Sin for the rest of us

[dmallind]

I have what I think might be an interesting maybe even fun idea. We have often heard the dearth of theologically useful or even serious discussion on DU. I've tried a few times with results ranging from nugatory to indifferent. I'm going to try again with a twist. I will also post a companion thread on the exact same topic at roughly the same time from a more scriptural and theological view. It will be interesting to see how many and what kind of responses each draws. To be clear: I intend this thread to be the free for all casual discussion . I won't pretend I can or should be able to direct your responses, but please, if you prefer a more serious half-assed theological (all I can manage) discussion - go here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/121838984


So what is sin? Can nonbelievers sin? Is it anything different to crime? Pointless made up idea or religious mirror of human legalism? Why did the idea arise even that crimes can be committed against gods?

[skepticscott]

1. Well, theologians act as if

they are Very Serious People, but they can't even get over the hurdle of convincing people that, without too much question, their god even exists. Until they can do that, all of theology is just finger painting. Fun to do, but meaningless.

[LARED]

2. And with all that "finger painting" there are only a few billion believers nt

[Silent3]

3. Most of those billions of believers, however, don't know much about theology

They're just responding to a muddle of emotions and traditions and social cues and tribal affiliations. "Serious" theology has little to do with their beliefs.

[skepticscott]

4. That's what theologians do

They try to make religious seem reasonable and palatable, so that people can feel good about practicing and believing, rather than foolish. But it says nothing about the truth of what they expound on with such pomposity.

[2ndAmForComputers]

6. Sigh.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html

[LARED]

7. I think you missed my point

but they can't even get over the hurdle of convincing people that, without too much question, their god even exists.

My point was that even thought theologians cannot prove God exist, billiosn still believe in God. Billions look to theologians to help us understand God. That is not an appeal to popularity. It is just stating the facts. If I made a claim that God exists because it's popular, you would be correct.

[skepticscott]

8. But if there is no god

then theology is just an empty, meaningless shell. All of the ink spilled so pompously about the nature of the Trinity, transsubstantiation, Purgatory and whatever is nothing but mental masturbation, no matter how many people believe the crap.

[LARED]

9. And if there is a God

then theologians are doing legitimate and worthwhile study.

If you were around about 2000 years ago you would be telling me Galen was "mentally masturbating" because he could not prove anything.

[skepticscott]

10. Christian theologians have had

2000 years to show convincing evidence that their god exists. So far, fail. Miserable fail. It didn't take that long from the first claim to convince people that Pluto exists. Or the atom. Or viruses. Etc.

Try again. Sheesh.

[LARED]

12. If I understand your position correctly

Last edited Sun Aug 5, 2012, 07:32 AM - Edit history (1)

theology (and by extension Liberal Arts studies) are a waste of time unless the practitioners can prove something? Or is your contempt soley directed at religious study?

[skepticscott]

13. You don't understand my position correctly.

In fact, you've misstated it badly. Whether you just have limited comprehension, or are being deliberately disingenuous is something you'll have to let us know.

Try again. If you need help, please feel free to ask.

Just as a hint, literary criticism discusses the nature of books that actually exist. Comparative religion discusses religions and religious practices that actually exist. See if you can go from there.

[LARED]

14. I think I understand now

In order to be worthy of study the subject must exist.

Yes?

[skepticscott]

15. Getting warmer

Keep trying.

[LARED]

23. No clue? How in the world will I ever figure it out???

[Jeffersons Ghost]

5. Okay, let's "horse" around with wordsRomans 6:23 King James Version: "the wages of sin is death."

Last edited Sat Aug 4, 2012, 08:28 AM - Edit history (1)

Revelations 6:8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.

In the first sections of this chapter the "sword" is mentioned quite a bit. How do you like this graphic?


It was worn by the 62nd Highway Patrol (MP) in Germany from 1948 to 1957

[struggle4progress]

11. Roughly speaking, sin is our failure to love our neighbor as we love ourselves

It can be divided into two general classes:

(1) I actually don't give a shit whether or not I love my neighbor as I love myself
(2) I really do keep trying to love my neighbor as I love myself, but I don't do a very good job of it for various reasons

[skepticscott]

16. So where do

"sins" like blasphemy, masturbation and the use of artificial birth control fall into that?

[Humanist_Activist]

17. Well, usually, when I masturbate, a lot of tears and self loathing is involved...

I guess that could be considered sin.

[struggle4progress]

18. Feel free to sort out for yourself the categories into your various personal behaviors fall:

Category (1) I actually don't give a shit whether or not I love my neighbor as I love myself
Category (2) I really do keep trying to love my neighbor as I love myself, but I don't do a very good job of it for various reasons

[skepticscott]

20. Irrelevant non-answer

but thanks for playing.

[struggle4progress]

21. No, I've indicated a certain POV, though it may not coincide with your ideas about my POV

[AlbertCat]

22. According to the Mahabharata (I think)... the ONLY sin is....

.... ignorance.

[edhopper]

19. People do acts and have thoughts that other people

think of as sins. What they are and what constitutes a sin is up to the individual. If someone tells me a sin is something that offends God, i would say there are no sins, as there is no God. If another says it is something that does harm to oneself or others, then I can think of many sins.
Without a precise definition, there isn't an answer.

As to your last question, it keeps the populace in line.

[GliderGuider]

24. The best definition of sin I've found

is by Nisargadatta, the recent Indian Advaita sage:

"The only sin is acting against your better knowledge."

[Thats my opinion]

25. Sin and ethics

I'll just skip over the bulk of the responses thus far, since they come from the same tired voices that instead of dealing with the post, just want another excuse to trash all religion. Boring!

dmallind raises an interesting concern, but one that has not been anywhere near the center of theological thought for a long time. Theology has moved a long way from the ancient or even the modern juridical concern about sin. While it is true that some churches, basically the Roman Catholic and Protestant fundamentalists, still seem to center on obedience, and the accompanying guilt, progressive religion has moved in another direction. This direction was instigated by Jesus who held that all the commandments could be summed up in loving God and loving each other. So right living moved beyond obedience to law, to an ethical imperative. Far before that, the prophet Micah held, in the face of the commandment keepers, that religion could be reduced to doing justice, loving kindness and walking humbly with God.

This notion of right living has come not only from and through religion, but in all sorts of non-religious secular perspectives, because this ethical system is deeply rooted in the heart of reality. Religion has only offered a way to access what is universally true. It not only has to do with how we related to one another, but how we care for the earth, the preservation of peace and harmony between nations and even ideologically diverse perspectives. It has basic implications for how we deal with the outsiders, the "non-persons", the disabled, the poor, the left out. Those are the people Jesus included. This personal action simply followed his articulated ethical stance.

Perhaps sin is to live outside this ethical imperative. If you want the full treatment of this notion read Emmanuel Kant and his categorical imperative. Put simply, it is acting as if were your action to become universally accepted, it would eventuate in a better world. In every world religion the corollary comes in words like, "do to others as you would want others to do to you." These corollaries are exactly what Jesus meant when he summed up the list of commandments.

Most contemporary religions discourse deals with this ethical imperative, not sin.

[Shadowflash]

26. Sin is an irrelevant term in the real world.

Sin is a concept invented by religion as a term for what displeases gods. --


'sin 1 (sn)
n.
1. A transgression of a religious law, especially when deliberate.
a. Deliberate disobedience to the known will of God.
b. A condition of estrangement from God resulting from such disobedience.




No gods, no 'sin'.

Easy, peasy.