I can't understand why doing a little harm to yourself ISNT a sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Angel7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Angel7

Guest
To briefly state what I am asking.

Seriously hurting yourself is a definit sin right? probably mortal

hurting yourself but not so seriously can still be a sin, right?

but when it comes down to “small” things like smoking, alcohol, eating food that is a risk to your body and health (during a retreat 2 of the group leaders [teenagers] drank a raw egg so we wouldn’t forget about the retreat, (something along those lines))

people say it isn’t sin whatsoever.

I’m sure some scrupulousity or some of my OCD is involved.
but why isn’t the small stuff sin, if there bigger stuff is.

If something is wrong, it should be wrong no matter what. and not be based on how much damage is done. right?

I really want an explanation as to why somethings that are considered sins, are not considered wrong after reaching a low quantity.

Thank you! 🙂

and

May The Lord Our God Bless You All!
 
So eating raw eggs should be sin?!? :rolleyes:

People eat raw eggs everyday - whether in easy overs (mmmm), in raw cookie dough (yummy!), or in those protein affairs athletes consume.

Some things may not be to smart (smoking, eating McDonalds for every meal every day), but since when has not being smart been a sin?

If not being smart was a sin, then most of the world’s population would be in a constant state of sin.
 
Drinking, smoking eating raw eggs (BLEH!) could be a sin if done in excess… but so can eating good cooked food. That one cookie (though cookie dough IS delicous) is perfectly fine. Eating the whole batch… not so much.

No offense but your illogical approach at this would even make exercise a sin. When you lift weights, run, ride a bike or do pretty much anything that your body is not accustomed to your muscle tissue tears. This is how muscles grow and become stronger. Say someone wants to run a marathon (still don’t understand how people enjoy running but whatever) if you’ve never run 26.2 miles you have to train your muscles to do it… you’re going to make them sore and you will tear them. Manual laborers do the same thing. Heck as a drummer I do the same thing pushing my muscles farther than I have before to increase stamina. Even guitar players have to subject themselves to a bit of pain when learning (unless your fingertips are naturally calloused). Bodybuilding on the other hand… arguably sinful but I don’t think I’d attribute this to the things they put their bodies through so much as the vanity involved.

All things in moderation 👍
 
Angel7 said:
To briefly state what I am asking.

Seriously hurting yourself is a definit sin right? probably mortal

hurting yourself but not so seriously can still be a sin, right?
Click to expand...
I believe that the operative word here is “can.” It can be a sin. A lot has to do with the person’s intent IE - knowledge that the action is harmful. It doesn’t rest there however. Next culpability comes into play. Is the person willingly and knowingly doing the action.
Angel7 said:
… but when it comes down to “small” things like smoking, alcohol, eating food that is a risk to your body and health
Click to expand...
While it’s true that these examples can be harmful to your body, how culpable is the person who commits them? Is it a habitual problem that the person wants to stop but as of yet has not been able to overcome?
Angel7 said:
(during a retreat 2 of the group leaders [teenagers] drank a raw egg so we wouldn’t forget about the retreat, (something along those lines))
Click to expand...
I don’t see that as being sinful, though I would not have taken part in it simply because I prefer fried eggs over liquid chicken. Is there a harm in drinking eggs? If so, did these 2 group leaders know of the risks? Was their intent to cause harm to themselves?
Angel7 said:
… people say it isn’t sin whatsoever.
Click to expand...
I’d have to agree but then I’ll admit that I am not a dietician nor a nutritionist and therefore don’t know one way or the other whether drinking raw eggs is harmful.
Angel7 said:
If something is wrong, it should be wrong no matter what. and not be based on how much damage is done. right?
Click to expand...
Situations and circumstances play a role in determining sinfulness. This is why we are not to judge the soul of another person. We can look at the action and say that it’s grave, unjust, sad, etc. but only God knows the heart (the intentions) of the individual. Likewise, we cannot know whether the person even understood that his/her actions were wrong.
Angel7 said:
I really want an explanation as to why somethings that are considered sins, are not considered wrong after reaching a low quantity.
Click to expand...
Is killing another human being wrong? The knee-jerk reaction is to say confidently that it is. However, is it wrong to kill if the person you kill is trying to kill you or a loved one (self-defense or defense of another)? In other words are you sinning by surviving an attack in which you had to take the life of your assailant?
 
Years back (1980s) the “Orange Julious” franchise would whip an egg into orange juice.

Improperly washed eggs carry salmonella poisoning on their shells and female chicken’s can produce poisoned eggs when their ovaries are infected.

Moderation is key in all the activities that we allow into or next to our bodies (sight, sound, touch, taste, smell).

