Sin: Intent or Action

[LoyalViews]

When the nature of sin is thrown in the air and all definition of what it truly is, falls to earth in its various strands, a few things fall in order: it is a rejection of God, His grace, and His commandments.

But what is the nature of sin? What defines “sin-ness” as sinfulness?

Does the action define sin or does the intent define sin? The intent of the action or the action of the intent?

Also, how would sin apply to Kant? Is every sin a sin in itself because it is a universal maxim that sin follows, or is it more refined than that?

 

[catholic1seeks]

Sin is in the will as a free choice against God’s love.

As such, it can be in the intent, if one so has an evil intention; or, it can reside in the act itself, if one so freely chooses to commit an act that is, itself, against God.

An evil intention can make a good act sinful.
But a good intention cannot make a bad act right.

 

[EnosJadon]

Sin is in the will as a free choice against God’s love.

I’m sorry, but this tells me absolutely nothing about what sin is.

 

[mikekle]

well, when it comes to lust, it is said we are guilty of the sin once the thought enters our mind, so even though we may resist the urge and not try to take things further, just the thought entering your mind is enough to ‘convict’.

It is a question whether this applies to other sins as well, but if it applies to lust, Id imagine it does apply to everything else, if that is true then Im in trouble, as Id bet many others are too! Most people I know consider it a sin once they have done the act, not just the thought alone.

Im not sure whether we get any ‘points’ for resisting to act on the urge to sin though, it seems logical that we would, but…?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

When the nature of sin is thrown in the air and all definition of what it truly is, falls to earth in its various strands, a few things fall in order: it is a rejection of God, His grace, and His commandments.

But what is the nature of sin? What defines “sin-ness” as sinfulness?

Does the action define sin or does the intent define sin? The intent of the action or the action of the intent?

Also, how would sin apply to Kant? Is every sin a sin in itself because it is a universal maxim that sin follows, or is it more refined than that?

Both action and intent define sin.

This song says it right:

Never think evil thoughts of anyone,
It’s just as wrong to think as to say,
For a thought is but a word that’s unspoken,
In God’s eyes He sees it this way.

 

[EnosJadon]

well, when it comes to lust, it is said we are guilty of the sin once the thought enters our mind, so even though we may resist the urge and not try to take things further, just the thought entering your mind is enough to ‘convict’.

Question: Why do you refer to lust as a sin? This is relevant because lust in and of itself doesn’t seem to be a sin. For example, is lusting after one’s own wife sinful? If not, then the sin must be something else, and not the lust itself.

So what is it?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Question: Why do you refer to lust as a sin? This is relevant because lust in and of itself doesn’t seem to be a sin. For example, is lusting after one’s own wife sinful? If not, then the sin must be something else, and not the lust itself.

So what is it?

The dictionary definition of lust is “1) intense or unrestrained sexual craving, or 2) an overwhelming desire or craving.” Lust has as its focus pleasing oneself, and it often leads to unwholesome actions to fulfill one’s desires with no regard to the consequences. Lust is about possession and greed.

Lusting after one’s wife is something you should learn to control, (if this is your problem). You should honor her as a person, no a sex object.

 

[EnosJadon]

The dictionary definition of lust is “1) intense or unrestrained sexual craving, or 2) an overwhelming desire or craving.” Lust has as its focus pleasing oneself, and it often leads to unwholesome actions to fulfill one’s desires with no regard to the consequences. Lust is about possession and greed.

So, lust then, like gluttony, is a matter of degree. But at what point does mere desire become sin?

And for the sake of this thread, does a desire restrained by self control, fail to reach that threshold?

Lusting after one’s wife is something you should learn to control, (if this is your problem). You should honor her as a person, no a sex object.

At 60 years old, I can honestly say that I have never lusted after any one, or any thing. If you have, then you and I are not alike.

 

[e_c]

The dictionary definition of lust is “1) intense or unrestrained sexual craving, or 2) an overwhelming desire or craving.” Lust has as its focus pleasing oneself, and it often leads to unwholesome actions to fulfill one’s desires with no regard to the consequences. Lust is about possession and greed.

