Why are they sins?

[chris epic]

Something that always bothers me in this Christian/Judao/Islamic idea of certain sins, namely Drink, Sex and physical pleasures.

First of all, numerous "laws" or "comandments" in the book of Leviticus dealt with health issues, cleanliness, etc. (ex. circumcision, kosher foods, sanitary food) as well as holistic living.

Secondly, its a given that drinking, sexual permiscuity, and other physical pleasures could be unhealthy physically, spiritually, and even socially if practiced without moderation.

Thats why monogamy was so important (eventually) because it was believed that the more people you were sexually active with, the more unlcean you were. It was thought that every time you had sex with someone, not only were you physically fused as one flesh, but as one spirit, too. This, today, has evidential psycological support. Not on the spiritual aspect, but emotionally.

It says in the bible that their god commanded that they go 'forth and procreate' (procreate? create? creators? Maybe for another discussion)

Yes, this is beside your point, but God created people in His image: creators. In the context of Genisis, people had to get moving with the whole procreation thing because they had to start populating the earth. It was probably when the population began to grow in heavy excess that monogamy became the marital norm.

It also said that god's very own son turned water (healthy beverage) into wine (unhealthy beverage). It says very clearly that he turned it into wine, not grape juice, very good wine in fact.

Good doesn't imply the amount of alcohol. Because of water conditions in the Middle East, wine was to them as koolaide or soda is to us. Wine back then was consumed my everyone, even children. It wasn't generally high in alcohol: around 2%.

If you look at the human body (created in his own image?) it is designed, more so than all other creatures' on this planet, to experience great pleasures, be it eating a meal, taking time out with friends and family or just a plain good old bonk.

Sure, but not everyone is "responsible" with these freedoms. I've been sober for 5 months now (2 DUIs and countless other mistakes later). I just couldn't have only one drink. And compulsivity doesn't just come in the form of substance abuse. It can be through work (the sabbath), sex (monogamy, marriage), pride, fear, murder, adultary. All of these are addressed in the bible. They are warned against, comanded against, and responded to.

I guess you could say "sin" comes from self-anarchy, and God's law addresses that anarchy with theocrasy.

The bible demands we have sex, we are built for pleasure, god's own son makes wine and his very last beverage before dieing was indeed wine. He even requested his follows to drink it with him and to remember him by that exact beverage.

Well, in the bible, it never says Jesus drink the wine, but even if he did that doesn't mean he was a fall-down drunk, standing out in the street, exposing himself and harassing women (oh, wait, that was Rasputin.)

Why? I mean really, why are christians so against these things?

some are, some aren't. A Catholic friend of mine drinks with his seminarian brothers, some smoke. I know other Christians that drink, they just don't have a "problem" with it. They can have one drink for the night and be good to go. Others can't, or they feel being drunk seperates them from God.

It also talks about drinking the "new wine" in the bible- that is, undoubtably the Spirit of God.

We won't even go into all the commands that he gave his followers that they so blantently ignore.

Yeah, there are a ton of hypocrites out there. There are a ton of hypocrites that aren't Christian. And even parents as a general rule say "Do as I say, not as I do." We mean well, but at the end of the day, we falter.

 

[themyst]

First of all, numerous "laws" or "comandments" in the book of Leviticus dealt with health issues, cleanliness, etc. (ex. circumcision, kosher foods, sanitary food) as well as holistic living.

Secondly, its a given that drinking, sexual permiscuity, and other physical pleasures could be unhealthy physically, spiritually, and even socially if practiced without moderation.

And we can not decide that for ourselves?

Thats why monogamy was so important (eventually) because it was believed that the more people you were sexually active with, the more unlcean you were. It was thought that every time you had sex with someone, not only were you physically fused as one flesh, but as one spirit, too. This, today, has evidential psycological support. Not on the spiritual aspect, but emotionally.

and yet there are many people who practice safe, responsible sex with multiple partners. If I had three sexual partners and we were faithful to each other, is that less safe?

Yes, this is beside your point, but God created people in His image: creators. In the context of Genisis, people had to get moving with the whole procreation thing because they had to start populating the earth. It was probably when the population began to grow in heavy excess that monogamy became the marital norm.

