Theft, if you had to steal food for a poor, starving family.
2007-09-19 04:22:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
8⤊
5⤋
Hi...I would probably say Slander. The Catholic Church believes that there are two types of sins. The Venial Sin and the Mortal Sin. The Venial sin is an act or thought that was unintentional. Such as gossiping. The act was unintentional not prevoked or premeditated in anyway. God will forgive if one is sincere in asking for His forgiveness without the assistance of a priest. Now a Mortal sin is breaking one of God's Commandments. This is a severe sin that has been comitted such as murder, adultery, slander, stealing and so forth. This is a sin that was intentional, provoked or premeditated. Even the thought for lust with another mans wife is considered a mortal sin. When one commits one of these sins the Catholic Church believes that one needs a priest to ask Gods forgiveness. If one doesn't seek out a priest then this individual that has committed this sin will be condemned to hell for all eternity. Now God is an all forgiven God. But what the Catholic Church believes does make sense. I also believe that God will forgive one's sins if one is sincere in asking and doesn't repeat the same sin over and over again. I feel that God does have His limitations on how many times He'll forgive one of the same sin so do speak. Committing a murder has no justification not even in war. One is taking life that God created. Now I can see your point if the person is protecting another from harm. I don't know if God would make this an exception or not only He can make that judgement. If one asks for Gods forgiveness with the assistance of a priest then I would imagine God would forgive. I'm not a Catholic, however I do believe in some of their teaching and views on their beliefs. Have a great day!
2007-09-19 04:45:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Do you want someone to have a reason to justify killing you or someone you love?
I am aware that there are situations where people feel justified in the intentional killing of another. Where do we draw the line? Who decides which one is justified and which one is not? Hitler, the Khmer Rouge, Idi Amin - were they justified? Most would say no. Killing them justified? If we say yes aren't we just doing the same thing they did, only on a smaller scale - riding the earth of those considered "evil" or "less"?
2007-09-19 04:40:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
All, for we are no longer under that law code. However we are obligated to there principles. Killing is never justified by men, and the author of the bible holds that right exclusive to himself, but only in justice.
Lev 19:18, Rom 12:19, Heb 10:30
2007-09-19 04:30:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Depends.
For Jews...none.
For non-Jews...at the very least, the commandments concerning the sabbath do not apply.
BTW: despite the KJV translation, the original Hebrew says 'murder', not 'kill'...and later passages distinguish between the two acts and also give examples of when killing is justified.
2007-09-19 04:25:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by mzJakes 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
God said "Don't murder". Murder is different from killing ie: Killing is protecting yourself, someone else or family if in danger, death penalty is killing (they allowed the death penalty in the bible), protecting your country if in harms way. Murder is the willfull corrupt sinful choice of taking another life for no apparant reason. Sometimes killing is justifiable.
Also, the sabbath. We don't know - really - what day the sabbath is. Sat or Sun? I worship God all week long so I don't feel I need to go to bed on the "sabbath" and rest for a whole day. I may be wrong in my thinking, however, I am guilty of not taking the sabbath seriously.
2007-09-19 04:31:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Kaliko 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
No. Killing is not justified unless your own life is in danger.
The very same people who accuse athiests like myself of being morally inferior are the ones who love them some killin', and they love it for stupid reasons such as when someone has a different belief about their god.
Hell, they don't even have to think differently all they have to do is just look different *cough lynchings cough*.
2007-09-19 10:12:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Bradford S 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Most of the ones relating to sex are not necessary, any of the dietary laws or ritual cleansing/ritual cleanliness can be ignored. Killing in self defense, defense of others, war and/or as a legal punishment. Worshiping a deity or any deity can be ignored. Telling lies can be argued from several angles, while not the best thing to do and rightly illegal in some cases, there are situations when it's a reasonable course of action i.e. "Of course Nana, I love your cooking..."
I realize some of these are from the law and not the 10 commandments.
2007-09-19 04:30:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Pirate AM™ 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
The intention is that none of them are disposable. However No 10 (covetting) is a hard one to avoid because it involves a state of mind rather than a deed. So long as it doesn't lead to theft (against No8) it would be the least important one.
2007-09-19 04:26:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
As already stated, there are none! However, I guess some of them can be bent on the occasion of circumstances being brought in your interface of action.
For instance: God says: thou shalt not steal. However, if you're a homeless guy trying to make it, then it'll pass.
And if you're encountered by a dude with a gun, and you have a knife, a gun of your own, or some nifty kung-fu moves, then go ahead!
And what about adultry? Little slu, I mean girls of promiscuousnicity do it all the time!
2007-09-19 04:28:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
There are 613 commands in the Holy Scriptures; they are binding only to Israel (Jacob) and his descendants.
Christians are restricted by 1 Cor 10:23-24.
As citizens, Christians are required to obey civil authority which includes laws.
2007-09-19 04:27:45
·
answer #11
·
answered by J. 7
·
0⤊
1⤋