• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Do These Acts Break Commandments?

mark wright

Active Member
Dec 3, 2016
325
32
67
england
✟1,803.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
True but surely Paul is simply quoting the law, and knew we knew what it said so didn't bother to quote the entire thing "thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s."



I can't be sure what Paul was doing; but it would seem that if he were quoting the tenth commandment we could deduce that he was coveting something belonging to someone else.



We seem to be on a slippery slope, now that leads to liking something as "sin" since how are you now defining "impure thoughts" since there's no "commandment" for us to "know" (since Paul's talking about, knowing sin by the express commandments; and not, inference)



I think you're incorrect in talking about "loopholes" because you're inferring "lust" as "sin"; if "lust" isn't sin, there's no loophole. Also, this would lead to every man committing an act worthy of death for even falling in love with a girl, and desiring her to be his wife; since that would be violation of the tenth commandment. I'm not sure God would design a commandment that condemned two unattached people falling in love and getting married.



I understand and chalk that up to you as you stated.
Just to add. People who keep stressing you must obey the commandments( to attain heaven) in my view do not understand what obeying them truly entails. I am not speaking of you when I say this. Paul states the ten commandments are the ministration of death, yet today many give the impression they obey them.
Why do people believe they can well obey what Paul termed the ministration of death? In my view because they do not fully appreciate what obeying those commands entails, Paul did. Hence his words concerning them
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
55
Hyperspace
✟50,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I have tried twice to quote rom 7:7-11 kjv but my phone is playing up.
I think it is clear from those verses Paul is saying lust breaks the tenth commandment. He is giving an example from his own life as to why he had to die to a law of righteousness. He says sin took advantage of the commandment and by it slew him, for he said all manner of concupiscence was aroused in him through the commandment. Though shalt not covet. Your dictionary will tell you the meaning of concupiscence. Paul states he was slain by the commandment. As he says he would not have known lust apart from the commandment, and the result of knowing it was sin producing I him all manner of concupiscence which slew him, it is correct to deduce in my view concupiscence and lust break the tenth commandment, otherwise he could not have said he was condemned by it

I don't agree that Paul not quoting the entire commandment warrants blanketing all "concupiscence" against everything. But, I do understand where you're coming from, and if it's so, then that covers "do no concupiscence" which is a command of Paul, I presume? Now that I think about it, the tenth commandments was left out of Jesus' statement: Mark 10:19. That's odd.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Okay that is some heavy-duty stuff. So basically you're saying, the interpretation of law is up for grabs, and we're basically 24/7 sin machines with absolutely no chance of obedience at any given moment? We don't even really know what the law actually says or means.
We ARE 24/7 sin machines, to be sure. I didn't say that interpretation of the law is up for grabs, I said that there are wider-ranging applications of the given law. But, just for an example, the commandment is not "Thou shalt not kill." It's "Thou shalt not murder." Now think about the ways we murder people every day...Do you really think God just doesn't want us to stick a knife in someone's gut? Expand your mind. Even Jesus said this about how we commit adultery. He expanded the law.
I would, though, disagree that "adultery" and "fornication" are the same. Not only would it then be appropriate to just use the word "adultery" and not muddy the waters with another term that means the same thing; but in the law there's clearly allowance for relationships where no one gets stoned to death, whereas in adultery, you're stoned to death, period. So, basically; you're proposing that the way we in modern times define the two words, are completely wrong, and we need to go back and understand the words over again?
Yes, that's what we should do. I examine my conscience nearly every night to figure out how many ways I've offended God, which is what sin is all about, and to try and do better every day. I fail every day. By the way, I never suggested any sort of punishment for offenses. I know that God will be the judge. Also, I didn't say that adultery and fornication are the same. I said that fornication is a type of adultery. Adultery is voluntary sexual intercourse between a person and another person who is not his/her spouse. Fornication is sexual intercourse between two people who are not married to each other. Really, though, what's the difference???
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Paul Yohannan
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
55
Hyperspace
✟50,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
We ARE 24/7 sin machines, to be sure. I didn't say that interpretation of the law is up for grabs, I said that there are wider-ranging applications of the given law. But, just for an example, the commandment is not "Thou shalt not kill." It's "Thou shalt not murder." Now think about the ways we murder people every day...Do you really think God just doesn't want us to stick a knife in someone's gut? Expand your mind. Even Jesus said this about how we commit adultery. He expanded the law.

