Original Sin?

Quote: Evenbob

What does any of that have to do with
offending god? You're making logical
assumptions where none exist.

I am just simply stating that sin, outside of any spiritual sense, exists for all of us. You keep wanting to turn this into some theological exercise but the first step is anthropological. You have continually maintained that a very specific definition of sin doesn't exist because of its connection to offending God. I am just helping you realize that even leaving God out of it, we have offended ourselves by sin. We are beset with a notion that we long to be better but fail often to do so, this is the human condition. I don't know why you are so scared to acknowledge this. Stop talking about offending God and let's just agree that humanity has a problem with sin, meaning 'regrettable faults, mistakes, or omissions."

Quote: FrGamble

I am just simply stating that sin, outside of any spiritual sense, exists for all of us.

No it does NOT!!!! It only exists if you
change the definition of it, which you
have no authority to do.

This is what sin is:

1.
an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.

a. Deliberate disobedience to the known will of God

definition of sin is breaking God's rules

"Whosoever commits sin transgresses also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law"

Sin is any deliberate action, attitude, or thought that goes against God


It's offending god, and you know it.
Play words games with it all day and
it changes nothing.

Quote: FrGamble

We have made great progress and it seems that almost everyone, I’m looking at you EvenBob, .

I haven't made any 'progress', I still feel
exactly the way I felt about sin 40 years
ago. You forget, I was exposed to Christianity
for over a year on almost a daily basis.
That's when I came to realize there was no
god and sin was just a made up concept.

So if you think you're seeing progress, it's
your over active wishful thinking imagination
at work again. If anything, this discussion has
cemented my beliefs about god and sin even
further.

Quote: Evenbob

I haven't made any 'progress', I still feel
exactly the way I felt about sin 40 years
ago.

I would posit that anyone who feels exactly the same way about something after 40 years is not seriously thinking about it.

Anyway, that quote you mentioned was referring to just about everyone involved in the discussion seemed to come to some type of agreement that things like genocide were always and everywhere evil. That genocide was objectively a bad thing and that even if everyone thought it was fine and good, this would not make it so. I had not seen such a recognition form you.

About our little spat about sin, I'm sorry you feel strongly about your definition, which involves God. I thought we could discuss the matter using a definition that we could both agree upon and then discuss whether it is true of not that all humanity knows sin in a secular sense and then what effect that has on us. However, you see unwilling to go there and I respect that. When you've held onto something for 40 years you don't want to let it go.

Quote: FrGamble

I thought we could discuss the matter using a definition that we could both agree upon.

I agree with the definition that the authorities
give, sin is an offense against god. And because
there is no god, there can be no sin. This isn't
really hard to understand.

At one time, Europeans believed tomatoes were
poisonous. There was no proof, no evidence, and
it certainly wasn't true. But everybody believed it,
so it must be right, and nobody ate tomatoes. At
one time, Europeans believed witches roamed the
countryside, stealing babies, causing plagues and
making crops fail. Of course we know that was a
ridiculous lie, but everybody believed it, so it must
have been true, and witches were hung or burned
alive.

Humans are capable of believing the most ridiculous
of concepts, with no proof or evidence of any kind.
Like sin, for instance.

When the missionaries tamed the savages, did the savages know deep down that what they were doing was wrong, or did they have to be taught that first?

Quote: Dalex64

When the missionaries tamed the savages, did the savages know deep down that what they were doing was wrong, or did they have to be taught that first?

Lots of stories about that. For instance
the Mexican Indians that lived in So Calif
had a very hard time understanding the
concept of sin as the missionaries explained
it. They couldn't grasp how their actions
could offend a god. It got so frustrating that
the missionaries gave up and started teaching
the children instead. Kids will believe anything
if you get to them young enough.

"Native Americans had no word for 'sin',
it was a foreign idea. Sin was an alien
concept for the Indians, so it was difficult
for missionaries to shoehorn it into existing
cosmologies." One Indian complained that
he was perfectly content with life until the
Christians preached sin sin sin every day.
From then on he blamed whatever bad thing
that happened on the Christians. The
missionaries were a 'plague on me, you are
the ones that caused me all this trouble.'

No doubt at least partially true..

Quote: FrGamble

The difference in discovering the true and unchanging morality is that we already know it.

You keep saying that, as if repetition will make it true.

If we knew morality innately, there'd be no need to teach children anything about how to behave. they'd know not to hit their siblings, share their toys, play nice, etc. etc. for that matter, the Bible and other "holy" books wouldn't be filled with immoral rules, such as the keeping of slaves, the objectification of women, the hostility towards other religions, etc.

In particular as regards killing people in particular, human sacrifice wouldn't have been so prevalent in various societies if everyone innately knew it was wrong to kill. What kind of deity would demand human sacrifices, if it were something everyone innately knew to be immoral?

Quote:

Ignorance is not an excuse especially because we already know deep down it is wrong.

That's the payoff, isn't it? That's how you can hook people through unearned guilt.

Quote: Evenbob

I agree with the definition that the authorities
give, sin is an offense against god. And because
there is no god, there can be no sin. This isn't
really hard to understand.

It isn't hard to understand because it is the textbook definition of circular reasoning. There is no sin because there is no God and because there is no God there can't be sin. Tada! Now I see why you insist on a definition that makes no sense to you instead of really engaging in discussion.

Quote:

Humans are capable of believing the most ridiculous
of concepts, with no proof or evidence of any kind.
Like sin, for instance.

Like reincarnation or that God doesn't exist.

Quote: Evenbob

They couldn't grasp how their actions
could offend a god.

Are you saying that their culture, or really any culture, had no notion of offending God through their actions and then attempting to appease God through others actions or sacrifice?

Quote:

"Native Americans had no word for 'sin',
it was a foreign idea. Sin was an alien
concept for the Indians,

Again are you suggesting the concept of doing something regrettable that upset their deity was a foreign idea? You know that this is just not true.

Quote:

One Indian complained that
he was perfectly content with life until the
Christians preached sin sin sin every day.

So before the missionaries came he had never committed any regrettable action, fault, or omission? Being of course strong spiritual people you don't think that this Indian felt that his actions shamed his ancestors or upset the Great Spirit, or what have you?

Quote:

No doubt at least partially true..

maybe a little bit true, the part about the plague.