What a strange quote.

Perhaps then we should worship john? That is who you quoted then is it
not.

I am glad sir that you find comfort in your book.

I shall continue to find comfort in that which is.

and in response to your quote...

IAM

Mail call.

Spider, thanks for your patience. I see now, after your responce, the
I missed a part of your conversation with Abra, I did not realize that
it was only Jesus that could pay for our sins, I took it to mean that
"somebody" or anybody had to.

I'll have to re-read the rest tomorrow, too late to think much more
tonight - oh dang, it is tomorrow - shoot!

AB wrote:
“Then I have not sinned. As I have always given myself to the will of
god.”

Exactly. And I feel the same way.

If Jesus died for my sins he died in vain.

Spider wrote:
“If your question is "Why does God require repentance?", my answer would
be that if you feel no guilt for your actions, why should you be
forgiven? There is no reason for God to forgive you, if you don't think
you need and don't want to be forgiven.”

Have you ever considered the possibilty that if a person feels no guilt
for their actions perhaps they haven’t done anything to feel guilty
about?

You see, the bible teaches that all men are born into sin, and that all
men are sinners.

Well, since I don’t feel that I am a sinner I see this as a blatant lie
in the bible. It’s simply incorrect. All men are not sinners. I'm
living proof! What more proof do I need?

This is why I must conclude that this book was written by men who were
trying to control the masses rather than havng been written by a loving
God who would know better than to say such an absurd thing.

I mean, which scenario is more compelling from a rational point of view?

To believe that men wrote the bible to control the masses?

Or to believe that a God actually proclaims that all his children are
sinners?

The first scenario seems to me to be a much more rational explanation.
Especially for me since I do not feel like I am a sinner.

I can see where guilt-ridden people might fall for the second
explanation as being rational simply because, from there point of view,
it may very well be possible that all men are sinners just like they
are.

But to a person who doesn’t feel that they are a sinner it makes
absolutely not sense at all.

Like I say, if Jesus died for my sins it was a terrible shame because it
was a totally unnecessary act.

The Christian religion seems to be working under the assumption that
every human being is a sinner.

There’s no way I’m going to buy into a religion that is founded on such
an absurd principle.

It must have been a book that was written by male-chauvinist men to make
women feel inferior and to control the masses by making them all believe
that they are guilty and in need of repentance.

Now that scenario makes perfect sense.

I haven't read everything and perhaps I should have, although I cannot
say how sin originates. It had to have existed before it was brought
onto man. But I can tell you that there is proof of original sin from a
religious aspect. Notice how you can teach kids to do good, but they
usually do bad without being taught. This is a perfect example of
original or natural sin. Greed, lust and all that other good stuff.


To go back to the opening question. Eve disobeyed God, Adam stood by
and watched her commit, and also ate. People like to think Adam wasn't
there, but if you read, he was right there. Did nothing, and a man is
responsible for his household and his wife... etc..

Hope this helps.

How innocent can a person be?

When I post my thoughts on religion I may sound like I’m attacking a
religion. But in truth I’m actually just trying to shove it aside so
that people can see the truth that its presence obscures.

However, I do this in total innocence in the sense that I am only
thinking of the beautiful sinless people that I would like to share this
enlightenment with.

I never really think in terms of the genuinely guilty people. I simply
don’t think in terms of people who purposefully and knowingly do bad
things because that’s outside the scope of my own personal life’s
experience.

So my intent to push a sin-based religion out of the way is solely for
the sake of innocent people.

To anyone out who actually enjoys doing nasty things and has a great
temptation to do them, please disregard my posts! There is absolutely
no basis for any of my arguments. I am totally wrong!

Christianity is the ONLY TRUE RELIGION and God sent his only begotten
son to die on a cross for YOUR sins, but in order for you to benefit
from his sacrifice you must STOP your sinful behavior right now and
accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. Then God will forgive you
for your past sins and he will come into your heart and help you to
become a nice person.

Amen brother! May the Lord Bless you!

For AdventureBegins and Abracadabra

I wanted to explain these scriptures in response to what both of you
have posted.