What I mean by "up for grabs" is that there are no limitations to our "expansions" of law, in this regard. Without limitations, then everything we do would be a violation of a commandment at any time. We could say, watching tv is idolatry because we're not giving the time to worship. Being on a computer is theft since it "steals" unnecessary energy. Everything is breaking the law.

I understand the idea, I just don't think I would agree with it. It would create a scenario in which, everyone should've been being stoned to death at every instance of the OT. I do think Jesus expanded the law toward the "root" of the matter, the heart: but I don't think He was "expanding" the law in the sense that you're proposing. I think they idea of what you're proposing suits the spirit of what Jesus was doing; He was making it so impossible to obey the commandments that not even the staunchest Pharisee could hide behind an illusion of obedience.

But what I'm really looking for here, is actually commandments in the scripture. Think of it as a purely academic endeavor in my part. Do you know what I mean? As if I'm asking "Strictly scripturally speaking; are these things transgession of law under new covenant?"

Yes, that's what we should do. I examine my conscience nearly every night to figure out how many ways I've offended God, which is what sin is all about, and to try and do better every day. I fail every day. By the way, I never suggested any sort of punishment for offenses. I know that God will be the judge. Also, I didn't say that adultery and fornication are the same. I said that fornication is a type of adultery. Adultery is voluntary sexual intercourse between a person and another person who is not his/her spouse. Fornication is sexual intercourse between two people who are not married to each other. Really, though, what's the difference???

The difference in those two is that if the adulterous woman was brought before Jesus, the Pharisees could say "This woman was caught breaking the commandment 'do no adultery' which specifies a particular punishment" whereas if a fornicating woman was brought before Jesus, they couldn't say that same thing. If we have a group of Christians who bring a woman to Jesus and say "This woman is an adulterer" they would have a case by the letter of the commandments; but if they brought a man and said "This man is a fornicator" or "addicted to drugs" or "has tattoos" or "dancer" or "Christian occultist" or "gambler" would they actually have any scripturally legal case against the person?
 
Upvote 0

1John2:4

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2016
1,204
361
48
New Braunfels, TX
✟40,108.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
All this talk about commandments is making me wonder about something. We can point at the ten commandments, and there they are. "Don't do this" "Do that": but what about a lot of other things that, seem to be viewed as "sinful"; I was wondering, where is the commandment for some of these? I'm going to go ahead and forgo the ten-thousand ton elephant in the room:

1. Drug use. Let's have this meaning, drugs like, alcohol, marijuana since these seem to be two big "that's sinful"s; but also putting in all manner of drugs from LSD to cocaine to, whatever the streets are hawking these days. Also, would we add drugs to this list? Not, drug drugs; but, drugs like from a pharmacy?

2. Fornication. This one gets people hopping mad at this "sin" but I don't see it on the ten commandments, so why is this a sin? Technically this word in scripture looks to mean "prostitution" but people seem to categorize it as relations prior to marriage; so I'm giving it its own place on the list.

3. Gambling. Sinful breaking of a commandment?

4. Musical instruments in the church service?

5. Dancing?

6. Prostitution?

7. What about occult practitioners? Here I mean, people who are professing Christians who practice "magick" (yes, with a "k"; it's ridiculous, I know but that's how they spell it). All of their occult rituals are all "in the name of Christ" and they call it "Christian white magick": I presume this can get people stomping mad at sin, but where is the commandment?

