 Eaglewings says: For the wages of sin is death. Death to one's self worth. Death to one's well being. Death to one's happiness and joy. Sin is just not worth the price one has to pay for it. What if people don't believe in sin - then how can sin be the cause? It is more likely a biochemical reaction in the brain. Sin is a problem whether or not one believes in it. I don't beleive anthropogenic green house gases cause global warming. Just because I don't believe it doesn't make it not so, if in fact it is. I wish you would comment more Eaglewings. By the way, your website is quite a beautiful thing. There are those who claim there is no God and there are those who believe there is a mother ship circling the earth. Many people believe many things but just because you believe something or do not believe something does not prove or disprove one's beliefs. It is in how you respond to that belief that makes a difference. I happen to know there is a GOD for I have seen Him in many ways. I happen to know there are sinful people in the world for I have seen the results of sin in the world. I also know that a man came from God to restore fallen man that man was Jesus. I know these things to be true, therefore; I believe that there are consequences beyond this life that must be accounted for. If... My guess is, if you DO believe in this SIN crap, then you are scared out of your wits after you "sin," and it is FEAR that causes the depression. If anyone's interested, the paper shows that while experimenting with drugs or sex results in men being 1.6 times more likely to be depressed than male abstainers, this effect is not statistically significant. The effect of drug/sex experimentation is stronger for women and statistically significant--women who experiment with drugs are 2.1 times more likely to develop depression, and those who experiment with sex are 3.1 times more likely to develop depression. Having multiple sex partners also as much more negative effects for women (10.9 x more likely to get depression, statisticaly significant) than for men (2.4 x more likely to get depression, not statistically significant). Heavy u... Except for the drugs, I'd guess the depression is linked to social norms and/or superstition. Women, especially young women, are the object of far more social disapproval for sexual behavior. Also rightwing religions treat sin as condemnation to hell, which superstitious people treat as literal. The drugs, on the other hand, might have some actual causal relation with depression, especially since this is about hard drugs. Or the fact that access to them involves particularly risky behavior, might suggest some lurking variable. It would seem that this link as caused the most discussion of all my posts which makes me wonder. Could it be that this sin matter is of greater importance than one would admit to? I mean why does it matter what a report says about depressiong being linked to sin cause any emotion unless of course it could be true and then one would have to explain away the fact that there are consequences to bad behavior. On the other hand if there are no consequences to bad behavior then EAT DRINK AND BE MERRY for tomorrow you are dead. Now that is depressing! Eaglewings, I agree with you whole-heartedly about everything you stated. It is amazing the inventions the mind and it's sinful nature will make to seek out all sorts of answers that always result in disaster. The truth is only what they know from moment to moment. The truth that remains, they avoid. The current "scientific dreams are "multiple universes" with absolutely no evidence. This they believe. They define freedom as "nothingness". They find affirmation of existence in philosophical theories that keep them trapped in Humism, where the world is defined by economic progress. They say we cannot know real truth. Man does not want to be governed by objective rules of morality, so they s... A study just came out in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management by Joseph Sabia that found that while there is an association (correlation) between teen sex and depression, the evidence that there is a causal link (having sex causes depression) is pretty weak. In other words, teens who are having sex have some other factor(s) that increase the tendency for depression, but there not much evidence that just having sex by itself increases this risk. JK, something tells me you do not have kids, associate with kids, mentor a kid, or had many friends when you were a kid. willhelm--the empirical question of whether or not teen sex causes depression does not hinge on whether or not I have kids. When something is an empirical question, that means that the question can only be settled by going out into the world and investigating. Sabia analyzed a survey that did exactly that. or had many friends when you were a kid.That's a pretty pathetic thing to say. Sin is hard to define, as it can mean different thing based on your religion/culture. For instance, SIN in the Christian point of view is an act