Our bodies are meant to be temples for the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 6:19)
The bacteria, Salmonella enteritidis (also referred to as S. enteritidis), can invade an egg in several ways. One way is by the contamination of egg shells with fecal matter. The bacteria are present in the intestines and feces of infected humans and animals, including chickens, and can be passed to the eggs when chickens sit on them.
Click to expand...
Stringent cleaning and inspecting procedures of shells were implemented in the 1970s to decrease this form of contamination, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).
Click to expand...
However, outbreaks of salmonellosis (an infection caused by Salmonella bacteria) still happen because Salmonella also silently infects the ovaries of healthy-looking hens, contaminating the eggs inside the chicken before the shells are even formed, according to FSIS. To curb this form of contamination, the egg industry regularly tests hens for the ovarian bacteria.
Click to expand...
lifeslittlemysteries.com/how-does-salmonella-get-inside-eggs-1033/
Click to expand...
 
Barbkw said:
Years back (1980s) the “Orange Julious” franchise would whip an egg into orange juice.
Click to expand...
ewwwwwww…

Though… I bet it’s a lot quicker than trying to get up 20-30 minutes earlier to cook myself breakfast…
 
I was visiting a priest-friend in a priests’ retirement home.

The aroma of pipe tobacco wafting through the environs … was very … “tantalizing”.
 
mdrummer5 said:
ewwwwwww…

Though… I bet it’s a lot quicker than trying to get up 20-30 minutes earlier to cook myself breakfast…
Click to expand...
You can “nuke” an egg in mere seconds and if you use a paper cup, there are no dishes or frying pans to wash.
 
Angel7 said:
To briefly state what I am asking.

Seriously hurting yourself is a definit sin right? probably mortal

hurting yourself but not so seriously can still be a sin, right?

but when it comes down to “small” things like smoking, alcohol, eating food that is a risk to your body and health (during a retreat 2 of the group leaders [teenagers] drank a raw egg so we wouldn’t forget about the retreat, (something along those lines))

people say it isn’t sin whatsoever.

I’m sure some scrupulousity or some of my OCD is involved.
but why isn’t the small stuff sin, if there bigger stuff is.

If something is wrong, it should be wrong no matter what. and not be based on how much damage is done. right?

I really want an explanation as to why somethings that are considered sins, are not considered wrong after reaching a low quantity.

Thank you! 🙂

and

May The Lord Our God Bless You All!
Click to expand...
I get what you’re trying to say, but there are problems at the root of your question.

The definitions of ‘harm’ through food and drink and recreation vary wildly from person to person. Who is to be the ultimate authority? The state? The popular media,which cannot distinguish lies from truth? Herein lies danger.

There is a modern attempt to sanctify the self through food or other basically neutral pastimes, which can become extremely self-rightous, even obnoxious.

The end result of such false sanctification is that it drives away many more people than it attracts.
 
The word “fad” supposedly means “for a day”.

No idea if that is true or not.

But some people develop some very firm “beliefs” of which health ideas are harmful or not. Or helpful or not.

Coffee … deadly? or good for the prostate?

Sugar … deadly? or a source of meaningless calories?

Eggs … deadly source of cholesterol and albumin? or the world’s lowest cost best source of nutritiion?

Tobacco? … deadly source of Polonium 225? or a useful stimulant?

Exercise? … must be vigorous and heart pumping for a minimum of 20 sweat inducing minutes? Or does that destroy the knee joints? Or can you just move around a little more?

Cholesterol? A deadly chemical that clogs the arteries? Or a normal part of everybody’s body chemistry? Does cholesterol clog the arteries while repairing tears in arterial walls caused by spikes in blood pressure due to stress … and get reabsorbed later after the stressor goes away and the tears self-repair?

How can someone live and run two miles a day and lift weights for years with all five arteries blocked 100%? Does the human body gradually and naturally build alternative pathways for arterial blood to flow to the organs and bypass the blockages?

What is a normal level of stress?

How can some societies and cultures eat a 100% fatty meat diet and do just fine? Inuit and related groups eat relatively few veggies.
 
Angel7 said:
To briefly state what I am asking.

Seriously hurting yourself is a definit sin right? probably mortal

hurting yourself but not so seriously can still be a sin, right?

but when it comes down to “small” things like smoking, alcohol, eating food that is a risk to your body and health (during a retreat 2 of the group leaders [teenagers] drank a raw egg so we wouldn’t forget about the retreat, (something along those lines))

people say it isn’t sin whatsoever.

I’m sure some scrupulousity or some of my OCD is involved.
but why isn’t the small stuff sin, if there bigger stuff is.

If something is wrong, it should be wrong no matter what. and not be based on how much damage is done. right?

I really want an explanation as to why somethings that are considered sins, are not considered wrong after reaching a low quantity.

Thank you! 🙂

and

May The Lord Our God Bless You All!
Click to expand...
Jesus drank wine. Are you saying he was a sinner because of that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top