There is no sin if you are an Atheist.

[tucker58]

There is no sin if you are an Atheist.

Anybody?

love,

tuck

 

[nolongerhome]

Well, let's work out what is meant by sin first.

sin 1 (s

n)
n. 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.

So, you can count out definition two straight off the bat. An atheist can potentially beleive in sin if we are following definitions 1 (but only from a moral, rather than a religions perspective) and/or 3, but not necessarily.

Personally, I think the word is too wrapped up in its religious/theological connotations for it to be particularly useful outside of those contexts.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Well said, nolongerhome.

 

[Samantha0]

You question is solved thanks to nolongerhome.

Atheists absolutely have def 3: Something regarded as being shameful, deplorable, or utterly wrong. But we are not given them by any imagined deity.

 

[nolongerhome]

If only all questions were so easily resolved

 

[quatona]

There is no sin if you are an Atheist.

Whether there´s sin (in the theistic definition of the term, which - I think - can be summarized as "missing the mark god has put up for us", correct me if I´m wrong) does not depend on whether you are an atheist or not, but rather on whether a god exists or not and whether this god has put up a mark for us or not.

love,

...and French Kisses.

 

[Eudaimonist]

There is no sin if you are an Atheist.

That depends on what you mean by sin. If sin means "disobedience to God", then there is no sin in any atheist's worldview.

However, an atheist may certainly take the view that one may "miss the mark" in ethical action, and so there can be unethical acts. The "mark" in this case would most likely be a natural telos. This is in fact my view.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[tucker58]

Well, let's work out what is meant by sin first.

sin 1 (s

n)
n. 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.

So, you can count out definition two straight off the bat. An atheist can potentially beleive in sin if we are following definitions 1 (but only from a moral, rather than a religions perspective) and/or 3, but not necessarily.

Personally, I think the word is too wrapped up in its religious/theological connotations for it to be particularly useful outside of those contexts.

Hi nolongerhome, Your approach to this topic is rational and very valid.

In "Original Language", the base language for all indo-European languages and most American Indian languages and some other world languages, the English word "sin" translates, "Away-Unpleasant-Not". If we used that definition, then the word "sin" would mean, "'That which constantly creates unpleasantness.' or, 'That that does create unpleasantness.'"

From there one could ask, "Does a person's actions create unpleasantness for themselves and or for society?"

love,

tuck

 

[nolongerhome]

Hi nolongerhome, Your approach to this topic is rational and very valid.

In "Original Language", the base language for all indo-European languages and most American Indian languages and some other world languages, the English word "sin" translates, "Away-Unpleasant-Not". If we used that definition, then the word "sin" would mean, "'That which constantly creates unpleasantness.' or, 'That that does create unpleasantness.'"

From there one could ask, "Does a person's actions create unpleasantness for themselves and or for society?"

love,

tuck

In other words, depending on your definition, your original statement is incorrect. It is good to see everyone is in agreement.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

There is no sin if you are an Atheist.

Anybody?

There is no external reality if you are an idealist.

Anybody?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Hi nolongerhome, Your approach to this topic is rational and very valid.

In "Original Language", the base language for all indo-European languages and most American Indian languages and some other world languages, the English word "sin" translates, "Away-Unpleasant-Not". If we used that definition, then the word "sin" would mean, "'That which constantly creates unpleasantness.' or, 'That that does create unpleasantness.'"

From there one could ask, "Does a person's actions create unpleasantness for themselves and or for society?"

love,

tuck

But that might be to commit the etymological fallacy and to assume that because a word meant something different so many thousand years ago, that meaning still has relevance today.

 

[BrianOnEarth]

"sin" is a term religious people use to blame a set of personal preferences and prejudices on God. It is a convenient abdication of personal responsibility.

Atheists and other non-believers in caretaker gods do not employ this particular device. Which, by an ironic illogic, some religious people use to accuse non-believers of having no sense of personal responsibility. Outstanding.

 

[tucker58]

In other words, depending on your definition, your original statement is incorrect. It is good to see everyone is in agreement.

I love you "nolonger" , you have created a twisty as your response.

