Meaning of Idolatry

[RayMarshall19]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
RayMarshall19 wrote,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> It appears to me that you are confusing your "interpretation" with the "facts" themselves.

There is a fundamental difference between data and the interpretation of the data. I have posted data (facts) that prove that your interpretation as posted is faulty. Any interpretation, in order to be true, MUST be in harmony with all of the data. Rather than amending your interpretation to bring it into harmony with the facts, you have falsely claimed that the objective facts that I have posted are merely my interpretation. If you were to post data that is out of harmony with my interpretation of idolatry, I would most certainly amend my interpretation to bring it into harmony with that data.

</font>[/QUOTE]The only "data" is scripture itself, not what one or more "scholars" say about it. Even if, hypothetically speaking, your interpretation is correct, it is still an interpretation, not a fact.

 

[Craigbythesea]

John of Japan wrote,

Hey, I never said that a physical act, in and of itself, is sin. I agree totally that there must be the sin of the heart, or the physical act is not sin. I just don't agree that sin is not physical and only inward. And your effort to make my quotes from Strong and Erickson agree with you don't make sense to me. How can Erickson's "evil act" mean anything but physical sin?

If a physical act, in and of itself, is not sin, it is not sin. Adding to a physical act, which in not sin, a sinful disposition or state of the mind, does nothing at all to change the physical act into a sinful act.

A robot, since it cannot have a sinful disposition or state of the mind, cannot sin, but it can perform the very same and identical acts that you seem to believe are sin. If the very same robot were, however, to be given the ability to have a sinful disposition or state of the mind and perform exactly the very same and identical acts that were not sin before it had the ability to have a sinful disposition or state of the mind, would those acts become sin?

Apparently you are not understanding what I have been saying, and since I have said it over and over again as clearly as I know how, I shall say good-bye for now and hopefully fellowship with you in another thread sometime in the future.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by Paul33:
Come on boys,

Is not the act of choosing an act of behavior? If I choose to lust, desiring in my heart to commit the sin of adultery if I get the chance, have I not acted behaviorally?

The act of choosing is not a physical act; it is all in the mind. Sin is exclusively a function of the mind, and never a function of the physical body apart from the mind. Behavior that is limited to the mind is not physical behavior and therefore no physical acts are involved.

 

[John of Japan]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:

Apparently you are not understanding what I have been saying, and since I have said it over and over again as clearly as I know how, I shall say good-bye for now and hopefully fellowship with you in another thread sometime in the future.

Just got back from a translation committee.

Hey, go easy on me. What do you expect from a brain full of this crazy Japanese? (2000 Chinese characters, each with more, sometimes many more, pronunciations than Chinese has for them.)

Catch you somewhere, sometime on the BB.

 

[Paul33]

Right. But the mind and the physical act can not be separated.

We do what we choose!

Ourward acts of sinful behavior can be punished by government because we can see it!

Murder, for example.

But God looks at the heart as well. He finds us guilty of murder when we hate our brother, but the government is not able to "read" our minds and hearts.

Therefore, the physical act is only the extension of the mind, but it is considered a "sin" according to the ten commandments.

Thou shalt not steal! But, of course, coveting is also a sin. The act, the mind. Both are sins.

 

[Hope of Glory]

You can kill without murdering; what's in the heart makes it murder. By the same token, you can be guilty of murder without physical action.

 

[Paul33]

The premise has been posed that physical acts are never sinful, only the sinful disposition of the mind is sin.

Try this out.

I have no disposition of the mind to commit adultery. I am not lusting at another woman.

However, I do have physical sexual urges that I need satisfied.

Therefore, I choose to alleviate or satisfy these desires by having sex with a woman not my wife.

But its not adultery, because I am not lusting after her nor do I desire her emotionally or spiritually. I just need to satisfy a physical need which is normal and healthy with a physical act of intercourse.

No sinful dispostion of the mind. Therefore, no sinful act!

Now isn't that right!

 

[rlvaughn]

Originally posted by John of Japan:
...I don't know how to make a Greek font work on the BB.

Here's one way to do it, John. It is going to a little trouble, but it isn't too bad if you're only doing a few words. There may be a better way, but this is the only way I knwo.

