Is it hard?

[Eudaimonist]

Some are doing (bad) things to make themselves better. Some succeeded, some did not.

To make themselves better? Huh?

How would you define "a decent person"? What does decency mean to you?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[juvenissun]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that? Do you mean that I'm going deeper into agony because I find myself agreeing less and less with the beliefs of theistic religions?

If is certainly a likely case.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If is certainly a likely case.

I'm still not entirely sure what you are saying. I don't feel agony because I no longer believe in the supernatural.

 

[juvenissun]

Easy with the insults there.


Yes, Christian doctrine says we have a sinful nature, we are all sinners. What did I miss?



That´s why I wasn´t speaking about them other animals but about you, the human animal. I wasn´t aware that you were striving to become a non-human animal in order to become sinless, and I wasn´t aware that the bible and Christian doctrines were written for non-human animals, as well.


Yes...what´s that got to do with anything?

I guess now you are ready to debate on what is "perfect". I am not taking that bait too. If you care to make a definition of that, then we can resume the discussion.

 

[juvenissun]

I'm still not entirely sure what you are saying. I don't feel agony because I no longer believe in the supernatural.

You just said you are struggling harder and harder with sinful feeling. Didn't you? If you were not, then forget it, there will be no issue.

Atheists can always justify on what they are doing. No sin at all.

 

[Stevelee44]

I don't understand how someone sins everyday. I don't. When we sin we know on the inside when we missed it. You can't sin by your thoughts only by your actions. If you sin your conscious will let you know.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Atheists can always justify on what they are doing. No sin at all.

No, no, no. What you've just said there is inaccurate.

Atheists don't "sin" because sin is understood as "disobedience to God". However, that does not mean that atheists don't have moral standards. I definitely cannot justify just any course of action. I have high moral standards.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

It is a bait because it distracts.

Distracts from what?

I have no intention to debate that. It is not a problem to me at this moment.

Have it your way, but it seems that getting your meaning across isn't a high priority for you.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[quatona]

I guess now you are ready to debate on what is "perfect".

Don´t guess what I might say. Consider what I do say.

I am not taking that bait too. If you care to make a definition of that, then we can resume the discussion.

Why would I debate that? We are talking about the Christian ideas, and I would be quite surprised to learn that in the Christian view sinfulness/sinning is reconcilable with perfection, or vice versa. Last time I checked Christian doctrine, perfection of the creation got corrupted when A&E sinned for the first time. Correct?

If you would like to take the term "perfection" out of the discussion, ok:
Christian doctrine: man has a sinful nature, everyone is a sinner. Correct?
Implication: the goal of being not sinful is not reachable. Literally nobody (except for Jesus) will or even only can shrug off their human nature, their sinfulness.

Conclusion: Minimizing our sins is the best we can possibly do.

And there´s your answer to the question you asked at the beginning of this discussion: robbing a bank is a sin, and therefore abstaining from robbing a bank is better than robbing a bank.

 

[DaisyDay]

A criminal is also trying to be a decent person. Why is yours better than his?

I imagine many criminals are decent people. One of the most self-consciously religious persons I know regularly downloads pirated software, yet he is consistently kind to others.

 

[juvenissun]

Don´t guess what I might say. Consider what I do say.

Why would I debate that? We are talking about the Christian ideas, and I would be quite surprised to learn that in the Christian view sinfulness/sinning is reconcilable with perfection, or vice versa. Last time I checked Christian doctrine, perfection of the creation got corrupted when A&E sinned for the first time. Correct?

If you would like to take the term "perfection" out of the discussion, ok:
Christian doctrine: man has a sinful nature, everyone is a sinner. Correct?
Implication: the goal of being not sinful is not reachable. Literally nobody (except for Jesus) will or even only can shrug off their human nature, their sinfulness.

Conclusion: Minimizing our sins is the best we can possibly do.

And there´s your answer to the question you asked at the beginning of this discussion: robbing a bank is a sin, and therefore abstaining from robbing a bank is better than robbing a bank.

This argument started from the link between sin and perfection. Your argument is that we feel sinful because we are not perfect. My argument is that we feel sinful NOT because we are not perfect.