against god or his commandments or moral views. (IE: sex before marriage, theft, hate, etc... in fact, some might cal your little snide remark will, as being a sin, personally it looks like Malice to me... shame  )The Buddhists, on the other hand so not believe in sin, instead believing in Karma, or Cause & Effect. Ie: harming animals, using bad speech (hurtful, etc), theft, sexual misconduct, using drugs or drinking to excess. When somethi... I can't read the original site, since it's behind a paywall, but this sounds like a classic case of the old "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" fallacy to me. Because kids were using drugs or having sex before they were diagnosed with depression, that proves that the behaviors caused the depression? I have a hard time beliving it's quite that simple. Cat Whisperer, please raise your antennae in the case of sarcasm, parody, and humor. Your childish attitude about "meanness" and "political correctness" is getting annoying. Are you the playground monitor? I did not detect "sarcasm, parody and humor" either. It certainly read as an intented personal attack because I was citing a study that contradicted your position. (interestingly enough, you did not resort to personal attacks to dismiss the study in this clipping that found support for your position). Remeber the lawsuit filed against Larry the Smut peddler by Pat Robertson for a cartoon saying Pat Robertson engaged in beastiality. The court decided no "reasonable" person could assume it to be true. Since it is obvious I do not know JK personally, it is left to the intellect of the reader to detect the meaning. Now, I know this is clipmarks and the combined IQ of SOME of the participants here is not much to shout about, but I cannot and will not take responsibility for the irrational sensativities of the commenters here. Who said anything about the truthfulness of your comment? All CW and I are saying is that you resorted to a personal attack instead of engaging in reasoned debate. Rather than engage the issue you made an irrelevant reference to my personal life. You did it again n your last comment with your remark about "combined IQ". Obviously, saying "Pat Robertson engages in beastiality" is a personal attack (and a rather juvenile one at that) even though no one takes it serious as a factual claim. Perhaps I unintentionally struck a chord. Or to put it another way--pushed a button. Some here wear virtual "suits of many buttons"; each button with a hair trigger. Being offended is attractive and seemingly addictive to some; in my observation, most often those of the left. If this is the case, why indulge said people's desires by pushing the aforementioned buttons? From your description, sounds like you're both getting off on it. (Not that there's anything wrong with a little consensual S&M.  ) You're wrongly assuming it intentional [via an idea by PWright (I think that's the name. The folks at Big Clip still haven't provided a means of browsing or searching Clippers, so I'm not certain)] With my sidebar open, headline in centerpane reads: "Sin cause of Teen Depression study" You're wrongly assuming it intentionalNo need to assume, mon frère: Godfrey Daniel said:It's OK, there's no need for shame. We accept you for who you are here, no matter how unusual your fetish. lol @ Kore7 I'm used to GD & will attacking people who do not see things the way they do. I take it to mean they have nothing useful to say & are frustrated that we are right hehe.. *button pushing* Seriously now, sarcasm or not, it was disrespectful and offered nothing but ill feelings. I personally use CM as a forum for discussing the news of the day and letting others know the information I have found. Using it as a method to attack and degrade those you disagree with is just pathetic. based on your previous responses to clips you have also disagreed with, I seriously doubt it was anything but an attack. Cat Whisperer is so right. What exactly is a sin ? Eating Beef might be a normal thing for a Christian but for a Hindu, it's a sin. Converting others to your religion might be common for you Christians but it's a great contradiction for a Hindu. Religion is not a 1 size fits all basis. It never has or never will be. Wow what a wave of totally off the mark comments received on this one issue. I have posted 31 topics but only this one caused a stir. That is an interesting study in and of itself. Not sure what it indicates but I sure do see the need for Christian values and brotherly love amongst us here. It is not my purpose in life to condemn anyone to hell nor am I of the persuasion to correct fools in their folly. Each one will have to give an account for their actions one day unless of course you do not believe in such a thing. Until that day when all will be revealed I remain your fine feathered friend. The Eagleman Eaglewings, I'm curious to hear your response to Sohil's comment. Any thoughts? Since there is only one God, and His word defines sin, it doesn't really matter that some people think one thing