can you know that? How can you know who is in heaven, or going to heaven - or what heaven is or if it even exists? How can anyone possibly claim to know this? The Catholics think that they are the only ones going - what if they are right? And if they are wrong, why should any other Christian group be right?

And the Muslims think they are the only ones going, and the Hindus have probably already been there and back.

It's all back to the same circular arguments.

You don't KNOW. You think you know, you believe you know, the same way I believe that flipping a switch will turn on the light.

You may feel it inside that you feel it's right, but you can't possibly KNOW.

No one has come back and told us about it. Unless you want to believe that Jesus rose from the dead. but he told about heaven before he died, not after. he didn't say much after he got back.

No one KNOWS. You can't PROVE it, you can only believe you know.

And hope you are right.

you're wrong there. christianity is unique in its 'my way or the highway' approach.

believer:
this is the trouble with christian sin. nothing is ever good enough.i've been divorced twice, i take drugs, i swear and drink and smoke, i do not attend church and i eat what i want. acording to christian teaching that lot is enough to negate the fact that i have never been unfaithful to anyone in my life, and i'm a lot more honest than a few regular church goers i know.

sin is relative - it dependes on your circumstances, and that argument holds true for all the commandments. unfortunately christianity lacks any kind of flexibility, which is why i don't see it as a very positive relgion.

[quote]this is the trouble with christian sin. nothing is ever good enough...............sin is relative - it dependes on your circumstances, and that argument holds true for all the commandments. unfortunately christianity lacks any kind of flexibility, which is why i don't see it as a very positive relgion.[/quote]You are correct to say that there is not any flexibility, but it is not with Christianity, it is with sin. Sin is not relative, sin is sin regardless of how small it is. Sin means missing the mark, not hitting the bull’s eye. It is not placing on one side of a scale all the bad things and on the other all the good things. One sin, regardless of its size, is sufficient to separate us from God. If you sin, you physically and spiritually die (separation from God). The law was not given to show us that we can meet it, but to show us that we could not. No matter how good we are, we will always miss the mark (nothing is ever good enough). In order for the sin to be forgiven, a sacrifice of some innocent animal became the substitute. Our belief is that the only one in the history of man to never miss the mark was Jesus. Therefore death had no claim on Him. Yet He became the sacrificial lamb and died in our place. His death paid the price for our sins and the sins of humanity. Through His death and resurrection we have life and are no longer separated from God. All he wants us to do is to believe in Him. Believe does not mean to just acknowledge that he exist, but to repent and make a complete turn around by following Him. This is the gospel which means good news or what is positive of Christianity. We don’t have to focus on not sinning, but we have to focus on God. The law was summarized into only two, love our God with all our heart and all our might and our neighbors as we love ourselves. I am not perfect and when I sin, I ask for God's forgiveness. The more I focus on Jesus, the less I sin. This is why we believe we can enter heaven. It is not because of anything we did, but because of what Jesus did.

Lets assume this is true; The only one correct answer to life's purpose is that we are supposed to accept Jesus Christ as our savior, follow him, be good to one another and spread the good news. Why does God choose to be so obscure? Why the big puzzle??? I mean, there are plenty of other perfectly nice religions to choose from that are darn-near identical in concept... "lead a good and just life", "follow these scriptures".

Fish, why is Christianity the only logical choice for you? Your claim that it simply "feels right" or that events have happened to you that give you the "personal" proof you need, but these things happen to other people too, people who are Islamic (who you have the same roots with), or Budhist.

To me, it's exactly like this: God puts eight plates of food on the buffet table. Each looks different, but all look good to eat. Seven are poisoned, there is only one correct choice. The lucky people who choose correctly eat well. The poor saps that choose incorrectly suffer an agonizing death.

Can it possibly be this random?? How could a just and fair God do this to his creation?

Why does there have to be one and only one answer??? And please, enlighten me without quoting the Bible for pete's sake!!

Catholics tend to carry a lot of guilt and my Mum is RC - though she has always considered my brother and me to be very good people, I think I just inherited the guilt anyway - it happens that way.

My headmaster - at an ordinary state school - was very religious. My Sunday School teacher was forever telling me that I wouldn't go to heaven because of doubts and questions. All my Christian friends were convinced of their own sinfulness.

So that is probably why I always felt this burden of guilt and sin - until the day, as I said, when I suddenly realised that, within the bigger picture, my sins were practically non-existent and my intentions were mostly good.

I decided to make a point of bringing up my children believing that even if they did something 'naughty' it was the act that was bad and not them. They went to church and Sunday School for a while and had basically Christian assemblies at state school - but, this being England, they were pretty much secular assemblies.

They have been taught that good behaviour is good for everyone. They are very decent people who are kind and try to do their best. They do not go to church and are not in any way religious. They behave well because they have consciences and have been brought up to behave well.

They do not carry burdens of sin and guilt around with them - and I am so very pleased about that.

'Sin is not relative, sin is sin regardless of how small it is.' [fish]

Hi fish, we have had this very same discussion on the forum before and, while you are free to believe this, I'm afraid that I just cannot.

When I was very tiny, I was passing a shop and saw a basket of sweets outside. I thought I'd take one. I was probably too young to understand about stealing, but I still remember the occasion well and I felt uncomfortable about it, so, even then, I must have known that it was wrong. Sin.

A couple of years ago here in England, a young man, who worked in a school, took advantage of the trusting relationship that he had built up with the kids, lured two 10-year-old girls into his home, assaulted them and murdered them. Sin.

Based on your comments, I can only assume that you think that it was as bad for a 2-yr-old to take a toffee, as it was for that man to torture and kill those two young girls.

That surely cannot be a serious conclusion for Christians to draw. It cannot be correct. If it is right, then what kind of God are we talking about here?!

But then, maybe it is right, because 'God is supposed to have slaughtered the Amalekite babies, according to the book of Samuel. Christians seem to be ok with that.

I cannot understand it.

Have a look at the threads on murder and theft:

Topic: Thou Shalt Not Steal - What is Theft?
http://www.wineintro.com/forum/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000319

Topic: 10 Commandments - thou shalt not kill? .. murder?
http://www.wineintro.com/forum/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000302