Do you believe in sin?

[the Princess]

I don't believe in sin or shame - because it's really all about making decisions and taking responsability for those decisions.

What do you think???

[Birthmark]

1. Believe in it?

Madam, I invented it!

[rabid_nerd]

2. What would you call not taking responsibility?

and what should you feel when you don't take responsibility?

[the Princess]

8. OK Not taking repsonsability for your actions

Example:

You have sex with someone outside your marriage. You say "It just happened" when in fact you made a decision to do this no matter how hard you try to say you didn't. Some would call that a sin - or adultery - I would call it a sexual encounter and leave it at that.

But see that's just me - I don't think the way most people do.

[barb162]

3. yes ,sin=GOP

[meti57b]

4. yeah, I do believe in it ...isn't it great?!

[JVS]

5. Yes, I believe in those things

[patcox2]

6. Hello there, Ms Rand.

No such thing as morality, eh? Been reading Ayn Rand? Or Nitzche?

[the Princess]

9. Morals have nothing to do with it

I have morals. I just don't think sin or shame serve any purpose.

[Beware the Beast Man]

20. Ah, but sin is an act that runs counter to morals.

And shame is a byproduct of sin. Have you ever felt badly for the way you treated someone?

[the Princess]

24. sin and morals

You can link the two if you wish - but I don't think one has anything to do with the other. First in order to think anything I do is a sin I have to believe that there is a God who demands I do NOT do certain things. So I can't believe in sin if I do not believe in God. I have morals - there are things I would NEVER do. Because they would cause pain to others. Not because I think they are sinful.

And have I ever felt badly about the way I treated someone? If I went out of my way to hurt someone - then yes I would feel badly about that. But I don't do that. I am brutally honest at all times - but I also know when to shut my mouth. And I try to approach all situations from love rather than hate.

You can have morals and be a moral person without having a belief in sin or shame.

[Beware the Beast Man]

27. But hypotheically,if you treat someone poorly, and feel bad about it,

Wouldn't that be a sense of shame?

Sorry, just playing :evilgrin:'s advocate here.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

29. I've treated you badly and never felt bad about it

I'm with her

[Beware the Beast Man]

31. That's because you're a fucknut.

And I mean it, and I know it's right, so I feel no shame :P

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

38. If thats the case Hedges has NEVER sinned - he doesn't know the

meaning of regret

[the Princess]

34. No

Shame to me is making another feel badly about who they are. Shame is a far deeper emotion than feeling badly about something you did. Shame makes people commit suicide. Shame makes people cut themselves to feel better. Shame makes people do any number of horrible things to themselves and others to feel better.

If I hurt someones feelings - I would feel badly - but I would not feel shame.

They too very different emotions to me.

And I am enjoying the conversation. :)

[tigereye]

70. shame is a very deep cultural concept for some

I think we should always question our reactions to rules that our culture has, since most of these rules are social constructs. Not always bad, not always good, not always right, but serving some function in our society.

[CO Liberal]

28. Conversely....

There are many so-called Christians (such as Falwell, Phelps, Robertson, and Dobson) that I consider to be immoral, because they use religion to drive people apart.

This is the DU member still known as CO Liberal.

[Beware the Beast Man]

32. ABSOLUTELY!

Thank you. They wield spirituality as a weapon, and use it as a free pass to step on others. In turn, they spoil it for the lot of us who truly believe in a higher power and in love for our fellow man.

[the Princess]

35. And I agree with you

I believe there is a higher power and I have love for my fellow man - but I do not believe sin or shame have any place in that equation.

[CO Liberal]

37. Then It's Up To You.....

...to take action against the charlatans.

I used to think it was ironic. In the gospels (which were read to us every Sunday when I was a Catholic), it says that one of the last things Jesus did before the crucifixion was drive the money-changers out of the temple. And now (thanks to Falwell, Dobson, Robertson et al), the money-changers OWN the temple.

This is the DU member still known as CO Liberal.