Of course this is only true if you believe the earth is only 6000 years old and that god created us from sand.

Good doesn't imply the amount of alcohol. Because of water conditions in the Middle East, wine was to them as koolaide or soda is to us. Wine back then was consumed my everyone, even children. It wasn't generally high in alcohol: around 2%.

Sure, but not everyone is "responsible" with these freedoms. I've been sober for 5 months now (2 DUIs and countless other mistakes later). I just couldn't have only one drink. And compulsivity doesn't just come in the form of substance abuse. It can be through work (the sabbath), sex (monogamy, marriage), pride, fear, murder, adultary. All of these are addressed in the bible. They are warned against, comanded against, and responded to.

Congratulations.

But the question remains, if a small minority can not control their own selves, then all must suffer because of the will of god?

I guess you could say "sin" comes from self-anarchy, and God's law addresses that anarchy with theocrasy.

Well, in the bible, it never says Jesus drink the wine, but even if he did that doesn't mean he was a fall-down drunk, standing out in the street, exposing himself and harassing women (oh, wait, that was Rasputin.)

At the last supper he did.

some are, some aren't. A Catholic friend of mine drinks with his seminarian brothers, some smoke. I know other Christians that drink, they just don't have a "problem" with it. They can have one drink for the night and be good to go. Others can't, or they feel being drunk seperates them from God.

It also talks about drinking the "new wine" in the bible- that is, undoubtably the Spirit of God.

Yeah, there are a ton of hypocrites out there. There are a ton of hypocrites that aren't Christian. And even parents as a general rule say "Do as I say, not as I do." We mean well, but at the end of the day, we falter.

This is the main problem, there are parts in the bible that says certain things are good and yet the follows say it is bad, and there are things that the bible says are bad and its follows say such is good.

and it is these wrong ideals that they try and force on the rest of us. I can make up my own mind. I can decide my own life and how I wish to live it.

 

[chris epic]

And we can not decide that for ourselves?

As over simplified as that question is, you also call into question the necessity of modern secular law.

and yet there are many people who practice safe, responsible sex with multiple partners. If I had three sexual partners and we were faithful to each other, is that less safe?

sure, if one of those partners didn't have an STD.

Of course this is only true if you believe the earth is only 6000 years old and that god created us from sand.

Buddy, didn't I just say "in the context of [the book of] Genisis

Congratulations.

Dont patronize me.

But the question remains, if a small minority can not control their own selves, then all must suffer because of the will of god?

If a small minority break the law, then all must be subject to the same resrictions of freedom? Don't you understand that the Jewish political system back then was a theocrasy??? The same principal stands for any rule of law, order, or government. Their laws were coupled spiritually and socially- but the pincipal remains simplistically the same: to regulate, maintain order, and protect- from others and ourselves.

At the last supper he did.

show me the scripture in the bible that states that Jesus consumed wine.

This is the main problem, there are parts in the bible that says certain things are good and yet the follow[er]s say it is bad, and there are things that the bible says are bad and its follow[er]s say such is good.

So you are saying that the main problem is that people don't practice what they preach. Well...yeah! You think that inconsistency only exists in religious practice??? What are you debating, that people aren't perfect? Congratulations.

and it is these wrong ideals that they try and force on the rest of us.

Okay, so that irritates you. I can understand that. You dont have to listen to them, or give in, they aren't prohibiting you from living your life the way you want to. They're not keeping you from making your own choices. I don't care how many Christian fundamentalists are in politics or are lobbiests, we're never going to have a theocrasy in America so I'm not too sure what you're worried about.

 

[skeptifem]

And most sins are a choice, all choices have consequences, and the consequence of sin is always bad.

even if someone points out someone who lives in all kinds of sin w/o negetive consequences you are just going to say that they will end up in hell.

 

[themyst]

Dont patronize me.

I was not. I have a very good friend who has just reach her 1 year, I know the struggle that it takes to get you from one day to the next.

Show me the scripture in the bible that states that Jesus consumed wine.

I just rechecked and it says in the last supper he drank from the cup never what was in it, you may be right here.

 

[themyst]

Don't you understand that the Jewish political system back then was a theocrasy???