8. Tatoos and piercings? Is this a sinful practice?

That's all I can think of right now. Let me be clear in case anyone jumps the gun here; I'm not advocating any of this, I'm wondering where the commandment to not do these things is at? This is a sincere question. It's that I'm looking at the ten commandments and wondering now if I actually break any commandments. The only one that looks "ify" to me is "adultery" but that only in application to Jesus further adding that, even lusting is an act of adultery. But, then again, I'm not married so, can I even commit adultery by lusting? Or, would I have to have a wife to be commiting "mental adultery"?

Many of these can be encompassed by the second commandment. Not to take the name of God in Vain. The commandment does not mean do not say the G- word as many claim, even though I will admit that is pretty offensive. It means do not be a hypocrite, do not professes to be a Christian and live like the world.

Drugs can also fall under #5 Honor thy father and mother. People who have addiction plaguing families know how much impact it has on parents of the individual using the drugs.
 
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
55
Hyperspace
✟50,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Many of these can be encompassed by the second commandment. Not to take the name of God in Vain. The commandment does not mean do not say the G- word as many claim, even though I will admit that is pretty offensive. It means do not be a hypocrite, do not professes to be a Christian and live like the world.

To be a "hypocrite" means you would have to be breaking a commandment. See, what you're doing is begging the question. You're looking at the list and already concluding these things as "sin": this is why you're using the word "hypocrisy" because you're begging the question of whether or not the listed things constitute "sin" according to an actual commandment, or, just because you personally have learned not to like them. Meaning, all you're doing in applying your own opinion of what is "living like the world" into the commandment. I would also disagree with your personal interpretation of the commandment not to take the name in vain, but that is beside the point.

What I mean is this: according to many Christians (such as the Amish) you are "living like the world" by everything you are doing (let alone being on a computer): so is an Amish legal correct if he were to say to you "You are in a constant state of taking the name of God in vain"? You see what happens when we just start plugging our own personal value-system into the commandments? Because, believe you me, for every person saying "You are a hypocrite" there is a person standing being him saying to him "You are a hypocrite": much like the saying "Big fleas have little fleas on their backs to bite 'em; and little fleas have littler fleas, and so on; ad infinitum"

Drugs can also fall under #5 Honor thy father and mother. People who have addiction plaguing families know how much impact it has on parents of the individual using the drugs.

It seems that we're just plugging things into commandments now. I suppose if we wished we could say "everything I don't like or value is placed under commandment #5" but now we've created that slippery slope back to Amish land.

We could revise the drug use to be the type that is, not plaguing families.

About the drug use; I'm wondering about drugs from a pharmacy, as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YouAreAwesome
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
What I mean by "up for grabs" is that there are no limitations to our "expansions" of law, in this regard. Without limitations, then everything we do would be a violation of a commandment at any time. We could say, watching tv is idolatry because we're not giving the time to worship. Being on a computer is theft since it "steals" unnecessary energy. Everything is breaking the law.

I understand the idea, I just don't think I would agree with it. It would create a scenario in which, everyone should've been being stoned to death at every instance of the OT. I do think Jesus expanded the law toward the "root" of the matter, the heart: but I don't think He was "expanding" the law in the sense that you're proposing. I think they idea of what you're proposing suits the spirit of what Jesus was doing; He was making it so impossible to obey the commandments that not even the staunchest Pharisee could hide behind an illusion of obedience.

But what I'm really looking for here, is actually commandments in the scripture. Think of it as a purely academic endeavor in my part. Do you know what I mean? As if I'm asking "Strictly scripturally speaking; are these things transgession of law under new covenant?"



The difference in those two is that if the adulterous woman was brought before Jesus, the Pharisees could say "This woman was caught breaking the commandment 'do no adultery' which specifies a particular punishment" whereas if a fornicating woman was brought before Jesus, they couldn't say that same thing. If we have a group of Christians who bring a woman to Jesus and say "This woman is an adulterer" they would have a case by the letter of the commandments; but if they brought a man and said "This man is a fornicator" or "addicted to drugs" or "has tattoos" or "dancer" or "Christian occultist" or "gambler" would they actually have any scripturally legal case against the person?
Jesus summed up the commandments in this way. Love God, Love your neighbor.
 