If you take the perfection out of the picture, then I have no argument with you.

 

[juvenissun]

No, no, no. What you've just said there is inaccurate.

Atheists don't "sin" because sin is understood as "disobedience to God". However, that does not mean that atheists don't have moral standards. I definitely cannot justify just any course of action. I have high moral standards.


eudaimonia,

Mark

You have "your" moral standard. Is it "high" or not will still subject to debate. You need an absolute scale to measure the degree of morality. For atheists, there is no such scale.

When I was an atheist, I could easily justify all my actions and retracted any sinful feeling appeared in me.

 

[juvenissun]

I don't understand how someone sins everyday. I don't. When we sin we know on the inside when we missed it. You can't sin by your thoughts only by your actions. If you sin your conscious will let you know.

You don't have to think about it. But if you do, then here is a list. You MUST have done some on the list every day.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You have "your" moral standard. Is it "high" or not will still subject to debate. You need an absolute scale to measure the degree of morality. For atheists, there is no such scale.

When I was an atheist, I could easily justify all my actions and retracted any sinful feeling appeared in me.

For theists, there are as many "absolute" scales as there are different gods to believe in.

 

[Eudaimonist]

You have "your" moral standard.

No, I have the moral standard, according to my best judgment. Of course, it is "mine" in the sense that not every agrees with me on this subject.

Is it "high" or not will still subject to debate.

It is high in the sense that it limits my actions. You don't have to agree that I have identified the correct moral standard.

You need an absolute scale to measure the degree of morality. For atheists, there is no such scale.

WRONG! BZZZT!

My absolute scale is human flourishing, which is based on the requirements of life as a rational being with a human psychology. I have a rich sense of ethics, including many virtues that I identify as appropriate to human existence.

You don't have to agree with my ethical philosophy, but I definitely do identify a completely binding and objective scale with which to identify virtues and rank values for their appropriateness to human life.

When I was an atheist, I could easily justify all my actions and retracted any sinful feeling appeared in me.

Then you were a foolish atheist. Not all atheists are foolish, however.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Phil4v13]

I don't understand how someone sins everyday. I don't. When we sin we know on the inside when we missed it. You can't sin by your thoughts only by your actions. If you sin your conscious will let you know.

Everything you do everyday is determined by your mind and your conscious the right or wrong thing to do, the smallest things like little white lies for example are considered a sin to God. According to God's words in his bible (and I paraphrase here) it says even if a man lookes on a woman and lusts after her it is as bad if not worse as actually going through with your thoughts... This applies for every sort of sin not just lusting...

 

[Danyc]

Everything you do everyday is determined by your mind and your conscious the right or wrong thing to do, the smallest things like little white lies for example are considered a sin to God. According to God's words in his bible (and I paraphrase here) it says even if a man lookes on a woman and lusts after her it is as bad if not worse as actually going through with your thoughts... This applies for every sort of sin not just lusting...

Thought-crime.

 

[ChrisLeishy]

I think acceptance of sin is part of our humanity, we are not perfect. I think as gratitude for our salvation making the effort to reduce it is a good gesture and a bit of a requested thing by Jesus.

My friend once said to me jokingly " I have no issue with temptation, I give in instantly it saves the sin of worry" - he was not serious lol.

 

[quatona]

This argument started from the link between sin and perfection. Your argument is that we feel sinful because we are not perfect. My argument is that we feel sinful NOT because we are not perfect.

It was more like: As long as you aren´t perfect you will always feel sinful.

If you take the perfection out of the picture, then I have no argument with you.

Ok.

 

[quatona]

You need an absolute scale to measure the degree of morality. For atheists, there is no such scale.

The actual difference is not theism vs. atheism. The actual differences is: There are people who declare their subjective standards objective, and there are those who don´t. Unfortunately for them, the first regularly fail in trying to demonstrate how their morals are objective or to demonstrate that the alleged absolute source of their morality even exists.

When I was an atheist, I could easily justify all my actions

That says something about your personality rather than about atheism. I´m glad to hear that your religion helps you dealing with this condition.