Do you talk to your children about sin?

[Anonymous]

Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

Reference in a Bible/Torah/Quaran/other holy book for this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

Reference in a Bible/Torah/Quaran/other holy book for this?

All of the above and then some, as many modern societal 'no-nos' are built on these same concepts.

Specific emphasis given to the way "sinfulness" is applied thicker/heavier to women/femmes than men/masc-of-center people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

So a telling someone it is wrong to murder is “shaming” and “control”? God telling us not to whore out our bodies due is slut-shaming?

The wages of sin is death. Those who continuously and willfully persist in sin will not be righteous, will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

So a telling someone it is wrong to murder is “shaming” and “control”? God telling us not to whore out our bodies due is slut-shaming?

The wages of sin is death. Those who continuously and willfully persist in sin will not be righteous, will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

You're not even trying to engage in good faith, but if you look at the language in your second example and simply ask yourself who it's most often applied to and who suffers most under that stigma, you've proven my point.

[Anonymous]

We talk about sin as being actions that cause harm to ourselves or our relationships with others. God wants us to be our most whole selves and live in peace with others, and some choices get in the way of that.

We’re Episcopalian but DH and I grew up evangelical. So we think a lot about the deconstructing-reconstructing we went through as young adults, and how to help our kids build a foundation of thoughtfulness and compassion that will serve them even if they choose a different faith tradition (or none) as adults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

So a telling someone it is wrong to murder is “shaming” and “control”? God telling us not to whore out our bodies due is slut-shaming?

The wages of sin is death. Those who continuously and willfully persist in sin will not be righteous, will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

You're not even trying to engage in good faith, but if you look at the language in your second example and simply ask yourself who it's most often applied to and who suffers most under that stigma, you've proven my point.

It is the law which reveals sin. People should be stigmatized and caused to be ashamed of doing evil, else they will persist in it, not knowing right from wrong.

[Anonymous]

Leviticus 11:12: "That which has no fins nor scales in the waters, that is a detestable thing unto you"

No shrimp - ever. This is one of the key things I talk to my kids about. I apply the same credence to all of Leviticus, not just some parts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Leviticus 11:12: "That which has no fins nor scales in the waters, that is a detestable thing unto you"

No shrimp - ever. This is one of the key things I talk to my kids about. I apply the same credence to all of Leviticus, not just some parts.

There is an actual, Biblical reason that Christians believe the moral law still applies, but the civil law for Israel and the ceremonial law for Old Testament worship does not.

Romans 14:5-8
One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

Reference in a Bible/Torah/Quaran/other holy book for this?

All of the above and then some, as many modern societal 'no-nos' are built on these same concepts.

Specific emphasis given to the way "sinfulness" is applied thicker/heavier to women/femmes than men/masc-of-center people.

I think you misunderstood. A reference would be you quoting something from one or more of those books to prove that they say "standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leviticus 11:12: "That which has no fins nor scales in the waters, that is a detestable thing unto you"

No shrimp - ever. This is one of the key things I talk to my kids about. I apply the same credence to all of Leviticus, not just some parts.

There is an actual, Biblical reason that Christians believe the moral law still applies, but the civil law for Israel and the ceremonial law for Old Testament worship does not.

Romans 14:5-8
One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

I disagree. There is nothing that says the old laws don't apply. In fact Jesus says the opposite in Matthew 5:17- “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

If you wish to obey god's laws and achieve salvation you obey all of them. Not just the convenient ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leviticus 11:12: "That which has no fins nor scales in the waters, that is a detestable thing unto you"

No shrimp - ever. This is one of the key things I talk to my kids about. I apply the same credence to all of Leviticus, not just some parts.

There is an actual, Biblical reason that Christians believe the moral law still applies, but the civil law for Israel and the ceremonial law for Old Testament worship does not.

Romans 14:5-8
One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

I disagree. There is nothing that says the old laws don't apply. In fact Jesus says the opposite in Matthew 5:17- “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

If you wish to obey god's laws and achieve salvation you obey all of them. Not just the convenient ones.

You have heard it said that Jesus came to fulfill the law, but I tell you that Jesus never made that claim. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says he came to fulfill “the Law and the Prophets,” a traditional phrase that refers to the whole Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament). And he’s not talking about simple obedience to the statutes. For Jesus, following the law’s 613 commands matters, but to truly fulfill it, or to “fill it full,” is something more.

