SIN!

Tired of wandering the lawless wilds of the AC&A forum? Have a friendly chat in our cozy, velvet-covered civility lounge. Alcohol not permitted, only the Kenny G button works on the jukebox. All undesirable types will be quietly escorted out the back door.

Re: SIN!

Postby Og3 » Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:05 am

Particles wrote:
Og3 wrote:
Particles wrote:Og, I am not telling you not to believe your theology, I am saying don't assume I believe in sin the way you do. I don't even use the word sin myself to avoid the confusion.

So it's not the meaning of the word that offends you, but the word itself?

Again, it's the context of the use. If a Christian were to tell me that we all sin, so we all need Jesus (which has happened multiple times to me), would you not agree that they are using a Christian meaning of sin and not a secular one?

Either meaning works in that context.

"You use the name of God in vain, therefore you need a savior" or "You just cheated that guy out of $20, so you need a savior" both say pretty much the same thing.

Let's put it another way: We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.
Og3
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:46 am
Location: California, USA
Affiliation: Baptist (SBC)

Re: SIN!

Postby Particles » Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:04 pm

Og3 wrote:Either meaning works in that context.

"You use the name of God in vain, therefore you need a savior" or "You just cheated that guy out of $20, so you need a savior" both say pretty much the same thing.

Let's put it another way: We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


What would a secular savior be?
Particles
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 2089
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:47 pm
Location: USA
Affiliation: Gnostic atheist

Re: SIN!

Postby sayak » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:25 am

Og3 wrote:
Either meaning works in that context.

"You use the name of God in vain, therefore you need a savior" or "You just cheated that guy out of $20, so you need a savior" both say pretty much the same thing.

Let's put it another way: We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


So you are accepting that sin is an idea which makes sense only within a Christian savior theology? You have yourself answered Rian's question as to why we atheists who believe Christianity to be false, reject the concept of sin when someone tries to apply it on us.
sayak
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:09 pm
Affiliation: Humanist

Re: SIN!

Postby humanguy » Thu Feb 04, 2016 2:30 pm

Og3 wrote:We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


Is it fair to say, then, that according to this explanation non-Christians can't really sin at all, that, strictly speaking, sin applies only to the followers of God/Christ in the same way that Haram applies only to the followers of Muhammed?
Most of us, just about all of us, have the capacity to be rock and rolled by a feeling of pure ecstatic raw joy. You do, don't you? We should respect each other for that.
User avatar
humanguy
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3876
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:50 pm
Location: Lumpen Post-Industrial District
Affiliation: Human

Re: SIN!

Postby Og3 » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Particles wrote:
Og3 wrote:
Particles wrote:Og, I am not telling you not to believe your theology, I am saying don't assume I believe in sin the way you do. I don't even use the word sin myself to avoid the confusion.

So it's not the meaning of the word that offends you, but the word itself?


Again, it's the context of the use. If a Christian were to tell me that we all sin, so we all need Jesus (which has happened multiple times to me), would you not agree that they are using a Christian meaning of sin and not a secular one?

Regardless which they use, the end result is the same.

"You offended people, therefore you need Jesus."
"You offended God, therefore you need people."

If one statement offends you, the other should also.
Og3
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:46 am
Location: California, USA
Affiliation: Baptist (SBC)

Re: SIN!

Postby Og3 » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:56 pm

humanguy wrote:
Og3 wrote:We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


Is it fair to say, then, that according to this explanation non-Christians can't really sin at all, that, strictly speaking, sin applies only to the followers of God/Christ in the same way that Haram applies only to the followers of Muhammed?

No, a non-Christian can look at the same plumb line we do; in fact a Christian no longer needs the plumb line because he has been reconciled to it.

Thus we say, we are not under the law, but under grace.
Og3
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:46 am
Location: California, USA
Affiliation: Baptist (SBC)

Re: SIN!

