The Political Fray - Political Forum
Go Back   Political Fray > The Political Fray > Religion

Religion For discussion about different religions and belief structures - Please be respectful of other's beliefs


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 22nd, 2009, 09:13 PM   #1
Representative
 
GekiDan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Philippines
Posts: 416

Sins on Atheists & Other Religions

Since I'm a Christian, a sin means that we have done something bad that is against God's rules or commandments. It is also said that God will always forgive your sins everytime you pray to him or simply go to a confession.

I have been wondering lately what do a sin means to other religions and to atheists?
GekiDan is offline  
Old April 22nd, 2009, 10:10 PM   #2
Retired Moderator
 
The Parakeet's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 639

There are really just two sins for me. I'd say that the vast majority of atheists practice secular humanism, which is basically fancy philosophical talk for "Be Nice."

The first is stealing. I'm sorta stealing this from Kite Runner (wrap your head around that hypocrisy ). Basically, physically stealing is wrong because you are taking that which doesn't belong to you. Murder is stealing a man's life. Lying is stealing the person's right to the truth. Generally all the true sins fall under the simple category of "stealing" something.

I'll also throw general cruelty in as the second. No real explanation needed.
The Parakeet is offline  
Old April 22nd, 2009, 10:30 PM   #3
Representative
 
Delta's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 369

I like that Parakeet - I never really put it into that perspective before.

For me, assuming you get rid of any religious overtones to the word "sin", sin is basically anything immoral. I don't believe morals stem solely from religion but rather from society as a whole and personal beliefs in general. Of course religion plays a large role in the society you live in, but general humanity plays a larger role. To me, societal morals were worked into religion, rather than the other way around.

For example, a few hundred years ago, it was considered moral to kill a scientist for blasphemy against god.. Societies outlook has changed, and therefore religion has been altered in the process.

As for specifics, your general: murder, adultery, rape, etc... all of which could go under stealing if you look at it in Parakeet's frame of mind.
Delta is offline  
Old April 23rd, 2009, 03:09 AM   #4
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta View Post
I like that Parakeet - I never really put it into that perspective before.
Ditto for me too. Is it true that the meaning of sin is limited to religion only? You can't find sin outside a religion? I have been involved in discussions where it is argued that sin is only possible within the context of religion. My point of view is that sin has to do with a moral code and it can be either within a religious context or outside religion.
deanhills is offline  
Old April 24th, 2009, 12:28 AM   #5
Representative
 
GekiDan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Philippines
Posts: 416

Thanks for your honest responses. I understood it alot this time. Sins are not basically from any religion thus it is on the soceity. Plus you can also sin against fellow human, not on God only. Am I right?
GekiDan is offline  
Old April 24th, 2009, 08:33 PM   #6
Representative
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Florida, USA
Posts: 422

Quote:
Originally Posted by deanhills View Post
Ditto for me too. Is it true that the meaning of sin is limited to religion only? You can't find sin outside a religion? I have been involved in discussions where it is argued that sin is only possible within the context of religion. My point of view is that sin has to do with a moral code and it can be either within a religious context or outside religion.
I don't think the idea of 'sin' can exist outside a religious context. The idea of right or wrong, however, does. If I lie, I have committed a wrong, but I haven't sinned. I have done nothing to offend god, since I don't think god exists.

However, I looked this up in the Free Online Dictionary and apparently the meaning has been generalized.

1. A transgression of a religious or moral law, especially when deliberate.
2. Theology a. Deliberate disobedience to the known will of God.
b. A condition of estrangement from God resulting from such disobedience.

