What is your theory of sin? I don't think I have ever heard that term before, but the concept is much discussed. Basically the question is: what determines sin? This is not nominitively about labeling or quantizing sins (though these may have to used as examples), but just our standard for determining what makes an action sin. What is your best description of the question at hand among these options?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
What is your "theory of sin?"
- Thread starter Alcott
- Start date
All sin is against God. All sin in the bible is against one or more of the ten commandments......as all "other " laws are an expansion of the Decalogue.
absolutely agree!
I would further the statement that in the case of a believer and fellowship that there is the standard of conforming to the weakest. Nothing in itself may be a sin, but some may hold it a sin, and therefore it is a sin when in their presence.
That is, if I don't consider something a sin, and those in whom I am in fellowship with do, then I must conform to that standard until I am no longer in the fellowship.
For me to cause another believer to stumble because I am "free to engage in some activity" is a sin.
I suppose that would be a violation of loving the neighbor.
While I'm not against this approach-- as I'm not against any of them listed, as it depends on many factors, such as being literate, for one-- I do think you have to "interpret" (not a word I like in theological context) the Commandments broadly to say all laws are an "expansion" of them. What is being stoned on LSD, for one example? Most likely that would come to 'having no other gods,' or putting something between oneself and God. But if that's the case, then do we actually need any other commandment at all? If all sin comes down to putting something before/beside God, then why such a complex system of sacrifice in those first five books? And indeed, if that was required for the Israelites, then the same thing is required of us, unless we say what the Ten Commandments mean changes. Do you claim that?
And, of course, one must be a sabbatarian to really believe that sin is described as violating any of them. As I am not a sabbatarian because New Testament scripture does not require that, and Romans 14:5-6 and Colossians 2:16 are quite clear on that, that cannot be my own 'theory of sin.'
menageriekeeper
Active Member
Sin, for the Christian, is whatever seperates us from doing the will of God as reflected in the commandments given to us by Christ: Love thy God, love thy neighbor as thyself.
Sin for the unsaved is simply rejecting Christ. All the other things are simply reflections of the rejection.
Sin for the unsaved is simply rejecting Christ. All the other things are simply reflections of the rejection.
Old Union Brother
New Member
Romans 14:23 says anything not of faith is sin. Does that cover it?
SaggyWoman
Active Member
Choice. choices. choices. Let us pick our sins.
I don't know. Does clipping your toenails come of faith? How about sitting on the toilet? Swatting a fly?
Same problem as when we pick our noses-- what do we do with what we get?
Hello Alcott,
Yes...I think this is the essence of it. In your example of the drug user...it would violate the have no other gods before me...idolatry...and possibly violate the thou shalt not murder.....
In the NT 1cor 6:12 comes to mind with this same law/principle, or law /word
In your poll you also list the verses from romans 13;
Do you see under the heading of loving your neighbor....Paul lists the other commandments and then uses this phrase-
sort of a catch all...
In the Ot it goes into great detail as to leave no stone unturned.....
And yet Jesus in the sermon on the mount even showed,taught and clarified the right use of the law ...even our thoughts....not just actions.
Many think those verses teach otherwise....but it is no so....
The verses you offered were speaking of ceremonial laws... not the decalogue.
You might find this helpful;
http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/sabbath-rest/
Old Union Brother
New Member
I believe making light of the scriptures is sin....It maybe how you interpert faith:
To quote all of Romans 14:22-23
Isn't faith in these scriptures the reliance upon Christ for salvation? If you do not rely on Christ, then it is sin.
preacher4truth
Active Member
Absolutely. Good call on alcott. :thumbsup:
glfredrick
New Member
You forgot the MAIN sin that we are all born with -- separation from God.
I went with the simple approach. I go with the two that Christ gave and His words never fail us. Keeps me out of trouble and in fellowship when I obey them. Wish it was always easy,but it can be a moment by moment trial. Nice commentary here.....
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
Matthew 22:34-40" An interpreter of the law asked our Lord a question, to try, not so much his knowledge, as his judgment. The love of God is the first and great commandment, and the sum of all the commands of the first table. Our love of God must be sincere, not in word and tongue only. All our love is too little to bestow upon him, therefore all the powers of the soul must be engaged for him, and carried out toward him. To love our neighbour as ourselves, is the second great commandment. There is a self-love which is corrupt, and the root of the greatest sins, and it must be put off and mortified; but there is a self-love which is the rule of the greatest duty: we must have a due concern for the welfare of our own souls and bodies. And we must love our neighbour as truly and sincerely as we love ourselves; in many cases we must deny ourselves for the good of others. By these two commandments let our hearts be formed as by a mould."