You will type ampersand [&], then pound [#], then a three digit number [from 945-969], then semi-colon [;]. It would look like this - & # 9 4 5 ; - except without the spaces in between. If you type that (without spaces), it will show up as the Greek letter "alpha." ( α ) Continue the process up through 969 to reach "omega." ( ω )

& # 9 4 5 ; - α
& # 9 4 6 ; - β
& # 9 4 7 ; - γ
& # 9 4 8 ; - δ
& # 9 4 9 ; - ε
& # 9 5 0 ; - ζ
& # 9 5 1 ; - η
& # 9 5 2 ; - θ
& # 9 5 3 ; - ι
& # 9 5 4 ; - κ
& # 9 5 5 ; - λ
& # 9 5 6 ; - μ
& # 9 5 7 ; - ν
& # 9 5 8 ; - ξ
& # 9 5 9 ; - ο
& # 9 6 0 ; - π
& # 9 6 1 ; - ρ
& # 9 6 2 ; - ς
& # 9 6 3 ; - σ
& # 9 6 4 ; - τ
& # 9 6 5 ; - υ
& # 9 6 6 ; - φ
& # 9 6 7 ; - χ
& # 9 6 8 ; - ψ
& # 9 6 9 ; – ω

The Greek capital letters can also be done with the slow boat system - same principle, just start with 913 for Α and proceed through 937 for Ω.

& # 9 1 3 ; - Α
& # 9 3 7 ; - Ω

Not positive, but I think this will work on any bulletin board that uses UBB code.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by Paul33:
The premise has been posed that physical acts are never sinful, only the sinful disposition of the mind is sin.

Try this out.

I have no disposition of the mind to commit adultery. I am not lusting at another woman.

However, I do have physical sexual urges that I need satisfied.

Therefore, I choose to alleviate or satisfy these desires by having sex with a woman not my wife.

But its not adultery, because I am not lusting after her nor do I desire her emotionally or spiritually. I just need to satisfy a physical need which is normal and healthy with a physical act of intercourse.

No sinful dispostion of the mind. Therefore, no sinful act!

Now isn't that right!

Choosing to disobey God and sin against Him for sexual gratification is the sin.

The proof that the physical acts of murder and adultery, in and of themselves and apart from the state and disposition of the mind has already been posted earlier in this thread.

 

[John of Japan]

Originally posted by rlvaughn:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by John of Japan:
...I don't know how to make a Greek font work on the BB.

Here's one way to do it, John. It is going to a little trouble, but it isn't too bad if you're only doing a few words. There may be a better way, but this is the only way I knwo.
</font>[/QUOTE]Thanks for this and the PM, rlvaughn. You are a stand up guy!

 

[Craigbythesea]

Ξθστ τυπε λικε τηις! Τηερε ις νοτηινγ το ιτ.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Actually, typing Greek fonts on this message board is easy if you omit the grave and circumflex accent marks, and use acute accent marks only in short posts.

I post occasionally on another Christian message board, and it is much more Greek font friendly than the BB.

 

[John of Japan]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
Ξθστ τυπε λικε τηις! Τηερε ις νοτηινγ το ιτ.

 

[rlvaughn]

Just one more piece of advice for John or anyone else concerning this. If you see some character, letter, etc. used by someone else on the Baptist Board, just click on "quote" and pull their post into a reply box, and you should be able to view what code they used to make the character(s).

 

[Paul33]

Disobey God?

I don't think so. If a person seeks a physical release sexually, they haven't sinned against God, according to your logic.

Only the mental decision to sin against God is a sin. The physical act is not sinful, those are your words.

Therefore,

If there is no lust, there can be no sin, and the physical act of sex is not sinful. The person has not disobeyed God!

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by Paul33:
Disobey God?

I don't think so. If a person seeks a physical release sexually, they haven't sinned against God, according to your logic.

Only the mental decision to sin against God is a sin. The physical act is not sinful, those are your words.

Therefore,

If there is no lust, there can be no sin, and the physical act of sex is not sinful. The person has not disobeyed God!

Any and all willful states and dispositions of the mind that are contrary to the word of God are sin. The physical act of adultery, severed from the state and disposition of the mind, is not sin—I have explained this in great deal in previous posts in this thread. However, it is absolutely impossible for any normal man to commit adultery against a woman without an exceedingly sinful state and disposition of the mind, a state and sinful disposition of the mind that Jesus called adultery. If nothing else, there is the will to do something that is contrary to the will of God.

It may help you to look up all of the several Greek words that are translated “lust” in the KJV and study these words in detail. And if that does not convince you, we are commanded to love one another, and it is impossible for a normal man to willfully commit adultery with anyone whom he loves. Therefore, the state and disposition of his mind would have to be contrary to the will of God for him to commit adultery.

 

[Paul33]

Without cbts's disclaimers, here's what he is proposing.

"The physical act of adultery, severed from the state and disposition of the mind, is not sin."

I disagree. The physical act of having sex with someone other than my wife is sinful in and of itself, the mind notwithstanding.

 

[Petrel]

We've already been over multiple examples of how the state of one's mind is critical in determining whether or not a sin has been committed, even using the particular example of adultery.

 

[Paul33]

Yes. And you are wrong.

The physical act of adultery is sin, period.

 

[Petrel]

Well gee, if you put it that way!

I shall counter: You are wrong!

And if that is going to be the limit of intellectual depth of this discussion, I'll say goodnight!