Honor One Another

[Ice]

I've been researching this area for a while now and would appreciate your thoughts on this;

http://paganwiccan.about.com/od/contemp ... AndSin.htm

[Blind Owl]

Would you care to get the ball rolling?

What's your opinion on the subject?

[Heddwen]

(sorry to have missed you earlier on, I'm feeling a lot better, thanks. I hope that you had an enjoyable morning)

Bart, I'm not sure what you mean but I'm referring to all those orange lipstick wearers out there. It's a local craze you know and nothing to do with this thread.I speak on many levels sometimes, no man is an island

And while I'm on the subject I suggest we write it down and take it forward to that next step. Thanks lol

Dhonour, isn't there something in the Bible about checking out the log in our own eye before investigating the speck in our neighbours? or that thing about 'he who is without sin to cast the first stone'. If so then why are we transposing those Christian ideals,( perhaps a casualtyof our nurtured upbringing) and applying them to (perhaps) our new(ish) path, if you know what I mean.

[Bartholomew]

There we go again.

[DJ Droood]

I've been researching this area for a while now and would appreciate your thoughts on this;

http://paganwiccan.about.com/od/contemp ... AndSin.htm

First, the definition of "sin" is, according to Dictionary.com, a transgression of divine law. It can also be "a reprehensible or regrettable act.

Others believe that if you violate the rules of your gods -- whoever they may be -- you are committing a sinful act, whether you call it that or by some other terminology.

I think under these definitions, pagans could sin...littering, for instance....or sinking your oil rig....and "karma' seems similar to paying for sin. I think it is a much bigger deal in Christianity. A pagan can figure out a way to atone on their own, while the condition in Christianity is spelled out quite clearly....it is the entire point.

I think the article also made a clear distinction about what christians and pagans view as sin. (we needn't run through them )...or more specifically, what pagans have a more laissez faire attitude about. I know pagans who aren't cool with homosexuality, anti-abortion pagans....I think they just see it more as a personal choice...."you" doing it doesn't offend "their" gods....maybe that is another difference. Pagans are mostly concerned about their own morality, whereas Christians want everyone to shape up and get with the program...it is their duty....

[Mountainheart]

I think that Jesus would have made a good pagan His teachings were focussed on encouraging his followers to live positive, balanced, lives and to live life to the full : his interaction with sin was to release people who were screwed up by it; by enabling them to give themselves permission to move on from their 'sins'.

It was Paul who introduced the sin-focussed aspects of Christianity; and some of the early church Fathers who took the ball and ran with it.

Thx
David

[Heddwen]

I seem to have double posted and altered the above

[Mountainheart]

Dhonour, isn't there something in the Bible about checking out the log in our own eye before investigating the speck in our neighbours? or that thing about 'he who is without sin to cast the first stone'. If so then why are we transposing those Christian ideals,( perhaps a casualtyof our nurtured upbringing) and applying them to (perhaps) our new(ish) path, if you know what I mean.

Hi Heddwen: My views on sin / Jesus / Paul were developed while I was a Christian, not after: so I don't think I'm being judgemental. The Pauline version of Christianity was the log that blinded me to many things that Jesus taught. My current beliefs were mainly developed as a result of rejecting Paul, studying *Jesus's* teachings in depth and reaching beyond the biblical gospels: especially to the Gospels of Thomas and Mary. I subsequently found that the belief system that this engendered seemed to match very well with being druid.

Thx
David

[Heddwen]

Dhonour, I wasn't implying that you were being judgemental. After all we can only judge ourselves, finger pointing is a worthless occupation IMHO. I'm glad that you've found a path which merges your beliefs with druidry.

[Mountainheart]

Dhonour, I wasn't implying that you were being judgemental. After all we can only judge ourselves, finger pointing is a worthless occupation IMHO. I'm glad that you've found a path which merges your beliefs with druidry.

Hi Heddwen: thanks for clarifying

[DJ Droood]

Dhonour, I wasn't implying that you were being judgemental. After all we can only judge ourselves, finger pointing is a worthless occupation IMHO. I'm glad that you've found a path which merges your beliefs with druidry.

So in regards to the article Ice posted and asked for comments on, how do you...especially those of you who are Christians...understand the concept of "sin", and is it different than a pagan conocept of "sin", if such a thiing even exists?

And Dhonor, when you say:

his interaction with sin was to release people who were screwed up by it; by enabling them to give themselves permission to move on from their 'sins'.

Is this a restatement of John 3:16? (we can leave Acts and Romans, etc. out of it is wwe want to avoid Paul) And I guess if Jesus gave people permission to move on, that is really like God giving permission to move on, and ultimately that is by "accepting" the sacrifice of Jesus, who was the scapegoat. (point of theological clarification please...who was actually offering up Jesus as the scapegoat? Was it Jesus giving himself over a sacrifice (to Himself, ultimately), was it other humans offering Jesus as a sacrifice or was it Yahweh offering his son to himself?)

In the Christian conception of sin, is it possible to "move on" without accepting this sacrifice?

