Tonight was week 2 of the Alpha course I'm doing and as one person shared how they felt it was difficult to get over the idea that if they had done one thing wrong that they were just as bad as a mass murderer, I started thinking that's actually not only a hard thing to believe but perhaps a pretty silly thing to ask Xns to believe. This attitude we project onto God that, a small sin of someone trying to be good is as bad as all the sins of the world’s worst mass murderer is an attitude we wouldn't accept from our friends or our legal system. So it would be understandable why many wouldn’t accept it from God. I wondered if this might be a better way of looking at it...
Sin is evidence of separation (or disconnection) from God.
This definition would mean that the average try to be nice to everyone kind of person isn't "just as bad" as a mass murderer. It just means that perhaps they've got less evidence that they are not connected with God.
Just a thought.
Sin is evidence of separation (or disconnection) from God.
This definition would mean that the average try to be nice to everyone kind of person isn't "just as bad" as a mass murderer. It just means that perhaps they've got less evidence that they are not connected with God.
Just a thought.
7 comments:
Hey from a random blog follower of yours,
I have been reading Miroslav Volf's 'Exclusion and Embrace' recently - look it up on Amazon.
He argues (pp 82, 83 paraphrase):
Quote.
From 'All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God' we have 'Solidarity in Sin' with every other. This is disturbing as it seems to erase distinctions and unite precisely where the differences matter the most - where dignity is denied, justice is trampled underfoot, and blood is spilled. Solidarity in Sin seems to imply the 'Equality of Sins', and the equality of sins lets the perperatrators off the hook. The world of equal sins is a world designed by the perpertrators. The logic is simple: if all sins are equal, then the action of the perpetrator is no worse than the reaction of the victim; all are perpetrators and all are victims, all are equally evil - and the perpertrators can walk away from the crime scene free to repeat the deed with impunity. But does 'Solidarity in sin' imply 'equality of sins'?
He goes on to argue:
From 'All are sinners' it does not follow that 'all sins are equal'. The aggressors destruction of a village and the refugees looting of a truck and thereby hurting their fellow refugees are equally sin, but they are not equal sins; the rapists violation and the woman's hatred are equally sin, but they are manifestly not equal sins. The equality of sin dissolves all concrete sins in an ocean of undifferentiated sinfulness. This is precisely what the prophets and Jesus did no do. Their judgements were not general but specific; they did not condemn everyone and anyone, but the mighty and the ruthless who oppress the weak and crush the needy.
Unquote.
I found this a refreshing reading of sin. I realised that I don't actually believe all sins are equal and I would hope to never the deny the justice that someone needs by dissolving the injustice done against them by saying it is the same as their own sin.
Anyway i hope it adds into your own thoughts and explorations.
Yep youre right it sounds crazy. but thats religion for you.
Hello anonymous,
Thanks for the quote! I will add it to my explorations.
Hello James,
I don't mind religion being crazy just as long as it has it's internal logic.
Actually 1 John 3:4 says sin is transgression of the law. Gods moral law the 10 commandments
if we have ever lied we are a liar
if we have stolen anything irrespective of it's value we are a thief. We do these things in spite of the light that God has given to every man [the conscience]
While some sins may bring a greater degree of condemnation, any sin is an infinite offence against an infinitely holy creator therefore the punishment is infinite!
Thanks for the comment Anonymous.
So does that mean that there was no sin before the 10 commandments?
And what about the rest of the Hebrew law?
If we're strictly going by the 10 commandments isn't lying ok as long as it doesn't involve "bearing false witness against your neighbour."?
I assume that you are ok with homosexuality as that is not mentioned in the 10 commandments (except of course if you are a lesbian and you are coveting your neighbours wife).
Also what is your basis for any sin resulting in infinite punishment?
And finally 1 John 3:4 actually says "Everyone who commits sin is guilty of lawlessness; sin is lawlessness." and doesn't mention the 10 commandments.
I know this looks like I'm having a go. Well I am but in a jovial kind of way. I think you've said some things many Xns often say but they doesn't come up well after a little bit of scrutiny.
'Tonight was week 2 of the Alpha course I'm doing and as one person shared how they felt it was difficult to get over the idea that if they had done one thing wrong that they were just as bad as a mass murderer...'
That view is hardly Christianity.
Jesus claimed that if you were angry with somebody that was the same as murder.
Now I think I have free will, and can exercise a free choice whether or not to act upon that hatred.
Let me see if I understand Christianity correctly.
If we are tempted by something, eg a temptation to adultery, then we are sinners if we use our free will to choose evil.
But if we use our free will to choose good, then we are still sinners, because Jesus saw us look at a woman lustfully.
Steven, Thanks for the comment but I have no idea what you are trying to say. It sounds like you are contradicting yourself.
Post a Comment