TIP-TOEING TO MARY

caseyann

This has to be one of the sweetest thing i have ever seen.


http://fatherjoe.wordpress.com/2006/10/03/tip-toeing-to-mary/




Children the most open pure people on the planet.Do they see and feel what we lose through pain and greed and lack of hope?


I notice babies always stare up in the air and goo and gaa and it just feels so calming and special.
I sometimes feel they are seeing angels floating over us and them.
Do you feel those times?

Keylem

Out of the mouth of babes!

liamw

Most children have imaginary friends

himnextdoor

We're born sinners?

I don't think so.

Keylem

himnextdoor wrote: »

We're born sinners?

I don't think so.

We are not created sinners. But I do belive we are born (not created) with an inclination towards sin!

himnextdoor

Keylem wrote: »

We are not created sinners. But I do belive we are born (not created) with an inclination towards sin!

But juxtaposed with a capacity to do great good.

Children are led by example; we are taught to sin and then we teach our children to sin. It's tragic.

wolfsbane

caseyann wrote: »

This has to be one of the sweetest thing i have ever seen.


http://fatherjoe.wordpress.com/2006/10/03/tip-toeing-to-mary/




Children the most open pure people on the planet.Do they see and feel what we lose through pain and greed and lack of hope?


I notice babies always stare up in the air and goo and gaa and it just feels so calming and special.
I sometimes feel they are seeing angels floating over us and them.
Do you feel those times?

Logically, would the child do any different to a doll standing in the shrubbery?

*********************************************************************************************************
Exodus 20:4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.

PDN

himnextdoor wrote: »

But juxtaposed with a capacity to do great good.

Children are led by example; we are taught to sin and then we teach our children to sin. It's tragic.

In my experience children don't need anyone to teach them how to sin. if they want something that is in the hands of another child then they quickly learn to grab, scratch and bite each other with no-one teaching them to do so.

PDN

PDN wrote: »

In my experience children don't need anyone to teach them how to sin. if they want something that is in the hands of another child then they quickly learn to grab, scratch and bite each other with no-one teaching them to do so.

what kind of children do you know :eek:

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

In my experience children don't need anyone to teach them how to sin. if they want something that is in the hands of another child then they quickly learn to grab, scratch and bite each other with no-one teaching them to do so.

Yes, there are kids that snatch; and there are some that share.

homer911

himnextdoor wrote: »

Yes, there are kids that snatch; and there are some that share.

...and the ones that share are the ones that have been taught to share

(Parent of 3 children who didnt need to be taught how to sin, but did need to be taught to share)

JimiTime

homer911 wrote: »

...and the ones that share are the ones that have been taught to share

(Parent of 3 children who didnt need to be taught how to sin, but did need to be taught to share)

Have to say, I feel a little uncomfortable with this idea of referring to childish things as sin. You believe that children would have been perpetually well behaved if Adam and Eves great rebellion never occurred? I don't, personally.

caseyann

JimiTime wrote: »

Have to say, I feel a little uncomfortable with this idea of referring to childish things as sin. You believe that children would have been perpetually well behaved if Adam and Eves great rebellion never occurred? I don't, personally.

I agree children aren't sinners,how can they be when they dont know what sinning is.

homer911

caseyann wrote: »

I agree children aren't sinners,how can they be when they dont know what sinning is.

Well first of all the Bible says we are all sinners (Romans 3:23) and secondly just because someone doesn't know what sinning is, doesnt stop them being a sinner.

If I visit a foreign country and in my ignorance, break some of that countries laws, the fact that I am unaware of those laws does not mean I haven't broken them

liamw

homer911 wrote: »

...and the ones that share are the ones that have been taught to share

No you're wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-eU5xZW7cU

Keylem

For a sin to be serious (Mortal), three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.

A little child is not capable of either of the above until the age of 'reason', which is roughly about the age of 7 or thereabouts!

homer911

liamw wrote: »

No you're wrong.

No, I'm not - theres a world of difference between one video of a child playing with an adult and two or more children playing together - are you a parent?

homer911

Keylem wrote: »

For a sin to be serious (Mortal), three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.

A little child is not capable of either of the above until the age of 'reason', which is roughly about the age of 7 or thereabouts!

