No, we are only to blame for our sins, but society sure does a hell of a job taunting us with these sinful indulgences... I don't beleive we were made to go through life without sinning. I beleive that is part of the big picture. It is how we live our lifes and what we do to avoid sin or change ourselves after we have comitted sins.. Hey, priests are people too. I had two uncles that were both priests and beleive me, they sined... My uncle gerald cursed worse than my father and I think he hated children.. He made Monsenigor.. My uncle leo on the other hand was maybe the kindest most gentle person I have ever known. Allthough I am cath;oic, I don't always follow their teachings.. Any religion who condems anyone must ahve flaws.. Jesus is only to judge and let he who is without sin cast the first dtone.. Now these here are the basic principals taught to children yet they are the first ones forgotten, even by the pope.. Just live good my friend.. Help others and give what you can to those less fortunate.. When you sin, be sorry, be sorry by not repeating the sin.. My church wants 10% of what I make. If my Uncle Gerald gave 10% of his money to the church, none of us would have to ever give again..
2006-07-26 23:04:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Being a part of a society remains being majorly effected by its beliefs, stereotypes, rights and wrongs, which means that the nowadays society of any place motivates an individual not only to commit sins but also to let go some personal principals in order to fit in this world...sad but true
2006-07-26 23:07:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Hendrix_lover 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no way to go through a day without committing sin....period. I don't care if you're a priest or the Pope. Well, maybe if you managed to sleep for 24 hours. Even then, though, it's a tough job.
2006-07-27 00:13:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by fix_agent_86 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
If one follows the Freudian line of thinking we ourselves take the initiative not to sin, because we are bound to obey the rules and norms of society. A little follow up, even theologians would admit that we live in a "sinful condition" and we cannot help but sin, and that includes priests and other holy people.
2006-07-26 23:10:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by glAssbOy 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sin is just the breaking of a set of arbitrary rules. To many many ppl, being a priest is a sin. So who gets to make up the definition of sin? Anyone willing isn't worthy and anyone worthy isn't willing.
I for one have gone through life with-out sin because I am not constrained by any ones definition of sin.
2006-07-26 23:08:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by Octal040 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Everyone sins. The Bible itself says that we are born into a world of sin. To sin is part of life. But the challenge is to try to not sin. Society may influence our decisions a little but in the end the choice is ours.
No one is perfect, but that doesn't mean we should try to be.
2006-07-26 23:06:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jon H 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oh hell no,
even priests sin! They judge people... so like isnt that a sin?? or something.
Its just something we are gonna have to accept that humans are not perfect, and NEVER will be. We are just gonna have to try to be the best we can and not be dillholes and piss people off and all that stuff....
Yeah.. I dont really know where Im going with this so Ill just stop lol
2006-07-26 23:05:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Branwen 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Doesn't it depend on your definition of sin? And yes, if you are generally a good person who cares for others more than yourself, you can certainly make it through a day without sin.
2006-07-26 23:06:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Perils of Paulette 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The human race as an entire is hypocritical, to have the ability to call out a particular faith as a hypocritical one is unnecessary in itself, if no longer a touch ironic. to declare that starting to be up without needing 2 parental figures is better detrimental to a society than a pair of consenting gay adult males in a relationship isn't a straightforward one. I grew up without a father discern, even if i do no longer experience i'm any better detrimental to society than the subsequent individual who grew up lacking one figure because of divorce, or lack of existence, or the different condition that ends up in little ones starting to be up without both their moms and dads round. in the international we stay in there are those who will refuse to have their money spent on helping others. regrettably it is a appropriate that you carry on your head it really is unlikely to ever variety right into a reality - the international is merely too finished of snobs, non secular or no longer. The accusations adversarial to gay adult males are unfair, to run round calling someone out for his or her sexuality at the same time as they could no longer even percentage your faith is behaviour I significantly disapprove of. A gay relationship isn't a sin. If 2 gays marry, the apocalypse does no longer without be conscious befall the international. God does no longer smite everyone. If 2 gays were to marry, then what ought to happen, is two gays marry. even if, i imagine at the same time as your aspect of view that the non secular mindset in the route of gays in some religions is arbitrary and an rather actual and life like view, i will no longer help yet imagine you asking human beings to spend their money on each and every individual else to make society a significantly better position for all is unrealistic. and that i will also upload the following that the conception of sins supply human beings each and every reason to voice their dislike or hate for particular communities or human beings, without ever having to assert they're unjustified of their perspectives. they could blame some larger ability for his or her hate and their movements, without ever having to be stricken about moving into difficulty for it. it really is how petty the human ideas is.
2016-11-26 02:22:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
not at all i think if anything its the largest and most prodomanat reason for it, thou sin probably isnt the word since its judged by something thats not even proven to be real, who is to say whats right and whats wrong apart from our own morals?
2006-07-26 23:05:29
·
answer #10
·
answered by manic jester 2
·
0⤊
0⤋