Showing posts with label original sin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label original sin. Show all posts

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Sin, Sanctification, and Today's Sermon

Today's sermon was a continuation on temptation. The pastor emphasized how desires that are not "maintained" lead to sin. He went on to explain that it was only a complete surrender and trust not based on reason that would "help" in attaining sanctification. One must identify with Jesus.

Although he had said that he did not believe any of us are immune to the normal capacity to sin and that we all do, he also seemed to say that one's "entrustment" and "commitment" to God in modelling Jesus' life was "entire sanctification. (These were not his words, but my understanding of the implications of his sermon).

My question is if desire is not a sin, then when does it become a sin? when it impinges upon others? when it hinders other things that someone else thinks should be more important to you? when it limits other areas of your life through addiction? when it become the focus of one's life? what about goals, life purposes, and noble causes that one sees as the epitome of desire?

Buddhism teaches that if we can disengage ourselves from desire, then we can attain a "state of Nirvana". Should Christians then, disengage themselves from their desires to seek entire sanctification? I think not, as desire is not wrong, but channelling it into the right direction is important. This is why our free society is important to maintain.

I think that whenever one talks of "sin", there is an inevitable reaction in the religious of "appeasement to God", as "he is the one offended"....or a spiritual reaction of "moral superiority" because this particular "sin" is not my weakness. Religion intensifies an otherwise "decent" and civil discussion. Religion can be dangerous and often hinders open and free discussion for fear of treading on "forbidden territory".

I think that today's world of religious intolerance, dogmatism, and ideological "drivenness" is not an atmosphere open for civil discourse. Dogmatism hinders open-mindedness, because one's identity is so tied to one's understanding of "god" that any discussion is seen as a personal attack. This is an unhealthy identification, or a limited development, at least.

Traditions do breed security and identity, but can also breed prejuidice and discrimination, through a limited understanding of living and being in the world. One's "world" is "all there is" and should dominate everyone else's reality, as well.This is nothing short of self focused living in the name of "god" and it is repugnant to many who see differently.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Original Sin, Evolution, and Grandparenting

I have been keeping my two grandchildren while my daughter works. Hannah and Drayton are two and ten months.

My husband and I had three children that were born within four years. I have learned a lot since then. And this is what wisdom is about.

When my children were young, I was so concerned that they be brought up in the "admonition of the Lord". "Train up a child in the way he should go..." were mottos we lived by. We were in Church every Sunday for Sunday School, as well as the main service. We went to services again on Sunday evenings. We even sang together as a family on an occassion. But, if I was desirous of teaching my children what was important, which was about God, what have I learned about my failures?

First and foremost, I understood that our children were "fallen". They had "sin natures". So, every childish behavior was viewed as rebellion. Unfortunately, too late for them, I have learned that they were not rebellious, but just children. They needed guidance, but not oppression. I was an authoratarian, because I feared for their future, as well as failing as a parent. My desire for being a good parent became a goal that was oppressive even to me. So, I am glad for an opportunity to be "wisdom" to my daughter and to help her in bringing up the children, with the "wisdom" I have gained.

The main problem with the view I had was that there was a "form" of parenting that must be adhered to. I did not take into consideration the differences in my children or that my own issues would play into how I saw my parenting.

Evolution teaches that we are animals. Animals must be trained. But, the problem with this view is similar to my "sin nature" view. There is a "form" in which parenting is done, which is behavior modification. This is not a relational view, but again an authoritarian one.

Parents and grandparents must build a relationship with their children or grandchildren. This means listening first and foremost to what their needs are and attempting to serve them. It means that when it is possible without compromising the things that are most important, then do. Distract with other opportunities. Give praise, encourage, but be firm when necessary. This brings joy to the heart to see how responsive a little child can be and what they can learn so quickly if they believe you love them.