I did not assume he was referring to one of the Bible concepts of sin; that's why I asked if he was speaking of all concepts of sin, or just the Bible concepts.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Morality and/vs sin
- Thread starter DogmaHunter
- Start date
GrowingSmaller
Muslm Humanist
Dogmahunter ty for the thread I find it useful to organise thoughts.
I think "morality" may be a term borrowed from secular philosophy, like Aristotle etc. So religions have their ethics, but maybe historically they weren't presetnted as "systems of ethics" as such. Therefore when we look at Christian ethics there is a question of how is that going to be defined as a topic.
At least some Christians go by the "analogy of faith" method of interpretation - interpreting scripture by scripture. If "ethics" is not specifically defined therein, there will be problems of interpretation.
In Islam there is the term "aklak"* (manners, morals) and it relates to "khulik"* and "khuluk"* (outward appearance and inward spirituality).
Morals in the Western tradition tend to be differentiated from legal rules. But in Islam the whole point of morality and law too is to please God. Because God can do no wrong, He is the only one truly worth pleasing. Either through outward action or inward spirituality.
The Eastern Dharma based religion have "ahimsa" i.e. the concept of non-harm to living beings. I think some Jains even wont eat, they literally fast to death.
Islam isn't like that. God may harm or punish people, because they stray into sin - and sin is basically the realm of corruption, decay etc. But He does no wrong or no injustice thereby.
If you seek to please other than God you've bad intentions - because only God is wholly good. An extreme example would be pleasing Hitler or Jack the Ripper. Imagine would a principle of non-harm be applicable to Hitler? Because non-Gods have base desires and motives, the conclusion is if we please them there'll be some badness entailed. And prevention of evil may sometimes involve -in fact I see "Gods plan" (punishing the wrong and rewarding the virtuous) as something like providential law and order....
So, I suppose therefore that all of Islamic virtue is ethical in that actually pleasing God is intrinsically good. Huzzah! That's the theory at least, but ty DH because Id never thought of it that way.
(plus I'm no scholar so not really qualified to instruct, these are just semi educated reflections)
*Note my Arabic is not great.
I think "morality" may be a term borrowed from secular philosophy, like Aristotle etc. So religions have their ethics, but maybe historically they weren't presetnted as "systems of ethics" as such. Therefore when we look at Christian ethics there is a question of how is that going to be defined as a topic.
At least some Christians go by the "analogy of faith" method of interpretation - interpreting scripture by scripture. If "ethics" is not specifically defined therein, there will be problems of interpretation.
In Islam there is the term "aklak"* (manners, morals) and it relates to "khulik"* and "khuluk"* (outward appearance and inward spirituality).
Morals in the Western tradition tend to be differentiated from legal rules. But in Islam the whole point of morality and law too is to please God. Because God can do no wrong, He is the only one truly worth pleasing. Either through outward action or inward spirituality.
The Eastern Dharma based religion have "ahimsa" i.e. the concept of non-harm to living beings. I think some Jains even wont eat, they literally fast to death.
Islam isn't like that. God may harm or punish people, because they stray into sin - and sin is basically the realm of corruption, decay etc. But He does no wrong or no injustice thereby.
If you seek to please other than God you've bad intentions - because only God is wholly good. An extreme example would be pleasing Hitler or Jack the Ripper. Imagine would a principle of non-harm be applicable to Hitler? Because non-Gods have base desires and motives, the conclusion is if we please them there'll be some badness entailed. And prevention of evil may sometimes involve -in fact I see "Gods plan" (punishing the wrong and rewarding the virtuous) as something like providential law and order....
So, I suppose therefore that all of Islamic virtue is ethical in that actually pleasing God is intrinsically good. Huzzah! That's the theory at least, but ty DH because Id never thought of it that way.
(plus I'm no scholar so not really qualified to instruct, these are just semi educated reflections)
*Note my Arabic is not great.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Sketcher
Born Imperishable
The non-murderer will have other sins on his hands. So will the murderer, of course. If the murder repents and believes on the Lord Jesus Christ his sin record is generously washed clean, same as the non-murderer should he choose to do so. Washed clean is washed clean. If you're not washed, the stain remains. The murderer of course, had the bigger stain before coming to Jesus.
Upvote
0
- Aug 6, 2007
- 8,192
- 2,452
- 39
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
a sin is anything against and in the way of God and his child who is chiefly known as Truth and Goodness or Wisdom and Love. immorality depends upon the moral system. in some instances we might break a moral system for the sake of God, but it has to be Gods will.
I doubt that Gods moral system is different than what he considers a sin, but other people might have various other moral systems that might be different from Gods understanding of morality.
and God is eternal so he might not consider humans finitude as much if he desires their longer term well being rather than short term. therefore to God it is okay to let some of his people stone an innocent guy, as that would save the guy from a lot of trouble in dealing with a bunch of crazy people that could corrupt his innocent heart.
people also have various interpretations of what God says and so there is also argument about what Gods moral system is.
p.s. 2. is way worse since 1. had not real crimes on his hands. but people who join the army and kill people become saved all the time, apparently. so who knows, maybe he had 50 years to repent.
I doubt that Gods moral system is different than what he considers a sin, but other people might have various other moral systems that might be different from Gods understanding of morality.
and God is eternal so he might not consider humans finitude as much if he desires their longer term well being rather than short term. therefore to God it is okay to let some of his people stone an innocent guy, as that would save the guy from a lot of trouble in dealing with a bunch of crazy people that could corrupt his innocent heart.
people also have various interpretations of what God says and so there is also argument about what Gods moral system is.
p.s. 2. is way worse since 1. had not real crimes on his hands. but people who join the army and kill people become saved all the time, apparently. so who knows, maybe he had 50 years to repent.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
