This is a quote from another thread that I wanted to avoid ganking. Mark, could you explain this to me? I'm very curious.
Sin
- Thread starter Feisty Mouse
- Start date
I'm kinda wondering as well. Good question.
Due to my own curiousity that I'm thinking I sin everyday of my life in some, way, shape, or form. :idunno:
Due to my own curiousity that I'm thinking I sin everyday of my life in some, way, shape, or form. :idunno:
RandomPhantom700
Master of Arts
farnsworth, it depends on who (or what group) you ask. In my opinion, you and you alone decide whether you've "sinned" or not. Committed a crime? That's another story.
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
Okay I will do my best to share with you.
The main difference is that in the Christian point of view is that everyone is born into a "sinful" state. However in the Jewish point of view no one is born into sin. Sin is the breaking of the principles, commandments and guideance of the Torah. You can not be held accountable for breaking the Torah if you have never been taught what is required of you unless you are taught.
Therefore the Christian "Sin" is not acceptable in the Jewish mindset. No one is born into a sinful state. If this were the case then it opens a great moral debate lets say abbout if a child dies at say 2 hours, one day, a week, a month does this child go to the Christian idea of Hell. Which by the way this hell is not the same as the hell Christians are aware of.
Hell is not a place of punishment but a place to relearn and undo and fix different areas of ones life. Where do you think the Roman Catholic Church got the idea of Preguratory.
The main difference is that in the Christian point of view is that everyone is born into a "sinful" state. However in the Jewish point of view no one is born into sin. Sin is the breaking of the principles, commandments and guideance of the Torah. You can not be held accountable for breaking the Torah if you have never been taught what is required of you unless you are taught.
Therefore the Christian "Sin" is not acceptable in the Jewish mindset. No one is born into a sinful state. If this were the case then it opens a great moral debate lets say abbout if a child dies at say 2 hours, one day, a week, a month does this child go to the Christian idea of Hell. Which by the way this hell is not the same as the hell Christians are aware of.
Hell is not a place of punishment but a place to relearn and undo and fix different areas of ones life. Where do you think the Roman Catholic Church got the idea of Preguratory.
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2004
- Messages
- 4,262
- Reaction score
- 41
Mark Weiser said:
I think there are conflicting views on this. Old way was for a baby to be baptized in the first few months, now it is not baptism, but christening or dedication ceremonies - bringing the baby to Christ. But since a baby is not knowing of sin, he is pure so that was always confusing to me. I like this new way better. Or is a baby born of sin because of past digressions of the parents or parent's parents so should be baptized at birth? Not a question I'm asking, just to show the ambiguity of thought on that. TW
Interesting. Because I do not believe that we inherit the original sin either, nor that man is born into sin. I know some Christians believe this, but I do not. Feisty?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #7
Mark - thanks for replying. (I find discussions like this fascinating, I hope it is not tedious for you.)
I understand now what you were referring to. I wasn't sure what exactly you were referring to before - i.e. is the nature of sin different, or is sin action or thought or desire or all of the above...?
Would you expound a little bit more on the idea of Hell, too? This is a tricky one for me - there is an interesting conceptualization of the afterlife in Orthodoxy that I don't think I can fully verbalize at this point, but I would like to hear the differences between, say, other branches of Christianity and Judaism.
ETA: she-sulsa, just saw your response. Orthodoxy does have the concept of Original Sin in it, I cannot deny that. The emphasis (i.e. what has been delivered to me over the years in sermons and homilies) haws been on the nature of Man (humankind) to be sinful - i.e. to be imperfect - but to also be able to be redeemed, to ask for forgiveness, to be aware of one's own flaws, and try to be humble and do good.
It's all in my head but sometimes it comes out confusing online. Did that make sense?
I understand now what you were referring to. I wasn't sure what exactly you were referring to before - i.e. is the nature of sin different, or is sin action or thought or desire or all of the above...?
Would you expound a little bit more on the idea of Hell, too? This is a tricky one for me - there is an interesting conceptualization of the afterlife in Orthodoxy that I don't think I can fully verbalize at this point, but I would like to hear the differences between, say, other branches of Christianity and Judaism.
ETA: she-sulsa, just saw your response. Orthodoxy does have the concept of Original Sin in it, I cannot deny that. The emphasis (i.e. what has been delivered to me over the years in sermons and homilies) haws been on the nature of Man (humankind) to be sinful - i.e. to be imperfect - but to also be able to be redeemed, to ask for forgiveness, to be aware of one's own flaws, and try to be humble and do good.
It's all in my head but sometimes it comes out confusing online. Did that make sense?