Atheists feel guilty because of religions that promote God when it comes to "sin". The Atheist's simple solve is to claim that God does not exist . And they (the Atheists) have some pretty slick reasons in a psychological way why God does not exist.

Nolongerhome, there is absolutely "no" evidence that God does not exist, but there "is" circumstantial evidence that God does exist .

The Atheist folk have to claim that God does not exist so that they do not have to feel guilty about doing what ever it is that they want to do .

Tis my point. and the Atheist folk have absolutely "NO" evidence that God does not exist!

tuck

 

[quatona]

Atheists feel guilty because of religions that promote God when it comes to "sin". The Atheist's simple solve is to claim that God does not exist . And they (the Atheists) have some pretty slick reasons in a psychological way why God does not exist.

Nolongerhome, there is absolutely "no" evidence that God does not exist, but there "is" circumstantial evidence that God does exist .

The Atheist folk have to claim that God does not exist so that they do not have to feel guilty about doing what ever it is that they want to do .

Tis my point. and the Atheist folk have absolutely "NO" evidence that God does not exist!

tuck

...like pushing a rope.

 

[kharisym]

I love you "nolonger" , you have created a twisty as your response.

Atheists feel guilty because of religions that promote God when it comes to "sin". The Atheist's simple solve is to claim that God does not exist . And they (the Atheists) have some pretty slick reasons in a psychological way why God does not exist.

Nolongerhome, there is absolutely "no" evidence that God does not exist, but there "is" circumstantial evidence that God does exist .

The Atheist folk have to claim that God does not exist so that they do not have to feel guilty about doing what ever it is that they want to do .

Tis my point. and the Atheist folk have absolutely "NO" evidence that God does not exist!

tuck

... So what's this evidence that god exists? I suppose I missed that in a class somewhere.

Also, I'm an atheist, and I fail to feel bad because religions try to promote gods. I feel irritated when they scream it in my face, call me evil and antagonistic for existing, and then try to tell me what I feel and think though.

 

[BrianOnEarth]

The Atheist folk have to claim that God does not exist so that they do not have to feel guilty about doing what ever it is that they want to do

And just what would that be? Seriously. What is it you fear about atheists?

I would like to know what Christians think sin is. I think Jesus' idea was that you should empathize with other humans and love them rather than fear them and put yourself at personal risk in so doing. Love, in a Jesus sense, is not meant to be comfortable or easy.

Sometimes sin seems to be described as something people do to God. As if it doesn't matter what you do so long as you love and honour God. But if I were the top banana I think I would tell people that divisiveness is no-no and ignorance is not bliss, and I would be offended by those who denied the facts of natural world I had created.

But I am lowly hanging fruit so you don't have to worry about any of that.

 

[tucker58]

And just what would that be? Seriously. What is it you fear about atheists?

I would like to know what Christians think sin is. I think Jesus' idea was that you should empathize with other humans and love them rather than fear them and put yourself at personal risk in so doing. Love, in a Jesus sense, is not meant to be comfortable or easy.

Sometimes sin seems to be described as something people do to God. As if it doesn't matter what you do so long as you love and honour God. But if I were the top banana I think I would tell people that divisiveness is no-no and ignorance is not bliss, and I would be offended by those who denied the facts of natural world I had created.

But I am lowly hanging fruit so you don't have to worry about any of that.

Your anger is not against God, your anger is against Christians .

Sometimes, God and Christians are not on the same page. Some times religion and God are not on the same page .

Either way Brian, you are a very angry person.

tuck

 

[tucker58]

... So what's this evidence that god exists? I suppose I missed that in a class somewhere.

Also, I'm an atheist, and I fail to feel bad because religions try to promote gods. I feel irritated when they scream it in my face, call me evil and antagonistic for existing, and then try to tell me what I feel and think though.

You are also angry against people, not God.

tuck

 

[tucker58]

...like pushing a rope.

Ropes are pushed



Where do you personally fit in this?

tuck

 

[tucker58]

But that might be to commit the etymological fallacy and to assume that because a word meant something different so many thousand years ago, that meaning still has relevance today.

Ah yes the "brightest bulb" in the candelabra. Growing Smaller, activity is the life of a message board and your gifts are appreciated.

love,

tuck