What is sin? - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-22-2007, 06:22 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2isthebest


Personally, I believe I don't aspire to be holy. I try to make choices that line up with what I think God wants me to be. That has nothing to do with holiness. I'm called holy by God because I chose to accept what Jesus did for me not because of any action on my part.
I thought Yolland's question was a good one and it raises another question.

How do you define "holy"? Is there even any practical definitiion outside of the theological one?

I find that Christians (and I'm sure othe faiths, but I'm a Christian so I'll speak about what I know) throw around these terms "sin" "holiness" "grace" etc and I often wonder if they have any real significance to anyone outside the Christian faith, and furthermore if they even have the correct connotatin within the faith?(though the second part of that question would certainly be subject to a lof debate among Christians)

Again, the question is open to all regardless of faith.
__________________

__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 06:23 PM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by shart1780
Why foolish?
Cuz we would have already hashed this out and I totally forgot.
__________________

__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 06:24 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Washington State
Posts: 3,861
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Oh well. It was a good discussion in the past. Don't see why it can't be good now.
__________________
shart1780 is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 06:31 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by shart1780


I've never understood how this view could be logically defended.

If there is no God, and if we are truly sophisticated animals with no true soul, then what does right and wrong really matter at all? It wouldn't.

Let's say The human race evolved from soulless creatures and we're still soulless creatures that will just dissolve into the dust when we die like every other animal. How is there truly any wrong at all? If there is no universal right or wrong we are simply masses of flesh bumping into eachother on a tiny ball in space.

If we are fleshy masses with no real purpose (except maybe the percieve purpose society makes up for us), why is it wrong to kill? All it would be is the act of causing another mass of flesh to cease to live. Why is that "wrong"? Why is it not wrong for my cat to kill a mouse for sport?

And if morals are decided by society, then who's to say the ancient Mayan cultures who practiced savage human sacrifice were morally wrong? In there minds that was perfectly acceptable because society said so. Something can't be wrong in one part of the world and right in another.

If right and wrong are only dictated by society than I'd say that morals are a pretty stupid and petty thing.
So your definition of sin, put simply would be sin=immorality=whatever God says is bad. Correct?

So based on your definition, people who don't believe in God could not then believe in sin. I know you can't see a rationale for morality outside of faith (remember the atheism thread you brought down last summer?) So let's leave it at that for a moment.

It is clear that most atheists/agnostics DO believe that some things are immoral. Addressing those of you on the forum with those views, do you have a practical use for the term "sin" or do you see it strictly theological term. Whether as practical "secular" term, or as you understand believers to use it, what do you understand the term sin to mean. A Wanderer said "The good stuff." Vincent Vega mentioned "things that Christians believe God doesn't want them to do" or something to that affect.

Any other thoughts?
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 06:32 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by shart1780
Oh well. It was a good discussion in the past. Don't see why it can't be good now.
True, true.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 06:36 PM   #36
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 08:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by shart1780


I've never understood how this view could be logically defended.

If there is no God, and if we are truly sophisticated animals with no true soul, then what does right and wrong really matter at all? It wouldn't.

Let's say The human race evolved from soulless creatures and we're still soulless creatures that will just dissolve into the dust when we die like every other animal. How is there truly any wrong at all? If there is no universal right or wrong we are simply masses of flesh bumping into eachother on a tiny ball in space.

If we are fleshy masses with no real purpose (except maybe the percieve purpose society makes up for us), why is it wrong to kill? Al it would be is the act of causing another mass of flesh to cease to live. Why is that "wrong"? Why is it not wrong for my cat to kill a mouse for sport?

And if morals are decided by society, then who's to say the ancient Mayan cultures who practice savage human sacrifice were morally wrong? In there minds that was perfectly acceptable because society said so. Something can't be wrong in one part of the world and right in another. It just doesn't make sense.

If right and wrong are only dictated by society than I'd say that morals are a pretty stupid and petty thing.
And that is what I don't get with religious people. The notion that they have a monopoly on morality. That they are the only ones capable of feelings, forgiveness, and so on.
Ever read Kant? He gives some answers.