Of note is the self love mentioned above............comes from the way God created us. The failure to keep the love pure is sin IMO:love2::love2:
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
Matthew 22:34-40" An interpreter of the law asked our Lord a question, to try, not so much his knowledge, as his judgment. The love of God is the first and great commandment, and the sum of all the commands of the first table. Our love of God must be sincere, not in word and tongue only. All our love is too little to bestow upon him, therefore all the powers of the soul must be engaged for him, and carried out toward him. To love our neighbour as ourselves, is the second great commandment. There is a self-love which is corrupt, and the root of the greatest sins, and it must be put off and mortified; but there is a self-love which is the rule of the greatest duty: we must have a due concern for the welfare of our own souls and bodies. And we must love our neighbour as truly and sincerely as we love ourselves; in many cases we must deny ourselves for the good of others. By these two commandments let our hearts be formed as by a mould."
Of note is the self love mentioned above............comes from the way God created us. The failure to keep the love pure is sin IMO:love2::love2:
Also this from C S Lewis
“You are told to love your neighbour as yourself. How do you love yourself? When I look into my own mind, I find that I do not love myself by thinking myself a dear old chap or having affectionate feelings. I do not think that I love myself because I am particularly good, but just because I am myself and quite apart from my character. I might detest something which I have done. Nevertheless, I do not cease to love myself. In other words, that definite distinction that Christians make between hating sin and loving the sinner is one that you have been making in your own case since you were born. You dislike what you have done, but you don't cease to love yourself. You may even think that you ought to be hanged. You may even think that you ought to go to the Police and own up and be hanged. Love is not affectionate feeling, but a steady wish for the loved person's ultimate good as far as it can be obtained.”
I'm done now..we should be able to identify some sin now anyway. Have a great day y'all!
“You are told to love your neighbour as yourself. How do you love yourself? When I look into my own mind, I find that I do not love myself by thinking myself a dear old chap or having affectionate feelings. I do not think that I love myself because I am particularly good, but just because I am myself and quite apart from my character. I might detest something which I have done. Nevertheless, I do not cease to love myself. In other words, that definite distinction that Christians make between hating sin and loving the sinner is one that you have been making in your own case since you were born. You dislike what you have done, but you don't cease to love yourself. You may even think that you ought to be hanged. You may even think that you ought to go to the Police and own up and be hanged. Love is not affectionate feeling, but a steady wish for the loved person's ultimate good as far as it can be obtained.”
I'm done now..we should be able to identify some sin now anyway. Have a great day y'all!
preacher4truth
Active Member
All of these OT examples of Law, and our breaking them are only there to show us we are born with a sin nature, that we are corrupt from the womb, and incapable of being righteous and holy to the meeting of God's standard.
They're not written in order that we can pick and choose, and decide which ones being broken are "to us" sin, or, to choose which ones we think we have and have not broken, nor to come up with some "theory of sin."
Rather, it is written that we may have a true concept of ourselves, that is, that we are lost and in need of God, totally incapable of coming to Him, while totally dependent upon Him to save. Thus, man has missed the mark, is sinful, bound for destruction, his very nature being sinful and corrupt, which is not dependent nor activated upon mans personal decision to commit an act of sin, for he is already lost within this state at birth. Man sins because he is in a sinful state to begin with. The words and indictment in Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," carries much weight when understood within this truth.
They're not written in order that we can pick and choose, and decide which ones being broken are "to us" sin, or, to choose which ones we think we have and have not broken, nor to come up with some "theory of sin."
Rather, it is written that we may have a true concept of ourselves, that is, that we are lost and in need of God, totally incapable of coming to Him, while totally dependent upon Him to save. Thus, man has missed the mark, is sinful, bound for destruction, his very nature being sinful and corrupt, which is not dependent nor activated upon mans personal decision to commit an act of sin, for he is already lost within this state at birth. Man sins because he is in a sinful state to begin with. The words and indictment in Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," carries much weight when understood within this truth.
:thumbsup:
And :thumbsup: to the rest of the post that I didn't copy and paste.
You just came up with one there.