Hello everyone,
there is a god in India known by the name of Sai Ba Ba. I have heard atheists say that Jesus is not the only one who offers to take sins away, since there is Sai Ba Ba from India also. Although, why would we not believe in Sai Ba Ba? What do you all think? Here is an image of who Sai Ba Ba is:
Itâs an allegorical story @Kimberly_Topete. We make them up. The claim of Godâs incarnation stands independent of any meaning we attribute to it, no matter how parallel the meanings we make up, which demonstrates the limitations of our evolved consciousness. A rock falls in the pond, the ripples arenât the rock. And ripples form on other ponds, without rocks.
As Christians we believe sin is doing something evil, something contrary to the will and nature of God. A non-conformity between our will and Godâs will. I am also monotheistic and feel God manifests himself in three different persons. Thus, though I know nothing about that religion, if Baba can actually cleanse sins, then Baba is just another name for the one and only Yahweh. To use Shakespeare, would not a rose by any other name smell just as sweet?
Vinnie
The word for âsinâ in the Greek, which is the original, is âamartiaâ. It literally means âmissing the markâ. It doesnât mean doing any thing evil. It is not a transgression, which is evil. The meaning is more ânot getting it rightâ. It is doing something wrong, but out of not having clear vision or not thinking something through.
To the extent that this definition means merely âmaking a mistakeâ (like an arithmetic error), is the extent to which it fails to capture the biblical notion of sin. Sin may certainly include âmissing the markâ (one certainly has) - but it usually does not include the innocence of having tried in good faith to aim at the righteous mark in the first place. It is me literally aiming for something else that I know good and well is not where God would have me aim. I didnât âtry to be righteousâ and just merely failed despite all my stellar effort. No - I used my effort to actively pursue a course while my conscience informed me with perfect clarity that this is not the course I should be choosing. It is Jonah running the other way after God told him where to go. There may be such a thing as âinnocent sinsâ too (I can accidentally step on somebodyâs toes with no ill intent whatsoever toward them - but I am still obliged to apologize just the same.) But to limit sin to those âinnocentâ blunders is to miss the vast bulk of what sin really is.
You can have intentional mistakes in humor and making jokes. Is that a sin? I donât think so. So⌠I donât think even intentionally doing something which isnât right is enough to make it a sin either.
I think there are other things that bother me about this whole âmissing the markâ idea. Does this mean, that if we surprise God in any way whatsoever that we have sinned? Or what if we accomplish a task in a insignificantly different way than what God might have imagined⌠going on a different route, talking to a different person, starting out a day earlier⌠Are these sins as well?
Of course⌠I am basically defending my own assertion that equates sin with self-destructive habits. That is a meaning of the word by which I can take all the claims made in the Bible about sin seriously. These other notions⌠not so much.
Then your response may classify as a sin 
Just kidding. In the context of the Bible â Judaism and early Christianity-- sin is missing Godâs mark, which I believe is what I said.
Vinnie
Since the conversation has turned toward the question of what is sin, I have an ignorant impression to offer. Iâd say sin is anything which undermines your relationship to that which gives rise to God belief ⌠presumably the divine. As with human relationships, most things can be forgiven but continued abusiveness can kill any relationship.
Interesting idea, and well putâthough in 1 John, he says that whoever doesnât love his brother, doesnât love Godâso if someone says heâs holy because heâs dedicated to God, but doesnât love his brother, heâs not right.
Thank you Randy. I agree with the sentiment in that.
Before I could replace Yahweh with another god I would have to see that the other one is actually a real reflection of him. I have yet to see that happen.
I believe that the gospel is very clear on who Jesus was, what his mission was, and what he believes. Iâve yet to see another faith align with it. These other beings, though they may connect in some common places, they miss in many others.
Galatians 1:8
New American Standard Bible
8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!
I believe in only one God and thatâs Yahweh. I have no reason to believe that God has revealed himself through the layers of another set of faiths.
I also agree that sun means to miss the mark, to make a mistake. But itâs not in the context of a spelling error, itâs in the context of deviating from Gods will. But itâs also further fleshed out in places like romans that says in addition to gods commands, we also have a subset of regulations tied up with our own conscience.
Take eating meat. Itâs not a sin to eat the slowly decaying corpses of some animal. But He says that if it bothers youâre conscience, then donât do it because youâre not doing it for the lord.
As Christians there are things we just do, things me must not do, and things that are up to us and where we drew a line.
Itâs abuse of power, of privilege, by commission and omission. Itâs never against God except by way of abusing others who bear His image. What apart from failure of transaction with others could âsinâ possibly be? And why is it a transcendentally capital offense needing someone to die instead?
No, it is not about simply a mistake made in good faith.
It certainly does include what you have quite rightly stated as:
"I used my effort to actively pursue a course while my conscience informed me with perfect clarity that this is not the course I should be choosing. "
But note here, you say pursue a course while my conscience informed me etc. The person still has a conscience and yes, has gone against it for some reason. They may be enraged and in their rage even commit murder, but they will end up with a bad conscience.
This is however a far cry from evil. An evil person or inhumane person has NO CONSCIENCE. They have deadened their conscience and as a result have no empathy, no love. So they do harmful acts without a second thought. They have no remorse for their actions, no regrets, no bad conscience. This is the difference.
A person, who has done a sinful action needs to acknowledge the wrong doing, have remorse/ change of heart and then ask for forgiveness.
A person, who has done a evil actions, has none of the above. My late, psychopathic husband even saw this state of no conscience as a boon. He claimed that being inhumane was superior to humane people because being inhumane the person could do whatever he or she liked and never had any second thoughts about it, never bothered about it. This is a transgression, not a sin. That is the difference.
A lot of people seem to think that sin can include evil actions, but this is not the case.
But it does.Doing evil actions makes you miss the mark ,which is Heaven.Also can we please stick to the question rather than going on at eachother?Im sure the op wanted an answer which he didnt get .I dont want to create trouble i just feel we are missing the question.Thanks and God bless
I disagree. An evil action is an action done IN THE KNOWLEDGE that it harmful, NOT MISSING THE MARK.
The mark is not Heaven. The mark is being just, righteous.
Heaven is not a reward for being good. Heaven is granted for those who are righteous for righteousness sake, i.e., regardless of the opportunity to be hateful and harmful⌠evil.
You are quite wrong is accusing me of âgoing on at each otherâ. I made a comment to clarify a point that is relevant for the question.
Sorry i didnt accused anyone .I just said WE generally need to stop going at eachother(meaning creating our own small conversations into someones question.Sorry if that got out wrong didnt meant it that way
Hense the mark is Heaven.
Mark=Righteous.Righteous=Heaven
Hense Mark=Heaven
Simple
Not so simple.
Heaven, at least as I understand it, is a state of eternal bliss. That is attained by those who have be granted immortality, eternal life.
Righteousness is a state of being. A conscious being (person if in this life), who is righteous acts out of love. That means they take the other into account and not act selfishly. It is about having love for God, for Godâs sake alone and not for any self interest like wanting to get to Heaven.
A person, who is walking on the path of Righteousness can get things wrong, they can act in a way that is divergent or in other words be sinful. Hence the need for forgiveness. However, even if sinful sometimes, they still have direction, the moral compass, conscience.
A person doing things evil is not righteous hense they lose that stase.So my equzation remains
Letâs agree to disagree.
âLet your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.â -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.
