What is sin?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Therefore if you are an atheist you can't sin?

A good point wasted on the intellectually challenged people who tend to believe in God.

Originally posted by howardgee
A good point wasted on the intellectually challenged people who tend to believe in God.

And is misunderstood by the psudo intellectuals,who think their flop stinketh not.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Is it breaking any law on the books of mankind? Is running a red light a sin? Is strealing the change in a buskers hat a sin?
Is burning down an abortion clinic a sin? Just what is the definition of sinness?
Are there laws on the books that, if broken, would NOT be defined as sin?

Sin is nothing more than breaking the great commandment of love.

Originally posted by Ice Cold
I cant answer that because I am not an atheist,and I do not believe in judging others.

There is a lie, if I ever heard of one. Would you judge a man who raped or killed your sister or mother?

Originally posted by Ice Cold
And is misunderstood by the psudo intellectuals,who think their flop stinketh not.

Hehe, got a chuckle out of that one.

Originally posted by sonhouse
What is sin?

In Spanish, it means "without". Example, the word sinsemilla translated means "without seeds". Useless information, I know. So long, and Thanks for all the Fish.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Is it breaking any law on the books of mankind? Is running a red light a sin? Is strealing the change in a buskers hat a sin?
Is burning down an abortion clinic a sin? Just what is the definition of sinness?
Are there laws on the books that, if broken, would NOT be defined as sin?

Paris Hilton bringing out an album. . . thats a sin 😠

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
Paris Hilton bringing out an album. . . thats a sin 😠

How bout a tribute to Milli Vanilli?

Well nobody has given a real answer as to what is sin, so what is it anyway?

Originally posted by LemonJello
Since 'sin' is normally used to denote transgression against the will or law of some existent god, 'sin' is probably just a word without a referent. It's also a pretty useless concept since it has no necessary connection with moral wrongness: as a concept, it just reinforces the sort of infantile behavior in which people follow heteronomous rules without giving any thought to the justification (if any) of such rules.

Etymologically sin means "missing the mark", failing to reach a certain standard of behaviour e.g. under Stalin "hoarding" was a sin against communism punishable by death. Perfectionists are often racked with a sense of having sinned (they deserve to).

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Etymologically sin means "missing the mark", failing to reach a certain standard of behaviour

Excellent answer (and very biblical as well) drawn from the world of Greek archery.

It is, meanwhile, worth noting that the word "Sin," in the ultimate cosmic sense (which is what most of us would probably be referring to in this forum), would not really be a valid word when determining moral culpability unless there was a transcendant power one was accountable to.

For example, in the play "Wild Strawberries" the judge says the man is "guilty of guilt." If all I am, ultimately, is guilty of guilt, then the Christian counterperspective has nothing to say to me. If, on the other hand, I am guilty of sin, then and only then is there a savior.

Fond regards,
R

Originally posted by Ristar
It is, meanwhile, worth noting that the word "Sin," in the ultimate cosmic sense (which is what most of us would probably be referring to in this forum), would not really be a valid word when determining moral culpability unless there was a transcendant power one was accountable to.

How about Atman? Or, the Supreme Self, the mark one aims to hit (that book on Zen & archery comes to mind).

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
How about Atman? Or, the Supreme Self, the mark one aims to hit (that book on Zen & archery comes to mind).

Since you mention Atman... 😉

In Hinduism, when one is trying to achieve Moksha (release), the veracity of the concept of Sin (pavam) would depend on one's path in life (by the way, if any Hindus are reading this and see misconceptions they wish to correct, please do so; the one thing I'm not is omniscient 😉 ).

In the paths of Yoga, for example, one can be a theist following the "Way of Devotion," or you can even be an atheist following the "Way of Knowledge."

If one follows the way of devotion, it is really then that Sin becomes meaningful. Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami described "Pavam" as a transgression against divine law.

The point to remember here is that the whole cosmic sense of Sin hinges upon a transcendant ethic.

Regards,
R

Originally posted by Ristar
Since you mention Atman... 😉

In Hinduism, when one is trying to achieve Moksha (release), the veracity of the concept of Sin (pavam) would depend on one's path in life (by the way, if any Hindus are reading this and see misconceptions they wish to correct, please do so; the one thing I'm not is omniscient 😉 ).

In the paths of Yoga, for example, one ca e is that the whole cosmic sense of Sin hinges upon a transcendant ethic.

Regards,
R

However. trancendant ethic comes about because of a belief system
not a cosmologic fact.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Is it breaking any law on the books of mankind? Is running a red light a sin? Is strealing the change in a buskers hat a sin?
Is burning down an abortion clinic a sin? Just what is the definition of sinness?
Are there laws on the books that, if broken, would NOT be defined as sin?

I once heard someone describe sin as abuse. It is abuse of something or someone that goes against its origianal design or purpose. For example, there is nothing wrong with food, unless you become a gluten. There is nothing wrong with alcohol unless it leads to drunkeness. There is nothing wrong with sex unless it is done outside of marriage, etc.