===========================================================
Romans 2:15
in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their
conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or
else defending them,

Everyone is born with a conscience, which is God's law written onto your
heart. So you don't have to read the Bible or agree with the Bible to
already know the laws.
===========================================================
Romans 3:20
because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight;
for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.

Even if you were to never break a single commandment (which is
impossible), you would still not be found guilty. The reason for this
is that you can't help but violate the spirit of the law on which you
will be judged.
===========================================================

Romans 7:7
What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the
contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for
I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "YOU
SHALL NOT COVET."

The Law is the school master, which teaches us that we are incapable of
living up to God's standard. Eventually, many people will make a
choice. Some choose to follow Jesus and be forgiven for their sins.
Some choose to harden their hearts and convince themselves that they are
sinless. Both of you have taken the second of these two options.
===========================================================

You both know full well that you have lied, lusted, hated, stolen (no
matter how little), taken the name of the Lord in vain and have focused
your life around something, rather than God. Perhaps you have denied
your conscience so long that you no longer feel it's sting, but I doubt
that. You can claim that you don't believe in God or the Bible, but to
claim that you don't feel the goad of your conscience is not believable
in the least. Being that I am recently saved, I know that before I was
saved, I felt guilt when I sinned. I don't think either of you is less
of a human than I am, so you must have experianced guilt.

See you all missed the boat on original sin anyway. The sin was God's in
the first place. Any being to create two members of the same species
that think so differently and then make them biologically dependent for
the survival of the species has a warped sence of humor that surpasses
sinful....I believe penance is in order.

All this crap about Eve...that was just a ruse to divert
attention....yet another sin

AdventureBegins wrote:
What a strange quote.

Perhaps then we should worship john? That is who you quoted then is it
not.
==============================================================
SpiderCMB replied:

I quoted John, quoting Jesus. John was inspired by God to write those
words, so they accurately reflect the truth.
==============================================================
AdventureBegins wrote:

I am glad sir that you find comfort in your book.

I shall continue to find comfort in that which is.

and in response to your quote...

IAM
==============================================================
SpiderCMB replied:

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one
comes to the Father but through Me.

Jellybean wrote:
“All this crap about Eve...that was just a ruse to divert
attention....yet another sin”

You got him pegged sister!

MAYBE!!! ... we are nothing other than 'meaning making machines'!

And meaning gains power with consensus. The larger the group of people
whom believe in a particular meaning, the more 'truish' or 'common sense
like' does it become for 'most'! No more need to think it through for
ourselves it seems. No effort required. Just adopt the common sense
presented by many others and argue blindly that,
'That is what it is, because that is what it is!!!'

Meaning plays funny tricks on people. To create 'new' meaning is
extraordinary! It requires true questioning of the existing order, it
requires true thinking, and it requires courage and strenght to face the
'common sense' non-thinking and non-questioning blind believing 'crowd'.

But we would have nothing to talk about, if it weren't for that
courageous and 'heroïc' feat of standing in 'not knowing' of the 'very
few' throughout human history whom have dared standing up against the
'accepted' dogma and orthodoxy: questioning, truly, honestly, sincerely.
Questioning the meaning WE, human beings have created thus far, and
asking ourselves earnestly, whether that meaning is still 'meaningfull'
today. That is our only job IMO.

To keep thoughtlessly resassing the meaning of 2000 years ago is IMO the
only sin we commit.

The sin of not 'thinking' for ourselves: this ability to think and to
question what surrounds us, is the only phenomenon that distinguishes
human kind from other primates.

It may be that our only 'duty', is to think for ourselves.

Sin by the way, putting aside 'personal' meaning, individuals might
give it, is simply 'COMMITTING A FAULT'. And the fault we might commit,
the only sin, might very well be not to honor the whole and thinking
human being we might be. Committing a simple fault, one moment at a time
against that simple duty to honor ourselves and others as whole.

As 'mikeM' mentionned: being present to GOD within us, however we may
define 'god' is the state of grace.
The opposite, not honoring our true 'thinking' nature, would the
essence of committing a sin against ourself.

Committing the fault of not honoring that WE: each one of us, and all of
us together, are whole: nothing missing and nothing to be added.