[Beware the Beast Man]

39. As a Catholic, I find it odd

That a lot of RWers in the Church think that the moral crusaders in this administration are on their side. In reality, they'd love to see any belief beyond their extremely narrow vision extinguished, especially Catholicism.

[CO Liberal]

45. I Know

A lot of the religious wackos out here in Colorado don't even consider Catholisim a religion - they call it a cult.

This is the DU member still known as CO Liberal.

[Beware the Beast Man]

51. Ooh, you're in Bob Enyart country, aren't you?

That guy's fuckin' bananas. I used to watch his show on the religious channel in Pittsburgh, just because my BP isn't high enough. That guy was so horrid. They put him on at like 4 AM, because I'm sure even most religious nuts are ashamed of him!

[CO Liberal]

53. Even Worse - I'm Within Ten Miles of Focus On The Family's Headquarters

:scared:

This is the DU member still known as CO Liberal.

[Cheswick2.0]

78. not since the catholic church had developed it's own right wing fundie

groups. The idea that fundamentalist protestants are against the catholic church doesn't hold water anymore. That all died in the 1970s. Now anyone who preaches against abortion and homosexuality can join the church of "YOUR SIN IS WORSE THAN MINE".

[CO Liberal]

84. I Hear People Out Here Saying That All the Time

Maybe the fundies out here are a bit behind the curve.....

[patcox2]

43. I thought of "sin" as being equivalent to "immoral acts."

You seem more concerned with shame. I think shame is a good thing. But I think from your tone that you relate it more to victorian type prudery and school-marmy "shame on you" finger waving over so-called sexual imorality. Well, that kind of shame is bad, certainly, because the designation of those things as "sins" is wrong.

But I think murderers and theives, Ken Lay and George Bush, should feel ashamed.

[the Princess]

48. I think in most cases

Sin and shame are used to control.

I just do allow them in my life anymore.

[Cheswick2.0]

76. shame does serve a purpose, falsE shame does not

sometimes shame is the motivation to stop fucking up your life and the lives of others. False shame put on you by other people for things that you do which are not wrong is indeed useless.

[WindRavenX]

7. Nope

We do bad things. That's all.

[Metatron]

10. I don't believe in sin.

[Cuban_Liberal]

11. Yes, I believe in sin. I also believe in...

... evil, and salvation.

[JVS]

12. What are you some kind of fundy-maniac?

;-)

[Cuban_Liberal]

14. LOL!

Nope, just a garden-variety RC.

:P

[JVS]

16. I'm going to need to see your papers

Make sure you aren't one of those Mel Gibson type Catholic Fundies. ;-)

[JohnKleeb]

17. evil!

kidding we're the same, except I only consider myself Catholic out of respect for my GC relatives, GC= Greek Catholic, and no I am not Greek.

[VaYallaDawg]

22. Me too, CubanLiberal.

We all get big doses of sin and guilt stuff. I don't know if it makes us any better off as humans or not, but it sure does get inside you, doesn't it.

[MatrixEscape]

13. Yes, in a way.

My understanding of the definition of sin is sans the emotional, guilt-ridden facade pulled over it. The Catholic Church was adept at transforming its meaning.

My understanding of it? It is simply to be prone to error. That is how I define it. Under that definition, to err is human and I agree totally with it as an orginal human trait. There is wise humility in that understanding as many know.

All the grevious, shameful, self-effacing noise that breaks people down into self-hating sheeple that dow what they are told is a travesty and a manipulative lie.

To forgive is Divine, BTW ;)

[Beware the Beast Man]

15. Semantics: it depends on your view of sin and shame.

Sinning, in my experience, is doing something or treating someone contrary to the way you would want to be treated. Shame is the acknowledgement of sin. One can feel shame for what they did, but it doesn't mean you should sulk and hem and haw about what you have done. It's an awareness that you have done somthing wrong to another, and an intention to right your wrongs in the future.
Feeling unnecessarily shameful about things is another matter altogether.