I'm sure you have interacted with other non-religious people, or read some posts on here from people like me, A_Wanderer or dazzlingamy. Did you ever get the feeling that we are blood thirsty, immoral creature seeing every person as a pile of flesh and bones?

As I said, morality is not a religious term that doesn't apply to atheists or agnostics, or people from other religions.

I value other people, as I value other creatures. I reject any killing for fun.

I don't think we are so much superior of animals. But on the other hand, animals usually don't kill for pleasure. Either they are hungry, or they are defending themselves.
I'm not a cat expert to know why they play with a mouse, but I think it's insulting to say a non-religious person like me would do the same thing, only because we don't believe that there is something in Heaven or whereever controlling and steering us. I don't need God for my set of morals.

I don't know what our purpose is, but when the useless flesh of my father's died one and a half months ago there was so much more that left than just that. There left loads of purpose. When people kill each other, they don't just take the life of another person.

I really don't get how you could imply we are viewing people just like atoms without a reason for being on earth.

Other cultures had other sets of principles and morals. And mind you, the reason the Mayans sacrificed people, like other cultures did, was to please their Gods. Am I to say whether this was moral or not? Today, it would be far from moral.

But then think about what the Catholic church did to people not applying to their set of principles. The Malleus Maleficarum, Giordano Bruno, Galileo Galilei, the crusades, the support of the Nazis (also done by the Lutherian Protestants) and so on. And all in the name of God.
It took centuries to be able to say that the earth isn't flat, that there doesn't need to be a higher being, or that we might not be the middle of the universe, without getting brutally tortured and killed by those oh so moral higher people.

Quote:
by myself:
Society defines what is right and what is wrong. But not solely. The law, developed over centuries and revisited over and over again provides for a basis we can use to define what is right or wrong, moral or immoral. Not one person, and never one book.
Please reread that again, and if need be, I will clarify.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 06:44 PM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 08:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean


So your definition of sin, put simply would be sin=immorality=whatever God says is bad. Correct?

So based on your definition, people who don't believe in God could not then believe in sin. I know you can't see a rationale for morality outside of faith (remember the atheism thread you brought down last summer?) So let's leave it at that for a moment.

It is clear that most atheists/agnostics DO believe that some things are immoral. Addressing those of you on the forum with those views, do you have a practical use for the term "sin" or do you see it strictly theological term. Whether as practical "secular" term, or as you understand believers to use it, what do you understand the term sin to mean. A Wanderer said "The good stuff." Vincent Vega mentioned "things that Christians believe God doesn't want them to do" or something to that affect.

Any other thoughts?

Hmm, I really don't use sin. When I read of someone doing something criminal, I don't say "Oh, he committed a sin."
When I think about the term, it's mostly the seven mortal sins that come to mind.
So it's really closely connected to religion.
I know the word, but I wouldn't use it.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 06:46 PM   #38
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean


Thanks everyone for your responses so far. It's been really interesting. Deep, I wanted address your response in particular. . .

You reject the concept of sin. Fair enough. But could you define the concept you are rejecting?
I don't have a lot of time today

but I think this is an excellent topic

I will add more tomorrow.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 06:50 PM   #39
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by shart1780

I've never understood how this view could be logically defended.

If there is no God, and if we are truly sophisticated animals with no true soul, then what does right and wrong really matter at all? It wouldn't.

Let's say The human race evolved from soulless creatures and we're still soulless creatures that will just dissolve into the dust when we die like every other animal. How is there truly any wrong at all? If there is no universal right or wrong we are simply masses of flesh bumping into eachother on a tiny ball in space.

If we are fleshy masses with no real purpose (except maybe the percieve purpose society makes up for us), why is it wrong to kill? Al it would be is the act of causing another mass of flesh to cease to live. Why is that "wrong"? Why is it not wrong for my cat to kill a mouse for sport?

And if morals are decided by society, then who's to say the ancient Mayan cultures who practice savage human sacrifice were morally wrong? In there minds that was perfectly acceptable because society said so. Something can't be wrong in one part of the world and right in another. It just doesn't make sense.