Lusting after one’s wife is something you should learn to control, (if this is your problem). You should honor her as a person, no a sex object.

“Dictionary definition”? Which dictionary and why?

One could consider “lust” in a number of different ways… As a vice, as a sin (they are distinct), as a passion…

OP: simply put, a sin is a voluntary thought, word, or deed against the will of God.

 

[e_c]

At 60 years old, I can honestly say that I have never lusted after any one, or any thing. If you have, then you and I are not alike.

Then you must not have a body, or were born into the heights of spiritual perfection… or are not understanding what is meant by the term.

 

[John_Martin]

Sin is a bad translation of Greek and Hebrew.
It is actually a “missing of the mark”, with the mark defined by law, by the lawgiver, whether it be God, the State, the Parent, etc.

So, the Mark not to miss, but to aim at and hit, is this: “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul, strength, mind; and you shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
And the boundaries around this mark as helps in hitting the Mark, the boundaries being the limiting laws of the Ten Commandments. Staying within those boundaries helps with your confidence that you are going to actually hit the mark of Love to God and Man. Deviating from those boundaries means you are off target and missing the mark definitely, mortally.

When Jesus said to the woman, “Go and sin no more”, he actually gave her a view of the positive (the Mark of Love) rather than just the negative (avoiding the boundary).
He said, “From this moment, no longer miss the mark.”
Look at the Mark of Love and run toward it; don’t look at evil acts and run from them (you still will not know where you are running, and will run into other sin). The Mark not to miss is the focus.

 

[e_c]

well, when it comes to lust, it is said we are guilty of the sin once the thought enters our mind, so even though we may resist the urge and not try to take things further, just the thought entering your mind is enough to ‘convict’.

It is a question whether this applies to other sins as well, but if it applies to lust, Id imagine it does apply to everything else, if that is true then Im in trouble, as Id bet many others are too! Most people I know consider it a sin once they have done the act, not just the thought alone.

Im not sure whether we get any ‘points’ for resisting to act on the urge to sin though, it seems logical that we would, but…?

There are three events…

1. An image or proposal entering the mind.
2. Delighting in the image or proposal for its own sake.
3. Acting to obtain in reality what is virtually represented.

Supposing we are speaking of grave matter, which lust is in its genus, 1 may happen without sin at all, and if we dismiss it as soon as it appears and we recognize what it is then we escape without guilt. 2 will happen if we wish it to, and it is venial sin. However, the sin ceases when we actively will against having the thought which our passions are delighting in. 3 typically means mortal sin, unless there is some special constriction of the intellect or will, such as great confusion or fear or pain, or even a lack of time to deliberate in some cases.

 

[puzzledtoo]

“But a good intention cannot make a bad act right.” If this is the case then there is no such thing as a just war. There is no reason for the death penalty. My killing someone to save one or more innocent people from certain death is not justified. Self defense is indefensible.
I’m against the death penalty.
I’m for self dense.
I’m all for defending others’ lives even if it means killing someone else.
I don’t get “just war”.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

So, lust then, like gluttony, is a matter of degree. But at what point does mere desire become sin?

And for the sake of this thread, does a desire restrained by self control, fail to reach that threshold?

At 60 years old, I can honestly say that I have never lusted after any one, or any thing. If you have, then you and I are not alike.

I’m 61 and yes I have been guilty of lust in my youth. I’m past those days though!

 

[CHRISTINE77]

“Dictionary definition”? Which dictionary and why?

One could consider “lust” in a number of different ways… As a vice, as a sin (they are distinct), as a passion…

OP: simply put, a sin is a voluntary thought, word, or deed against the will of God.

It’s just one of those 7 deadly sins where your own desire for sex, money, or food can get out of control. Sex itself is good, so is food, and we all need some money, but too much can warp you and you become like a dragon hoarding your treasure. Sex can lead to perversion, food to gluttony…you know how it is. It becomes an obsession.

 

[mikekle]

Question: Why do you refer to lust as a sin? This is relevant because lust in and of itself doesn’t seem to be a sin. For example, is lusting after one’s own wife sinful? If not, then the sin must be something else, and not the lust itself.

So what is it?

I believe Lust is one of the 7 deadly sins.