Not honoring that, again, would be committing this fault (sin) of
forgetting the presence of god, or of forgetting the known and unknown
'wholeness' of the universe (or creation) momentarily.

This fault (sin) by the way, is void of all the guilt ridden, and
manipulative meaning the 'church of old', and the church today still
succeeds in imposing.

Again, I think 'mikeM' coined very well without all the heavy 'meaning'
and baggage that might have made sense 2000 years ago.

Spider wrote:
“I don't think either of you is less of a human than I am, so you must
have experienced guilt.”

A person can indeed experience guilt without having sinned. I often
have feelings of guilt that are not related to what I would consider to
be ‘sin’.

For example, if I do something unintentionally to hurt the feelings of
another person I feel guilty about that. I suppose it’s not really the
same kind of guilt that a person would feel if they intentionally hurt
someone on purpose. But it’s guilt just the same. But not the kind of
guilt that requires repentance.

After all, if you did not intend to do the thing that you feel guilty
about why should you be required to repent? You didn’t do it on
purpose.

Spider wrote:
“You both know full well that you have lied, lusted, hated, stolen (no
matter how little), taken the name of the Lord in vain and have focused
your life around something, rather than God”

I don’t define sin the same way that you do. To me sin is an
intentional act to do something wrong. Sin is all about intent.

For example, if I see a sexy woman and I become sexually aroused in her
presence, have I committed the sin of lust? No not at all. It’s not a
sin to be the biological creature that I am and have natural sexual
feelings toward members of the opposite sex. In order for lust to have
been a sin, I would need to actually act on that lust in an intentional
way that was improper.

I also don’t believe that I have every hated anyone in my entirely life.
I’ve been angry with people and there are people I would prefer not to
be around. But do I hate anyone? No I can’t think of a single solitary
person that I have ever hated. Even someone like Hitler has my
sympathy, not my hatred. I tend to feel sorry for people rather than to
hate them. I can honestly say that don’t hate anyone.

I could explain away all of the other 'sins' that you have suggested I
might be guilty of in a similar fashion? Well, to me sin is all about
intention. I have absolutely no evil intentions and therefore I am
without sin.

You just have a differnet view of things than I do which is fine.

I have absolutely no desire to change your views. Nor do I care whether
you personally believe that I can or cannot be without sin.

I have no interest in any religion that is so hard-up to make a big deal
about sin and salvation that it as makes it impossible for anyone to be
without sin.

You keep quoting the bible like as if it is the word of God. But to me
it’s just the words of men. I don’t buy into those words as having any
divine merit.

Since I paraphrased 'mikeM' piece very liberally, I thought I would
re-post his very insightfull share.

It feels to me, like the kind of 'thinking' and freedom of thought that
so often appears to be lacking from Church and religious dogma. For
some reason, 'mike's' message seems to have gone unnoticed in this
post!!! I thought you might all appreciate reviewing it.


************************************************************
Here are my thoughts on Original Sin. It exists, but is not 'bad'.

Sin is the absence of God. Where God "isnt" there is "sin". This is not
a bad thing. Its a simple statement of fact. God doesnt 'physically'
exist in the 'world', and so we can say this 'shadow' is simply 'sin'.
Its by design, its a limitation, its reality. So be it.
*************************************************************

Isn't that great!!! No judgement. No guilt. Just the free choice,
moment by moment, to be conscious and responsible to life, to be
conscious of God whole presence.

Abracadabra Wrote:

A person can indeed experience guilt without having sinned. I often have
feelings of guilt that are not related to what I would consider to be
‘sin’.

For example, if I do something unintentionally to hurt the feelings of
another person I feel guilty about that. I suppose it’s not really the
same kind of guilt that a person would feel if they intentionally hurt
someone on purpose. But it’s guilt just the same. But not the kind of
guilt that requires repentance.

After all, if you did not intend to do the thing that you feel guilty
about why should you be required to repent? You didn’t do it on purpose.