But today it is not ..... or is it?

 

[chris epic]

I was not. I have a very good friend who has just reach her 1 year, I know the struggle that it takes to get you from one day to the next.

I apologize, its hard to tell when we don't have voices and body language to put to the words.

 

[chris epic]

But today it is not ..... or is it?

Israel, no. Iran? Kinda-sorta. A Theocrasy implies that God rules and his conduit is the Priest. The Holy Roman Empire, yes. America? Some would wish.

There is no doubt in my mind that many Conservative Republican politicians have a theocratic agenda.

I wouldn't want to live in a theocrasy, but I wouldn't mind [American] culture reflecting a little more moral conviction. But of coarse we slip down the slope of "which morals" and "whose morals."

I also don't think Christian morality should mix with secular morality (although American secular moralty is based on Christian morality) when it comes to things like not giving homosexuals equal rights.

But I wouldn't mind things like "Love one another" to shine through a little more in his country: the government, politics, society. Jesus was right on with that commandment.

 

[chris epic]

even if someone points out someone who lives in all kinds of sin w/o negetive consequences you are just going to say that they will end up in hell.

Using the terminology, I dont see where "sin" is never followed by w/o negetive conseqences?

 

[themyst]

But of coarse we slip down the slope of "which morals" and "whose morals."

That is my greatest fear.

But I wouldn't mind things like "Love one another" to shine through a little more in his country: the government, politics, society. Jesus was right on with that commandment.

The problem with Love one another is that you are still depending you love and values on others.

If there ever was such a person as Jesus and if said such person ever gave a commandment, I have a hypothesis that it may actually only have been "LOVE" the extra bits were again tacked on by over over eager followers.

 

[themyst]

I apologize, its hard to tell when we don't have voices and body language to put to the words.

Of course, this is the Internet and some things are not easy to interpreted. Below is an extract from my blog ...


7. Remember, this is a text only version of my mind, you can not see my face nor hear the inflection of my voice.

 

[chris epic]

Or on a different note, what precisely are the bad consequences of my working on the sabbath?

If you work day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 every week, you over work yourself, neglect your family, etc... If you work day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and take day seven off, you get rest and more time with your family.

seven
seben
sabado
seba
Sabbath

 

[chris epic]

Depending on who you ask, homosexuality.

Depending on the homosexual

 

[pgwenthold]

If you work day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 every week, you over work yourself,

But the commandment is NOT against working on the sabbath "every week."

It is against working the sabbath, ever.

I have noticed this throughout your comments. You always add conditions that are not part of the initial situation.


Consider

its a given that drinking, sexual permiscuity, and other physical pleasures could be unhealthy physically, spiritually, and even socially if practiced without moderation.

Who said anything about "without moderation"? Yes, I agree that excessive masturbation could cause social issues (although probably not physical problems). But I don't know any religious statutes that are only against _excessive_ masturbation, or excessive sexual promiscuity. Those who consider "thou shalt not commit adultery" to be an edict against sexual promiscuity don't consider it to be ok "in moderation," but against ANY sexual promiscuity, regardless of whether or not it is excessive.

Too much of anything, of course, can be harmful. Drink too much water and you can die from water toxicity. So, why isn't drinking water a sin?

Or, if you want an elective activity, how about eating chocolate? Eating too much chocolate will also be harmful, and no one has to eat chocolate. Thus, eating chocolate is an activity done solely for pleasure that can be harmful if done without moderation.

How is that any different from masturbation or protected, promiscuous sex? Why is one a sin and the other is not?

 

[chris epic]

The problem with Love one another is that you are still depending you love and values on others.

I dont see anything wrong with that value, and I don't see it being far from universal in need, want, or goal

If there ever was such a person as Jesus and if said such person ever gave a commandment, I have a hypothesis that it may actually only have been "LOVE" the extra bits were again tacked on by over over eager followers.

Absolutely, good point!

From the bible:

"God is love"

"In the begining...the Word was God"

Yes, of coarse, it should all be love. Then people got all tripped up in words. Another scripture I likeby St Paul in 1 Corinthians 4:20 (hehe) "For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power." But then he goes into some Jerry Springer drama after that.