Before a loving a perfect God all sin is serious - there can be no imperfection in the presence of perfection

Dont confuse the punishment of sin with the recognition of the sin by the sinner - Sinfulness is determined by God, not by the sinner.

liamw

homer911 wrote: »

No, I'm not - theres a world of difference between one video of a child playing with an adult and two or more children playing together - are you a parent?

I feel we're going slightly off topic, but are you asserting that the act of sharing between humans has absolutely nothing to do with a natural evolved instinct?

homer911

liamw wrote: »

I feel we're going slightly off topic, but are you asserting that the act of sharing between humans has absolutely nothing to do with a natural evolved instinct?

Yes, you are going even further off topic by dropping the word "evolved" in there - I'm not going down that rabbit hole - there's a creationist thread if you want to go that route.

And no, I'm not saying that a desire to share is not instinctive - however nobody is sinless 100% of the time - nobody is perfect (other than Jesus), therefore we sin some/most of the time, therefore we are sinners...

Keylem

homer911 wrote: »

Before a loving a perfect God all sin is serious - there can be no imperfection in the presence of perfection

Dont confuse the punishment of sin with the recognition of the sin by the sinner - Sinfulness is determined by God, not by the sinner.

Mortal and Venial Sin


Realising all this people are sometimes surprised to hear Catholics distinguish between greater and lesser sins. Surely, they say, sin is just sin. It is always an offence against God. How can you say that some sins are not serious?
It is perfectly true to say that all sin is an offence against God. We can never consider even the smallest sin as trivial. And if we once understand what sin is we should be prepared to die rather than to commit even the smallest sin.
And yet Catholics distinguish between what we call mortal sin and venial sin. (There is obviously a difference between murder and impoliteness.) We say there are certain sins which are so serious that they cut us off from the grace of God, kill the supernatural life in our souls. We do not die physically. But we die spiritually. (Hence the name "mortal sin" just as we say a man receives a "mortal" wound.)
Such a sin would be, for example, blasphemy, a denial of God, murder, real hatred, a great injustice, adultery or other sexual sins.
There are three things which make a sin a mortal sin.

1. It must be a serious matter.
2. We must know what we are doing, we must have knowledge of the seriousness of the sin.
3. We must do it deliberately, there must be full consent.1

A venial sin, for example, a hasty word, carelessness at prayer, is a sin which does not indeed cut us off from God, yet it displeases God and often leads to mortal sin2. It is called a venial sin from the Latin word "Venia" meaning pardon, because it is more easily pardoned than mortal sin.
This is a common-sense distinction which in practice everybody understands and acknowledges. And yet we should never lightly estimate any sin. All sins are disorder, all sins are offences against God, and in a greater or lesser degree a sign of the lack of love of God in our hearts.

himnextdoor

homer911 wrote: »

...and the ones that share are the ones that have been taught to share

(Parent of 3 children who didnt need to be taught how to sin, but did need to be taught to share)

You consider your three children as 'natural sinners'?

Lucky them.

homer911

himnextdoor wrote: »

You consider your three children as 'natural sinners'?

I'm sure they would agree with me. Save the sarcasm and study your Bible a bit more

PDN

I think their might be some confusion here, with people talking past each other rather than to each other, over what is meant by beinga 'sinner'.

Very young children are 'sinners' in the same sense that a sapling grown from an apple seed is an 'apple tree' (even though it has not yet borne any fruit). The sapling does not become an apple tree once it produces apples - being an apple tree is part of its very nature.

In the same way none of us needed anyone else to teach us to be violent to each other, or to lie our way out of trouble. These things come naturally and easily to all of us.

However, if we use 'sinner' to mean that we have committed sinful acts that are worthy of condemnation, then very young children are not, in that sense, sinners. That will happen, soon enough, when they are old enough to make choices for themselves.

Recommended reading for understanding this concept would, in addition to the Bible of course, include William Golding's "Lord of the Flies".

JimiTime

PDN wrote: »

I think their might be some confusion here, with people talking past each other rather than to each other, over what is meant by beinga 'sinner'.

Very young children are 'sinners' in the same sense that a sapling grown from an apple seed is an 'apple tree' (even though it has not yet borne any fruit). The sapling does not become an apple tree once it produces apples - being an apple tree is part of its very nature.

In the same way none of us needed anyone else to teach us to be violent to each other, or to lie our way out of trouble. These things come naturally and easily to all of us.

