A brief history of Hell

domer76 said:
Yeah, but one can interchange the word with “breaking the rules.”

With Christians, the sin concept has consequences for that afterlife thing. Those of us who reject that concept also reject the concept of sin.
Click to expand...

I don't think a series of "thou shall not" list of rule breaking is all there is to Christianity, or any other world religion.

I never saw the Sermon on the Plain or the parable of the good Samaritan as a list of 'thou shall not' mortal sins, but an exhortation to right conduct.



Jesus, Sermon on the Plain:
Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the Earth. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the Sons of God. Love your enemies and turn the other cheek. Treat others the way you want to be treated. Don't judge and you won't be judged, don't condemn and you won't be condemned, forgive and you will be forgiven, give and you will receive. Remove the log from your own eye before attending to the splinter in your friend's. A good tree does not produce bad fruit and a bad tree cannot produce good fruit, each tree is known by its fruit.
 
Phantasmal said:
No, it’s not. Sin is the concept of failing to follow the laws of a god.

Societies do need laws, but sin is not breaking societies laws, sin is breaking god’s law. They don’t tell you in court that you have sinned.
Click to expand...

When I was younger, about age 7th grade onward, I began carrying around a paperback copy of Merriam-Webster. A desired Christmas present in HS was a hardback copy of the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Now I have the Internet. Progress! LOL

You're free to define it however you like, Phan, but I'll stick with the leading definition.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sin
sin noun
1a: an offense against religious or moral law
b: an action that is or is felt to be highly reprehensible
it's a sin to waste food
c: an often serious shortcoming : FAULT
 
Doc Dutch said:
When I was younger, about age 7th grade onward, I began carrying around a paperback copy of Merriam-Webster. A desired Christmas present in HS was a hardback copy of the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Now I have the Internet. Progress! LOL

You're free to define it however you like, Phan, but I'll stick with the leading definition.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sin
sin noun
1a: an offense against religious or moral law
b: an action that is or is felt to be highly reprehensible
it's a sin to waste food
c: an often serious shortcoming : FAULT
Click to expand...

Dictionaries don't define any word, Sock.
 
Doc Dutch said:
When I was younger, about age 7th grade onward, I began carrying around a paperback copy of Merriam-Webster. A desired Christmas present in HS was a hardback copy of the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Now I have the Internet. Progress! LOL

You're free to define it however you like, Phan, but I'll stick with the leading definition.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sin
sin noun
1a: an offense against religious or moral law
b: an action that is or is felt to be highly reprehensible
it's a sin to waste food
c: an often serious shortcoming : FAULT
Click to expand...


Here’s mine from Googling Define Sin

noun


  • an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.
    "a sin in the eyes of God"
 
Phantasmal said:
Here’s mine from Googling Define Sin

noun


  • an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.
    "a sin in the eyes of God"
Click to expand...

I'll stick with M-W over the Internet Overlords at Google. :)

No doubt the religious will agree with you. The Secularists, not so much. Certainly not any behavioral psychologists I know. LOL
 
God's ego- I am going to take credit for everything good on Earth (If it's something bad- The Devil must have done it :laugh:)!

Now worship me, have no other Gods before me, accept me as your savior based on blind faith- not proof, or I will cast you to Hell where you will BURN FOR ETERNITY! :palm:

Sounds all too much like Donald Trump to me! G.O.D.- Good Ole Donnie! :whoa:

:thinking:Sounds as if I need God- or Good Ole Donnie- as much as I need another hole in my ASS!

NO THANKS!
 
Last edited:
Doc Dutch said:
I'll stick with M-W over the Internet Overlords at Google. :)

No doubt the religious will agree with you. The Secularists, not so much. Certainly not any behavioral psychologists I know. LOL
Click to expand...
I think you have it backwards, Secularist don’t believe in sin, it’s the religious that try to equate all negative actions based on their religion to sin.
I’ve never had a psychologist tell me I have sinned, so I’m really confused about your comments.
 
Phantasmal said:
I think you have it backwards, Secularist don’t believe in sin, it’s the religious that try to equate all negative actions based on their religion to sin.
I’ve never had a psychologist tell me I have sinned, so I’m really confused about your comments.
Click to expand...
They do when they use the M-W definition. :)

Consider the Hamas attack on Israel and Israel's retaliation. Is it wrong to kill children? If so, why? Under what code of morals?
 
Hell is described by Jesus in the "Lazarus and the Rich man" parable in Luke 16. The Rich man looks up from Hell and asks to have Lazarus come down with a finger dipped in water to give him a drop of water to ease his thirst because the fire was hot....
 
Damocles said:
Hell is described by Jesus in the "Lazarus and the Rich man" parable in Luke 16. The Rich man looks up from Hell and asks to have Lazarus come down with a finger dipped in water to give him a drop of water to ease his thirst because the fire was hot....
Click to expand...
Good chapter. :thup:

Someone should tell the Trumps, Paula White and the Prosperity Christians about Luke 16. Specifically verse 13:

No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

84xl18.jpg
 
Doc Dutch said:
They do when they use the M-W definition. :)

Consider the Hamas attack on Israel and Israel's retaliation. Is it wrong to kill children? If so, why? Under what code of morals?
Click to expand...
It is against the Geneva Convention, international law, to target citizens. Hamas is a terrorist organization and they have no regards for any laws. Israel may retaliate to the level they were attacked, if they continue in total destruct of Gaza and the killing of civilians, they may expand the war, or they may lose the sympathy of the international community and sanctions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top