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
55
Hyperspace
✟50,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Jesus summed up the commandments in this way. Love God, Love your neighbor.

Oh sure, I agree completely. Just to make myself as clear as possible to anyone, I'm not advocating anything here in this thread; I'm not pondering, spirit of the law, or justification through faith, or, any actual theology: I'm really just asking a strictly academic question, and looking for real, nuts and bolts, "letter of the law" commandments.

Like, if a man were a strict Pharisee "by the letter"; what case could he make from scripture against these things?
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
All this talk about commandments is making me wonder about something. We can point at the ten commandments, and there they are. "Don't do this" "Do that": but what about a lot of other things that, seem to be viewed as "sinful"; I was wondering, where is the commandment for some of these? I'm going to go ahead and forgo the ten-thousand ton elephant in the room:

1. Drug use. Let's have this meaning, drugs like, alcohol, marijuana since these seem to be two big "that's sinful"s; but also putting in all manner of drugs from LSD to cocaine to, whatever the streets are hawking these days. Also, would we add drugs to this list? Not, drug drugs; but, drugs like from a pharmacy?

2. Fornication. This one gets people hopping mad at this "sin" but I don't see it on the ten commandments, so why is this a sin? Technically this word in scripture looks to mean "prostitution" but people seem to categorize it as relations prior to marriage; so I'm giving it its own place on the list.

3. Gambling. Sinful breaking of a commandment?

4. Musical instruments in the church service?

5. Dancing?

6. Prostitution?

7. What about occult practitioners? Here I mean, people who are professing Christians who practice "magick" (yes, with a "k"; it's ridiculous, I know but that's how they spell it). All of their occult rituals are all "in the name of Christ" and they call it "Christian white magick": I presume this can get people stomping mad at sin, but where is the commandment?

8. Tatoos and piercings? Is this a sinful practice?

That's all I can think of right now. Let me be clear in case anyone jumps the gun here; I'm not advocating any of this, I'm wondering where the commandment to not do these things is at? This is a sincere question. It's that I'm looking at the ten commandments and wondering now if I actually break any commandments. The only one that looks "ify" to me is "adultery" but that only in application to Jesus further adding that, even lusting is an act of adultery. But, then again, I'm not married so, can I even commit adultery by lusting? Or, would I have to have a wife to be commiting "mental adultery"?

Sin is what you do that you know you should not do.
What others do is not sin through we know we are all
in the same boat and none are dry, no not one.
 
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
55
Hyperspace
✟50,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Sin is what you do that you know you should not do.

I know I shouldn't hurt others. That I know. Physically or emotionally; I should not hurt others. In the spirit of your answer, I would presume no one knows if the listed things are "sin" since apparently we can't "know" what commandment expressly forbids the action? In the academic sense, what I really wanting to figure out is if Jesus and Paul are actually adding commandments (which I can't believe they would do); or if they are alluding to some commandment, or if they are using the word in a way that we don't. I suppose I keep bringing 'fornication' to the forefront because it's the most obvious of the "sins" that most people condemn, but of which I cannot seem to actually understand why that is since there's no express command "do no fornication": so I'm left wondering if the NT is adding that command? Or, if that word is being somehow connected with an express command? Or, if that word means something completely different when, say, Paul uses it, than the way we use it today. Meaning, when Paul says "fornication" is he meaning, relationships between unmarried people? Or, something completely different? Is it a metaphor for "idolatry"? I look at the Greek word and it is usually defined as "harlotry": but is this indicating, what, exactly?

I'm simply, in an academic fashion (purely, "by the book" with no theological ramifications) wondering about these things. I suppose even the ten commandments, such as someone above brought up what they supposed the commandment "do not take the name of the Lord in vain" what does that really mean?

