What Are You Going to Do

[Edgarcito]

The inquiry today is, what happens when you adopt the science, no-religion life, but you're still not perfect......a bad person, a "SINNNNNERRRR".

 

Thanks.

[midniterider]

If you think of yourself as a sinner then you feel guilty and fearful and shameful for no real reason.

 

If you adopt a non-religious life then you wont feel those things for no real reason.

[Edgarcito]

2 minutes ago, midniterider said:

If you think of yourself as a sinner then you feel guilty and fearful and shameful for no real reason.

 

If you adopt a non-religious life then you wont feel those things for no real reason.

Good idea, but reasonably sure it's not that easy.

[midniterider]

To me , sin is imaginary. I have dealt with it using mental tools. 

 

But I wasnt infected with Christianity as deeply as others.

[florduh]

I'm pretty sure I don't accept your definition of "perfect."

 

I'm a polar thinker. I realize that we can't have a winner without a loser, a seller without a buyer, justice without injustice or what we might deem good unless there is also that which we deem bad - otherwise how would you know what is good? Your cells and other microscopic entities are doing battle to the point of genocide, but that battle is necessary for you to exist; conflict at one level is harmony when viewed from a different perspective. So really,  what is "perfect?"

 

[WalterP]

2 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

The inquiry today is, what happens when you adopt the science, no-religion life, but you're still not perfect......a bad person, a "SINNNNNERRRR".

 

Thanks.

 

Sin only exists when there's a perfect deity to set a perfect standard for us to fall short of.

 

Please provide evidence for the existence of this deity, Edgarcito.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter. 

[Edgarcito]

7 minutes ago, florduh said:

I'm pretty sure I don't accept your definition of "perfect."

 

I'm a polar thinker. I realize that we can't have a winner without a loser, a seller without a buyer, justice without injustice or what we might deem good unless there is also that which we deem bad - otherwise how would you know what is good? Your cells and other microscopic entities are doing battle to the point of genocide, but that battle is necessary for you to exist; conflict at one level is harmony when viewed from a different perspective. So really,  what is "perfect?"

 

 

1 hour ago, midniterider said:

To me , sin is imaginary. I have dealt with it using mental tools. 

 

But I wasnt infected with Christianity as deeply as others.

Both good thoughts imo.  It's has occurred to me, right or wrong, that there appears to be a separation due to acceptance.....that manifests itself for years and years.

 

24 minutes ago, WalterP said:

 

Sin only exists when there's a perfect deity to set a perfect standard for us to fall short of.

 

Please provide evidence for the existence of this deity, Edgarcito.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter. 

We've already had this conversation years before you arrived sir.

[WalterP]

18 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

 

We've already had this conversation years before you arrived sir.

 

Then why not just refer back to the thread/s in question, rather than re-plough the same furrow?

 

[Edgarcito]

46 minutes ago, WalterP said:

 

Then why not just refer back to the thread/s in question, rather than re-plough the same furrow?

 

Not the thread question, the question you posed.....what is sin, does sin exist, etc.  Has been asked many times I'm sure.

[florduh]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

We've already had this conversation years before you arrived sir.

 

And the answer which is just as old is, "It's YOUR god, YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell."

 

Do you, and others who identify as Christian, believe in Islam's version of an afterlife? How about Zeus? Xenu? Moroni? (From which we get our word "moron.")

[MOHO]

8 minutes ago, florduh said:

Moroni? (From which we get our word "moron.")

Oh, to have said that to the bishopric years ago. Would have been worth the beating.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

 

We've already had this conversation years before you arrived sir.

Ha.  That reminds me of the time the Wachowskis were trying to figure out how to provide a convincing demonstration of Neo dodging bullets and somebody suggested that they just watch End3 when the tough questions were asked.  Yeah, good times.

[WalterP]

19 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Not the thread question, the question you posed.....what is sin, does sin exist, etc.  Has been asked many times I'm sure.

 

 

The existence of sin is your claim. 

 

It falls to you to justify any claim we call you out on.

 

I don't have to do the legwork to justify your claim.

 

You do.

 

 

So Edgarcito, please provide evidence for the existence of a perfect deity who sets a perfect standard for us to fall short of.

 

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

[florduh]

59 minutes ago, MOHO said:

Oh, to have said that to the bishopric years ago. Would have been worth the beating.

 

And "bishopric" is from where we derive "prick."

[mwc]

5 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

The inquiry today is, what happens when you adopt the science, no-religion life, but you're still not perfect......a bad person, a "SINNNNNERRRR".

 

Thanks.

     What does science have to do with being non-religious?  They're not the same thing are they?  You can be both non-scientific and non-religious.

 

     Seems like you just want to attack being scientific for some reason.