========================================================
SpiderCMB Replied:

Sin is disobeidience to God's will. If you hurt someone, even
unintentionally, it is God's will that you should make amends with that
person. We know it is God's will, because we feel guilty.
========================================================
Abracadabra Wrote:

I don’t define sin the same way that you do. To me sin is an
intentional act to do something wrong. Sin is all about intent.

For example, if I see a sexy woman and I become sexually aroused in her
presence, have I committed the sin of lust? No not at all. It’s not a
sin to be the biological creature that I am and have natural sexual
feelings toward members of the opposite sex. In order for lust to have
been a sin, I would need to actually act on that lust in an intentional
way that was improper.
========================================================
SpiderCMB Replied:

You have a very interesting definition of "Lust". Lust is traditionally
defined as "Intense or unrestrained sexual craving." There is no
mention of action, the simple desire to commit sin is a sin.

========================================================
Abracadabra Wrote:

I also don’t believe that I have every hated anyone in my entirely life.
I’ve been angry with people and there are people I would prefer not to
be around. But do I hate anyone? No I can’t think of a single solitary
person that I have ever hated. Even someone like Hitler has my sympathy,
not my hatred. I tend to feel sorry for people rather than to hate them.
I can honestly say that don’t hate anyone.

========================================================
SpiderCMB Replied:

That's wonderful, I wish I could say the same.

========================================================
Abracadabra Wrote:

I could explain away all of the other 'sins' that you have suggested I
might be guilty of in a similar fashion? Well, to me sin is all about
intention. I have absolutely no evil intentions and therefore I am
without sin.

========================================================
SpiderCMB Replied:

That is a problem. You feel guilt, but you ignore it. You know the
laws, but you assume your innocence. You have walled off your heart and
given yourself excuses for behavior that God has said is unacceptable.
Your feelings of guilt, regardless of if you feel they are justified or
not, are God's way of calling you to repentance. God's laws are meant
to break you. You are supposed to be brought to the realization that
you will always fail to keep the law, which is why you need a savior.
You have found a way to exempt yourself, in your mind, from God's law.
Now ask yourself if God exists and there is eternal repercussions for
our actions, do you think God will accept the "to me sin is all about
intention" line? Using your example, a beautiful woman walks into the
room with you. You become sexually aroused. If she offered you a night
of wild sex, would you say no? Your intent just went out the window,
because sexual arousal IS intent, all you are missing is opportunity.

Spider dude you have no idea.

You quote a man who quote's a man...

A copy of a copy is allways degraded.

I will say this again so that you may understand.

I need no man to stand between me and god. Such a concept is outdated
and unnecessary. Why? Because I have said so. My perception IS my
reality because all that I see, feel, hear, taste, smell, and know comes
to me at the center of my being. god is present at all times in my
world. He is my world.

I need no book of words bound in the skin of an animal or the bark of a
tree to teach me. Gods lessons are in everything.

The man you name as christ was a man. Born of a woman. He is not god
no matter what his disciples claimed.

I will never quote that book you quote from as if it is god, will of god
(as it pertains to me) is written in my heart and my soul belongs to him
in a way yours will not as long as you place ANYONE between you and god.

If you had a lamp in a moonless night would you shroud it when you set
out upon a journey. Or would you let its light shine unfettered so you
may see your path clearly.

Spider,

If you desire to believe in the Bible then you should. If it serves
you well, this is a good thing. I have no desire to turn you away from
it personally. That’s not my intent at all. My personal beliefs are
totally unimportant for you. Your beliefs are what is important for you.

You said earlier that you have recently been saved. And this is a good
thing. God will indeed come into your life and fill you with love and
compassion. This has been an established fact that many saved
Christians have shown to be true over the ages.

No one on this forum is intentionally questioning your personal faith.
That’s not the point of these discussions. You are very correct to look
up the words of God in the Bible in response to any questions of faith.
And you appear to be very good at that. This is a good thing.

Don’t let heathens like myself and others dissuade you in your own
personal journey. That is not the purpose of these forums. Nor is that
the intent of anyone here.

Psalms 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain
thing?

IMO, there is no such thing as a "sinless" person, except perhaps to
people who are sociopaths and the like, those who have no moral
conscience.