is a sin while others don't. Sin is sin. What a Hindu thinks is a sin matters very little, since that is a false religion. Again, no matter what you believe, there is in reality only one God. He determines what is sin. He created you. He has put within you a knowledge of Him, and you know sin when you see it. If you don't *want* to see it, you can use all sorts of logic to pretend it doesn't exist. Why He doesn't make things more obvious I have no idea. But that's the way it is. OMG travis... Just because you belive in God, doe snot mean He exists. For all you know he could just be a firy tale that you and millions of others have belived in forever.. waht makes your god more real tan the Hindu God(s)? Because you say so? HA! *button push* Sin is sin. What a Hindu thinks is a sin matters very little, since that is a false religion.DFTT. Okay ENBAR I will take the bait. In regards to SOHILS post who I understand is a teenager. What exactly is a sin ?Sohil gives examples of what some people constitute sin and then closes with this statement. Religion is not a 1 size fits all basis. It never has or never will be.Herein lies the problem with any discussion concerning spiritual matters. It is so easy to revert to RELIGIOUS teachings rather than BIBLICAL principles. Religion is man-made while Salvation comes only through God by way of belief in Jesus Christ God's son. Without this basic belief than any discussion on the topic of sin is a mute issue. Without the blood of God's... Without this basic belief than any discussion on the topic of sin is a mute issue.You're saying that if someone doesn't already believe what you believe, then there's no point in talking to them? No what I am saying is this Enbar. If you do not believe that God sent His Son Jesus to save sinners from an eternity in hell then it really does not matter how you view sin. Without the removal of the penalty of sin we are all hopelessly and enternally lost. Destined to spend an eternity trying to FIX man's problem being SIN. If you take the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob out of the equation and replace Him with some other godlike being then the whole issue of sin against an angry Jehovah God is mute because then you can invent any way you like to appease a god who was made in man's image rather than dealing with the God who made man in His image. To me, it sounds like you are saying that if someone doesn't share your religious views, then you have nothing to discuss with them, at least on this topic. Exactly! Be it has you have thus stated for as a man believes thus he is. Speaking about button pushing, I have a question for any Christian willing to answer: why do Christians worship a (c)(b) ZOMBIE(/b) (/c) yet never acknowledge this little fact? I am of course refering to his resurrection ... A Zombie? I do not worship a Zombie. I have no idea what you are referring to. Unless of course you are talking about the original night of the living dead where the dead in Christ arose at his crucifixion and were seen walking around? Or are you referring to the third day when Christ arose from the dead and was seen by many? Or are you referring to when Christ ascended into heaven where He now sits at the right hand of God? Zombie I think not. For we are alive in Christ not dead which being a Zombie would infer. I have seen many Zombies ( living dead) in my time and none I would care to worship. I'm not really sure about "reaching out to the lost." Certainly, I don't feel that I have any compelling evidence that I could present to a non-believer to cause them to believe the Bible, or in the God of the Bible. I wouldn't even know where to start. It seems hopeless and futile. There is evidence in the Bible that for a person to become a believer God must first draw them to Himself. He must work in their hearts or their minds, whatever. Does He do that for everyone? Does He do it only for those he knows will "come around?" I have no idea.... Certainly, I don't feel that I have any compelling evidence that I There is evidence in the Bible that for a person to become a believerExcellent comment travislaborde. A good book on this subject is Chosen By God by RC Sproul. Travis, God reached out to the whole world when He sent His Son Jesus to die on a cross. John 3:16 says that whosoever believes this shall be saved. It was a great outreach for God to reach down from heaven and birth a Son via a virgin Mary in a manger in Bethlehem only to watch him die as a young man on a cross. It was the plan from the beginning when God created the world. He has such love for mankind that He was willing to sacrifice His only son so that through the death of His son the whole world would be forgiven. The only rub is you got to believe that Jesus died for you to recieve the forgiveness you need. If you are not willing to do that well then there remains no other options to y... Eaglewings, many are not open to the message and this is part of God's plan. I highly suggest the book to you in my previous comment. This doctrine is