Postby Og3 » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:58 pm

Particles wrote:
Og3 wrote:Either meaning works in that context.

"You use the name of God in vain, therefore you need a savior" or "You just cheated that guy out of $20, so you need a savior" both say pretty much the same thing.

Let's put it another way: We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


What would a secular savior be?

There is none. A man who sees himself with comparison to the plumb line of perfect righteousness and refuses to allow Jesus to reconcile him to that line has no recourse but to remain crooked.
Og3
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:46 am
Location: California, USA
Affiliation: Baptist (SBC)

Re: SIN!

Postby Og3 » Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:01 am

sayak wrote:
Og3 wrote:
Either meaning works in that context.

"You use the name of God in vain, therefore you need a savior" or "You just cheated that guy out of $20, so you need a savior" both say pretty much the same thing.

Let's put it another way: We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


So you are accepting that sin is an idea which makes sense only within a Christian savior theology? You have yourself answered Rian's question as to why we atheists who believe Christianity to be false, reject the concept of sin when someone tries to apply it on us.

Not at all.

You obviously reject the consequent, "Thus you need a savior." But you cannot deny the antecedent, "You just performed an evil act."
Og3
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:46 am
Location: California, USA
Affiliation: Baptist (SBC)

Re: SIN!

Postby sayak » Fri Feb 05, 2016 10:50 am

Og3 wrote:
sayak wrote:
Og3 wrote:
Either meaning works in that context.

"You use the name of God in vain, therefore you need a savior" or "You just cheated that guy out of $20, so you need a savior" both say pretty much the same thing.

Let's put it another way: We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


So you are accepting that sin is an idea which makes sense only within a Christian savior theology? You have yourself answered Rian's question as to why we atheists who believe Christianity to be false, reject the concept of sin when someone tries to apply it on us.

Not at all.

You obviously reject the consequent, "Thus you need a savior." But you cannot deny the antecedent, "You just performed an evil act."


That is for the secular law of the land to decide, not some writing on an old book claimed to be inspired by a god. As a citizen of a democratic country, I am only answerable to the laws created through consultations of my peer citizens for the administration of that country. The OT, the Shariah or the Dharmasutras (this one from Hinduism) are irrelevant.
sayak
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:09 pm
Affiliation: Humanist

Re: SIN!

Postby humanguy » Fri Feb 05, 2016 5:10 pm

Og3 wrote:
humanguy wrote:
Og3 wrote:We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


Is it fair to say, then, that according to this explanation non-Christians can't really sin at all, that, strictly speaking, sin applies only to the followers of God/Christ in the same way that Haram applies only to the followers of Muhammed?

No, a non-Christian can look at the same plumb line we do; in fact a Christian no longer needs the plumb line because he has been reconciled to it.

Thus we say, we are not under the law, but under grace.


Alright, but for argument's sake, why would a morally upstanding non-Christian need to know that the plumb line even exists? In other words, can a person trying to live a completely moral life according to society's moral values still be found lacking according to the God-given plumb line measurement?
Most of us, just about all of us, have the capacity to be rock and rolled by a feeling of pure ecstatic raw joy. You do, don't you? We should respect each other for that.
User avatar
humanguy
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3876
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:50 pm
Location: Lumpen Post-Industrial District
Affiliation: Human

Re: SIN!

Postby kuwano » Sat Feb 06, 2016 7:30 am

Particles wrote:
Og3 wrote:Either meaning works in that context.

"You use the name of God in vain, therefore you need a savior" or "You just cheated that guy out of $20, so you need a savior" both say pretty much the same thing.

Let's put it another way: We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


What would a secular savior be?


This is a good question, I'll use a different example from Og3. Though using different terms, there are lots of overlaps with the concept of self-esteem that might be seen as a secular alternative.

Self-esteem is about a verdict - of meeting a standard/approval by the highest authority over our lives. On a secular level, for many we construct our own realities and define our own meaning in life so self-esteem is meeting the criteria of the one we are ultimately accountable to i.e. ourselves.