Sin originated when Adam and Even disobeyed God. But I don't believe
we're paying for their sins. God gave us all free will and we choose to
sin (commit a wrongdoing) or not to sin.

Even most atheists (I presume) have a moral conscience, do they not?

ALL have sinned and come short of the Glory of God...meaning, basically,
that "no one is perfect."

I take the words of the Bible as fact. Soley because it has shown
itself to me, in what was my future and is now my present. I have only
been involved with reading the Bible the last 7 or 8 years. Picking and
choosing and researching and doing it again, over and over. My
understanding changes every single time I read it.

I have found that every disruption of the earth, people, and their
behaviors, not to mention tragedies, wars, world leaders. The condition
of life forces and all the surrounds us is there.

I will not try and force my beliefs on anyone at anytime. It wasn't
forced on me, and I am happier than I have ever been.

Have I sinned?? Hell yeah, I've sinned. Many many times, more than I
could ever count. I know that my conscience is "the spirit of the Lord"
within me setting me straight.

As far as me hurting anyone unententionally...yes, I owe that person an
apology as if I had done it on purpose.

I have also felt guilty when there wasn't a reason for me to feel that
way. I have done that since I was a child. I have no explaination for
that. But, I must say, that it has caused some to think that it was
proof enough of my guilt.

As for the laws of the Bible, or the word of God...and not feeling the
need to believe in it, because it is the words of mere men. Well then,
in that instance: why would we be expected to obey present day laws? I
mean, they are written by simple men.

Why should we even have marriage vows? They are written by men. Why
should we have drivers licenses? They are written by men. Any contract;
why have them? Men again.

By saying that the Bible is not good because it was supposedly written
by men at the voice of another man (Jesus)(and parts by God)for
historical value and life rules, is saying that man cannot be trusted to
tell the truth. Then why do we have all these books about history? We
can't trust them. Man wrote then at the insistance of man, and by the
accounts of simple men.

It's funny to me that we can read history books about The land run,
Jesse James and Bonnie and Clyde and Queens and Kings of a thousand
years ago or even less, and see them as fact. Not to mention we are
taught some of these things in school that are written by man. The Rise
and fall of the Roman Empire, Dinasaurs, Early man. The history goes on
and on.

So, yes...My life is guided by my choice to believe in a book that has
lessoned my bad behaviors and taught me kinder and more enthusiastic
life values.

As long as people that have their own beliefs and values in place that
are doing good and live life as a good thing without harm to others. I
will choose to think that there is a spiritual reason.

It is pleasing to see this thread be considerate and wholesome.

Kat

OK, let's try again.

Not honoring being whole: for human beings to be whole there must be
some humble and honest thinking, and questioning going on. That
thinking neo-cortex, giving us a picture of being and allowing us to
reflect upon the possible grace, is the only factor that distinguishes
humans from other primates.

Primates, by definition, are primitive, savage and barbarian. Not
honoring the distinct 'thinking' dimension from the primate we also
are, only leaves the babaric, savage and primitive dimension acting in
the world.

IMO the only 'sin' would be committing the fault of forgetting
momentarily our ability to think the aspect of 'wholeness': state of
grace of human beings.
Very distinct from the barbarian, primitive and savage primate we also
are.

IMO if we are not in the presence of 'wholeness', we are committing the
fault (sin) of denying our 'whole' nature. Not bad as 'mike M' said.
Just a fact to take into consideration. Why would we go on in life with
half the lights turned off!!!

All there is to do when we forget our true nature of 'wholeness', is to
make the thinking effort to recognize that our primitive nature took
over momentarily. IMO, feelings of guilt, fear, anger, anxiety,
jealousy, envy, etc., are all indicators of 'lights turned off', and a
signal to get back to 'wholeness'.

By the way, that is the true meaning of 'educate', from latin:
'educare', to nourrish, heal and elevate our 'being' above its primitive
nature. Very distinct from the deviate meaning of 'educere', which has a
directive aspect of making someone conform to 'code' being that is
judged acceptable by others than 'self'.

Maybe that is the real dicotomy going on in this post? 'educare' vs
'educere'?!?!?