It seems to me the clear ones are, "do no murder", "do no false witness", "do no stealing", "do no adultery"? Maybe?
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I know I shouldn't hurt others. That I know. Physically or emotionally; I should not hurt others. In the spirit of your answer, I would presume no one knows if the listed things are "sin" since apparently we can't "know" what commandment expressly forbids the action?

The law is failure and Christians are not subject to the law.
Rather, we live by "Grace".
We do what is right and avoid Sin by choice.
What laws we don't know, are not Sin.
The OT commandments are past becasue Jesus filled all those laws.
He completed them for us.

28 Bible verses about Law, And Gospel
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,819
4,708
Hudson
✟363,217.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
All this talk about commandments is making me wonder about something. We can point at the ten commandments, and there they are. "Don't do this" "Do that": but what about a lot of other things that, seem to be viewed as "sinful"; I was wondering, where is the commandment for some of these? I'm going to go ahead and forgo the ten-thousand ton elephant in the room:

1. Drug use. Let's have this meaning, drugs like, alcohol, marijuana since these seem to be two big "that's sinful"s; but also putting in all manner of drugs from LSD to cocaine to, whatever the streets are hawking these days. Also, would we add drugs to this list? Not, drug drugs; but, drugs like from a pharmacy?

2. Fornication. This one gets people hopping mad at this "sin" but I don't see it on the ten commandments, so why is this a sin? Technically this word in scripture looks to mean "prostitution" but people seem to categorize it as relations prior to marriage; so I'm giving it its own place on the list.

3. Gambling. Sinful breaking of a commandment?

4. Musical instruments in the church service?

5. Dancing?

6. Prostitution?

7. What about occult practitioners? Here I mean, people who are professing Christians who practice "magick" (yes, with a "k"; it's ridiculous, I know but that's how they spell it). All of their occult rituals are all "in the name of Christ" and they call it "Christian white magick": I presume this can get people stomping mad at sin, but where is the commandment?

8. Tatoos and piercings? Is this a sinful practice?

That's all I can think of right now. Let me be clear in case anyone jumps the gun here; I'm not advocating any of this, I'm wondering where the commandment to not do these things is at? This is a sincere question. It's that I'm looking at the ten commandments and wondering now if I actually break any commandments. The only one that looks "ify" to me is "adultery" but that only in application to Jesus further adding that, even lusting is an act of adultery. But, then again, I'm not married so, can I even commit adultery by lusting? Or, would I have to have a wife to be commiting "mental adultery"?

The Bible defines sin as lawlessness (1 John 3:4) and says that we would not even know what sin is if the law had not revealed it, so it is a sin to disobey any of God's laws. Do you think that the eminently fair judge of the universe who punished Israel for their disobedience to His commands will wink at us for doing the same thing? If so, they He owes an apology to them. However, the 613 commands are not an exhaustive list of how to do everything that is righteous and how to avoid everything that is sinful because the law is spiritual (Romans 7:14), so it is meant to teach us deeper spiritual principles, of which the listed laws are just examples, and by which we can use to determine whether or not other things that aren't listed are righteous or sinful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1John2:4
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
55
Hyperspace
✟50,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The Bible defines sin as lawlessness (1 John 3:4) and says that we would not even know what sin is if the law had not revealed it, so it is a sin to disobey any of God's laws. Do you think that the eminently fair judge of the universe who punished Israel for their disobedience to His commands will wink at us for doing the same thing? If so, they He owes an apology to them. However, the 613 commands are not an exhaustive list of how to do everything that is righteous and how to avoid everything that is sinful because the law is spiritual (Romans 7:14), so it is meant to teach us deeper spiritual principles, of which the listed laws are just examples, and by which we can use to determine whether or not other things that aren't listed are righteous or sinful.

