Monday, 23 March 2009

Looking at the lectionary Psalm for next Sunday, 51, why does contamination always strike me as an appropriate metaphor for sin (even though reason tells me it isn't necessarily)? Is it a man thing?
Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. janetlees23 March 2009 at 09:47

    I don't really know what you mean by 'a man thing' but if you mean culturally conditioned, then maybe. I have problems with sin. Like, I don't really go for it as a word or concept or something to major on. Maybe this makes me a weak and wishywashy sort of minister but there it is.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jane23 March 2009 at 14:43

    Janet I suspect your sense of not doing sin is what makes you a radical - Bob and I are just liberals trying to be radicals we feel pretty sinful ourselves in a sort of Calvinistic way and so can't shake off believing in sin - when actually believing in sin is actually rather sinful - so you see sin does - contanimate our theology hmmm

    ReplyDelete
  3. therevbob24 March 2009 at 09:19

    Jane - I wondered if that makes sin sort of recursive - causing itself.
    Then maybe it gives light on the Fall story. What the archetypal couple (we all) learn is a sense of sin rather than the thing itself.

    ReplyDelete
  4. therevbob24 March 2009 at 09:19

    - or is that 'archetypical'?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)