is smoking a sin

[Xeno]

The Holy Spirit through Paul taught that ANYthing you do that can cause one to stumble, be offended or weak in the faith is sin, and not the love of God. Not only this but all things are lawful but not all things are beneficial, nor edify. Be not held ubder the power of any, and if there is any scripture that pinpoints to answering your question it would be the concerning the body would be that God will destroy those who destroy their temples. Therefore if you sin a sin that leads to death than itis a grave matter,and you need to repent or perish. If you sin a sin that does'nt lead to death than pray, and confess to a brother for prayer to help you to resist. II use to smokebut God stopped the cravings thank God for His grace, and wilm power in me to resist. But I would'nt let it eat up my conscience for it is what comes out of them mouth that defiles us.

420, smoke weed e'rry day.

And what MSP said in his second paragraph.

[Red_web_city]

This touchy subject is left for the last day, the secrets of men will be revealed on His day. I will not approve of addictive behaviors but I will say that homosexuals smoke cigarettes just like Straight men so it is a craving, and lust of the eyes, and mind. I believe the body can built an immunity to it thus making it a common chemical in the blood which causes the flesh to ask for it, andek it when there's none in the system for a while. It has a power over the mind to change your perception of time, and this is why so many depend on it when they feel impatience, and or are held by its magic to stimulate the senses with its instantaneous pleasure also connected to the memory. From experiance, I believe if one cannot remember the scent of tobacco, taste, and desires for the experiance of the instant gratification of smoking one cannot be linked to its effect on the reward system of the mind. What is impossible with man "the patch", is possible with God. Believe in miracles, Jesus removes cravings, call on His name, and pray the Father will remove your lusts if it is wounding your conscience, and harming your life

[Peanut]

There is no verse to my knowledge that outright calls smoking a sin so I'd say it isn't. The verse that says we should treat our bodies with respect because we are a temple of God is in a passage about sexual immorality so it too isn't specifically about this. I don't think there is anything wrong with applying the basic principle from this verse here or elsewhere in one's life but it isn't something that will get you in trouble with God.

With that being said, I'm not for smoking at all and would encourage anyone to avoid it entirely. I had/have asthma as a kid and my allergy to peanuts affects my lungs. In fact this past summer I had to go the ER for said allergy because I had difficulty breathing. Not being able to breathe isn't fun and, honestly, what I've experienced isn't all that close to the lung disease you can get from smoking. You say you want to live your life to the fullest Ryan? Great, and death comes for us all is a great bit of justification for actions like Skydiving where death should be pretty instant if something goes wrong. But smoking is different. You aren't talking about a sudden drop dead sort of death in a lot of cases, you are talking about years of struggling with illness that can rob your ability to do simple things like walk up stairs without loosing your breathe. Sure, you might get lucky and not have anything happen to you but enough people go through this stuff that the risk really isn't worth a practice that gives only a few minutes of pleasure. I don't see any wisdom in indulging in the moment so that we can be happy now and miserable later. Heck, even those McDonalds hamburgers are ultimately better then smoking because they at least satisfy a basic need of ours (hunger) even if they are terrible for you. Smoking doesn't. I guess what I'm trying to say is live each day of your life to the fullest because this life (regardless of what you believe about God) is a gift that we shouldn't waste.

Also, I don't know why anyone would want to support companies that have a history of being somewhat unethical...yeah...

[Red_web_city]

Disregard this message

[Red_web_city]

Lol @ mcdonalds burgers

[Xeno]

Also, I don't know why anyone would want to support companies that have a history of being somewhat unethical...yeah...

And thus it is assumed that fast food chains are in any way ethical businesses.

Also, what the hell does sexual preference have to do with any of this?

[Peanut]

Also, I don't know why anyone would want to support companies that have a history of being somewhat unethical...yeah...

And thus it is assumed that fast food chains are in any way ethical businesses.

Are there really any ethical businesses Xeno? I'd think it would be more of a degree of of how unethical they are then anything else. To my knowledge I don't know of any case where fast food chains have actively tried to stop research on the health effects of their products. Nor am I aware of them trying to make cigarettes safer but then again I don't smoke so I don't pay attention to these things really. So I'd rather take my chances with them then with the guys who don't seem to care at all.

Also, what the hell does sexual preference have to do with any of this?

As to the sexual preference bit, I'm referring to the context of the verse where the idea of treating your body as a temple of God comes from (1 Corinthians 6:19). The passage itself (6:12-19) deals with sexual morality, or in the case of that passage, probably temple prostitution but that's not important. The point is the verse is not specifically talking about behaviors like smoking, getting a tattoo, or whatever habit you want to attach to it so it cannot be used as concrete proof that one should or shouldn't do any of those habits. It can be used in a situation like this since the logic can be applied to other situations (namely “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be dominated by anything.") however its entirely based on the readers opinion of the verse and can't be viewed as a steadfast rule for this or any other situation.