 

          mwc

 

[Joshpantera]

 

 

 

[DanForsman]

8 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

The inquiry today is, what happens when you adopt the science, no-religion life, but you're still not perfect......a bad person, a "SINNNNNERRRR".

 

Thanks.

What happens with christians when they adopt the christian life and they're still not perfect......a bad person, a "SINNNNNERRRR".

[midniterider]

4 hours ago, WalterP said:

 

So Edgarcito, please provide evidence for the existence of a perfect deity who sets a perfect standard for us to fall short of.

 

 

 

Who sets a perfect standard for us to fall short of....that is absolute GOLD! 

[Edgarcito]

9 hours ago, DanForsman said:

What happens with christians when they adopt the christian life and they're still not perfect......a bad person, a "SINNNNNERRRR".

Then sometimes, not always, a person might get a little relief in different forms....communing, support, etc.

[Edgarcito]

12 hours ago, mwc said:

     What does science have to do with being non-religious?  They're not the same thing are they?  You can be both non-scientific and non-religious.

 

     Seems like you just want to attack being scientific for some reason.

 

          mwc

 

Science gives us something to identify with, with regard to truth, where the pressure to be a certain way can be put on it.....kind of like the scapegoat aspect of Christ.  So if a person can't identify with religion, then the alleviation of guilt can come through science.  That you bring it up, not sure I have met many that were non-science, non-religious.

[Hierophant]

19 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

The inquiry today is, what happens when you adopt the science, no-religion life, but you're still not perfect......a bad person, a "SINNNNNERRRR".

 

Thanks.

 

Sin takes on a different meaning and context. In the Christian worldview, sin equals stuff God doesn't like, which is frankly difficult to tease out of the Bible, or other Christians in any systematic way. I am not sure what denomination you hold to, or what denomination would best fit you, but I would assume you hold your idea of sin in that context, i.e., you idea of sin is upheld in the context of how you think about God and what his measuring stick is.

 

Outside of religion, sin and evil are still useful words. They provide meaning to behaviors humans, generally speaking, find distasteful or abhorrent within certain cultural/social context. For example, current Western societies, collectively, do not see value in pedophilia. It is anathema to a good and productive society in our opinion. In other places in the world, there are definitely some gray area, and in ancient cultures, it was a norm.

 

Laying that framework, how one would describe sin or evil is somewhat subjective (even if there was a God, sin and evil are still subjective, it just happens to be a God who is defining what sin or evil is). How would we describe a "bad" person? What does that really mean? I have my idea of what a bad person is, and some of my categories others in my society would agree, and other categories a minority would agree with me.

 

How I view myself, I know that some people would definitely label me a bad person because of their own subjective ideas. We would have to agree on a definition of a bad person before we could really get anywhere. For example, when you say perfect, what exactly do you mean by that? How do we measure what perfection is? In my opinion morality, "perfection," ethics, etc. make the most sense if discussed with an end goal in mind. First we would have to establish what the goal is, and then discuss the best ways to reach that goal.

 

As an example, suppose we agree that an ideal end goal would be to end world hunger. We have agreed upon a goal and now we would address how humans should behave morally and ethically to achieve that end goal. Any time humans did something contrary to that end goal, would could say they sinned or were acting in an evil manner.

[florduh]

21 minutes ago, Hierophant said:

Sin takes on a different meaning and context.

Though not actually listed in the Bible as such, Christians generally accept the venerable "Seven Deadly Sins" and most of them seem prone to committing all of them. Other than that, defining "sin" is totally subjective, with current trends focusing almost exclusively on homosexuality or abortion. Classics like envy, gluttony, greed and the rest are on the back burner.

[Hierophant]

25 minutes ago, florduh said:

Though not actually listed in the Bible as such, Christians generally accept the venerable "Seven Deadly Sins" and most of them seem prone to committing all of them. Other than that, defining "sin" is totally subjective, with current trends focusing almost exclusively on homosexuality or abortion. Classics like envy, gluttony, greed and the rest are on the back burner.

 

True, I meant that opening statement to mean that sin has different context in a secular society.

[Geezer]

My definition of sin is the breaking of some religious law, rule, command, or tradition. Therefore, IMO, “sin” only exist in religion and therefore only applies to those who are, by some definition, religious. 
 

In the secular world there is no such thing as “sin”. Actions are either lawful or unlawful. Unlawful actions are subject to punishment by the judicial system. God doesn’t factor into any of that. If it isn’t illegal then it’s okay to do it.

[florduh]

40 minutes ago, Hierophant said:

 

True, I meant that opening statement to mean that sin has different context in a secular society.

"Sin" isn't a secular concept. Sometimes we use the word incorrectly due to the influence of the religion on society. We also say "hell" and "damn."