[Pacifist Patriot]

18. Depends upon the definition, but as a UU

no, I don't routinely think in terms of "sin."

[pdx_prog]

19. responsibility

is key.....

[the Princess]

21. Exactly!

[CO Liberal]

23. I Believe That Sin is a Man-Made Concept

Since over the years I've reached the conclusion that all religions are man-made creations designed to keep people in line. And the concept of sin is one of their tools for controlling the masses and makign them do what they're told.

And believe me - I had a LOT of the "sin" concept pounded into me by the nuns in Sunday School.

This is the DU member still known as CO Liberal.

[the Princess]

25. Thank you honey

You said it better than me! :)

This is why I love you - amung many other reasons.

[CO Liberal]

33. We Make A Pretty Good Team, Don't We????

:loveya:

I guess that's why the sourpusses at that other place drove us out, right???

This is the DU member still known as CO Liberal.

[the Princess]

61. We do make a good team

And the fact is the people here while they have strong beliefs are willing to allow a differing opinion - that is the biggest difference.

[CO Liberal]

63. Compared With....

...the idiot up in Colorado Springs who wears sack-cloth and ashes to protest the Gay Pride Parade each year, and called me the Anti-Christ on KVOR.

:-)

This is the DU member still known as CO Liberal.

[hughee99]

74. It is a man-made concept... but

it is not always used to control the masses. I think it can serve a good thing. I personally believe that morals are not necessarily tied to religion. I think that morals can be based on a "social contract" type of system. Many non-religious people believe that it is wrong to kill, or steal, or cheat. In these cases, someone may feel shame, and that they have "sinned", not based on an religious beliefs, but based on their own personal moral compass. There are always things that we want to do, but either our fear of what others would think if they knew, or even better, our fear of what we would think of ourselves, prevents us from doing it. In this way, sin and shame can help us to better follow our own personal belief system. I don't believe that any act is necessarily sinful, in and of itself, but only in relation to what the person who does it, or someone who is talking about it believes to be moral.
I personally, for example, think it is wrong to cheat on my wife. I would never do it, not because of what others would think, but because of what I would think of myself. If I hear about someone else who cheated on their wife, but they had an open relationship, while I may think it's a sin, they would not, because they have done nothing to violate their personal beliefs. I would not be able to "shame" that person, unless they felt they had done something wrong.
Some religions instill a belief system that the followers may not really agree with (it is not really their personal belief system, although they pretend it is to "get along" in their religion). In order to be a good follower, they call things sinful, but they do those same things in their private life, because they don't really believe that it is. The only show "token" remorse when someone else points it out (see Falwell), but they don't really believe they've done anything wrong. The guilt, or shame, doesn't eat at them.

[Dogmudgeon]

26. Sin no longer has the same meaning

The original meaning of it was "imperfection", not "wickedness". In Greek, the word is hammartion and means something like "missing the target". Hammartiology is the academic study of sin.

Original Sin (in Christian hammartiology) is the state of human imperfection. When a person is said to sin, the assumption is that imperfection leads the sinner to his or her deed, which can be anything from a minor mis-step to a giant atrocity.

It's our modern idea of sin that is flawed, relative to the way the early Christians thought about it.

--bkl

[the Princess]

36. Excellent points!

I like that idea of sin meaning imperfection. That I can agree with. :)

[Beware the Beast Man]

46. That was, in fewer words, my earlier point.

I'm just not as eloquent sometimes. :hi:
We're imperfect. That's what makes us human and not divine.

[sundog]

30. No... and I think a lot of "morality" is bullshit too...

Sin is a human construct used primarily for social control.

And a lot of people go around with high-brow moralism (more moralistic than thou attitude) shoved up their asses... but when push comes to shove, they'll abandon their morals in a heartbeat.

My bottom line is protection & loyalty for those you love & trust.

[Beware the Beast Man]

40. So then let's revert back into animals.

I'm all about doing things 100%. Without a moral structure, I'm free to kill you for your food and shelter and steal your mate.