[Xeno]

Also, what the hell does sexual preference have to do with any of this?

As to the sexual preference bit, I'm referring to the context of the verse where the idea of treating your body as a temple of God comes from (1 Corinthians 6:19). The passage itself (6:12-19) deals with sexual morality, or in the case of that passage, probably temple prostitution but that's not important. The point is the verse is not specifically talking about behaviors like smoking, getting a tattoo, or whatever habit you want to attach to it so it cannot be used as concrete proof that one should or shouldn't do any of those habits. It can be used in a situation like this since the logic can be applied to other situations (namely “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be dominated by anything.") however its entirely based on the readers opinion of the verse and can't be viewed as a steadfast rule for this or any other situation.

I was referring to this

but I will say that homosexuals smoke cigarettes just like Straight men

[Mr. SmartyPants]

For what it's worth it's been a few months since I've actually purchased tobacco. So yeah. If I did buy a pack it would take me approximately a month to get through. But more than anything I really enjoy pipe tobacco.

I mean I totally get what you're saying, Peanut. Nobody is denying that smoking is largely unhealthy. I think the case is most effectively made when it comes to how others are effected when it comes to your health problems. Nobody wants their family to deal with an ailing family member. I get that.

But honestly at the end of the day I have those moments of selfishness. We all do. That's why we come to these weird compromises. That being said I still always try to limit my intake. You say that eating McDonalds is more justifiable because it fulfills a basic need, yet they still do the same thing -- satisfy you now and make you suffer later. Anyone super health-conscious person could contest your reasoning exactly how you contest somebody else's reasons for smoking. Someone will tell you to eat at Subway instead of McDonalds. Then another will say that Subway uses too many artificial ingredients and go eat somewhere that is fresh. Then another person will criticize that person for investing their money in an oligarchical-capitalist society run by war-mongers. And so forth. It's a weird analogy but you get my point. So at this point we're all doing the same thing: creating different standards of compromise on our own self-destructive behaviors in life.

[Red_web_city]

Hay Peanut, good question. I mentioned it because addictive behavior does'nt discriminate.

[Xeno]

Hay Peanut, good question. I mentioned it because addictive behavior does'nt discriminate.

That statement is utterly pointless. "Addictive behavior" is firstly incapable of discrimination being that it is not a sentient being or even a non-sentient being. It is a behavior acted out by humans. Secondly, a person's sexual orientation, skin color, gender, or anything else naturally assigned to them at birth, is not going to pre-dispose them to being more or less immune to any kind of addiction. For anyone to believe so is to believe in pseudoscience instead of real, fact-based science.

[mechana2015]

Sexual orientation has nothing to do with this thread, please stay on topic.

[Red_web_city]

Xeno I never mentioned that someone can be immune to the addiction, if you've read it correctly I stated "chemical", they're immune, and have built an immunity to it. Next It's obvious an addiction cannot discriminate therefore when I was speaking in figurative language perhaps you may have ointerpreted Jesus calling sinners "dogs" or "swine" he meant actual animals.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Not every smoker is addicted though.

[Xeno]

Xeno I never mentioned that someone can be immune to the addiction, if you've read it correctly I stated "chemical", they're immune, and have built an immunity to it. Next It's obvious an addiction cannot discriminate therefore when I was speaking in figurative language perhaps you may have ointerpreted Jesus calling sinners "dogs" or "swine" he meant actual animals.

No, I saw you making a point that didn't need to be made for absolutely no reason. And I did read what you wrote correctly, terrible grammar, spelling, and all. I'm starting to think maybe you're the one who has reading comprehension issues since I didn't state anyone would could be immune, nor did I insinuate that you did either.

[Lynna]

...Jesus calling sinners "dogs" or "swine" he meant actual animals.

Maybe I should just take this to PM, but I'm fairly certain Jesus never called sinners dogs or swine. I don't a concordance at hand, but the only instance I can think of is when he compared Gentiles to dogs when speaking with a Gentile woman, but that was only to test her faith.

[Nate]

Therefore if you sin a sin that leads to death than itis a grave matter,and you need to repent or perish.

That would be applicable if you can prove smoking is a sin, but you haven't proved that. This is called "begging the question." You're assuming it is a sin and then leading to a conclusion, but you can't just assume that.

It's also wrong to assume that anything you do that is dangerous is a sin. For example, the odds of you dying in a car accident are about 1 in 83 over your lifetime. Does that mean it's a sin to drive a car because you have a 1 in 83 chance of dying? Washing your hands too much can rub the skin raw and increase the risk of infection. Is washing your hands too much a sin?

This is where the problem sets in, and while I don't think it's okay to be reckless, I think it's a pretty ridiculous claim to say that doing anything with a risk of dying is a sin.

EDIT: oh god i missed an entire second page

[shooraijin]

But you're also going to eat that greasy hamburger because it's delicious.

Interestingly, almost this exact discussion is taking place within public health departments, but from the perspective of health and chronic disease impact.