(https://bibleproject.com/articles/how-does-jesus-fulfill-law/)

When Jesus was talking about that, he was talking about how he is the capstone on the Old Testament story. I went out of my way to say that there are ways the law still exists - typically that's called the moral law. Loving God and neighbor still stands. That fills up the law. But specific precepts have indeed passed away.

In fact, the ceremonies, sacrifices, and other elements of the Old Covenant were “only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves” (Hebrews 10:1). The tabernacle and temple were “holy places made with hands,” but they were never meant to be permanent; they were but “copies of the true things” (Hebrews 9:24, ESV). The Law had a built-in expiration date, being filled as it was with “external regulations applying until the time of the new order” (Hebrews 9:10).

(https://www.gotquestions.org/abolish-fulfill-law.html)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

Reference in a Bible/Torah/Quaran/other holy book for this?

All of the above and then some, as many modern societal 'no-nos' are built on these same concepts.

Specific emphasis given to the way "sinfulness" is applied thicker/heavier to women/femmes than men/masc-of-center people.

I think you misunderstood. A reference would be you quoting something from one or more of those books to prove that they say "standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that."

Broseph, standing in judgment of another of God's creations puts you above them. You're assuming God's role. What greater sin could there possibly be than usurping divine authority? Pick the holy book of your choosing and cite it yourself; I've never found one that says otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leviticus 11:12: "That which has no fins nor scales in the waters, that is a detestable thing unto you"

No shrimp - ever. This is one of the key things I talk to my kids about. I apply the same credence to all of Leviticus, not just some parts.

There is an actual, Biblical reason that Christians believe the moral law still applies, but the civil law for Israel and the ceremonial law for Old Testament worship does not.

Romans 14:5-8
One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

I disagree. There is nothing that says the old laws don't apply. In fact Jesus says the opposite in Matthew 5:17- “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

If you wish to obey god's laws and achieve salvation you obey all of them. Not just the convenient ones.

You have heard it said that Jesus came to fulfill the law, but I tell you that Jesus never made that claim. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says he came to fulfill “the Law and the Prophets,” a traditional phrase that refers to the whole Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament). And he’s not talking about simple obedience to the statutes. For Jesus, following the law’s 613 commands matters, but to truly fulfill it, or to “fill it full,” is something more.

(https://bibleproject.com/articles/how-does-jesus-fulfill-law/)

When Jesus was talking about that, he was talking about how he is the capstone on the Old Testament story. I went out of my way to say that there are ways the law still exists - typically that's called the moral law. Loving God and neighbor still stands. That fills up the law. But specific precepts have indeed passed away.

In fact, the ceremonies, sacrifices, and other elements of the Old Covenant were “only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves” (Hebrews 10:1). The tabernacle and temple were “holy places made with hands,” but they were never meant to be permanent; they were but “copies of the true things” (Hebrews 9:24, ESV). The Law had a built-in expiration date, being filled as it was with “external regulations applying until the time of the new order” (Hebrews 9:10).

(https://www.gotquestions.org/abolish-fulfill-law.html)

Total spin. What could you not rationalize with this method?

The words are clear, the law is clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Sin is a fear- and shame-based control structure. They must understand the distinction between control and actual morality. We also spend a lot of time discussing how sin is about our contract with God, not other people, and how, as the "other people" to others, it's not our place to judge another person's sins, it's God's. Standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that.

Reference in a Bible/Torah/Quaran/other holy book for this?

All of the above and then some, as many modern societal 'no-nos' are built on these same concepts.

Specific emphasis given to the way "sinfulness" is applied thicker/heavier to women/femmes than men/masc-of-center people.

I think you misunderstood. A reference would be you quoting something from one or more of those books to prove that they say "standing in judgment of a fellow sinner is, in and of itself, a sin, and the greater sin, at that."

Broseph, standing in judgment of another of God's creations puts you above them. You're assuming God's role. What greater sin could there possibly be than usurping divine authority? Pick the holy book of your choosing and cite it yourself; I've never found one that says otherwise.

But if that's the case, then you should be able to drop a clear quote here.

IMO the Bible, for example, says that the church as an authority figure gets to judge individual believers. I as a congregant don't exactly (though I am allowed to say something), but the church leadership absolutely does. For ex:

“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosedf in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.” --Matthew 18:15-20

Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. --Galatians 6:1

I'd like to see your cite that says that pointing out someone else's transgression is a sin. Specific verse or verses that together say this.