[the Princess]

41. You're hysterical!

LOLOL

[sundog]

54. ok btbm, sounds good to me...

But in all non-seriousness, I just see a lot of hypocrisy in morality.... Not saying a certain structure is without merit, I'm just saying that those who are most consumed by morality are often those who are most quick to transgress their own standards.

And who is going to define morality anyway?

Is the natural world (beyond humans... what is left of it) without morality? Is/was there a balance in nature? Who defines morality among the beings of the forest & jungle? Those things existed before humans, yet ultimately are less fucked up. Seems to me that they have often fallen victim to the fucked up "morality" of humans (who are the most recent arrival on the planet).

The placing of the human "above" animals is a Christian construct - nature is the enemy and must be controlled. Such morality was applied when Europeans first arrived on this continent found the need to tame the "savages" who were previously existing in balance with the natural world. In the minds of the conquistadors, the Native people were heathens & bad... So they felt the need to make them conform to the European moral standard (by force of course - lots of bloodletting involved).

Again, who defines morality?

[Cheswick2.0]

81. you mean if it weren't for Christians we wouldn't be wearing and eating

animals? What did all those people do before the time of Christ? D'oh!
People ARE above other animals. We are smarter and more resorceful and we eat them because we are higher on the food chain.

[sundog]

87. Did I say that?

There's a difference between need & greed, and I think the indigenous people of this continent were living with more respect simply to need. Such is a life in balance.

When the life of an animal was taken, it was done with respect to the spirit if that animal. Every part was used in a humble way.

<People ARE above other animals> Sorry, I beg to differ. I believe we are equal. Humans are simply the most arrogant of all the critters.

<We are smarter and more resorceful> Well, imperialists always have been... Sure, if you define smarter as more cunning.

So on that line of thought... If once race of humans enslaves and or annihilates another, is it because they are smarter and more resourceful?

[Beware the Beast Man]

88. I do. I'm God.

[Jack Schitt]

42. Yes I do. But I don't believe in original sin.

If God was all powerful, all loving, all forgiving, then why would he condemn the ancestors of Adam and Eve when it was they themselves who sinned?

Just because they ate a forbidden friut doesn't mean I should suffer! If they weren't so stupid, we'd be walking around nekkid today. :(

But in all seriousness, the concept of original sin doesn't make sense considering the adjectives used to describe God.

[the Princess]

44. That's because

Sin is a man made concept. Even the stories in the bible are man made.

Opps I shouldn't have said that. :)

[Jack Schitt]

47. You may be right.

That's why I'm an agnostic.

[the Princess]

49. Hey me too! LOL

[Squeech]

50. Definitions?

You can have morals without a theologically determined ethical structure. I think all it takes is an enlightened self-interest with a bit of empathy. That allows you to generate at least some variant of the Golden Rule from first principles-- at least the negative version, the one that says Don't treat others as you would not wish to be treated.

I think it was Robert A. Heinlein that said "Sin is hurting other people unnecessarily." That works for me. Sinning against God is possible only if you buy the idea of a God that has a plan for you (and is so careless that He hasn't issued an update of the basic user manual in a couple thousand years).

Shame is the sense of experiencing or expecting public disapproval. It has been said that the European Christian culture is guilt-based, while the Japanese culture is shame-based-- implying that, while the Judeo-Christian behavioral sanctions kick in when we acknowledge to ourselves that we have done wrong, they feel responsible only for violations of the so-called Eleventh Commandment ("Don't get caught!") :evilgrin:

At least, that's how I see it.

[the Princess]

52. Great post!

I love it! :)

[Squeech]

55. Glad to help!

I've been thinking about this lately in response to the idea that we lost the election because of "moral values." It is an article of faith (obviously) among the Christian right that moral behavior cannot exist unless God is in there pulling the strings. I disagree, and I think the argument above is valid.

