3 strkes and your out?

[Neal]

Just wondering if their is anything in the Bible about how many times you can sin and what kind of sins are worse then others like fornication and theft.

[Papa Spot]

According to the Bible, there is only one sin that won't be forgiven and that's blashpheming the Holy Spirit. Exactly what that means, no one knows for sure but some people believe that it means that your heart grows so hard that it's impossible for them to ever to turn again to God. Since the Bible says that if you repent and ask God to forgive you, He will not only forgive you but He will "remember your sins no more". So, if you take that literally, that means that God would have no way of knowing how many times you sinned prior to being forgiven.

As far as degrees of sins, yes the Bible very clearly ipliess that some sins are worse than others. One example is that it says that if you're angry with your brother without a good reason, you're in danger of the judgement. But if you say "Raca" to your brother (Raca is a Hebrew expression of contempt), you're in judgement of the council. And if you call your brother a fool, you're in danger of going to Hell. The Bible also expresses particular contempt for anyone who would lead a child astray. (If you do THAT, according to the Bible, it would be better for you if a huge rock was tied around your neck and you were thrown into the ocean.) Also, the Bible says that there are six thing that the Lord hates and there are seven that are detestable to Him. They are:

1. Haughty eyes,
2. A lying tongue,
3. Hands that shed innocent blood,
4. A heart that devises wicked schemes,
5. Feet that are quick to rush into evil,
6. A false witness who pours out lies
7. A man who stirs up dissension among brothers.

That very STRONGLY implies that some things are worse than others (according to the Bible).

[Neal]

I wonder how high up their lust is because I dn't really think anyone can contol that.

[Papa Spot]

I don't think that the term "lust" has the same connotation now as it has when the King James Bible was translated. It meant something more than just having a bad thought. In that time, it meant having so much desire for someone that you plotted to have sex with them.

[Neal]

O kind of like pre-metitating rape. Ya lust today isn't that bad.

[Papa Spot]

Well, more like premeditating fornication or adultry.

[Dr Small]

Don't mean to start another argument or make any hard feelings towards you, Papa Spot,
but if you believe all that you wrote, in your first post, why do you not believe that there is a God?!


Dr Small

[Papa Spot]

Don't mean to start another argument or make any hard feelings towards you, Papa Spot,
but if you believe all that you wrote, in your first post, why do you not believe that there is a God?!


Dr Small

If you notice, I use phrases like "according to the Bible" and stuff like that. I just pointed out what the Bible says about it because that seemed to be the nature of Neal's question. That doesn't mean that I believe that the Bible was written by anyone other than a group of about forty men (human beings).

Just to clarify, I've never said that I don't believe in God. I just don't believe in the Judeo-Christian interpretation of It.

[Dr Small]

Well, to plainly state, the Bible was written by a bunch of men, and they were human beings, but they were inspired by God, to write down what he said, and that is how the Bible was recorded.

How was Genesis, the first book of the Bible, recorded, and who recorded it?
Moses wrote Genesis. And you may say, but Moses was not around during the flood.
That is absolutely true. But the account of creation was passed on from generation to generation up to the flood, where Noah and his sons continued the account, until Egypt where Moses was with the Children of Israel in their bondage, and God told Moses to record it for a record.

That is how the Bible was written, in some parts, and others recorded it, just as it happened.
I do not deny the fact that it was written by human beings, but that it was inspired by God.

Dr Small

[Papa Spot]

I know that's what you believe, Dr Small and that's fine and I respect it. But you're explaining things as though the things that you are saying are facts. They're not facts, they're your beliefs. I'm not saying that your beliefs are not valid; they are valid. My beliefs are different and are just as valid. You cannot mistake temporal truths for spiritual truths. Facts fall within the realm of temporal truths. In other words, they cannot be argued and they are the same for everyone without regard to beliefs. And unlike spiritual truths, temporal truths can be proven. For example, if I say that you have blood inside your body, it is a fact; it is not subject to belief or disbelief and it can be proven. You can say that it isn't true but that doesn't change the fact that it IS true. You can deny it but I can prove it. We could take a sterile needle and prick your finger and a drop of blood would appear. You might then say, "Well, you've proved that I have a red liquid inside me but you haven't proved that it's blood." I say, "Okay, let's look at it under a microscope." Sure enough, we see red blood cells. Then we could stain a smear and look at the different neutrophils. We could do a phenolphthalein test to prove that it contains hemoglobin. Whether you ever accepted it as fact or not, it would still be a fact that you have blood inside your body.

Spiritual truths are different. They are subject to your own beliefs which are based on what you have been taught and learned and filtered through everything that you have experienced. You may say that it is a universal truth that Moses was inspired by a divine being when he wrote the Pentateuch. But I can say, "Prove it" and it immediately fails the test of a universal truth because it is impossible for you to prove it. You BELIEVE it and that's fine. I don't believe it and that's fine too. But that makes it a spiritual truth and NOT a temporal truth. And spiritual truths are true only to the individuals that believe them.