Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: sin Message-ID: Date: 11 Dec 89 08:51:47 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh, Comp & Info Services Lines: 24 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article bnr-fos!bmers58!davem@watmath.waterloo.edu (Dave Mielke) writes: > >The Scriptures do not teach that all sins are equivalent. Matthew 23:23 >says "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe >of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier {matters} >of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, >and not to leave the other undone.". > As I've described my conception of "sin", this is a non-sequitur. Matthew says that some matters (mercy, faith, etc.) are more important than others (tithes, sacrifices (by implication)). Where does this talk about sin? To make this a passage about relative "badness" of sins, you need the highly suspect additional assumption that "sin" is simply action which is not in accordance with the Law. I have already argued that this is a terrible mis- construction of the nature of sin, leading to nitpicking legalism, holier- than-thou hypocrisy among believers, and fragmentation of the Body. -- David M. Tate | DISCLAIMER: dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | "Hey, that's *my* dis!" _____________________________________________________________________________ Statistics is the science of inferring the obvious and the false.