 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
PhilTheThrill
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 95
| Posted 3/2/2004 12:58 PM (GMT -6) |   | Here's the question: If you commit a sin with right motives, is it still a sin?
Examples:
Thou shalt not lie. However, what if you lie to protect jews hiding in your attic during WW2?
Thou shalt not steal. What if you're stealing money from a terrorist cell and giving it to proper charities?
How important is the context of a sin to the sin itself, and does motive always, sometimes, or never make a difference?
Discuss!
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 3/3/2004 11:53 AM (GMT -6) | | Sin is sin is sin ... period, whether it's done to for noble or ignoble purposes (igoble's a word, isn't it?). The point is that the human race was never supposed to be in this muck, mire and mess in the first place; we were never supposed to have to deal with lying (or is that lieing?) in any form, fashion or manner. So, that one can lie for a good reason doesn't not redefine sin. Obviously, God takes all this into consideration, and, thankfully, His Son's death covers our sins. Situation ethics can never be solved by trying to adjust definitions and terms. What resolves the issue is perfection, completion and freedom from a sinful environment ... yet to come!
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 3/3/2004 12:02 PM (GMT -6) | | Oh, and let me say one more thing real quick here (without, I hope, having spell "lying"). When one is deliberately decieving by stating something that is not true, one has lied. This is the definition of the word. (Oh, for pete's sake, a definition of "lie" on dictionary.com says this: Norwegian politician and first secretary-general of the United Nations (1946-1953). I mean, really!)
Anyway, my point is that the word is defined by a deliberate deception (ommission not being the issue here). So, to lie, as the midwives did when delivering the Israelite children, was sin. It's sad that there they had to be put in this position in the first place, but they did, in fact, lie. "Oh, yes, the woman are pretty hearty, ya know [almost sound Norwegian, they do]; they give birth before we get there ... yup, that's the truth ... sure is." Oh, and where were the babies being kept, you know! Lies, I tell you, lies. It was really an early communist conspiracy, but no one will believe me when I tell them these things!
Oh, I have GOT to go!
Starkman
| | Back to Top | | |
|
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 3/3/2004 5:52 PM (GMT -6) | | Phil: A book I read recently called "Knowing The Unknowable God," had a chapter entitled "The God of Truth Who Sends Delusions: The Contrast Between Facts and The Truth," had an excellant take on
"lying for God" (so to speak). If you get a chance, pick up the book (by James Lucas). I'll try and excerpt some of it soon (I'm so tired tonight!)> | | Back to Top | | |
|
Wahoo
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 142
| Posted 3/3/2004 6:30 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Starkman
When one is deliberately decieving by stating something that is not true, one has lied. This is the definition of the word.
Anyway, my point is that the word is defined by a deliberate deception (ommission not being the issue here). So, to lie, as the midwives did when delivering the Israelite children, was sin. It's sad that there they had to be put in this position in the first place, but they did, in fact, lie. "Oh, yes, the woman are pretty hearty, ya know [almost sound Norwegian, they do]; they give birth before we get there ... yup, that's the truth ... sure is." Oh, and where were the babies being kept, you know! Lies, I tell you, lies. It was really an early communist conspiracy, but no one will believe me when I tell them these things!
What is a lie? Its just words... Air passing the vocal chords. It takes two agents of free will to decieve though. I know i've done something wrong if i've taken the low road. Wouldn't I be a sinner if I did nothing at all? What does the almighty expect I should do? I welcome the judgement that I'm a sinner if it comes from the lower creatures of earth. But praise God, I have an advocate with the Father. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 3/4/2004 3:16 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey John,
(Had to edit this to be a bit nicer ... don't know what the hek's wrong with me today ... haven't been spending the personal time in prayer that I need ... that's it!)
If sin were only defined by what is in the heart, then one could murder, rape, steal, etc., and it wouldn't be sin if that person didn't have the "heart" about it to which you refer. Sin is not defined in the heart, it is defined by God Himself; Thou shalt not steal, murder, etc. is not a heart issue, it is a moral issue. Heart or no heart.
Second, I was I did mean that Christ's blood cleansing our sin when I used the word "cover." Of course it doesn't cover our sins, as if it's some kind of blanket! I was using the term "cover" in a slang manner, like, "Hey, it covers our rear-end."
Wahoo,
No, a lie is not words created in the vocal cords; it is the intent to decieve by stating something that is not true. One can lie on paper, by words, in silent motion, whatever. Let's be clear here and not muddy the waters. Good ol' common sense doesn't need any more confusion then what the world is already doing with it! | | Back to Top | | |
|
Wahoo
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 142
| Posted 3/4/2004 3:26 AM (GMT -6) | | Starkman.
A lie does to take two active free agents to be deceitful. Well, I guess you can lie to an ATM machine but there is going to be someone who is deceived on the other end of the transaction.
Sin is sin according to the law, but then according to the Spirit so is a heck of a lot of other things. How are those things determined? By the Holy Spirit. The law of the Spirit is what happens to a believer, not a new set of rules for you, me and the rest of the world to abide by. We have the relationship and we are obedient to God, no matter what. That's what holiness is right?
I think you want to capitalize on the law of the Spirit by defining what is and is not sin. The only person who is worthy of that is in heaven right now. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 3/4/2004 4:06 AM (GMT -6) | | Wahoo,
I've lie like a dog to the ATM machine: "Why, I KNOW I have more money in there than that! What's wrong with you, anyway?" (I'm just hoping that the little guy in the machine dispensing the money will believe me one day!)
I simply wanted to make the point that a lie comes from intentions to decieve. The person on the other end is obviously not to be made aware of this. It is sin to lie in this regard. OK, let me be more specific here, because I can see where this will open a can of worms if I don't specify what I mean.