Of course, my formulation doesn't give the "right" answer to what they see as the biggest moral lapse in recorded history: sex outside of marriage. (Why this is worse than Abu Ghraib, I'll never understand.)

I should also note that I don't endorse this characterization of the Japanese ethic, I'm just quoting something I read once. I could cite Japanese behavior such as the rape of Nanking in their attempted takeover of China in the '30s (an event which still looms large in Chinese history), for example, but to say that this kind of shit is part and parcel of the Japanese character is no more reasonable than to say that Abu Ghraib is part and parcel of the American character.

Or, Dr. Milgrum, call your office. (Milgrum was the guy who tried to prove experimentally that Germans were more disposed than Americans to obey vicious orders. He found out otherwise.)

[qnr]

56. Depends upon your interpretation. I believe it is in the

dictionary, for example.

[Modem Butterfly]

57. No, I don't believe in sin

But I think shame is a most powerful force. I think our society relies on it entirely too much. I think xianity is steeped in shame. I think it's a very bad thing, personally.

[Cheswick2.0]

82. I think the use of the word Xianity is intentionally insulting

and divisive. Why go there?

[Modem Butterfly]

86. It's historically correct

X = the first letter of Christ's name in Greek. Its use is almost as old as xianity itself. It was used as a holy symbol, then later used as short hand for the word Christ (as in Xmas).

I'm not sure where you think I'm going. It's difficult to believe that anyone could consider the use of a term coined and used by xians themselves could be insulting to anyone.

http://www2.worldbook.com/features/holidays/html/history.htm

http://www.novareinna.com/festive/xmas.html

[Bertha Venation]

58. Not sin. I believe in right & wrong. Sin is a religious concept. eom

[the Princess]

59. I love this place

I love all the ideas and concepts everyone has brought to this conversation.

Thanks again! :)

[OneBlueSky]

60. from "A Course in Miracles" . . .

It is essential that error not be confused with sin, and it is this distinction that makes salvation possible. For error can be corrected, and the wrong made right. But sin, were it possible, would be irreversible. . . Sin calls for punishment as error calls for correction, and the belief that punishment is correction is clearly insane. . .

The Son of God can be mistaken; he can decieve himself; he can even turn the power of his mind against himself. But he cannot sin. . . . The Holy Spirit cannot punish sin. Mistakes He recognizes, and would correct them all as God entrusted Him to do. But sin He knows not, nor can He recognize mistakes that cannot be corrected.

[the Princess]

62. Wonderful post

Thank you.:)

[Nikia]

64. Yes

I just refrained from posting my post that went deep into my own personal theology. We can sin against God (or higher power or world), others, and ourselves. I struggle with an exact definition. There are wrong decisions that are harmful. We should always consider the consequences of our actions. I think that guilt helps keeps us from committing the same sins again. I think there is such a thing as too much guilt though and it could be consider a way that you can sin against yourself. I think that shaming someone who already is obviously suffering from their consequences and their own guilt is a sin. God will forgive all sins in which a person is sorry. We should act likewise. I'll stop now before I get too deep again and have to delete the post.

[the Princess]

65. I would ahve to say I respectfully disagree with you

Only because your argument seems to be based on a belief in God. And as I do not believe in God - I cannot agree with it.

But thanks for your thought sI appreciate them. :)

[Phillycat]

69. I am always interested to read your posts.

You seem like you come from and live in a deeply fundamentalist Christian patriarchal environment. Some of it you seem to have absorbed and some of it you seem to reject. What is most interesting to me is that you post here. I think that must be a strong rejection of where you came from.