However, if we use 'sinner' to mean that we have committed sinful acts that are worthy of condemnation, then very young children are not, in that sense, sinners. That will happen, soon enough, when they are old enough to make choices for themselves.

Recommended reading for understanding this concept would, in addition to the Bible of course, include William Golding's "Lord of the Flies".

I see what you're saying, but earlier you seemed to refer to the childish things themselves as sin:

In my experience children don't need anyone to teach them how to sin. if they want something that is in the hands of another child then they quickly learn to grab, scratch and bite each other with no-one teaching them to do so.


The above seems to suggest that you think a child who snatches a toy from another childs hand is sinning. Though I may just be misunderstanding the point that was being made? Is it that you believe that this behaviour eventually becomes sin if left unchecked?

LordSutch

wolfsbane wrote: »

Logically, would the child do any different to a doll standing in the shrubbery?

I have to agree.

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

I think their might be some confusion here, with people talking past each other rather than to each other, over what is meant by beinga 'sinner'.

Very young children are 'sinners' in the same sense that a sapling grown from an apple seed is an 'apple tree' (even though it has not yet borne any fruit). The sapling does not become an apple tree once it produces apples - being an apple tree is part of its very nature.

In the same way none of us needed anyone else to teach us to be violent to each other, or to lie our way out of trouble. These things come naturally and easily to all of us.

However, if we use 'sinner' to mean that we have committed sinful acts that are worthy of condemnation, then very young children are not, in that sense, sinners. That will happen, soon enough, when they are old enough to make choices for themselves.

Recommended reading for understanding this concept would, in addition to the Bible of course, include William Golding's "Lord of the Flies".

How would God judge the sins of a child who passed over?

Surely young children don't get damned for eternity.

himnextdoor

homer911 wrote: »

I'm sure they would agree with me. Save the sarcasm and study your Bible a bit more

If you label your children as sinners then they will come to think of themselves as sinners.

And if you think of yourself as evil then evil you will become.

We don't have to sin and the presumption of sin creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. (Your kids will view their own kids as sinners.)

PDN

himnextdoor wrote: »

How would God judge the sins of a child who passed over?

What sins? God will judge the sins we commit, not our natures.

Surely young children don't get damned for eternity.

I see no reason why they should be.

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

What sins? God will judge the sins we commit, not our natures.

I see no reason why they should be.

Which is as it should be.

homer911

himnextdoor wrote: »

If you label your children as sinners then they will come to think of themselves as sinners.

And if you think of yourself as evil then evil you will become.

We don't have to sin and the presumption of sin creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. (Your kids will view their own kids as sinners.)

Nobody goes around "labelling people" as sinners - we all have a sinful nature, we are all prone to sinning. Its a recognition of our sinfulness and need for salvation that brings us to Christ. Christians accept that sinful nature and pray for God's grace and strength not to sin. We also don't dwell on our sinfulness - but we do confess our sins to God and seek his forgiveness which he has promised us.

Anyone who thinks of themselves as evil has some serious mental health problems, but yes, that would be self-perpetuating.

Agreed, we dont have to sin, but we do have a sinful nature. I dont "presume" that my children sin, and I dont understand the point you are trying to make. (Perhaps I should clarify that my youngest child is now a teenager if that makes a difference to your thinking)

You seem to be confusing a sinful nature with being evil - that is not the case. It's like scoring 100% in a test (perfection) compared to scoring 99% (less than perfect), or scoring zero (not bothering to try). Our sinful nature means that we are less than perfect, our relationship with God is marred. To come before God we must become perfect, and we are made perfect in Christ, through his death and resurrection.

himnextdoor

homer911 wrote: »

Nobody goes around "labelling people" as sinners - we all have a sinful nature, we are all prone to sinning. Its a recognition of our sinfulness and need for salvation that brings us to Christ. Christians accept that sinful nature and pray for God's grace and strength not to sin. We also don't dwell on our sinfulness - but we do confess our sins to God and seek his forgiveness which he has promised us.

I'm sorry but you can't say 'nobody goes around "labelling people" as sinners -' and immediately follow that with, 'we all have a sinful nature, we are all prone to sinning.' which is exactly 'going around labelling people as sinners'.

homer911 wrote: »

Agreed, we dont have to sin, but we do have a sinful nature. I dont "presume" that my children sin, and I dont understand the point you are trying to make. (Perhaps I should clarify that my youngest child is now a teenager if that makes a difference to your thinking)

My point is that we don't naturally deliberately disobey God; we have to know God first before we can disobey Him.