As we noted with the Egyptian women who were instructed to kill the Israelite women's babies, they lied to Pharoah--clear, cut lies. And, of course, they did so for the right reasons. But, was their intention to decieve by telling Pharoah something that was not true? Yes. That (in this kind of case) is lying, and lying is sin.
The point is that the Egyptian women--mankind in general--were never supposed to be in this sphere of existence in the first place; they were never supposed to have to even "know" about lying, deceiving, trying to protect human life, etc. When God created us, He did not do so with this kind of context in mind. Does He know, though, what the Egyptian women were doing, that they were lying for good reasons? Well, of course He does. But does that excuse sin? No, not by any means. God is, however, gracious, understanding and all those kinds of things, and He has ultimately provided atonement for us, not just for the sins we know about, but for this whole dawg-gone mess we're in that is contaminated and corrupted by sin. That's all I'm trying to say.
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
PhilTheThrill
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 95
| Posted 3/4/2004 5:26 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Starkman
As we noted with the Egyptian women who were instructed to kill the Israelite women's babies, they lied to Pharoah--clear, cut lies. And, of course, they did so for the right reasons. But, was their intention to decieve by telling Pharoah something that was not true? Yes. That (in this kind of case) is lying, and lying is sin.
Well, in a situation like WW2, if you knew how horrific that Auschwitz was, what would be the more egregious sin: lying to save the Jew, or keeping yourself pure by giving up the Jew (the Bible also says that it is a sin to break the law of the land!). I'm of the mind that the worse sin would, in that case, be not to sin and let the Nazis take the Jew.
Also, do we need to ask forgiveness for hiding Jews?
-Phil | | Back to Top | | |
|
Wahoo
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 142
| Posted 3/4/2004 5:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Thank you Starkman,
Very important point about the origin of sin in the human condition. The forbidden fruit was the knowledge of good and EVIL. Before that, there was no use for sinful behaviour because the garden was the perfect egalitarian society. Make someone believe something that is not... What a concept!
But really, Thank you for the clarity. I was getting a little riled up from the "complicity" thread. I think I need to take a break for a while. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 3/4/2004 5:46 AM (GMT -6) | | As I thought more about what I've posted, I want to modify something. I think the bigger picture of situation ethics, beyond trying to resolve whether the Egyptian midwives were lying or not, is to note that it isn't a matter of sins as it is of sin. Trying to categorize every move a human being makes--is this a sin or not--is to mis not working with the bigger, and more important, picture; that mankind starts with and works inside of a sinful position, and this was never supposed to be. I think, therefore, that it's much easier to see what the Egyptian midwives were doing--committing a sin or not--by determining if what they were doing falls into the classification of those things people would not be doing in a non-fallen world. I think this is both interesting and important.
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
Wahoo
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 142
| Posted 3/4/2004 6:56 AM (GMT -6) | | I wouldn't say that God vetoes a cause if sin was involved in ot at some point. For instance, I have been disobedient many times in my spiritual journey, but God has been merciful. I didn't have to find the narrow path and get back on it again. He was willing to change and adapt to a new situation that evolved out of my disobedience.
Shalom! | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 3/4/2004 9:33 AM (GMT -6) | | Tigress,
You said, God counted their acts as good and righteous or He wouldn't have blessed them.
No, I don't believe God counted these kinds of acts as good and righteous. Big difference. It was these people's faith that attracted God. GOD then attributed righteousness (right-standing) to these people in view of their faith.
Let me note, too, that the midwives saving babies was not of a sinful sphere; that they lied in order to do it was. Again, we humans were never supposed to even be in an environment that would call for us to have to lie. That we sometimes have to only attests to the real problem: sinful, fallen mankind in a sinful, fallen world.
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 3/4/2004 10:49 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Starkman
If sin were only defined by what is in the heart, then one could murder, rape, steal, etc., and it wouldn't be sin if that person didn't have the "heart" about it to which you refer. Sin is not defined in the heart, it is defined by God Himself; Thou shalt not steal, murder, etc. is not a heart issue, it is a moral issue. Heart or no heart.
Jesus made it quite clear that to hate one's brother was equal to murder, and to lust after another man's wife was equal to adultery. Both these things originate in the heart, as Jesus also said elsewhere (For out of the heart comes adulteries...).
Perhaps I can illustrate. The common thread between adultery and godly sex is the physical act itself. What makes this same act sinful or godly is the moral context that it is done in. Likewise, in murder and (righteous) execution, the same ACT is done (taking the life of another), while the moral context defines the guiltiness or lack of guiltiness involved. That's all I'm saying.
So your objection to my original point does not pertain to my point in actuality. I agree with you that these things (adultery, rape, murder, etc.) are all sins. However, it is the heart that FIRST sins, and only secondarily does the body obey the sinful motivation--from the heart.
quote:
No, a lie is not words created in the vocal cords; it is the intent to decieve by stating something that is not true.
Amen. Precisely my point. Without the intent to decieve, one may say something that is incorrect without lying. They were simply mistaken. See what I mean?
Matt. 15:18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.
Luke 6:43 For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 44 For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. 45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. 46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 3/4/2004 11:12 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey John,
You said, However, it is the heart that FIRST sins, and only secondarily does the body obey the sinful motivation--from the heart.
I definitely agree. I think we're both on the same wave length here. It is really only my point that even beyond the heart, mankind lives within a sinful sphere of existence to start with. This, in and of itself, creates the distinction in what seperation there is between those things that are sins in and of themselves and that which comes from the heart. An example of this dichotomy in action is the perfect Lord Jesus within the mainstream of a sinful existence. I think, though, we're in harmony here!
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:35 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|