3. Something regarded as being shameful, deplorable, or utterly wrong.
intr.v. sinned, sin?ning, sins 1. To violate a religious or moral law.
2. To commit an offense or violation

It is also the name of a Babylonian god and is the second letter of the Hebrew alphabet.
curious is offline  
Old April 26th, 2009, 04:48 AM   #7
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
I don't think the idea of 'sin' can exist outside a religious context. The idea of right or wrong, however, does. If I lie, I have committed a wrong, but I haven't sinned. I have done nothing to offend god, since I don't think god exists.
I agree with that. Sin is something that contravenes divine laws. That which is about right and wrong outside divine law is something to do with a moral code. Some of it, like murder and stealing are also contained in country laws.
deanhills is offline  
Old May 1st, 2009, 02:51 AM   #8
Anarchist
 
Dirk's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: Disunited Queendom
Posts: 1,943

Fortunately for me, there aren't any really strictly enforced laws of Pastafarianism. The FSM provides a basic moral guideline in his eight "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts" but they're pretty liberal in themselves... So, in the context of religion, sin is not really a big issue for me.

From a secular viewpoint, i think that the original intention of "sin" was to maintain a moral framework for society, but in Jewish/Christian terms, i think a lot of the sins outlined in Leviticus etc are a bit outdated.
Dirk is offline  
Old May 2nd, 2009, 10:26 PM   #9
Representative
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Florida, USA
Posts: 422

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk View Post
Fortunately for me, there aren't any really strictly enforced laws of Pastafarianism.
There's really a religion centerd around pasta? Really?
curious is offline  
Old May 4th, 2009, 01:48 AM   #10
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
There's really a religion centerd around pasta? Really?
I guess their serotonins must be nicely provided all the time. Pasta is supposed to be a comfort food. Ha! Always wondered whether food as a religion could be possible. A worthy cause for sure! So who is their God?
deanhills is offline  
Old May 4th, 2009, 04:02 AM   #11
Representative
 
Delta's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 369

Quote:
Originally Posted by deanhills View Post
I guess their serotonins must be nicely provided all the time. Pasta is supposed to be a comfort food. Ha! Always wondered whether food as a religion could be possible. A worthy cause for sure! So who is their God?
Flying Spaghetti Monster is their God. The religion was created as an attack against teaching creationism in school. I think it was a MIT student who wrote the book of the FSM and what not. He then wrote a letter to the education board (I forget which State), stating that he thinks creationism is a great idea for teaching in schools. 1/3 of the time can go to creationism, 1/3 to true science and 1/3 to the FSM.

The education board at first ignored it, but it gained widespread publicity and they were basically forced to recognize the argument.

Pretty interesting stuff really. It's sort of become a symbol of freethinkers.
Delta is offline  
Old May 5th, 2009, 03:36 AM   #12
Anarchist
 
Dirk's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: Disunited Queendom
Posts: 1,943

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta View Post
Flying Spaghetti Monster is their God. The religion was created as an attack against teaching creationism in school. I think it was a MIT student who wrote the book of the FSM and what not. He then wrote a letter to the education board (I forget which State), stating that he thinks creationism is a great idea for teaching in schools. 1/3 of the time can go to creationism, 1/3 to true science and 1/3 to the FSM.

The education board at first ignored it, but it gained widespread publicity and they were basically forced to recognize the argument.

Pretty interesting stuff really. It's sort of become a symbol of freethinkers.
Yup, Bobby Henderson. And it was Kansas. Thing is, we've got plenty of (empirical) evidence for the existence of the FSM (Flying Spaghetti Monster). And our theory on the universe is definitely better than ID. Instead, we have UD (Unintelligent Design). Obviously, the FSM was drunk when he created humans and that's why we're imperfect. The "big bang", was, of course, the FSM falling out of bed with a hangover.

And evolution is also easily disproved. Man is no relative of the apes! Humans may share 95% of their genes with Chimpanzees but they share more than 99.9% of their genes with pirates. I think the real change is pretty evident here, don't you think? A fact that ol' Dawkins left out, eh?
Dirk is offline  
Old May 5th, 2009, 08:49 PM   #13
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk View Post
Yup, Bobby Henderson. And it was Kansas. Thing is, we've got plenty of (empirical) evidence for the existence of the FSM (Flying Spaghetti Monster). And our theory on the universe is definitely better than ID. Instead, we have UD (Unintelligent Design). Obviously, the FSM was drunk when he created humans and that's why we're imperfect. The "big bang", was, of course, the FSM falling out of bed with a hangover.