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
The Concept that a human being is born into a sinful state is not acceptable in the Jewish way of Life. Also the idea of Baptism is not the same as it is in Judaism. We have what we call a Mikvah which is a cleansing pool once you become an adult aka when a boy or a girl or even any adult accepts Judaism and learns what is required to be Jewish you are washed so that you are not unclean in order to be a part of the Synagouge. It is not to wash away any sins but to wash away ones willingness to follow gentile practices and priniciples.
Hell only started in the NT. Hell is more of a state of mind hence an unwillingness to change or being stubborn when presented facts and what will happen if you break these principles and teachings. The closest thing to hell in the Torah is a garbage pit outside the city which means you are dirty and unclean if you enjoy living there then do so but in order to come back into the city you have to wash the dirt off and make the neccessary atonements to the Priest.
Hell only started in the NT. Hell is more of a state of mind hence an unwillingness to change or being stubborn when presented facts and what will happen if you break these principles and teachings. The closest thing to hell in the Torah is a garbage pit outside the city which means you are dirty and unclean if you enjoy living there then do so but in order to come back into the city you have to wash the dirt off and make the neccessary atonements to the Priest.
oldnewbie
Purple Belt
The way I learned it in a Southern Baptist house....
Until the "age of accountability" (I think 12) you get a free pass.
Kinda like when a kid is old enough to know better....
After that you are tagged by the "original sin".
My two cents
Until the "age of accountability" (I think 12) you get a free pass.
Kinda like when a kid is old enough to know better....
After that you are tagged by the "original sin".
My two cents
OP
- Thread Starter
- #10
So you are not cleansing yourself (as is emphasized in baptism) so much as becoming part of the tribe.
The interpretation of Original Sin and how people react to it has changed over the centuries... the Puritans were REALLY INTO IT, which gave them one of the first modern views on child-rearing - i.e. children are not adults and do not understand what is right and wrong, we have to teach them differently.
ETA: I think the different ideas of acceptance/cleanliness are intriguing. Have these changed at all in terms of people's perceptions?
This is interesting. I'm off to do a bit of research.
The interpretation of Original Sin and how people react to it has changed over the centuries... the Puritans were REALLY INTO IT, which gave them one of the first modern views on child-rearing - i.e. children are not adults and do not understand what is right and wrong, we have to teach them differently.
ETA: I think the different ideas of acceptance/cleanliness are intriguing. Have these changed at all in terms of people's perceptions?
This is interesting. I'm off to do a bit of research.
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
Correct FM
If I may add that when is the age of accountability who decides? There again this is just a device of the Church to subdue the masses. In Judaism you are not an adult until you meet certain requirements until that time you are not expected to act as you are an adult in the sense of responsibilites and responses in life. HaShem does not expect a child to live up to the same standards of that child parents. The Parents are responsible for the child's actions.
If you attend a Bar Mitzvah you will hear that the boy is and does agree to take responsiblity for his own actions in life.
If I may add that when is the age of accountability who decides? There again this is just a device of the Church to subdue the masses. In Judaism you are not an adult until you meet certain requirements until that time you are not expected to act as you are an adult in the sense of responsibilites and responses in life. HaShem does not expect a child to live up to the same standards of that child parents. The Parents are responsible for the child's actions.
If you attend a Bar Mitzvah you will hear that the boy is and does agree to take responsiblity for his own actions in life.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #12
I've been to several Bar (and Bat) Mitzvahs over the years.
I'm looking up now when children may be considered to reach an age where they are responsible for themselves. There are certainly strong feelings on children being particularly innocent or blessed in Christianity - but I am not sure if there is a "hard and fast rule" about adulthood.
Of course, I am speaking from a perspective of being in a faith that allows infant baptisms. Some Christian faiths do not, and would consider, I assume, adulthood/responsibility to come when the child/young adult enters into the faith and community, as in Judaism.
I'm looking up now when children may be considered to reach an age where they are responsible for themselves. There are certainly strong feelings on children being particularly innocent or blessed in Christianity - but I am not sure if there is a "hard and fast rule" about adulthood.
Of course, I am speaking from a perspective of being in a faith that allows infant baptisms. Some Christian faiths do not, and would consider, I assume, adulthood/responsibility to come when the child/young adult enters into the faith and community, as in Judaism.
?
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
This the problem with Christianity if one is born into a sinful state and Christians belive that a child is blessed or innocent then when does one become sinful?
Jewish people see such twisted logic in Christianity. We see it from the outside in of course those of us whom have been gentiles and christians and have converted to Judaism see such a rich and meaning way of life being Jewish.
Christianity is often split and double minded in its logic at least in some areas of debate. Take for instance the statement of saying that a Child is innocent but at the same time we are all born into a sinful state or nature is a double standard to us.
Jewish people see such twisted logic in Christianity. We see it from the outside in of course those of us whom have been gentiles and christians and have converted to Judaism see such a rich and meaning way of life being Jewish.
