Religion in general, and Christianity in particular, does not always want things to be clear. If, for instance, a clear outcome is expected after a session of prayer, then the effectiveness of prayer will be shown to be statistically equivalent to randomness.
However, a religion like Islam, as far as I understand, makes it absolutely clear what is considered right and wrong. Any contradiction in scripture is resolved by the understanding that a later statement overrides an earlier statement. So Muslims have a clear understanding of what is expected of them (even though most, fortunately, ignore the clear commands to murder people). While being easily the world's most despicable religion, Islam is nevertheless clear, concise, and well defined by religious standards.
Christianity, on the other hand, does not make it clear what is right or wrong. One might think that the rules are similar to Islam in that the New Testament overrides the Old Testament, but that does not seem to actually be the case. Jesus and Paul, the two main founders of Christianity, did away with much of the Old Testament, but John - the fourth most important founder of Christianity behind Peter - says in 1 John 3:4 that "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." It would seem to make sense that the law as dictated by God through Moses is the "objective morality" that some Christians refer to, which would mean that sin is defined as defiance of any of the 600+ commandments in the law. Yet, essentially no Christian on earth would attest to the absolute authority of everything listed in the Mosaic law.
I've never gotten a clear answer on this issue. Worse, I don't know if I've ever even seen two Christians agree on this. Worst, this is the criteria by which we will be evaluated as worthy of eternal hellfire, and yet we have no access to this criteria.
The purpose of this thread is for someone to present a clear definition of sin. I must be able to apply your definition to any conceivable scenario and determine for myself if an action qualifies as sinful. If you think my expectations are unreasonable, please explain why Islam is capable doing this.
There are multiple schools of Islamic Jurisprudence that all define what is or is not acceptable or sinful, differently. Often they don't even agree within the school.
For instance, there are four major Sunni schools: Hanbali, Shafi'i, Hanafi, Maliki; and a whole host of minor ones.
Anyway, to illustrate: In the 19th century the Muslim inhabitants of the Cape asked the British to send them a learned jurist in Islamic Law. Victoria officially requested one from the Ottoman Empire, who sent Abu Bakr Effendi to the Cape. He was schooled in the four schools mentioned above. The majority of the population followed Shafi'i, but all four were present, as the Dutch had taken Islamic slaves from various places and deposited them here. On his arrival, he promptly started correcting local muslim abuses and declared the consumption of Snoek haraam or unlawful. Now Snoek was a major part of the fishermen's diet and there was an outcry.
As a consequence, some complied and others refused, with local Islamic Jurists disagreeing that the consumption of Snoek was sinful. So in the end, there are 8 opinions today, a yes and no, for each of the four schools and they still have not decided whether it is sinful or not.
So Sin in Islam is not clear at all...
In Christianity, Sin is what separates us from God. As Jesus said, you are to Love God with all your heart and your neighbour as yourself. Anything not confirming to this, is Sin.
Now how do we determine that? It is very difficult. For instance, a man that spends his entire life helping the poor, but he does it for acolades of others, is essentially a hypocrite eaten up by pride, and has essentially placed something else before God. This would therefore be Sin and we would not necessarily be able to know it.
Each person bears their own burden of sin and has to face their Maker to account someday. It is a personal affair, what sin a person finds he has set between him and God.
This is why there is the parable of the Sheep and the Goats, where often the sheep were unaware that they were followers and the goats are rejected in that Jesus did not know them, in spite of their claiming to be His followers.
Another example is the Publican and the Pharisee, where the sinner is redeemed, but the prideful Pharisee, who appears righteous from outside, is not.
So quite frankly, it is far too complex for us to be able to completely and objectively determine what is sin. This is why we are taught not to Judge. Sometimes it is simple, like in theft or murder, but often murky. We can give guidelines, but no rules can be "applied to any scenario" and "be able to determine for myself if an action qualifies as sinful". This is simply impossible and cannot be answered by our fallable and incomplete human perspectives. This is true in Islam as well, in spite of your pangyric approach to how clear and concise their rules supposedly are.
