3 ms·

> Reading cannot be a sin. Thinking cannot be a sin. Speaking cannot be a sin. the catholic church is an ancient institution that believes it is the continuing

> Reading cannot be a sin. Thinking cannot be a sin. Speaking cannot be a sin. the catholic church is an ancient institution that believes it is the continuing ministry of jesus christ. and thus, it is not beholding to purely biblical rules - but also tradition. indeed, sin is an "utterance, deed, or desire" that offends God. the concept of sin is that it is abhorrent, and caused by concupiscence. the ccc (catcheism) indeed has a definition for sin and does not specify what is or isn't sin directly - but rather through the above criteria, both biblical and traditional. and it is defined and ruminated upon by those who are the apostles (bishops) via the magisterium, which is their upholding of this which is to say, reading can be a sin - if those works are abhorrent to god, the bible, or the tradition of the church thinking can be a sin - if those thoughts are abhorrent to god, the bible, or the tradition of the church speaking can be a sin - if those words are abhorrent to god, the bible, or the tradition of the church and boy howdy, if those fuckin jesusmonks put together a book of read-sins and by the magisterium and the tradition of the church, then reading them is a sin. sorry about your religion

graemep 1y ago
The thing is what works, thoughts or speaking is abhorrent? It would have to be something sinful in itself, so, for example, planning a murder is clearly a sin, although only a thought. Taking pleasure is someone else's suffering is also a sin. Reading to learn, honest thoughts, and honest speech cannot be sins. I think those are what the post you are replying to had in mind.
- ivape 1y ago
  God-denial is a big deal in the Bible. I recommend people do a small survey on what happened to entire people(s) when they pursued God-denial in the Old Testament. With that said, doubt is part of faith, and exploration of that is just an articulation and not outright denial. I would bucket “honest confusion” the same way. To be confused in the desert is to be confused in the desert, akin to throwing a non-swimmer into water. The confusion before faith (before swimming) is okay, I believe. That’s all I can postulate from my own meditation. Anyway, we have to always remember that Christ went toe-to-toe against his own religion. These Christian denominations must always know Christ will reject them outright if they are misinterpreting (and how could anyone think otherwise is beyond me, going up against Judaism was his first major imperative). He was a very serious activist, beyond.
  - graemep 1y ago
    > God-denial is a big deal in the Bible. I recommend people do a small survey on what happened to entire people(s) when they pursued God-denial in the Old Testament. Have you drawn the correct conclusions from that? It is certainly not the conclusion the Catholic Church draws which is what we are discussing here. You may think the Catholic church wrong about this, but that is a different argument. > going up against Judaism was his first major imperative Everything he said and taught was in the context of the Jewish tradition. He said "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" - Matthew 5:17
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]

graemep 1y ago

The thing is what works, thoughts or speaking is abhorrent? It would have to be something sinful in itself, so, for example, planning a murder is clearly a sin, although only a thought. Taking pleasure is someone else's suffering is also a sin. Reading to learn, honest thoughts, and honest speech cannot be sins. I think those are what the post you are replying to had in mind.

ivape 1y ago
God-denial is a big deal in the Bible. I recommend people do a small survey on what happened to entire people(s) when they pursued God-denial in the Old Testament. With that said, doubt is part of faith, and exploration of that is just an articulation and not outright denial. I would bucket “honest confusion” the same way. To be confused in the desert is to be confused in the desert, akin to throwing a non-swimmer into water. The confusion before faith (before swimming) is okay, I believe. That’s all I can postulate from my own meditation. Anyway, we have to always remember that Christ went toe-to-toe against his own religion. These Christian denominations must always know Christ will reject them outright if they are misinterpreting (and how could anyone think otherwise is beyond me, going up against Judaism was his first major imperative). He was a very serious activist, beyond.
- graemep 1y ago
  > God-denial is a big deal in the Bible. I recommend people do a small survey on what happened to entire people(s) when they pursued God-denial in the Old Testament. Have you drawn the correct conclusions from that? It is certainly not the conclusion the Catholic Church draws which is what we are discussing here. You may think the Catholic church wrong about this, but that is a different argument. > going up against Judaism was his first major imperative Everything he said and taught was in the context of the Jewish tradition. He said "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" - Matthew 5:17
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]