You believe we are all sinners and presumably you tell your children we are all sinners therefore, if your children have faith in you then sinners they must be in order to vindicate you. If they were not sinful then you would be wrong.

How did you find out that we are all sinners?

homer911 wrote: »

You seem to be confusing a sinful nature with being evil - that is not the case. It's like scoring 100% in a test (perfection) compared to scoring 99% (less than perfect), or scoring zero (not bothering to try). Our sinful nature means that we are less than perfect, our relationship with God is marred. To come before God we must become perfect, and we are made perfect in Christ, through his death and resurrection.

I'm not confused; children are blank canvasses, not sinful.

homer911

himnextdoor wrote: »

I'm sorry but you can't say 'nobody goes around "labelling people" as sinners -' and immediately follow that with, 'we all have a sinful nature, we are all prone to sinning.' which is exactly 'going around labelling people as sinners'.

Theres a difference between accepting we are all sinners and going around labelling people - people contantly gossip about what other people have done/not done and how they would never do something like that - like the hyprocites praying in the synagogue in Matthew 6. In John 8, those who are without sin are invited to cast the first stone against the adulteress - these people all went around labelling a sinner and didnt realise their own sinfulness

In Luke 6 and Matthew 7 we are told not to judge - for we will be judged by the same standards

What point are you trying to make? that none of us have a sinful nature?

My point is that we don't naturally deliberately disobey God; we have to know God first before we can disobey Him.

I come back to my point about visiting a foreign country and not knowing the local laws - we dont need to know the laws to break them - why should we have to know God before we do something he would rather not have us do? - this is our sinful nature

You believe we are all sinners and presumably you tell your children we are all sinners therefore, if your children have faith in you then sinners they must be in order to vindicate you. If they were not sinful then you would be wrong.

How did you find out that we are all sinners?

Romans 3:23 for starters

I'm not confused; children are blank canvasses, not sinful.

Children, like the rest of us, have sinful natures, but are not necessarily, as PDN explained, sinners worthy of judgement

himnextdoor

homer911 wrote: »

Theres a difference between accepting we are all sinners and going around labelling people - people contantly gossip about what other people have done/not done and how they would never do something like that - like the hyprocites praying in the synagogue in Matthew 6. In John 8, those who are without sin are invited to cast the first stone against the adulteress - these people all went around labelling a sinner and didnt realise their own sinfulness

In Luke 6 and Matthew 7 we are told not to judge - for we will be judged by the same standards

What point are you trying to make? that none of us have a sinful nature?

I think that the philosophy of sin is a soldier's creed; it is about chain of command. The General has to be sure that when he gives the order, all men will perform what is required of them. Disobeying an order could put the war in jeopardy.

Consider, if you are ordered to shoot someone and refuse to do so then you are guilty of a sin but if you are ordered shoot as a soldier but find your target is a woman who is nursing a baby and refuse to shoot, are you still committing a sin? If genecide is the General's agenda then yes, you are.

So, if God can be likened to a general who has given the order to slaughter all in front of you then a tendency toward sin demonstrates the natural goodness in humanity. To baulk at killing would be a sin.

Are we soldiers?

homer911 wrote: »

I come back to my point about visiting a foreign country and not knowing the local laws - we dont need to know the laws to break them - why should we have to know God before we do something he would rather not have us do? - this is our sinful nature

Breaking the law and disobedience are two slightly different thing. Disobedience compounds the breaking of the law and then it is a sin.

homer911 wrote: »

Romans 3:23 for starters

You were told that we are sinful; I discovered that we are not.

PDN

himnextdoor wrote: »

I think that the philosophy of sin is a soldier's creed; it is about chain of command. The General has to be sure that when he gives the order, all men will perform what is required of them. Disobeying an order could put the war in jeopardy.

Consider, if you are ordered to shoot someone and refuse to do so then you are guilty of a sin but if you are ordered shoot as a soldier but find your target is a woman who is nursing a baby and refuse to shoot, are you still committing a sin? If genecide is the General's agenda then yes, you are.

So, if God can be likened to a general who has given the order to slaughter all in front of you then a tendency toward sin demonstrates the natural goodness in humanity. To baulk at killing would be a sin.

Are we soldiers?

You arbitrarily decide that the philosophy of sin is a soldiers creed, then ask 'Are we soldiers?'