Yeah I get that, I really do. It's just that, I'm not really looking for philsophy or theology here. Just nuts-and-bolts "by the book" information. Imagine if I asked "Why is adultery considered a sin?" everyone would point at a command in scripture reading "do no adultery" and I would reply "There it is; yes": do you understand what I mean? As far as I can tell, no one knows why (outside of personal value claims, or, a bit of 'reading into' explicit commandments e.g. 'lust is coveting' 'hypocrisy is taking the name of the Lord in vain'). No one is able to cite a command explicitly prohibiting the action.

The real question for me is, why is Paul listing things like 'fornication' and 'drunkards' if there's no commandment prohibiting them. Are we misunderstanding Paul? Is Paul using words in ways we're not aware? Does Paul's use of the word "sorcery" mean what we think it means? (Knowing Paul isn't speaking English; is his original use of the word in his own language meaning what it has come to us to mean?) Perhaps we may never know in this life; but I find the question - interesting.
 
Upvote 0

Paul Yohannan

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2016
3,886
1,587
45
Old Route 66
✟34,744.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
All this talk about commandments is making me wonder about something. We can point at the ten commandments, and there they are. "Don't do this" "Do that": but what about a lot of other things that, seem to be viewed as "sinful"; I was wondering, where is the commandment for some of these? I'm going to go ahead and forgo the ten-thousand ton elephant in the room:

1. Drug use. Let's have this meaning, drugs like, alcohol, marijuana since these seem to be two big "that's sinful"s; but also putting in all manner of drugs from LSD to cocaine to, whatever the streets are hawking these days. Also, would we add drugs to this list? Not, drug drugs; but, drugs like from a pharmacy?

The use of illegal narcotics and psychotropic drugs is self-destructive and therefore sinful. Medically prescribed drugs should only be used as directed.

2. Fornication. This one gets people hopping mad at this "sin" but I don't see it on the ten commandments, so why is this a sin? Technically this word in scripture looks to mean "prostitution" but people seem to categorize it as relations prior to marriage; so I'm giving it its own place on the list.

If we look at what St. Paul wrote, it is clear he is referring to prostitution.

3. Gambling. Sinful breaking of a commandment?

Gambling is essentially theft by mutual consent. It is also self-destructive. All self-destructive acts are obvious hamartia. God wants to help us; He does not desire that we destroy ourselves or others.

4. Musical instruments in the church service?

Not a sin. Fundamentalist Calvinists and some very misguided Eastern Orthodox argue otherwise, but they do so to their iconoclastic discredit. I would dedicate some energy to calling out theologically incompetent EOs on this point by citing the organ in the Hagia Sophia, the organs in use in the Greek church, and elsewhere, except I have bigger fish to fry apologetically speaking. For that matter I would even more enthusiastically criticize fundamentalist Calvinists on this point, but again one muat have a sense of priority.

5. Dancing?

Only if done in an erotic manner.

6. Prostitution?

Well duh.

The canon law of the early Church required prostitutes to change jobs before becoming catechumens.

7. What about occult practitioners? Here I mean, people who are professing Christians who practice "magick" (yes, with a "k"; it's ridiculous, I know but that's how they spell it). All of their occult rituals are all "in the name of Christ" and they call it "Christian white magick": I presume this can get people stomping mad at sin, but where is the commandment?

For our own safety, occult practices were proscribed in the OT and proscribed by the early Church, as they can lead to demonic posession.

8. Tatoos and piercings? Is this a sinful practice?

It can be. That said, the Coptic Orthodox of Egypt and the Croatian Catholics of Bosnia have tatoos of the cross on their person from childhood as a continual reminder of their Christian identity, in the event they are kidnapped by Muslims or otherwise tempted to apostasize.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1John2:4
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
55
Hyperspace
✟50,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The use of illegal narcotics and psychotropic drugs is self-destructive and therefore sinful. Medically prescribed drugs should only be used as directed.

Okay but where is this command or prohibition actually in scripture? Again, I'm not asking for opinion or value-claim; I'm asking for scripture. Consider that down below on the "sin" of musical instruments in worship; you say "Not a sin" while others say "sin": how would we determine, "by the book", who was right? I would imagine if the "is a sin" crowd are right, Christians ought to know it; otherwise we've got probably 99% of Christians in a state of constant sinful and unrepentant rebellion, true?