Lack of self-esteem is falling short of that standard which we as the judges of our lives have set. So sin in this context (although its never given this name) is what prevents us from giving ourselves the verdict of accepted/approved of. So the saviour is the one who removes this barrier - whatever that may be. So we might seek therapy to give us insight into what barriers prevent us approving of ourselves. Others might seek to get that promotion, that pay rise, that house or car, get married, or whatever else so that if we get that thing we need we will be OK - we have met the standard (or in Og's example the plumb line). So the judge is also the saviour - seeking to remove that key barrier that prevents us giving that positive verdict either through seeking self understanding, achievement, social respectability etc. The problem though is that though these things are often good in themselves they can become enslaving if we rest the hope of our lives on them and become disillusioned.
kuwano
resident
resident
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2015 1:04 pm
Location: UK
Affiliation: Christian

Re: SIN!

Postby Particles » Tue Feb 09, 2016 4:03 pm

Og3 wrote:
Particles wrote:
Og3 wrote:Either meaning works in that context.

"You use the name of God in vain, therefore you need a savior" or "You just cheated that guy out of $20, so you need a savior" both say pretty much the same thing.

Let's put it another way: We Christians believe that God gave us a "plumb line" in the old testament law: A string stretched tight to give a straight comparison. Sin is the measure of how far we are from that plumb line. We are given ten major metrics for this: Four that pertain to a relationship with God, and Six that pertain to a relationship with our fellow man. To be wrong by any of these metrics is to be wrong entirely.

And if we do no match the plumb line precisely, then we need a savior.


What would a secular savior be?

There is none. A man who sees himself with comparison to the plumb line of perfect righteousness and refuses to allow Jesus to reconcile him to that line has no recourse but to remain crooked.


If you say there is no secular equivalent, then you agree with me.
Particles
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 2089
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:47 pm
Location: USA
Affiliation: Gnostic atheist

Re: SIN!

Postby mitchellmckain » Sun Feb 14, 2016 5:29 pm

The point of the dumb line is using religion to control people.

LOL If God wanted to control people then he would do so. It is only people drooling for power themselves which have to bandy such over-the-top threats in order to cow the gullible into obedient dogs. God created life and free will precisely because control doesn't interest Him -- it is only a desire for creativity, passion, innovation, and love which can explain the creation of such things. Now who would want to crush this out of people to stamp out a bunch of brainless xtian zombies? It is the obsession with power and control which motivates things like this. Being so opposite the motivation and desire of God explains why Jesus called these abusers of religion the enemies of God.

I mean come on. Only people like would even imagine that goodness was this tiny narrow little line. The truth is the goodness is infinitely vast precisely because it is creative, and it is evil which is small and petty because it is destructive.
Out of Skull for the Stars My first book is now available on Amazon.com
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 10316
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:32 am
Location: Salt Lake City
Affiliation: Christian

Re: SIN!

Postby CL Moderator » Sun Feb 14, 2016 6:24 pm

* * * * Moderator Reminder * * * *

Remember to comply with Civility Lounge standards when in the Civility Lounge.
User avatar
CL Moderator
recruit
recruit
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 4:55 pm

Re: SIN!

Postby mitchellmckain » Sun Feb 14, 2016 10:49 pm

Sorry!

Particles wrote:If you say there is no secular equivalent, then you agree with me.


The secular equivalent can be seen in the very nature of a real plumb line which uses the laws of nature to determine a vertical line, which is important precise because of gravity. If you don't make your support post vertical then gravity will bring the structure down on top of you. Secularism requires a limitation of the use of governmental force to what can be established by the objective (scientific) evidence.
Out of Skull for the Stars My first book is now available on Amazon.com
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 10316
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:32 am
Location: Salt Lake City
Affiliation: Christian

Previous

Return to The Civility Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest