A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

[Guest]

1. Can now stop torturing myself with whether I sinned or not or whether this and that is sin or am I in right now or out.


The above statement taken from "Mutty" the thread has had me thinking for about a week now.
And I have to pose these questions -

Does a lack of belief in Christ or Christianity automatically means that you are no longer guilty of sin?

Where does the conviction of sin come from?

[bigbooie]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

no one is without sin. You don't need the bible to tell you that. Your convictions come from within. I've been trying to tell you guys this all along.. You know when your wrong. unless your mentally ill or something. And another thing is why do mentally disturb ppl (well some ) do wrong? Why not do good instead of going off the deep end the just do good?
Is it possible that when your santiy leaves you so does your convictions.thus your condemed.

[WitchyOoman]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Actually, sin - by definition - entails believing in God and His (or Her, if you like) choice of how He/She wishes you to live. In other words, sin is - by definition - the transgression(s) of whatever code you think God to will upon us all.


Some definitions of the word "sin" (taken from various sources at hand here in my office):

estrangement from god

an act that is regarded by theologians as a transgression of God's will

commit a sin; violate a law of God or a moral law

commit a faux pas or a fault or make a serious mistake, usually in light of religious beliefs or a code of ethics


Seen? It generally involves religious beliefs.

[Diplomat]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by WitchyOoman:
Actually, sin - by definition - entails believing in God and His (or Her, if you like) choice of how He/She wishes you to live. In other words, sin is - by definition - the transgression(s) of whatever code you think God to will upon us all.


Some definitions of the word "sin" (taken from various sources at hand here in my office):

estrangement from god

an act that is regarded by theologians as a transgression of God's will

commit a sin; violate a law of God or a moral law

commit a faux pas or a fault or make a serious mistake, usually in light of religious beliefs or a code of ethics


Seen? It generally involves religious beliefs.

Interesting POV. If a person chooses to not believe in God, does it negate the fact that if he commits any trangression of God's laws, he has in fact sinned?

[WitchyOoman]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Very interesting question yuh pose...


One side would argue that one can't sin if one isn't 'aware' [of God's wishes]. The other might argue that it's sin/ing regardless of any individual's knowledge.

The real issue at hand, in this discussion, I suppose, is if sin/sinning involves any awareness [of the sinner] of his/her action/s being sinful. ie: If the act of sinning is dependant upon the [alleged] sinner understanding that [his/her] act is [actions are] wrong.

Personally, I don't know. It's hard for me to reconcile a loving and fatherly God with a God who will punish each individual regardless of their respective of their capacities [to understand]. That's akin to saying that even if a person incapable of anything mental beyond that of a two-year-old - even if chronologically a 23-yr-old and an adult - who takes a candy bar in a pharmacy and eats it without payig for it SHOULD be punished by jail time for the crime s/he committed: shoplifting/theft. (Perhaps the person's adult companion, whose job it was to watch the this person, and who clearly wasn't doing their job, should rightfully be punished -- via docking them pay or something similar... but to punish the 'nurse' with jail time (the rightful sentence for the crime) is rather ridiculous.)

In essence, I tend to lean towards the school of thought that it's only sinning if the 'sinner' is aware that the action is wrong.

Now, how does that relate to such people who KNOW right from wrong but do not believe in God? In the ase of such actions that are criminal, it doesn't matter what the perpetrator's religious/spiritual beleifs are... But, in the case of "sinful" actions that are NOT criminal... and/or do not injure anybody else? I'd say that in such an instance, an act is NOT sinful. Others may (and will, I'm quite sure) say differently.

What's your take on this, CEW?

[Guest]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Awright mek me put dis in plain langwige-

In the absence of belief in Jesus Christ, or let say Jesus never even lived would jealousy, anger, wrath, malice, gluttony, greed, lust be acceptable?

[WitchyOoman]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Acceptable, jedi? As in acceptable forms of behaviour?

I would say not. (Others might say differently)

But... that's not what you originally asked. You asked (initially) if it would still be "sin". That might elicit a different answer from me than what I just said. [quote: I would say not.]

Any further questions, ma'am? [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Guest]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by WitchyOoman:
[qb] Acceptable, jedi? As in acceptable forms of behaviour?

I would say not. (Others might say differently)

But... that's not what you originally asked. You asked (initially) if it would still be "sin". That might elicit a different answer from me than what I just said. [quote: I would say not.]

Any further questions, ma'am? [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [/qb]

Hey (((Witchy))) [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Sin by any other name is still sin wouldn't you agree? [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Fledgist]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by Jedi l:
[qb] Awright mek me put dis in plain langwige-

In the absence of belief in Jesus Christ, or let say Jesus never even lived would jealousy, anger, wrath, malice, gluttony, greed, lust be acceptable? [/qb]

What, pray tell, is the difference between anger and wrath?

Morality is founded on reason. My reason tells me that certain behaviours are not acceptable if I wish to live in a human community. I will therefore avoid them, and expect others to. This has nothing to do with the existence of itinerant preachers in Palestine two thousand years ago.

[msgoody2shoes]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by Fledgist:
[qb]

Originally posted by Jedi l:
[qb] Awright mek me put dis in plain langwige-

In the absence of belief in Jesus Christ, or let say Jesus never even lived would jealousy, anger, wrath, malice, gluttony, greed, lust be acceptable? [/qb]

What, pray tell, is the difference between anger and wrath?

[MG2S: Ok Professor. I got this one.
Anger is described as a strong feeling of displeasure. Of fury and indignation and rage. It is synonymous to wrath.
Wrath is described as violent rage. Retributory punishment for an offense or a crime.
In other words; a person can make you angry to the point that you feel strong anger (hateful emotions) against them. When it turns to wrath, there is a strong desire to physically punish that person in a manner that words can never do.]


Morality is founded on reason. My reason tells me that certain behaviours are not acceptable if I wish to live in a human community. I will therefore avoid them, and expect others to. This has nothing to do with the existence of itinerant preachers in Palestine two thousand years ago.

[MG2S: Pure rubbish!!!]

[/qb]

[accepted77]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

I have purposely stayed away from these morality forums because they presuppose a morality without God. I have found no association of humans who do not presuppose a spirit being from who they set up their "moral" structure.
I posit there is no such thing as a "Godless" morality, even that conjured up by philosophers is heavily borrowed from "religion".

The christian faith presupposes this God given morality even before there was a law given.
Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

But it does not hold this true of christians only, this is true of all creation.


Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

All men are held responsible for sin, it is as though the truth of God is hard-wired into our conciousness, so we must deny this truth even to be an unbeliever.

In other words the natural state of man is not unbelief first then conversion.

Rather it's denial of belief then unbelief.

We must unlearn a belief in God like a child's natural instinct to trust is unlearned when they are nurtured into lies and mistrust.
Jesus said unless we become as a little child we cannot see the kingdom of heaven.
So likewise we are nurtured by our flesh into disobedience and must relearn trust to submit our lives to God, we must be "born again" into trustfullness to negate the easy walk of unbelief.

An unbeliever sees no sin in their ways,

Proverbs 21:2 Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by accepted:
[qb] I have purposely stayed away from these morality forums because they presuppose a morality without God. I have found no association of humans who do not presuppose a spirit being from who the set up their "moral" structure. I posit there is no such thing as a "Godless" morality, even that conjured up by philosophers is heavily borrowed from "religion".[/qb]

Where are all the examples that you have found of association of humans that presuppose a sprit being from which a moral structure was set up.

Post the links to all the ones that are conjured up by philosophers and let examine then and see if they are all drawn from your god that is only 6000 years, any god, or your bible that is only 2000 years old.

[accepted77]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Good to see you Tuff Gong, its baseball season again.
Sure you want a long list of cut and post links???

[Tuff Gong]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by accepted:
[qb] Good to see you Tuff Gong, its baseball season again.
Sure you want a long list of cut and post links??? [/qb]

Yes you are correct, it is Baseball Season again. I have switched States and found to my horror that the games are not being broadcast on air, either that or AM is finally dead. I don't have TV in my office because it is so distracting, so I am forced to try to catch up on the Highlights on Sports Center. Seems as if Barry Bonds have some new indictable drug or the one he was on is still working.

I have also decided to resume keeping up with Pro-Basketball, I lately moved from Indiana and I see the Pacers are threatening again. I will see how far they can go.

Anyway I guess you will not want to give me the answers to the religious business so I am going to be civil and not force it out of you. I will ask some different questions then.

Who are you carrying in the AL/NL in MLB and East/West in NBA?

[rebelgirl]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by Jedi l:
[qb] 1. Can now stop torturing myself with whether I sinned or not or whether this and that is sin or am I in right now or out.


The above statement taken from "Mutty" the thread has had me thinking for about a week now.
And I have to pose these questions -

Does a lack of belief in Christ or Christianity automatically means that you are no longer guilty of sin?

Where does the conviction of sin come from? [/qb]

the only people that would consider me guilty of sin are in fact believers, saying as how no god exist to me I have no belief in sin. sin is a abstract concept attached to a imaginary being with imaginary laws. I do not use the term sin to describe those who have transgressed against the moral consensus of humanity.

in short IMO no a non believer is not guilty of sin to himself or other non believers. only to those that judge him based on their beliefs which have no bearing on his or her lifestyle or guilt.