Calvinist and is subscribed to by most apologist's, Christian thinkers, and Church leaders. Willhelm, That would appear to be the problem with many in this enlightened age. The simplisty of the gospel is just not good enough so we must reinvent ways of saying what it is God was trying to say. Yes I agree that many are foolish in their thinking and have hardened their hearts towards God but that still does not negate the fact that God loves them all the way to hell. Hell was never the intended place for people to go. It was a place designed for the fallen angels and satan not for people. However there are many who choose to go there by refusing the free gift of God's grace through Jesus Christ. I appreciate your offer of the book but I think I will stick to my prefered reading the Holy Writ. That would appear to be the problem with many in this enlightened age.I hardly think Calvin was part of this culture you are describing. God is sovereign. He chooses us before we choos him. This is all Biblical. I am not holding you at fault for your beleif. I am just trying to offer a source for understanding why things are the way they are. Childlike faith does not mean childish faith. I am a firm advocate for defending the faith in a Post-Modernist culture. Hopefully, you are too. This requires, I beleive, a knowledge of scriptture that goes beyond the... I hardly think Calvin was part of this culture you are describing.I am very familiar with John Calvin and his writings and teachings. I do not hold to all his teachings anymore than I hold to all of present day preachers especially in regards to their end times prophecy teachings. I am also familiar with RC Sproul and it is to the latter I addressed my former remarks. Preachers have been wrong throughout the ages and God's word had always been proven true. Even though us mortals err God's word never errs. Being led by the Holy Spirit and allowing the Spirit to teach me what God meant when reading the scriptures has helped me avoid many a false teaching down through the ages.... Listen Eaglewings, I have a lot of respect for your beliefs, but regarding your last point, why does God permit the "enemy of our souls" to do that much damage? Why does God allow his creations to be blinded to the truth, if the truth is so clear and so important? Satan's soul existance is to negate God's plans and ways. If we just go through life thinking there is no battle of souls going on then we are deluding ourselves into a false sense of security. The devil delights in the lostness of a soul, keeping people from seeking after God, and thus being removed from the clutches of hell. Jesus came to preach liberty to these captives but if we do not hear this message or stop our ears to it or just refuse to listen then we are in danger of hell fire. I pray for all the saints who have come to the saving knowledge of Jesus to pray for all those losts souls out there who are in need of an eye opening experience. To address your question concerning the ... That sounds pretty manichaean to me. Enbar commented Man·i·chae·ism Christianity a heretical Christian belief in the separate nature of matter and spirit Now I must sit back and allow you to explain to me how you possibly got this from what I commented on above? Throwing out big words is nice but I do not believe you actually think I said that matter and spirit are separate. What I said was that the spiritual realm effect... That's an odd definition for "manichaean." Sorry, I thought everyone knew the word, or at least everyone who claims to be informed about Christian theology. What I meant was the old idea that God and the devil are battling it out for human souls, and that when sin wins, it is because the devil has a momentary triumph. The problem with that idea, theologically, is that it limits God's omnipotence. Why does God let the devil damn any of his precious human creations? That's an odd definition for "manichaean." Sorry, I thought everyoneThis definition was obtained from a very common source lets see I think it was a dictionary. This is the correct definition of Man·i·chae·ism. What I meant was the old idea that God and the devil are battling itThis thinking is flawed because it is not God who is all... Eaglewings, I agree that He did "reach out" etc... and I "drink the kool-aid" too. I'm a believer - there is one God, His name is Jesus, etc... BUT... It is very obvious that He is no longer in the business of proving that He exists. Somehow we are supposed to "just know it" maybe by "observing the heavens" or something. Just look at the "problem" of "is the Bible really the word of God?" If so, which version? How can we know? We wouldn't have this problem if He didn't "confuse our languages" to begin with. So, this very real problem that we have - was given to us directly by Him - on purpose! So, from a rational point of view, it is clear that God could do a LOT more to get an un... Travis it sounds like we agree... |
View the Top Clips from July 3, 2006
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