Also, allowing for what you say here; wouldn't that mean, practically everything we do is a sin in the "self-destructive" regard? Overeating, undereating; junk food; drinking tap-water; staring at a computer monitor; smoking cigarettes, drinking soda; so very many things would then be "sinful" that to point out "drug use" would be rather hypocritical since, everyone is in a constant state of unrepentant sin through "self destruction"

If we look at what St. Paul wrote, it is clear he is referring to prostitution.

Maybe.

Gambling is essentially theft by mutual consent. It is also self-destructive. All self-destructive acts are obvious hamartia. God wants to help us; He does not desire that we destroy ourselves or others.

Theft by mutual consent? I'm not sure a consent can be theft. Isn't that like saying, giving money to anyone is "theft by consent"?

Not a sin. Fundamentalist Calvinists and some very misguided Eastern Orthodox argue otherwise, but they do so to their iconoclastic discredit. I would dedicate some energy to calling out theologically incompetent EOs on this point by citing the organ in the Hagia Sophia, the organs in use in the Greek church, and elsewhere, except I have bigger fish to fry apologetically speaking. For that matter I would even more enthusiastically criticize fundamentalist Calvinists on this point, but again one muat have a sense of priority.

Well, I'm just saying; there are a lot of Christians who disagree. How do we determine who is right?

Only if done in an erotic manner.

Well, now we're begging the question of, what defines "erotic"? I'm sure you may see a certain dance as "not erotic" whereas some really modest women may (and do) very much disagree. Some people believe the saxophone is too erotic. So we're really just stating value-claims in these things.

Well duh.

Scripture?

The canon law of the early Church required prostitutes to change jobs before becoming catechumens.

I hear you, and am not for one second attempting to downplay anything anyone or their church leaders are saying. But, think of this question not as me asking about church beliefs: but an academic question of "what is the objective 'by the book' answer?" (if any): meaning, what scripture actually explicitly prohibits this?

For our own safety, occult practices were proscribed in the OT and proscribed by the early Church, as they can lead to demonic posession.

Well, again that's an opinion. I've known people who practiced "white Christian magick" and they would vehemently deny what you're saying; even stating that you are more likely than they to suffer spiritual attack since you have no "Godly" defenses.

It can be. That said, the Coptic Orthodox of Egypt and the Croatian Catholics of Bosnia have tatoos of the cross on their person from childhood as a continual reminder of their Christian identity, in the event they are kidnapped by Muslims or otherwise tempted to apostasize.

Well. You know what I'm going to reply here.

By the way, if you're the same man; I still have your Aramaic interlinear (or, what was completed of it): it was a good work; I still use it when comparing Aramaic scriptures.
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
671
✟58,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
1. Drug use. Let's have this meaning, drugs like, alcohol, marijuana since these seem to be two big "that's sinful"s; but also putting in all manner of drugs from LSD to cocaine to, whatever the streets are hawking these days. Also, would we add drugs to this list? Not, drug drugs; but, drugs like from a pharmacy?

Not all sins are listed in the 10 commandments. I suppose you could put a lot of stuff under not worshiping idols if you allegoricalize it a bit, or not honoring your parents. For drug use, maybe pharmakeia? Sorcery in Galatians?

2. Fornication. This one gets people hopping mad at this "sin" but I don't see it on the ten commandments, so why is this a sin? Technically this word in scripture looks to mean "prostitution" but people seem to categorize it as relations prior to marriage; so I'm giving it its own place on the list.

It's not in the 10 commandments, but it's still a sin. There was a death penalty for it in the case of a girl who fornicates, gets married off as a virgin with a bride price, and is discovered. There are also different varieties of fornication that are specifically mentioned, incest, homosexual sin, etc. Male homosexual sex had a death penalty like adultery.