If right and wrong are only dictated by society than I'd say that morals are a pretty stupid and petty thing.


it is not a sin for your cat to kill mice.

Hopefully,
humans are smarter than cats


and if you only choose to do what is right because
you want to believe you get to go to heaven

what good are your values?

I don't care about heaven
and my values are steadfast.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 07:04 PM   #40
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,237
Local Time: 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by shart1780
And if morals are decided by society, then who's to say the ancient Mayan cultures who practiced savage human sacrifice were morally wrong? In there minds that was perfectly acceptable because society said so. Something can't be wrong in one part of the world and right in another.
It's funny you bring the Mayans up as an argument for what could happen if morals don't come from God. Those savage human sacrifices were not their own idea - they performed those sacrifices to appease their gods. So if anything, perhaps the Mayans wouldn't have been so savage if they didn't believe in a creator/creators.
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 07:14 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 08:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Diemen


It's funny you bring the Mayans up as an argument for what could happen if morals don't come from God. Those savage human sacrifices were not their own idea - they performed those sacrifices to appease their gods. So if anything, perhaps the Mayans wouldn't have been so savage if they didn't believe in a creator/creators.

Quote:
Originally posted by shart1780


I mean that believing the Bible is the one true source for deciding what is and what's not sin is an unpoplar opinion.

So, if the Bible as the one true source, said, that people had to sacrifice a young baby every third month to appease their creator, who would be among those fanatically preying on young newborns for their ultimate sacrifice?
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 07:34 PM   #42
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega





if the Bible as the one true source, said, that people had to sacrifice a young baby every third month ?
the Bible does not say that

but the Bible (old Testament, in particular) does say plenty of other things are sins and punishable by death

Some Muslims have the decency to follow the Lord

most Christians only pay lip service and many cherry pick the parts that support their prejudices.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 07:44 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 08:14 PM
In that case, even if they only paid lip service they would deem the sacrifice of a you baby moral.
Or has the Bible ever been wrong?
After all, it's been written by God, and what he said is a commandment.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 09:07 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


I don't have a lot of time today

but I think this is an excellent topic

I will add more tomorrow.
I understand about lack of time, believe me. . .I'm leaving for the first leg of my journey home on Wednesday and my schedule is quickly filling up.

I'm thinking to myself, why on earth did I start this thread now, when I may not have time to really get into the discussion myself!

Ah well, I shall do my best and try to weigh in tomorrow as well.

At any rate I'm finding everyone's responses interesting and thought-provoking. Thanks all for keeping it relativity civil so far!
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-22-2007, 09:42 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 03:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean


I thought Yolland's question was a good one and it raises another question.

How do you define "holy"? Is there even any practical definitiion outside of the theological one?

I find that Christians (and I'm sure othe faiths, but I'm a Christian so I'll speak about what I know) throw around these terms "sin" "holiness" "grace" etc and I often wonder if they have any real significance to anyone outside the Christian faith, and furthermore if they even have the correct connotatin within the faith?(though the second part of that question would certainly be subject to a lof debate among Christians)

Again, the question is open to all regardless of faith.
Holy, to me, simply means that I accepted the work Jesus did for me on the cross, and I'm now looked at as perfect in his sight even though I still fuck up. It has nothing to do with any action on my part. I think a lot of Christians would say word like "moral" for a secular definition because they see holiness (from personal experiences here) as actions we choose to do or not do. I've noticed that those who are well-read in The Bible, pray a great deal, those who don't drink/smoke/do drugs/have premarital sex, etc. are looked at as holy. However, that's saying Jesus' death isn't good enough. It's saying I'm holy based on what I do rather than on what Jesus has already done. There are plenty of non-Christians who don't partake in any of those actions, yet that isn't going bring them into a relationship with God. I'm not saying we should all go out and do said activities, but we're missing it if we think doing/not doing ANYTHING is going to make us holy or pure in the eyes of God. That, according to The Bible, only comes from accepting the work Jesus did.
__________________

__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com