I haven't seen any benefits to a belief in sin. And people seem equally likely to act ethically regardless of religious beliefs, unless their religion is actively evil, in which case they are less likely to act ethically. Few eeligions are so evil that they strongly affect how ethical someone is likely to act, because I think taking things stupidly can happen with any religious belief or no religious belief.
Rachel, belief in sin is useful only if God exists, is omnipotent, and hates sin. But then it's crucial, because in this case we'd better know about sin, so that we can look for a solution against the consequences that it brings.
Xavier, just as lepers don't feel pain, atheists don't see sin. Both feeling pain and seeing your sin are unpleasant, yet both are crucial for survival (one of the body, one of the soul.)
However, to compare atheism to leprosy is absurd. A leper once /felt/ pain (and everything else) and can identify there is something wrong. I've *never* believed in God. Babies don't believe in anything.
I have a hard time believing that, if you are a moral/ethical person, but not religious, that any "God" would have issue with you. I also have issue that there is some sort implication here there being atheist means that you automatically have no set standards of conduct. Just because you do not have someone squawking rules down your gullet every Sunday does not mean that you can't have a code of ethics or some such thing that you live by. What it is important to note is that pretty much all major world religions have, basically, the same standard for how to live and treat others, if you break it down to the very basics. Why? Because when you live in a society, existing by those basic principles just makes things work better: Don't judge people; treat others as you would like to be treated; don't go out and kill people; etc. These aren't just things you learn in Sunday school, folks--these are things that you learn in Kindergarten.
And, the Dod has a point. What is considered a sin varies by who you talk to. Some say homosexuality is a sin, some don't. Some say a woman has to remain completely covered at all time, some don't. Its the nit-picky stuff (which is what, not surprisingly, people tend to quibble over the most) that is where the major religions come into conflict.
One might consider that it was the nit-picky stuff that may have been added later, in order to "clarify" what people were supposed to believe.
Pain Insensitivity is to Lepers as Denial of Sin is to Atheists. I do not agree, pain insensitivity to a leper is a blessing, denial of sin if it really exists, is false pride or hubris, and has nothing to do with Atheism. Even some self professing good Christians sometimes deny their own sins to themselves. The only real sin IMHO is not listening to that little voice of God within. Some call it your conscious, some call it the holy spirit, no matter what you call it; it tells you that you what the right thing to do is at any given time, even if you do not listen or ignore it.
Insensitivity to pain is not a blessing, it's generally fatal. It's massively dangerous. I'd rather lose a commonly named sense like sight or hearing than lose my ability to feel pain.
People tend to get the cost of losing senses all wrong. Losing smell is worse than most people realize. Losing sight is not as bad as losing hearing. Losing hearing or sight is not as bad as most people think it is. Losing touch is really damn bad. Losing the ability to feel pain is really damn bad. And losing your kinesthetic sense is crippling.
I don't have data on losing the sense of taste. Nor do I have data on losing balance without having distorted balance. Although having distorted balance is really awful. Chronic vertigo is an amazingly horrible thing.
jaime: why do you keep talking about people living moral lives
nobody lives moral lives
i know i haven't
and you know you haven't
so we should stop worrying about what the situation is for a moral person
because none exist
and start asking what hope there might be for an immoral person
Discussion (13)
Huh? Clarify please.
I haven't seen any benefits to a belief in sin. And people seem equally likely to act ethically regardless of religious beliefs, unless their religion is actively evil, in which case they are less likely to act ethically. Few eeligions are so evil that they strongly affect how ethical someone is likely to act, because I think taking things stupidly can happen with any religious belief or no religious belief.
Rachel, belief in sin is useful only if God exists, is omnipotent, and hates sin. But then it's crucial, because in this case we'd better know about sin, so that we can look for a solution against the consequences that it brings.
Xavier, just as lepers don't feel pain, atheists don't see sin. Both feeling pain and seeing your sin are unpleasant, yet both are crucial for survival (one of the body, one of the soul.)
However, to compare atheism to leprosy is absurd. A leper once /felt/ pain (and everything else) and can identify there is something wrong. I've *never* believed in God. Babies don't believe in anything.
It's just a metaphor (or what it's called.) Sure it's not totally correct.
There's a problem because pain is more, um, sharply defined than sin.
A married Christian woman who doesn't wear a veil is not an atheist, yet she denies that she's a sinner according to Islam.
Buddhism is much easier. No sin. Up to you.
I have a hard time believing that, if you are a moral/ethical person, but not religious, that any "God" would have issue with you. I also have issue that there is some sort implication here there being atheist means that you automatically have no set standards of conduct. Just because you do not have someone squawking rules down your gullet every Sunday does not mean that you can't have a code of ethics or some such thing that you live by. What it is important to note is that pretty much all major world religions have, basically, the same standard for how to live and treat others, if you break it down to the very basics. Why? Because when you live in a society, existing by those basic principles just makes things work better: Don't judge people; treat others as you would like to be treated; don't go out and kill people; etc. These aren't just things you learn in Sunday school, folks--these are things that you learn in Kindergarten.
And, the Dod has a point. What is considered a sin varies by who you talk to. Some say homosexuality is a sin, some don't. Some say a woman has to remain completely covered at all time, some don't. Its the nit-picky stuff (which is what, not surprisingly, people tend to quibble over the most) that is where the major religions come into conflict.
One might consider that it was the nit-picky stuff that may have been added later, in order to "clarify" what people were supposed to believe.
Claims inspired by this comment
I have a hard time believing that, if you are a moral/ethical person, but not religious, that any "God" would have issue with you.Pain Insensitivity is to Lepers as Denial of Sin is to Atheists. I do not agree, pain insensitivity to a leper is a blessing, denial of sin if it really exists, is false pride or hubris, and has nothing to do with Atheism. Even some self professing good Christians sometimes deny their own sins to themselves. The only real sin IMHO is not listening to that little voice of God within. Some call it your conscious, some call it the holy spirit, no matter what you call it; it tells you that you what the right thing to do is at any given time, even if you do not listen or ignore it.
Insensitivity to pain is generally not a choice. Denial generally is.
Insensitivity to pain is not a blessing, it's generally fatal. It's massively dangerous. I'd rather lose a commonly named sense like sight or hearing than lose my ability to feel pain.
People tend to get the cost of losing senses all wrong. Losing smell is worse than most people realize. Losing sight is not as bad as losing hearing. Losing hearing or sight is not as bad as most people think it is. Losing touch is really damn bad. Losing the ability to feel pain is really damn bad. And losing your kinesthetic sense is crippling.
I don't have data on losing the sense of taste. Nor do I have data on losing balance without having distorted balance. Although having distorted balance is really awful. Chronic vertigo is an amazingly horrible thing.
People take so much for granted.
Claims inspired by this comment
The worst senses to lose are the ones you tend not to think to name when listing senses.Robert:
You wrote,"pain insensitivity to a leper is a blessing".
Most people thought so until Dr. Paul Brand came along and revolutionized the treatment of lepers in India.
His biography,
The Gift of Pain,
written with Philip Yancey is a fascinating read. The book spells out why the lack of sensitivity to pain causes damage to the leper.jaime: why do you keep talking about people living moral lives
nobody lives moral lives
i know i haven't
and you know you haven't
so we should stop worrying about what the situation is for a moral person
because none exist
and start asking what hope there might be for an immoral person