And how does this effect your view of a Pagan who has not accepted John 3:16? If one was to come to one's own arrangement with a god or gods other than Yahweh, could tha be acceptable atonement?

[Bartholomew]

This is an interesting discussion, but I may have to go away and do some Bible studying ect and think a lot before I launch into anything if I can muster up the energy. These are issues which have given me much grief over a good many years and I am so weary. I say just do what your conscience tells you is right and do not intentionally set out to hurt another human being in anyway. Unintentional hurt is often unavoidable especially if you shoot from the hip, and are blunt in your dealings with others.Anyway I will have to come back. Orange lipstick wearers aplenty Heddwen? Now there you have shocked and disappointed me, I thought I was the only one to be wearing such a sacred shade. I'll pop back later.

[Mountainheart]

And Dhonor, when you say:

his interaction with sin was to release people who were screwed up by it; by enabling them to give themselves permission to move on from their 'sins'.

Is this a restatement of John 3:16? (we can leave Acts and Romans, etc. out of it is wwe want to avoid Paul) And I guess if Jesus gave people permission to move on, that is really like God giving permission to move on, and ultimately that is by "accepting" the sacrifice of Jesus, who was the scapegoat. (point of theological clarification please...who was actually offering up Jesus as the scapegoat? Was it Jesus giving himself over a sacrifice (to Himself, ultimately), was it other humans offering Jesus as a sacrifice or was it Yahweh offering his son to himself?)

In the Christian conception of sin, is it possible to "move on" without accepting this sacrifice?

And how does this effect your view of a Pagan who has not accepted John 3:16? If one was to come to one's own arrangement with a god or gods other than Yahweh, could tha be acceptable atonement?

LOL: well you are definitely asking the wrong person if you want an orthodox take on Christianity, since I reject the whole idea that:

a) Jesus was God in any sort of special way (he was the son of 'God' in the same way that you or I are)

b) Jesus's crucifixion had any meaning other that displaying mans' inhumanity to man.

My own take on 'sin' is the well worn "if it hurts no-one, do what you will"

My thoughts on Jesus's teachings revolve around the interpretation of the Greek word metanoia: meaning a change of mind or heart. In other words Jesus offered a new way of thinking and feeling about sin: he offered freedom from it through a change in attitude. For some who were ridden with guilt they 'needed' external permission for this metanoia to occur: and Jesus offered them this through telling them that their sins were forgiven.

John 3v16 is one man's interpretation of the Jesus story. IMO it creates a metanarrative where none really exists.

[Mountainheart]

BTW you might find this verse from the Gospel of Mary (Magdelene) interesting in the context of this discussion. It shows that the debate was not cut and dried in the early days of the church:

Peter said to him [Jesus] ... "What is the sin of the world?"

The Teacher answered: "There is no sin. It is you who make sin exist, when you act according to the habits of your corrupted nature; this is where sin lies. This is why the Good has come into your midst. It acts together with the elements of your nature so as to reunite it with its roots."

[Heddwen]

I found this, if it will help expand the debate a little:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin

and I was interested in the issue of atonement. The atheistic code of ethical conduct resonates here. It's something of a dilemma. How do we go about-

* Actually proving the existence of sin, further than any documented accounts and then there's the correct dissipation of the data.

* Performing the atonement, because personally it seems like a waste of energy.

Bart, I understand where you're coming from on this. Unintentional hurt or intentional hurt can be damaging BUT we need to prove first that damage has been actually caused. I don't think we need to take the Law into our own hands.It will end with a downward spiral leading to misery and many casualties.

Live and Let Live This is and always has been my policy.

[DJ Droood]

BTW you might find this verse from the Gospel of Mary (Magdelene)

The apocrypha?! I think St. Augustine wants to have a word with you, young man.

The atheistic code of ethical conduct

really? I didn't know we had one...I thought we were devoid of all beliefs, ethics and morals...strange what you can learn on the DHP!

[Mountainheart]

The apocrypha?! I think Constantine wants to have a word with you, young man.

I think he would have wanted a lot of words with me...

Incidentally, apparently Pelagius was British and it has been postulated that his objections to original sin may have been influenced by Celtic-based cultural beliefs.

[DJ Droood]

The apocrypha?! I think Constantine wants to have a word with you, young man.

I think he would have wanted a lot of words with me...

Incidentally, apparently Pelagius was British and it has been postulated that his objections to original sin may have been influenced by Celtic-based cultural beliefs.

ahhh, you quoted me after I did some googling and realized St. Augustine would be more POed at you than Constantine. (I aways like the Gospel of Thomas...sorry it didn't make the cut)

[Mountainheart]

(I aways like the Gospel of Thomas...sorry it didn't make the cut)

Gospel of Thomas Saying 77: "I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained. Split a piece of Wood; I am there. Lift up a stone, and you will find me there."

Seems pretty pagan to me...

David

[DJ Droood]

Seems pretty pagan to me...

Other than the eyeshadow, I usually can't see a difference.