This is all speculation of course. Feel free to tell me I don't know you from Adam. :)

[Nikia]

80. I am different than most people

Maybe that is egotistical of me to say or perhaps it is an observation. I did grow up in a rural area where many people are Fundamentalist Christians and people were shocked if you did not attend a church. It was also probably more patriarchal than average for the US. My parents were teenagers when I was born and I spent a lot of time with both sides of my extended family as I was growing up. I had many different political and religious influences on me growing up. I am white, but of many different ethnicities and my families kept old photos, records, and stories about those families. My families came from every type of socioeconomic class. My grandparents were basically middle class when I was born, but they weren't materialists by any means. I was raised with conflicting values in some ways, but the values that my grandparents and parents did seem to agree upon were that it was good to be educated, to treat others with respect, and to be an individual rather than following the crowd. I left the area of my childhood and went to a good liberal arts college. Now I live in another socially conservative area. I am constantly reevaluating my ideas all the time, always weighing things against what I know and what I believe. I like to think of myself as a dynamic character. I do consider myself a Democrat, a Christian, and a Feminist. I have always felt like an outsider wherever I have been, but always manage to find friends anyway.

[skygazer]

66. It's all a matter of definition

I don't necessarily believe that there is an omnipotent being who is going to judge my actions, hence I don't really believe in "sin" as in something that is a crime against god's wishes.

However, I do believe there are things we are morally bound not to do because they are wrong, like kill others or treat people poorly or send our kids to Iraq to kill Iraqi civilians, etc. Those are moral wrongs.

I take exception to the common belief that atheists and agnostics are immoral. I don't need some commandment from above to tell me that some things are wrong or that I should treat people kindly.

As for shame, I think there are plenty of people who should be ashamed of some of their acts - there are things I've done in the past that I'm ashamed of now. However that, like regret, does not rule my life. Since I can't change the past, I simply try to remember and not repeat mistakes in the future.

[Taverner]

67. Hmmmmm well first let's have a definition of sin

Sin, defined, is the Hebrew word "to miss the mark" as in archery. So sin is not, by definition, the act of evil, but the lack of good in an action.

However, as for sin, one must assume an objective sense of right and wrong, which I don't adhere to. I am a moral relativist.

[qnr]

68. Yes, but as I mentioned earlier, the very fact that there is a definition

gives you something to believe in - even if it is only the etymology of the word :)

[Taverner]

71. OK..well I beleive in etymology

And I beleive that there are those who think there is such a thing as sin, but do I think that there is an objective sense of right and wrong - no. But there are plenty of subjective right and wrongs, based on culture, and situational considerations.

For example, is it wrong to eat a box of crackers? Not usually, no. However if you are amont the last three survivors and you eat the only food all yourself (which consists of a box of crackers) then yes, this is wrong.

[qnr]

72. Yes, I know just what you mean. Me, I only believe in sin in the

sense that "s" + "i" + "n" makes a recognizable word :shrug:

[the Princess]

73. I like that! LOL

And for what it's worth. What some people believe is sin others think is OK. So how do you define it? I just choose to live my life as a good person.

[Cheswick2.0]

75. yes I do, but the word puts people off and the concept is poorly defined

I think of sin as dumb behavior or behavior that harms yourself or society. Instead of saying extramarital sex is a sin, think of it as destructive behavior. That is really what we are talking about after all.
When Paul talks in the bible about Peterasty people interpreted that as condeming homosexuality. So there are things talked about as sin (knuckled headed and harmful behavior)which are not "sins".

[the Princess]

79. Just a thought

Extramarital sex does not have to be destructive - provided both parties in said marriage agree that it's OK. I've seen it work in marriages and these people are happily married still.

JMO - I know most don't share my opinion. :)

[Cheswick2.0]

83. That's a different story...however they may be happy

and managed to screw up their kids or the other people they brought into the equation.
I grew up in a very permissive, do it if it feels good atmosphere, the original counter culture of the sixties. You really can't convince me that open marriage is a good idea. Every one I have observed has fucked up someone's life. I am about 40 years ahead of you there.

[Dzimbowicz]

77. I simply believe in

what goes around, comes around. You reap what you sow.

Just an Agnostic opinion.

[Cheswick2.0]

85. yup and sin is just a word....like evil

it is all about how you define it. What goes around, comes around is another way of saying sin and retribution. It just doesn't sound so biblical and scary.