Christianity is often split and double minded in its logic at least in some areas of debate. Take for instance the statement of saying that a Child is innocent but at the same time we are all born into a sinful state or nature is a double standard to us.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #14
Well, I think there is more than one aspect to sin we are talking about here.
1) human nature
2) doing something that is sinful - committing a sin
We all have "human nature" - that is, no-one is perfect. We strive for perfection, but also know we cannot reach it.
Understanding that what you do may be "right" or "wrong" comes as you develop past childhood. Realizing that you are responsible for your actions comes through time, obviously. Again, I cannot say it is whenever a child turns, say, 12 years old. It is based on the individual and their development.
When we look at children, we realize that they may do things that, as an adult, would be irresponsible, perhaps cruel, perhaps just silly. But they do not have the understanding of the full consequences of their actions.
Just because it does not seem logical or straightforward does not mean it's "twisted" or "double minded". I don't think anyone pretends that faith, and the nature of the world, and the nature of people, is completely logical, no matter what the faith. I didn't intend to start this thread as to say "mine is better" or "yours is better", but to try and understand the differences. The faith I am a part of draws heavily on early church history and teachings, so there is more closeness in perspective than perhaps you may think.
1) human nature
2) doing something that is sinful - committing a sin
We all have "human nature" - that is, no-one is perfect. We strive for perfection, but also know we cannot reach it.
Understanding that what you do may be "right" or "wrong" comes as you develop past childhood. Realizing that you are responsible for your actions comes through time, obviously. Again, I cannot say it is whenever a child turns, say, 12 years old. It is based on the individual and their development.
When we look at children, we realize that they may do things that, as an adult, would be irresponsible, perhaps cruel, perhaps just silly. But they do not have the understanding of the full consequences of their actions.
Just because it does not seem logical or straightforward does not mean it's "twisted" or "double minded". I don't think anyone pretends that faith, and the nature of the world, and the nature of people, is completely logical, no matter what the faith. I didn't intend to start this thread as to say "mine is better" or "yours is better", but to try and understand the differences. The faith I am a part of draws heavily on early church history and teachings, so there is more closeness in perspective than perhaps you may think.
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
Within Orthodox Judaism Christianity is not accepted in any form. This is not to say that all Christians are horrible people but you are what your parents teach you in the aspect of religious upbringing alongside social influences. Again it is hard to change how one thinks if it is deeply ingrained.
Again human nature is not sinful according to Judaism. One has to become sinful by his or her own actions. They are held responsble for those acts and need to atone for those acts without pressure or guilt. According to Judaism we are born perfect because we come directly from HaShem.
Again human nature is not sinful according to Judaism. One has to become sinful by his or her own actions. They are held responsble for those acts and need to atone for those acts without pressure or guilt. According to Judaism we are born perfect because we come directly from HaShem.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #16
I agree - not accepting or believing in someone else's faith doesn't mean they are a horrible person. We are all products of how we were raised.
As to the nature of sin, it sounds like the capacity to sin, from the Jewish perspective, comes when you enter into the community and agree to abide by the Law. If your actions violate the Law, you have sinned. Is that correct?
As to the nature of sin, it sounds like the capacity to sin, from the Jewish perspective, comes when you enter into the community and agree to abide by the Law. If your actions violate the Law, you have sinned. Is that correct?
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
You got it. Break out the party favors.
gmunoz
Purple Belt
As a Christian (I realize it would be different for others from different faiths), what determines sin is the Word of God. God doesn't leave it up to ourselves to determine what sin is. The Holy Bible teaches that sin is simply "know to do the right thing and not do it." - the right thing being what God teaches in His word. In other words to do something that God has said not to do; or not do something he has said to do. That's a Christian perspective.RandomPhantom700 said:
M
Melissa426
Guest
The concept of original sin, to my understanding, is not that babies are born sinners.
Human beings, by their very nature, are sinful. That is the original sin... your base nature.
Christian scripture claims that
1. through the disobedience of one man (Adam, thru whom mankind descended) the many were made sinners (Romans 5:23) (Only one person who ever lived was sinless... Jesus)
2. The righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace throught the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. (Romans 3: 23-24)
Peace,
Melissa
Human beings, by their very nature, are sinful. That is the original sin... your base nature.
Christian scripture claims that
1. through the disobedience of one man (Adam, thru whom mankind descended) the many were made sinners (Romans 5:23) (Only one person who ever lived was sinless... Jesus)
2. The righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace throught the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. (Romans 3: 23-24)
Peace,
Melissa
someguy
Master Black Belt
Hmm where does the magic number 12 come from any one know?oldnewbie said:
Or if that isn't the right age then what ever it is.