And evolution is also easily disproved. Man is no relative of the apes! Humans may share 95% of their genes with Chimpanzees but they share more than 99.9% of their genes with pirates. I think the real change is pretty evident here, don't you think? A fact that ol' Dawkins left out, eh?
Not sure how to read this posting Dirk. Both in awe of the creativity and it tickled my sense of humour too. Bottomline I enjoyed it. Everybody seems to be so hung on their perfect scientific theories, including Dawkins, yet there is really no finite knowledge available. The equivalent of science having proof with no certainty of their theories, and creationists having certainty without any proof of their theories. I still can't figure out why they persist in debating one another. If one uses mathematics, they could never agree on anything.
deanhills is offline  
Old May 5th, 2009, 09:27 PM   #14
Representative
 
GekiDan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Philippines
Posts: 416

It seems to me that FSM is very interesting. He make man when he was drunk and big bang because he have a hang-over.
I like the humor though.
GekiDan is offline  
Old May 5th, 2009, 10:39 PM   #15
Representative
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Florida, USA
Posts: 422

I want to start a religion where we worship chocolate.
curious is offline  
Old May 5th, 2009, 11:04 PM   #16
Retired Moderator
 
The Parakeet's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 639

FSM is a brilliant piece of satire. If one is reading it with an open mind, then they should realize that most of his points have the same credibility as biblical literalism.

A very effect symbol for the movement really.
The Parakeet is offline  
Old May 7th, 2009, 12:05 AM   #17
Representative
 
GekiDan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Philippines
Posts: 416

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
I want to start a religion where we worship chocolate.
What would we call it? Chocolism? Such a good name isn't it?
And men was made because the chocolate melted and the drops form humans...
GekiDan is offline  
Old May 7th, 2009, 02:18 AM   #18
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by GekiDan View Post
What would we call it? Chocolism? Such a good name isn't it?
And men was made because the chocolate melted and the drops form humans...
Chocoholism probably from "chocoholics". It has a large following, but nobody has claimed it as a religion yet.
deanhills is offline  
Old May 7th, 2009, 10:07 PM   #19
Representative
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Florida, USA
Posts: 422

I'm in Mexico, in the land of the Maya, where chocolate originated. Perhaps we should worship the Maya, as well as the chocolate. But I'm a purist, so let's call the Maya the originators or something, and work on worship of chocolate. We could call the god by its Mayan name, Xocolatl. I think I have that spelled right.
curious is offline  
Old May 9th, 2009, 01:40 AM   #20
Representative
 
GekiDan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Philippines
Posts: 416

Quote:
Originally Posted by deanhills View Post
Chocoholism probably from "chocoholics". It has a large following, but nobody has claimed it as a religion yet.
Really? First time I have heard about that.
But that name really sounds awesome.

I'm lucky that I came to Political Fray since I have got to learn lots of things that I didn't expect to knew from any other boards.
GekiDan is offline  
Reply

  Political Fray > The Political Fray > Religion

Tags
atheists , religions , sins



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Evil religions? Akuma Religion 8 April 6th, 2018 05:03 PM
Atheists and Heaven Delta Religion 6 December 11th, 2017 05:21 PM
Why do atheists believe in magic? pingpong12 Religion 87 March 15th, 2017 01:39 PM
Are there more atheists in the US now? curious Religion 13 February 29th, 2012 12:31 PM
The Most Brilliant Light-Messiah Shared by All One God Religions (1) prof. mes solzhenitsy Religion 8 January 11th, 2011 10:54 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2009-2013 Political Fray. All rights reserved.