No, we are not soldiers, which has nothing to say as to the universality of sin, but everything to say about your misunderstanding of sin.

You were told that we are sinful; I discovered that we are not.

Unfortunately, since you are in the Christianity forum, Christianity (and the words of Jesus) says you are mistaken in that belief too.

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

You arbitrarily decide that the philosophy of sin is a soldiers creed, then ask 'Are we soldiers?'

It was a rhetorical question and

PDN wrote: »

No, we are not soldiers, which has nothing to say as to the universality of sin, but everything to say about your misunderstanding of sin.

Makes me wonder why do we have to obey God; just remove free-will and... job done; no more 'sin', whatever that is.

What is wrong with disagreeing with God? I'm sure He would soon get fed up of spending eternity with 'yes-men'. Did Lot sin when he pleaded for Sodom and Gemorrah? It seems that God made the challenge in quite a good-natured way. Lot failed in the end but, had he sinned?

PDN wrote: »

Unfortunately, since you are in the Christianity forum, Christianity (and the words of Jesus) says you are mistaken in that belief too.

Are you saying that sin is more than simply disobeying the will of God? How so?

PDN

himnextdoor wrote: »

Makes me wonder why do we have to obey God; just remove free-will and... job done; no more 'sin', whatever that is

Because you rremove free-will and you remove love. A pre-programmed computer cannot love you.

What is wrong with disagreeing with God? I'm sure He would soon get fed up of spending eternity with 'yes-men'.

That's like saying, "What is wrong with a wife being unfaithful to her husband. Wouldn't a man get fed up being married to a yes-woman who remains faithful to him?"

Are you saying that sin is more than simply disobeying the will of God? How so?

That wasn't what I was saying. I was saying that you are mistaken, according to Jesus, when you claim to have discovered that we are not sinful.

But, since you raise the issue, sin is any transgression against the will of God, either deliberate or unconscious.

caseyann

The wonders and beauty of innocence of children.
I love that story and children in face of everything are the only people who can brighten up a day and make you laugh with heart.
And i believe we all have our angels beside us and in that picture shows she has hers.:)
I opened this thread for a happy note and usual people just couldn't help ruin it with their petty bitterness.

liamw

caseyann wrote: »

The wonders and beauty of innocence of children.
I love that story and children in face of everything are the only people who can brighten up a day and make you laugh with heart.
And i believe we all have our angels beside us and in that picture shows she has hers.:)
I opened this thread for a happy note and usual people just couldn't help ruin it with their petty bitterness.

Don't forget puppies and kittens too

caseyann

liamw wrote: »

Don't forget puppies and kittens too

lol this is about children if i wanted to open a thread on puppies and kittens i would go to animal and pets thread.
But you are right animals all animals have no bad in them to intentionally hurt.

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

Because you rremove free-will and you remove love. A pre-programmed computer cannot love you.

Why do you think this? Free-will is simply a decision-making filter that weighs selfishness against acceptability. Where is the relationship between free-will and love?

I think it is more accurate to say that when you add love, you remove free-will.

If a computer is pre-programmed to love you then it will only love you.

PDN wrote: »

That's like saying, "What is wrong with a wife being unfaithful to her husband. Wouldn't a man get fed up being married to a yes-woman who remains faithful to him?"

No it is not. That is a wildly inaccurate comparison.

A faithful wife who argues against her husband (privately) sometimes will give rise to a more interesting marriage than a faithful wife who constantly kowtows to her husband's will. How can a Husband find a 'kowtowing' wife interesting?

PDN wrote: »

That wasn't what I was saying. I was saying that you are mistaken, according to Jesus, when you claim to have discovered that we are not sinful.

But, since you raise the issue, sin is any transgression against the will of God, either deliberate or unconscious.

I think that Jesus was actually saying, "We all make mistakes; let us not be too harsh on the mistakes of others."

Furthermore, if Jewish law, or God's law, requires that adulterers are to be put to death, then by stopping the stoning of the adultress, wasn't Jesus actually encouraging sin 'en mass'? Wasn't stoning adulterers the 'will of God'?

Unconscious sin; what does that mean?

"Bless me Father for I don't know where I have sinned." How does that work except as a device to convince people that even in their piety they still sin and require 'saving'?

Where is sin defined as something other than - 'to deliberately disobey the will of God'?