3. Gambling. Sinful breaking of a commandment?

I know of no specific commands about it, but there is a command about coveting and Proverbs about the way money works. Gambling is getting money without working. There is teaching against being foolish. Some gambling certainly falls into that category.

It is also poor stewardship to throw your money down the toilet when you need money to buy milk for the kids, but there is no commandment against throwing money down the toilet.

If people are playing some game using pennies, just for fun, not large amounts of money, I can't really say that's a sin. But there is some major poor stewardship that falls into the gambling category.

4. Musical instruments in the church service?

Why would that be considered a sin?

5. Dancing?

The Bible does not call dancing a sin. David did it. Psalms command it. Jesus said, "I have piped unto you but ye have not danced." It's a metaphor, but why would he say that if dancing were a sin.

There are some types of dancing that may not be appropriate, rubbing ones body seductively against a single person or person married to someone else, nude public pole dancing, etc. But dancing in general is not a sin.

6. Prostitution?

See fornication. It's the same thing. Generally, society might think the 'lower class ones work for less. Some prostitutes (regular fornicators) work for free.

7. What about occult practitioners? Here I mean, people who are professing Christians who practice "magick" (yes, with a "k"; it's ridiculous, I know but that's how they spell it). All of their occult rituals are all "in the name of Christ" and they call it "Christian white magick": I presume this can get people stomping mad at sin, but where is the commandment?

There are commandments in the Torah against this. New Testament? Well, they burnt books. I could say pharmakeia again.

8. Tatoos and piercings? Is this a sinful practice?

It was forbidden in the Torah. There were 613 or so commandments, not just 10.

The only one that looks "ify" to me is "adultery" but that only in application to Jesus further adding that, even lusting is an act of adultery. But, then again, I'm not married so, can I even commit adultery by lusting? Or, would I have to have a wife to be commiting "mental adultery"?

Other men have wives that could be lusted after, too. Some pretty movie stars are married. Job made a covenant with his eyes that he should not look upon a virgin with lust.

'Lust' has to do with violating the command 'thou shalt not covet.' Same word used in the 10 commandments in the Greek Septuagint if I recall correctly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1John2:4
Upvote 0

Paul Yohannan

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2016
3,886
1,587
45
Old Route 66
✟34,744.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
everyone is in a constant state of unrepentant sin through "self destruction"

This hypothetical, which you appear to view with dismay, is basically the Orthodox doctrine. "We sin at the speed of thought," said one priest to me.

I suspect this is why Russian Orthodox confess before any reception of the Eucharist.
 
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
55
Hyperspace
✟50,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
This hypothetical, which you appear to view with dismay, is basically the Orthodox doctrine. "We sin at the speed of thought," said one priest to me.

I suspect this is why Russian Orthodox confess before any reception of the Eucharist.

No, not really dismay. The idea itself I would gladly agree with; which exalts forgiveness, and removes any pride or self-righteousness from anyone on the planet. But, even though I would agree with the spirit of the idea; I'm still wanting scripture. It's merely an academic exercise for my own interest in understanding scripture.
 
Upvote 0

Paul Yohannan

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2016
3,886
1,587
45
Old Route 66
✟34,744.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
By the way, if you're the same man; I still have your Aramaic interlinear (or, what was completed of it): it was a good work; I still use it when comparing Aramaic scriptures.

Wasn't me. I am opposed to interlinear translations because people always misinterpret them owing to syntactic dissimilarity. Instead I encourage everyone with questions about Aramaic to ask @SteveCaruso.
 
Upvote 0

Paul Yohannan

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2016
3,886
1,587
45
Old Route 66
✟34,744.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
No, not really dismay. The idea itself I would gladly agree with; which exalts forgiveness, and removes any pride or self-righteousness from anyone on the planet. But, even though I would agree with the spirit of the idea; I'm still wanting scripture. It's merely an academic exercise for my own interest in understanding scripture.

For this, one should refer to the Pauline epistles and to the dominical statements of our Lord on an integrated basis and not seek a single proof-text.
 
Upvote 0