Anyway, I'm getting off topic, but what I get burned about it how Christians et so wrapped up in the words in a book, they completely miss the point entirely and would rather argue about interpretation (which brings death: Ireland, Protestants, and Catholics) rather than concentrating on the real meat and potatoes (love and life)

 

[chris epic]

But the commandment is NOT against working on the sabbath "every week."

It is against working the sabbath, ever.

I'm lost. How is "dont work on the sabbath every week" different from "dont work it ever?" If you go every week without working the sabbath, you dont EVER work it.

I have noticed this throughout your comments. You always add conditions that are not part of the initial situation.

I didn't "add" squat, I responded to the question of the possible development of Hebraic law and how it was influenced by health and social issues current with the time, and even relavent today.

Who said anything about "without moderation"?

I couldhave broken that up a bit. Looking at it again, I shouldn't have lumped promiscuity with moderation. Or murder, or adultry- I meant moderation with things like drinking alcohol.

Yes, I agree that excessive masturbation could cause social issues (although probably not physical problems)

rug burns.

Drink too much water and you can die from water toxicity.

Well I guess they didn't have a whole lot of water junkies back then.

So, why isn't drinking water a sin?

don't be silly

Or, if you want an elective activity, how about eating chocolate? Eating too much chocolate will also be harmful, and no one has to eat chocolate. Thus, eating chocolate is an activity done solely for pleasure that can be harmful if done without moderation.

How is that any different from masturbation or protected, promiscuous sex? Why is one a sin and the other is not?

Like i said before, Moses issued these comandments that were relavent to the time and place. I dont think they had chocolate either, so I'm sure they're gonna miss some stuff that are current issues today. They didn't have meth back then either, so its okay to do meth now? No, but its not okay to abuse your "temple," so that covers the chocolate gluttons too.

 

[skeptifem]

Using the terminology, I dont see where "sin" is never followed by w/o negetive conseqences?

ok, how does masturbating hurt anyone?

 

[Tony]

ok, how does masturbating hurt anyone?

It makes the baby jesus cry.

 

[clarsct]

*shrug* If people want to get more mileage out of their vices by attaching guilt to them, then more power to them...I guess.

Even in the Bible, monogamy wasn't always the case. In fact, historically, the case was one man with many wives. Marriage for love is a modern concept. Marriage was a contract that melded families, and secured and consolidated power and wealth. This whole 'one man, one woman' stuff is pretty recent.


Don't any of you watch that excellent, and unmentionable(here, anyways), series put on by Penn and Teller on Showtime?


Truth is, people sin all the time with no negative consequences. If the consequences were so dire, people wouldn't do it. That would be called negative reinforcement.

 

[pgwenthold]

I'm lost. How is "dont work on the sabbath every week" different from "dont work it ever?" If you go every week without working the sabbath, you dont EVER work it.

Are you serious?

Let me explain: there are 52 weeks a year. Thus, if I am "working on the sabbath every week" that means that I would be working on the sabbath 52 times a year.

"Don't work it ever" means that I would be working on the sabbath 0 times a year.

Now, if I work on the sabbath 5 times a year, that means I would NOT be working on the sabbath every week, but I would also be failing the "don't work it ever."

You said that working on the sabbath every week would cause problems. However, even if I grant that is true (which I don't), then there is still no reason to insist that you NEVER work on the sabbath.

Like i said before, Moses issued these comandments that were relavent to the time and place. I dont think they had chocolate either, so I'm sure they're gonna miss some stuff that are current issues today. They didn't have meth back then either, so its okay to do meth now? No, but its not okay to abuse your "temple," so that covers the chocolate gluttons too.

You still don't get it.

Commandments against promiscuity or adultery are generally NOT interpreted as "don't to it to excess." They are "don't do it, period."

Your explanation is that if carried out to excess, then they will cause problems. But that does not explain why they are sins when carried out in moderation. Just like chocolate. If gluttony is a sin, then sure, excessive chocolate or whatever can be harmful. But that means that the sin is GLUTTONY, not the individual action. Too much of anything can be harmful. But then why are moderate amounts of some things sins, but not others?