The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Is everything fun a sin? 1 John 2:15-17

Geoffrey, I take it your familiar with John Granger. I read most of his books, and a few other Christian Commentaries on Harry Potter including Catholic author Luke Bell and Anglican Danielle Tuminio. I also recall a series of Harry Potter lectures from an orthodox teacher on Youtube by the name of Ted Sherman. I have found that there are some orthodox who are not fans of Harry Potter, but I guess every Christian denomination has its fundamentalists.

EDITED: Sorry, I just noticed what you wrote about John Granger.

Just a footnote here. Geoffrey was an Eastern Orthodox member…who believed in “Ultra-Universalism”. He is no longer here. I’m replacing him…as a current Eastern Orthodox prospect and RCIA attender. But I promise to replace his “Ultra-Universalism”…with the more rational position, of the tribulation and Z-Hell (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

Let me share a couple of interesting articles…from today’s Patheos Evangelical newsletter:

On regards to Wordliness, I find this is rooted in a Gnostic heresy where the material world was seen as made by an evil god. Plus, most of the time when the word worldliness is flung around, it is just a code word to hate anything of modern culture or anything outside their church. I would definitely be careful with someone like Steve Anderson, as he is quite pharisaical, and advocates for execution of Homosexuals. Now I best understand worldliness as giving absolute importance to matters of the world with no interest in God. Richard Rohr has a good understanding of the false and true self. The False self is the self independent of God, while the true self is in union with God. In using Fr. Rohr’s methodology, the world is the creation independent of God(I dont mean in a theocratic sense). Much Worldliness I would wager is a perversion and absence of a good. The best characteristics I can gather of worldly thinking are A) Either/or thinking, B) reductionism, and C) trust in brute might. IN fact, most of the churches that speak against worldly thinking just have an alternative worldliness of political incorrectness, separatism and self righteousness. In a non-worldly way, one could embrace the paradox of God being both absolutely soft and absolutely hard. In Peter Kreeft’s book on the Philosophy of Jesus, he stated that Jesus is softer than any liberal and harder than any conservative. The best example I can think of comes from the movie “The Prince of Egypt” when Moses comes across the Burning Bush. I think that this is one of the best representations of the otherworldliness of God that is haunting and firm, but not terroristic and bullying.

Now on having Fun, there is absolutely no sin in enjoying life. In fact, God made material blessings to be enjoyed. This is best contrasted with Sexuality. It would be just as worldly to treat sexuality as a necessary evil all for pro-creation not to be enjoyed as it would be to treat sexuality as a toy solely for personal gratification. This is also contrasted with the Liturgical Churches that have times of Fasting(Advent and Lent) with times of Feasting(Christmas and Easter). Either way, both the renunciation and indulgence are balanced out without resorting to any worldly extremes.

Is everything fun a sin?

Just to answer the OP question directly:

No. Not everything fun is sin—only that which harms other people or yourself.

1 Like

But Don at what point are what you/we/anyone saying constitutes what harms others or youself?

Or more broadly speaking… the OC world, of which of course the law was central.

At the point at which you or others are harmed. I don’t know how to say it any more plainly. All I can do is give examples.

  1. Getting drunk every day for a long period of time is sin. It is harmful to your health. Getting drunk at all could result in harm to one or more other persons.

  2. Smoking at almost any level is harmful to the health. Therefore it is sinful to smoke.

  3. Jealousy of one’s spouse is almost universal. Therefore it is sinful to copulate with another person’s spouse, thereby harming the mental well-being of that person.

  4. Withholding help for a needy person when you are aware of that need, and have the means to relieve that person, may result in harm or even starvation for that person. Therefore it is probably sinful to withhold the help that you are able to provide (though it may result in greater enjoyment or fun for you).

We’ll use this as an example, so in the fifties, when smoking was both VERY prevalent (and accepted) and not much data was known about the effect of smoking on ones health, was it a sin then?

I’ll leave you two to it, but just for anyone else who is interested - here’s a few things from a reliable source that do harm, and are sinfuil:

sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21 envy,d drunkenness, orgies, and things like these

Fortunately playing chess,ping pong, tennis, poker, posting online,investing & being conservative are not on Paul’s list

1 Like

I’ve been harmed at ping-pong (had a welt raised on my shoulder by my opponent’s full body slam for a winning shot), at tennis (when I fell over backward trying for an overhead slam) and at chess - though the harm there was just my self-esteem falling to the floor and kicking itself…
But yeah, those aren’t sins thank goodness. LOL

Such as above… when you understand “sin” as a mistake aka a misstep then yep those things can be — attaching the word “sin” however adds gravitas to the argument.

How many sins did Johnny committ, in this video?

Some are merciful or loving so I think the intention of the heart is what matters in lying and other questions about sin.

Yes, even though those who did it didn’t realize the harm of smoking. One can say the same thing about ANY sin. Many people who commit other sins often don’t know the harm that their actions bring upon others or themselves. That doesn’t imply that their actions were not sins. Many people sin unwittingly.

Many think that there are harmless lies.That’s because they don’t know the ramifications of their lies.
No lies are harmless.

The writer of Revelation took lying very seriously:

But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death." (Revelation 21:8 ESV)

The apostle Paul said that the consciences of liars is seared. (1 Tim 4:2)

So do you think these sins are held against these folks?

Come on Don? WTF? come on and give an answer…

Well… they seem to be in this life. Although the courts take ignorance into consideration, they don’t allow it as an excuse.

I don’t do acronyms. Ask your question properly if you expect an answer.